{"id":37261,"date":"2011-05-19T00:10:14","date_gmt":"2011-05-19T00:10:14","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2011-05-19T00:10:14","modified_gmt":"2011-05-19T00:10:14","slug":"liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/","title":{"rendered":"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a “Fetish” for the US Constitution"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

RUSH: Washington Post, by Jason Horowitz: ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw that it was good.\u2019 That\u2019s how this story begins. ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw that it was good. For more than 200 years, Americans have revered the Constitution as the law of the land, but the GOP and tea party heralding of the document in recent months – and the planned recitation on the House floor Thursday –‘ actually, Wednesday ‘– has caused some Democrats to worry that the charter is being misconstrued as the immutable word of God. New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler –‘ these people have such contempt for the Constitution, these Democrats. ”They are reading it like a sacred text,\u2019 said New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the outgoing chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.\u2019 By the way, (laughing) this is great. As they quote this clown, ‘They\u2019re reading it like a sacred text.\u2019 That\u2019s Nadler talking about the Republicans in a critical way. ‘They\u2019re reading it like a sacred text.\u2019 Now, listen to this, listen to how the Post describes this guy Nadler. <\/p>\n

‘Chairman, House Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitution, civil rights, civil liberties, who has studied and memorized the Constitution with talmudic –‘ or Talmudic — the Talmud, Jewish Talmud ‘– intensity.\u2019 So here\u2019s a guy who\u2019d looked at it as his Bible, they say, accusing the Republicans of looking at the Constitution as a sacred text. ‘Nadler called the ‘ritualistic reading\u2019 on the floor ‘total nonsense\u2019 and ‘propaganda\u2019 intended to claim the document for Republicans. ‘You read the Torah, you read the Bible, you build a worship service around it,\u2019 said Nadler, who argued that the Founders were not ‘demigods\u2019 and that the document\u2019s need for amendments to abolish slavery and other injustices showed it was ‘highly imperfect.\u2019 ‘You are not supposed to worship your constitution. You are supposed to govern your government by it,\u2019 he said.\u2019 Nobody\u2019s worshiping it, you fool. What we\u2019re doing is trying to reestablish it because it\u2019s under assault from people like you! Pardon my yelling. I get passionate about this. <\/p>\n

Individual liberty, the Constitution, freedom, are all under assault. They have been since the founding of this country. The change is that a large element of that assault now comes domestically from people like Jerrold Nadler and courts like the Ninth Circus who just found another cross in a public place unconstitutional. The Democrats so hate this document, leftists so hate this document, they read it and tell us it means the opposite of what it says. A couple fascinating stories I want to share with you today about Justice Scalia answering some questions about the Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment and how that just sent Democrats practically needing straitjackets and ambulances to the home. But here are a few sound bites on this Republican fetish with the Constitution. Last night on PMS MS — whatever it is, the stupid Mess NBC. Slate.com senior editor and legal correspondent Dahlia Lithwick about the Republican plan to read the Constitution. The question: ‘Is there an historical precedent for the Constitution fetish on the right?\u2019 <\/p>\n

LITHWICK: I think so. I think the way some people rub Buddha and they think the magic will come off, I think there\u2019s a long-standing tradition in this country. We\u2019re awfully religious about the Constitution. I think there is a sort of fetishization here that is of a piece with the sort of need for a religious document that\u2019s immutable and perfect in every way.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Miss Lithwick, you\u2019ll never understand it but all this is simply because health care is unconstitutional, Obamacare is. So much of Obama\u2019s agenda is unconstitutional. So much is what has come out of Congress in the form of legislation, unconstitutional. It\u2019s only the foundation for our existence, Miss Lithwick, and it\u2019s under assault. So what if it\u2019s revered. It\u2019s the most brilliant governing, founding document ever in the history of mankind. What is there about it that so threatens you, that you have to characterize people who love it, believe it, admire it as somehow having a fetish? All these people are doing, again, as I say, is showing their contempt. This is Chris Hayes. He\u2019s the guest host on this Mess NBC show and he responded to Dahlia Lithwick and her notion of a fetish here by saying this.<\/p>\n

HAYES: They kind of fetishize the Constitution and they had to give it this sort of biblical textual status. You know, what\u2019s wrong with that? Is this sort of harmless or is there something kind of insidious underneath that?<\/p>\n

LITHWICK: Part of what\u2019s a little bit fraud about this conversation is that the same people who are fetishizing the document as written, as framed by the framers and, you know, bracket the idea that there wasn\u2019t one framer, and there was no —<\/p>\n

HAYES: Right.<\/p>\n

LITHWICK: — one agenda embodied in this, but even if you bracket that idea, I think there\u2019s a real problem with the idea that we\u2019re trying to sort of fetishize the document at the same moment that we\u2019re falling over ourselves to amend and change the parts we don\u2019t like.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, that\u2019s part of the process is changing and amending it. But you guys don\u2019t do that because your changes and amendments would never see the light of day if voted on legislatively so you\u2019ve ginned up the courts to do it for you, and that\u2019s what\u2019s under assault here. They\u2019re simply defenders and protectors. And people are going to swear an oath today on the floor of the House to the Constitution and to God, to defend and protect the Constitution. A piece of propaganda, the left says. And, of course, the template having been established, Maud Behar had to get in on the act on her show last night on the headline whatever it is —<\/p>\n

BEHAR: Do you think this Constitution loving is getting out of hand? I mean is it a nod to the Tea Party?<\/p>\n

MAN: I think —<\/p>\n

BEHAR: For the first time a lot of congressman will have heard about it, read it.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Just to show you how the template gets started and the privates, the buck privates in the army start falling in place.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: What is it with these Democrats anyway sexualizing the opposition? ‘Tea baggers,\u2019 ‘fetishists of the Constitution.\u2019 These are perverts themselves! These are… (interruption) Well, don\u2019t roll your eyes in there, Dawn. It is what it is. These are perverts perverting the founding documents. Let me ask you: If the Constitution is not that big a deal, how come the same people had such a cow when they thought Christine O\u2019Donnell didn\u2019t know what she was talking about regarding the Constitution? If it\u2019s so unimportant, how come Obama is so proud to have been a ‘constitutional lawyer\u2019 or professor or lecturer, whatever he was? Abraham Lincoln. Do they hate him? Did Abraham Lincoln have a ‘fetish for the US Constitution\u2019? <\/p>\n

Here\u2019s what Lincoln said, among many other things: ”We the people\u2019 are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.\u2019 That\u2019s Lincoln. Is he a pervert? Did Lincoln have a fetish? Lincoln also said, ‘Don\u2019t interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.\u2019 I wonder how many people in the media and I wonder how many Democrats know and I wonder how many of you know (the odds of you knowing are far greater than the media or Democrats knowing) our nation\u2019s first official Thanksgiving was to give thanks for the new Constitution.<\/p>\n

Not the Indians and turkey and popcorn and all that. Not Gravy. It was to give thanks for the new Constitution. And now it\u2019s a ‘fetish,\u2019 and all it means, folks — all it means when Jerrold Nadler comes out with his contempt and Maude Behar follows the fax that she\u2019s sent; when Dahlia Lithwick and some of these others so-called intellectuals of the left begin to impugn the character of people who revere the Constitution, all they\u2019re telling us — is how much it threatens them. What they\u2019re telling us is how much they fear the Constitution. They don\u2019t revere it. In order for them to succeed they have to ‘pervert\u2019 it. Lincoln\u2019s word, not mine (although it fits). They\u2019re really afraid of it. They\u2019re afraid of the Constitution, afraid of Sarah Palin. They\u2019re afraid of a whole lot of things. But you have to add the Constitution to the list with this latest assault on people who revere it.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: I\u2019ll tell you who has a fetish. (Well, many people have fetishes.) The Democrats have a fetish for Maya Angelou poems. They even have her write poems for their swearing-ins like Clinton\u2019s. (Angelou impression) ‘The Rock, The River, and the Tree\u2019 by Maya Angelou at the swearing in of Clinton in 1993. That\u2019s right. It was (interruption) ‘The Rock, The River, and the Tw\u2019ee,\u2019 and then they read Maya Angelou poems all over the place. <\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: I heard about this when I was gone. ‘Scalia to Talk About Constitution to House Members,\u2019 and the Democrats are livid! This is a Michele Bachmann idea. This from the LA Times: ‘The decision by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia to accept an invitation from Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), the founder of the House\u2019s Tea Party Caucus, to speak to incoming House members about the Constitution is drawing fire from some who worry the court is injecting itself into partisan politics. The meeting ‘suggests an alliance between the conservative members of the court and the conservative members of Congress,\u2019 said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, who said Scalia had shown ‘exceedingly poor judgment” by accepting the invitation.<\/p>\n

‘He said the association of Scalia, an outspoken conservative, with the bombastic Bachmann…\u2019 (pause) Bombastic? She\u2019s just passionate. Anyway, it ‘could contribute to the high court becoming overly politicized.\u2019 I have to laugh at that. So it\u2019s Scalia that makes the court ‘overly politicized;\u2019 not a bunch of liberal hacks that are on the court, but Scalia who does nothing but interpret the original intent of the Constitution when he issues opinions. That\u2019s all he does! He does not impose his agenda, whatever it is. He interprets the Constitution as best he can according to its original intent — and that, the left hates. He\u2019s an originalist.<\/p>\n

‘But Bachmann\u2019s office said that Democrats and Republicans were welcome to attend the Jan. 24 speech. Also, it is not unprecedented for a sitting Supreme Court justice to confer with the legislative branch. Several justices have met in off-the-record sessions with the bipartisan Congressional Caucus on the Judicial Branch.\u2019 Separation of powers, by the way, is the topic. She went to see Scalia. He accepted the invitation. His topic is separation of powers. Yeah, that\u2019s really a threat. Wow! Can you imagine that, a Supreme Court justice accepting an invitation from a member of Congress — legislative branch — to talk about separation of powers? <\/p>\n

Well, we can\u2019t have that. No, no, no! Let\u2019s get a Marxist professor in there to talk about it and balance it out. Is that what we should do? Again, this is from the Washington Post by Emi Kolawole: ‘Justice Antonin Scalia has weighed in on the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, leaving women\u2019s rights activists seething.\u2019 I love it when women\u2019s rights activists ‘seethe.\u2019 The thing is it\u2019s their constant state of existence. ‘Women\u2019s rights activists\u2019 (i.e., feminazis) are constantly seething. They are perpetually ticked off, constantly angry, as are most liberals. ‘In an interview with California Lawyer [magazine], Scalia said the Constitution…\u2019 This is why they hate the guy. What did I just say? He searches for the original intent. <\/p>\n

‘Scalia said that the Constitution itself does not protect women and gay men and lesbians from discrimination.\u2019 (Gasp!) The horror! The horror! He\u2019s a bigot, he\u2019s a racist, he\u2019s a sexist, he\u2019s a homophobe! ‘Scalia said that the Constitution itself does not protect women and gay men and lesbians from discrimination. Such protections are up to the legislative branch, he said.\u2019 He\u2019s got a mature idea on the restraints of his branch. Here\u2019s what he said. This is the question to Scalia: ‘In 1868, when the 39th Congress was debating and ultimately proposing the 14th Amendment, I don\u2019t think anybody would have thought that equal protection applied to sex discrimination, or certainly not to sexual orientation. So does that mean that we\u2019ve gone off in error by applying the 14th Amendment to both?\u2019 <\/p>\n

Scalia: ‘Yes, yes. Sorry, to tell you that. … But, you know, if indeed the current society has come to different views, that\u2019s fine. You do not need the Constitution to reflect the wishes of the current society.\u2019 That\u2019s key: ‘You do not need the Constitution to reflect the wishes of the current society. Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn\u2019t. Nobody ever thought that that\u2019s what it meant,\u2019 the Fourteenth Amendment. ‘Nobody ever voted for that.\u2019 Sex discrimination, sex-orientation discrimination, nobody even thought of that when this amendment was being proposed, debated and voted on. ‘Nobody voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws. <\/p>\n

‘You don\u2019t need a constitution to keep things up-to-date. All you need is a legislature and a ballot box. You don\u2019t like the death penalty anymore, that\u2019s fine. You want a right to abortion? There\u2019s nothing in the Constitution about that. But that doesn\u2019t mean you cannot prohibit it. Persuade your fellow citizens it\u2019s a good idea and pass a law. That\u2019s what democracy is all about. It\u2019s not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society.\u2019 That\u2019s why they hate him, because that\u2019s precisely what judges are for: Imposing their view, imposing their personal policy preferences, imposing their ideology on society. That\u2019s how the left does it because they cannot win those votes, because they represent 20% of the thinking in this country. No matter what anybody else tells you. <\/p>\n

You know what I hope happens today? When it\u2019s time for Pelosi to give Boehner the gavel, I hope she doesn\u2019t. I mean, I would love to see them have to pry the damn thing out of her hand. I would love to see her stand up and, make a protest speech. Say, ‘For the good of America, I just can\u2019t do it! Cart me off to jail, string me up, but I refuse! I refuse to turn the gavel over to these perverts who have a fetish for the Constitution. I refuse! They want to send old people out on the streets, and they want to kick seasoned citizens out of their homes and they want to deprive Medicare coverage for all elderly and they want to deprive all health care for everybody, and they want everybody to die except the banks!\u2019<\/p>\n

I would love to see Pelosi go nuts. <\/p>\n

It won\u2019t happen. She\u2019ll do that behind closed doors, and probably already has. (interruption) Wait a minute here! Wait a second! Wait just a minute up here! There\u2019s a bunch of kids in that place today. Now, Pelosi and the Democrats are saying that reading the Constitution today (or tomorrow, whatever it is) is a stunt. It\u2019s theatrics; it\u2019s propaganda. But having a bunch of grandkids there isn\u2019t? When Pelosi was sworn in back in 2007 and making herself look like the grandmother of the House with all the grandkids, oh, that was great! Look, five of them are sitting in a row there in the front. Kids. Members\u2019 kids. That\u2019s not theatrics, is it? No, no, no. That\u2019s not. That\u2019s not a stunt, is it? Oh, no, of course not! ‘Mr. Limbaugh, that\u2019s just the sanctified ceremony of children in the family being present.\u2019 Right. Right. Yeah, some little six-year-old is sitting on Pelosi\u2019s lap there next to Steny Hoyer, who\u2019s sitting next to Pelosi. Hoyer, look at that expression. It\u2019s ‘What am I doing here?\u2019<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: You know, the word ‘sex\u2019 does not even appear in the entire Constitution, you can\u2019t find it there, not in the real one. <\/p>\n

Now, in the once-upon-a-time news magazine called TIME: ‘The GOP House\u2019s Opening Act: Making a Statement – or Making a Mockery?\u2019 What are they talking about here? ‘Two months after a sweeping victory in the midterm elections, Republicans will officially reclaim the House of Representatives on Wednesday. But before the new majority party begins the business of governing — which it doesn\u2019t even really get down to until the end of the month — it will take the opportunity to savor its triumph and make a statement with a good dose of Washington political theater. At about noon, the House clerk will call the chamber to order. After reciting a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, the members will elect Representative John Boehner as Speaker. The Ohioan will be presented by his predecessor, outgoing Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi, before swearing in the largest GOP freshman class in more than half a century.\u2019<\/p>\n

See, it\u2019s political theater to pray, say the Pledge of Allegiance, but when Pelosi flexed her muscles on the speaker\u2019s podium surrounded by an untold number of grandchildren and extended family, whoa, that was not theater. And then they refer to the reading of the Constitution as a mockery here in TIME Magazine. We truly do have two countries here, don\u2019t we? And I want to know where the middle ground is with these people? Even if you cross the aisle and try to meet these people halfway, where is there compromise with somebody who thinks the Constitution, if you revere it you have a fetish for it, reading it for the House of Representatives is a mockery? See, the Democrats, folks, can only win, can only get their agenda by lying and changing the rules, and that\u2019s why they hate the Constitution. The Constitution\u2019s a contract. It\u2019s our social contract. It\u2019s the mother of all rules, you might say. It\u2019s the source of the rule of law. Of course, they hate it, they want to pervert it. It\u2019s the only thing standing in their way. The Constitution is an obstacle. That\u2019s why Obama, the Democrats have conceived the new Bill of Rights and the whole concept of a charter of negative liberties, meaning for big statists and big government people, the Constitution doesn\u2019t spell out what government can do. All the Constitution does is tell the government what it can\u2019t do, and they hate that. <\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: To the phones, as promised. To Jacksonville, Florida. Rob, welcome to the EIB Network. Hello, sir.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Happy New Year and happy birthday, Rush.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Thank you.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Hey, I wanted to… You were talking about the Congress, congressional Democrats and their arrogance and disdain for the Constitution. I think that\u2019s fundamentally a religious problem. They acknowledge no authority except themselves. They won\u2019t acknowledge God as the Creator and they won\u2019t acknowledge the Constitution and the people of the United States as their boss. They are fundamentally arrogant. They lie through their arrogance. They will do anything to subvert this country and subvert the Constitution.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, I think you\u2019ve got a basic understanding of who they are. I mean, they\u2019re not ‘godless,\u2019 it\u2019s just they have a different god than you and me.<\/p>\n

CALLER: The other question I had for you is even our so-called Republican conservative representatives, they always want to seek accommodation with them, even though we\u2019ve told them: ‘We don\u2019t want accommodation. We want you to say ‘hell, no\u2019 to everything that\u2019s been going on for the last years, and we don\u2019t want you to get along. We want to overturn fundamentally everything they\u2019ve done be that health care, be that the curly lightbulb stuff. We just don\u2019t like what they\u2019ve done,\u2019 and they\u2019ve gotta answer to us, the bosses of the Congress and the president.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Oh, no, no, no, no. (chuckles) They have answered. They got shellacked. But that only makes them hold you in more contempt. That only makes you a bigger target for the next time they get their power back. They find out you\u2019re a Tea Partier? (laughing) If you\u2019re not from an unhappy family, they\u2019re gonna make sure yours ends up unhappy. Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh. Ah, you\u2019re right, you\u2019re right. Condescension is part and parcel of liberalism. <\/p>\n

Sophia in my adopted hometown of Sacramento, California. Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Hi!<\/p>\n

RUSH: Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Hello?<\/p>\n

RUSH: Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Hi. Hey, Rush. Happy birthday next Wednesday. I hope you enjoy it.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Thank you very much. Oh, Sophia, you\u2019re 14 years old? I just saw this on the computer screen.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah, that\u2019s right.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Fourteen! And you know when my birthday is.<\/p>\n

CALLER: (giggles) Well, I am a Rush babe, so…<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, thank you very much. You sound like a very mature 14-year-old.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Why, thank you.<\/p>\n

RUSH: You\u2019re welcome.<\/p>\n

CALLER: So earlier you were talking about a few clips of — I don\u2019t know her name, sorry — the lady who is talking about the Constitution, how people were like saying it\u2019s biblical. She was like mocking them, basically, in the way that she was saying, ‘Oh, they were using it as biblical text.\u2019 Well, honestly, the Constitution is what this country is — and if it weren\u2019t for this country, she wouldn\u2019t have been able to even have said that without being persecuted (probably severely) in many other countries. This country made her everything she is, and she dares to mock it. It really, really, really grosses me out. For example, like you. For example. You are just like great because you live the American dream, which is just fantastic… Sorry, I\u2019m kinda getting nervous here.<\/p>\n

RUSH: No, you\u2019re doing great. You don\u2019t sound nervous at all. You just sound like you\u2019re in awe of me, and you don\u2019t need to be.<\/p>\n

CALLER: (giggles) Well, I just…<\/p>\n

RUSH: (laughing)<\/p>\n

CALLER: Like, the Constitution is everything this country is. If it weren\u2019t for that, what would we be? You know? Like, how would this country have built anything?<\/p>\n

RUSH: That\u2019s exactly right. If it weren\u2019t for the Constitution, we would be a dictatorship, a tyranny of some kind like where most of the people of this world have to live.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Honestly if it weren\u2019t for America, Benjamin Franklin — I mean, not Benjamin Franklin, sorry. He\u2019s the one who discovered electricity. We still would be in, like, cavemen, you know? I mean, we would be nothing.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, according to certain women, men still are, and you\u2019ll learn that as you grow older. <\/p>\n

CALLER: (giggles)<\/p>\n

RUSH: But I know that\u2019s not what you\u2019re talking about today.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah. So it just really grosses me out when people dare to mock the Constitution when it\u2019s everything they are. If it weren\u2019t for the Constitution, they would be nothing, and they mock what they are. It\u2019s an oxymoron, honestly.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Why do you think they do that, Sophia?<\/p>\n

CALLER: I guess they think it\u2019s more powerful, like I guess they think that they\u2019re cool. I don\u2019t honestly know.<\/p>\n

RUSH: They\u2019re afraid of it. It\u2019s because they\u2019re afraid of it. The people you\u2019re talking about — the Democrats, liberals, whatever — will tell us who and what they fear by what it is they seek to destroy or what it is they endlessly criticize. So they fear the Constitution, and they fear it for the very reasons that you have stipulated. The Constitution… This is the cut-to-the-chase way to say it: The Constitution is the greatest obstacle in their way. What does the Constitution guarantee and preserve? Liberty and freedom for the individual. That\u2019s the biggest obstacle to the left, not just in this country, but anywhere around the world. Liberalism is liberalism, socialism is socialism, communism is communism. Wherever the people who believe in that stuff are, individual liberty and freedom are the biggest threat to big-government statists, liberals and Democrats. Your education on this is superb — don\u2019t let anybody change your mind as you grow older — and your instincts are profound. Your parents have to be, like we are, extremely proud of you, I\u2019m sure. I\u2019m glad that you called. It\u2019s great to have you on the program.<\/p>\n

And we will be back.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: The Constitution is a limit on government. That, ladies and gentlemen, drives the left insane, the limit on government. They just can\u2019t abide it, drives them absolutely wacky.<\/p>\n

Phillip in Dallas, your turn. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Rush, I want you to take these people\u2019s contempt for the Constitution, and I want you to wield it like a club. I want you to beat \u2019em over the head with it. I wanted to remind you of — I don\u2019t know if you remember this, but in 2010 a left-wing publisher began putting warning labels on copies of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Paine\u2019s Common Sense, the Federalist Papers. This was Wilder Publications, and they put out a warning stating that, ‘This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today.\u2019 The disclaimer goes on to warn parents that they ‘might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.\u2019 These people hate our country and our founding documents so much that they\u2019re putting warning labels on the Declaration of Independence.<\/p>\n

RUSH: My brain\u2019s churning here. My memory is pretty good, but I don\u2019t remember this.<\/p>\n

CALLER: This was reported by Fox News in June of 2010.<\/p>\n

RUSH: I must not have been watching Fox News in June of 2010. I had much more important things going in June of 2010. (laughing) But I\u2019m listening to you describe this, and I\u2019m trying to suppress laughter, although it\u2019s outrageous. I mean, what a great parody that would be except that they\u2019re already doing it.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Rush, I want you to take this issue, and I want you to beat them over the head every day with it. I want you to embarrass them with their own contempt for our Constitution.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Do you think they\u2019re embarrassable over contempt for the Constitution?<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yes. If you hound them every day, they are. You can make these people look even dumber than they already look.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, if anybody could do that it\u2019s certainly me.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Could I make one comment about the Mount Soledad war memorial that the Ninth Circuit just found unconstitutional?<\/p>\n

RUSH: Yeah, go right ahead. This is the cross and the memorial that\u2019s been found unconstitutional. Yeah.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yes, a memorial to our fallen war dead. I couldn\u2019t help but note the irony that in the same week Al-Qaeda, on their international websites, had been circulating ideas on how Muslims could destroy the cross, and I thought, what irony. Al-Qaeda, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals are kinda working toward the same goals. This is who they are, Rush.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well — (laughing) I know. I chronicled how I have heard Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talk about America and I could swear what\u2019s the difference in that and Obama, or Steny Hoyer or any other Democrat? The talking points between the totalitarian regime enemies of this country and the Democrat Party are identical in many ways, not just about policy, but about people. You listen to your average Democrat talk about Bush and it\u2019s no different than what Ahmadinejad says about Bush. I got everybody sending me that Fox story that you cited out there, Phillip, about warning labels. (laughing) By the way, the warning label, interpersonal relations, read that again if you have it handy.<\/p>\n

CALLER: The disclaimer goes on to tell parents that they ‘might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.\u2019<\/p>\n

RUSH: Classic work. Now, when you read that disclaimer, Philip, do you conjure an image of the person who might have written it? Not physically of course, but who?<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yes.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, who? I mean obviously somebody in a publishing company, individual there, who is this person? Give me a profile.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Someone who is badly in need of deodorant, a bath, probably remedial lessons in economics, probably desperately in need of education as far as American history and someone who inexplicably supports a Stalinist version of government.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Okay. Interesting. I have a totally different take, but that\u2019s why I asked you. You\u2019re right, I mean I wouldn\u2019t have thrown in the bath business, but the lack of education and the bias and the bigotry and so forth, yeah.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah, it was written by a Democrat, Rush.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, of course, of course. There are many kinds of Democrats.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Would you find this many warnings on an issue of Hustler magazine.<\/p>\n

RUSH: No, but one really isn\u2019t needed there.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah, but we treat our founding documents like pornography and we treat pornography like art.<\/p>\n

RUSH: No, we don\u2019t. The left does, the American left treats it, and, by the way, if you like it, how do you feel now being called one that has a fetish?<\/p>\n

CALLER: Well, I have the same exact observation as you did. They have to apply some kind of sexual stigma to any idea of fealty or loyalty to our Constitution. They have to try to make me look bad or feel bad about it, and these are the same people who are wanting to talk to your kindergarten child about gay sex. It\u2019s not a fetish wanting us to adhere to the rules and the founding documents of our nation. That\u2019s what guarantees our equality. That\u2019s what enshrines our rights. <\/p>\n

RUSH: Limits — <\/p>\n

CALLER: And if we\u2019re gonna go the communist route, I\u2019m not gonna be around very long.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Ain\u2019t gonna happen, ain\u2019t gonna happen. The American people are awake and they are aware. This is not 20 years ago when this program — if all this was happening 20 years ago, I\u2019ll just take you back, let\u2019s go back to 1989, \u201990, \u201991, if this exact stuff was happening, if for the first time the Democrats were talking about fetish of the Constitution, I guarantee you that the reaction to it would be much different. There would be fear. People wouldn\u2019t know what to make of it. ‘Oh, my gosh, what\u2019s happening?\u2019 But now there\u2019s so much sophistication about who the left is and why they say these things. There\u2019s genuine, ‘You are not getting hold of my country, pal. You can put warning labels all over every document you want, but you\u2019re not getting hold of our country.\u2019 Twenty years ago it was much different. Twenty years ago we were in the throes of the soon-to-come upset in the \u201994 elections. <\/p>\n

I\u2019ve been able to chronicle in 20 years how these things have changed, and believe me, the American people, it\u2019s taken a while but they\u2019re up to speed on what they\u2019re up against now and who\u2019s actually opposed to them. I remember 20 years ago when stuff like this was happening, I can\u2019t tell you how alarmed I was by it, scared. I\u2019d go talk to people older than I, who had lived longer than I, and without fail — Mr. Buckley was one of them, ‘Don\u2019t worry about it, the American people will get up to speed on this eventually. They\u2019re never gonna get away with all they want.\u2019 And when the election of Obama came along, face it, everybody thought, ‘Oh, my gosh, now they\u2019ve finally done it.\u2019 But, look, after two years of pure undiluted openness about who these people really are, look at the degree of opposition to it. I mean this election, again, I cannot emphasize what a genuine, overwhelming spanking this was for the Democrat Party all across the country. <\/p>\n

Now, there needs to be repeats of this for many elections in the future. Not just this one time. But it\u2019s a far cry different today, the reaction to this kind of stuff than it was 20 years ago. Twenty years ago, ‘I can\u2019t believe this, how dare they? Who do they think they are? What are we gonna do about it?\u2019 Now the outrage is still there, but there\u2019s not fear. There is a determination to stop it, and there is, in some cases, laughing at these people. And more and more of that is also starting to take place. I must take a break. Phillip, thanks for the call. I appreciate it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

RUSH: Washington Post, by Jason Horowitz: ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw that it was good.\u2019 That\u2019s how this story begins. ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-37261","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\nLiberals Say Conservatives Have a "Fetish" for the US Constitution - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a "Fetish" for the US Constitution - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"RUSH: Washington Post, by Jason Horowitz: ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw that it was good.\u2019 That\u2019s how this story begins. ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"28 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"headline\":\"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a “Fetish” for the US Constitution\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T00:10:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/\"},\"wordCount\":5772,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/\",\"name\":\"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a \\\"Fetish\\\" for the US Constitution - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T00:10:14+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a “Fetish” for the US Constitution\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ffb56b28807580b1dc8f699308d74821a07bb92c4598a9344e8f9450d00445b3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ffb56b28807580b1dc8f699308d74821a07bb92c4598a9344e8f9450d00445b3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a \"Fetish\" for the US Constitution - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a \"Fetish\" for the US Constitution - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"RUSH: Washington Post, by Jason Horowitz: ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw that it was good.\u2019 That\u2019s how this story begins. ‘And the Founders said: Let there be a constitution. And the Founders looked at the articles and clauses and saw […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"28 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"headline":"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a “Fetish” for the US Constitution","datePublished":"2011-05-19T00:10:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/"},"wordCount":5772,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/","name":"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a \"Fetish\" for the US Constitution - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg","datePublished":"2011-05-19T00:10:14+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/01125107.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2011\/05\/19\/liberals_say_conservatives_have_a_fetish_for_the_us_constitution\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Liberals Say Conservatives Have a “Fetish” for the US Constitution"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ffb56b28807580b1dc8f699308d74821a07bb92c4598a9344e8f9450d00445b3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ffb56b28807580b1dc8f699308d74821a07bb92c4598a9344e8f9450d00445b3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37261","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=37261"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37261\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37261"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37261"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37261"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}