RUSH: Now we move on to Massachusetts and the special election tomorrow. The weather forecast does not augur a large turnout. There’s snow and freezing rain, sleet today, 60% chance of the same tomorrow. And the people on the ground that I’ve spoken to, the Scott Brown people are far more fired up. He drew larger crowds than Obama did yesterday, far more energetic. Obama seemed to be not really interested in being there. He was thrown totally off track by a heckler on abortion. It’s like the teleprompter did not offer guidance or direction on what to do if he got heckled. They put this thing together at the last minute, and they chose a small venue. Now, normally during the campaign they picked venues of ten to 15,000. They chose a venue of 2,500 because they knew they wouldn’t be able to fill ten or 15,000 that late. And even before it started, Carl Cameron on Fox is reporting that there were seats galore that were empty and there was not a line outside and finally they got that together and there was a line outside and so forth and they did fill the arena.
Now, Public Policy Polling, which is this lib bunch down in North Carolina, this goes together with a Washington Post poll on Sunday that they undersold. The Washington Post had an ABC/Washington Post poll yesterday that has a really great nugget of information in it that they did their best to ignore, but first Public Policy Polling: ‘If Martha Coakley loses –‘ oh, and how about Patrick Kennedy calling her ‘Marcia’ Coakley? He doesn’t even know her name. Yeah, he went up there and started calling her ‘Marcia’ Coakley, and they talked to some people coming out of the Obama event yesterday afternoon, some woman said, ‘Oh, it’s just so sad, it’s so sad, poor Obama is working 36 hours a day to try to fix the mess George Bush left us in,’ and the people walking out of that thing were blaming Bush one year later for all the problems that we’re having. It’s Bush’s problem that Coakley is in trouble, ‘Marcia’ Coakley, according to Patrick Kennedy. He doesn’t even know her name.
Chris Matthews threw the religion card recently. A very Catholic state, Chris Matthews pointed out that Brown is Protestant. And he’s surprised here that the tribals have not arisen here. He’s trying to alert the Catholics that this guy is not a Catholic, he’s a Protestant. I kid you not. I kid you not. Look, they’re pulling out all the stops, Obama with a television ad now, and he did this in Virginia, too. Obama with robocalls all over Massachusetts. Now, he did this in Virginia and there was no hope of saving it in Virginia, and he did it in New Jersey, and it was a toss-up going in, so I don’t know what to make of this. I really am going to come down on the side that Obama, if the ship’s going to go down, he’s going to go down swinging to try to show Democrats he’ll run in for ’em and try to protect ’em. I think that’s what’s happening here. I’m still having trouble, folks — and I’m not trying to infuse any negative, I’m just being truthful here — I’m having trouble getting my arms around the fact a Republican can win this state, a Senate seat with the voter registration the way it is.
But I’m heartened by this data from Public Policy Polling: ‘If Martha Coakley loses tomorrow it will certainly have a lot to do with her running a poor campaign, but ultimately it will be a repudiation of the President. Scott Brown is winning 20% of the vote from people who voted for Barack Obama last year, but these are not people who think he’s doing a great job and just think Coakley is a duddy candidate. For the most part it’s people who voted for Obama and aren’t happy with how he’s performed in office. Among the Obama/Brown voters just 22% approve of the President’s work and only 13% support his health care plan.’ That’s of the 20% of the vote that went for Obama that’s going for Brown. ‘Coakley is leading Brown 87-10 among voters who still approve of Obama, so it’s not as if she’s losing a ton of support from people who are still happy with him. Brown has a 96-3 lead with ones who disapprove of Obama.’ And Tom Jensen here at Public Policy Polling says: ‘Coakley has run a bad campaign, no doubt. But the state of the race in Massachusetts is more a function of unhappiness with Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats than anything having to do with her.’
And the evidence can be found in question 15 of the Public Policy Polling survey. Here’s the question, it’s number 15: ‘Do you think that congressional Democrats are too liberal, too conservative, or about right?’ Too liberal: 53%. This is in liberal Massachusetts. Fifty-three percent say congressional Democrats are too liberal. Fourteen percent say they are too conservative. And 33% say that they are about right. So Scott Brown, if you want to know what’s really going on, the Democrat narrative is to throw ‘Marcia’ Coakley — call her that out of respect for Pat Kennedy — the narrative is to throw ‘Marcia’ Coakley under the bus, that she blew it. I mean if it weren’t for her varicose veins she would be totally colorless, there’s no question about that. But here are the biggest factors. Scott Brown worked his tail off. Scott Brown projected the image of a winning candidacy. That hasn’t been done on the Republican side since Romney. Scott Brown made it clear that he would vote against Obamacare, no hedging on that under the pressure brought to bear by State-Controlled Media.
Scott Brown is refusing to accept the traditional Massachusetts Republican Party role as token opposition to the machine. He is full-fledged opposition to the machine. He is positioning this as him and us against the machine, and that is resonating. He’s also had some extremely effective advertising. My spies on the ground up there say it’s some of the best TV spots they’ve ever seen anywhere, and his supporters are energetic at every stop. My spies on the ground went to some of his events on Saturday. He had at least 500 people in Plymouth fired up like you can’t imagine. They needed state police to direct traffic because passing cars kept slowing down to honk. There are pictures of Service Employee International Union workers brought in by the Democrats carrying Brown signs. A lot of SEIU carrying signs for Scott Brown after they’ve been brought in by the Democrats. Brown is signing autographs wherever he goes.
I think the key here, supporting a Republican in Massachusetts may no longer be something to keep quiet about. The situation has reversed. It’s now the Democrats have to keep a low profile, and all of this is because — and I’ve been trying to warn them, as you know I’ve been trying to warn the Blue Dog Democrats and any other Democrat up for reelection who would listen, you do not understand the mood of the people all over this country. They are totally opposed to the Obama agenda. They are totally opposed to the Pelosi Politburo way of running Congress. This is a country steeped in the traditions of liberty and freedom and self-reliance. They do not want big government, and that’s what the ABC/Washington Post poll showed yesterday. They didn’t emphasize it. They did report it, but they didn’t highlight it.
RUSH: All right. ‘[T]he Washington Post’s Sunday story that focused primarily on a new Washington Post-ABC News poll — ‘Poll Shows Growing Disappointment, Polarization Over Obama’s Performance’ by Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta — made no mention of the fact that the poll found that 58 percent of Americans say they favor a smaller government that provides fewer services… A large majority of Americans say they want a smaller government that provides them with fewer services, according to a new poll from the Washington Post and ABC News. But the Washington Post story about the poll makes no mention of this fact,’ and it’s huge. ‘The poll asked: ‘Generally speaking, would you say you favor smaller government with fewer services, or larger government with more services?’ Fifty-eight percent said they favor a smaller government with fewer services, and only 38 percent said they favor a larger government with more services. The Post did not mention the results from this poll question in its news story about the poll.’
Here is State-Controlled Associated Press. Headline: ‘A Year Later, Hope Dissolves into Disappointment — A year ago, on an Inauguration Day like no other, Barack Obama placed his hand upon the Lincoln Bible and then assured a weary nation that, with hope and virtue, we could ‘brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come.’ Across the country, in Seattle, Glen Boyd had only just entered his own economic storm. A couple of weeks out of work as a DIRECTV salesman, the Obama supporter nevertheless watched the inauguration on TV with a kind of goose-pimply, things-are-bound-to-get-better anticipation. He really felt it, that thing which the poet Alexander Pope said springs eternal. ‘I felt a tremendous sense of pride. I felt like he was the right guy. I felt a sense of optimism,’ recalls Boyd.
‘Now, a year later, Boyd writes this in his blog: ‘We believed what the man said in all those ‘yes, we can’ speeches. My one question is, where are all those reassuring speeches now?” Mr. Boyd, the reassuring speeches are there. The recovery is in full-fledged swing. The stimulus has worked miracles. Have you missed them? Obama is still giving lofty, oratorical speeches. Your better question would be: Where’s all the change and what happened to the hope? He concludes by saying, ‘To say I’m disappointed by the Obama presidency thus far would be an understatement.’ By the way, they collected a bunch of letters to the editor to approve the headline. It’s nine pages long if you print this story, and it’s nothing but letters to the editor all over the country. ‘A Year Later, Hope Dissolves into Disappointment.’ I can’t help but say again what an absolute scam was perpetrated on the people of this country, not just in 2008 during the campaign but for five years prior. The mainstream media convinced a majority of people that the country was in worse shape than it had ever been in, that George Bush was a lout, that the country was hated and despised. They really were convinced to believe that, when none of it was true.
RUSH: As usual, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have. Now, many people ask me to illustrate many of the things that I say. What do you mean, Rush, arrogant? What do you mean liberals are arrogant? What do you mean that they hold average people in contempt? Well, I have the two sound bites that will illustrate this as well as anything could. We have a montage, first off, the elitist party of Barack Obama making fun of people who drive pickup trucks. Scott Brown happens to drive a pickup truck. Scott Brown happens to drive a GMC pickup truck. GMC is General Motors owned, which means Obama owns it. His truck is a GMC Canyon. Now, maybe Obama forgot yesterday, and maybe John Kerry forgot that the United States and Barack Obama now own General Motors. You would think that Obama would want people to buy trucks. Here first a montage. We have ‘Marcia’ Coakley — you know, it’s a good thing that Patrick Kennedy didn’t call her ‘Martha Moxley.’ You know, it’s a good thing he goofed up on the first name and not the last name. You remember who Martha Moxley is? Michael Skakel was convicted of killing her. That’s Ethel Kennedy’s brother, whose father was Rushton Skakel, yes. Just a little interesting trivia. So here we have ‘Marcia’ Coakley, we have Senator Kerry, we have Obama and state Senate candidate Scott Brown talking about his truck.
KERRY: I’ve never seen an advertisement in a campaign for the United States Senate that begins with ‘I’m Scott Brown, and I drive a truck.’ I didn’t know it was a qualification for being in the Senate. Well, I got news for you, Scott, George Bush drove a truck, too, and look where it got us.
COAKLEY: And I’ll tell you one thing, just because you’re driving around in Massachusetts in a truck doesn’t mean you’re headed in the right direction.
OBAMA: Forget the ads. Everybody can run slick ads. Forget the truck. Everybody can buy a truck. I’d think long and hard about getting in that truck with Martha’s opponent. (laughter) It might not take you where you want to go.
BROWN: I’m Scott Brown, I’m from Wrentham, I drive a truck and I’m asking for your vote.
RUSH: Now, that is arrogance, that is genuine arrogance and conceit and holding average people in contempt, and Scott Brown is just like Sarah Palin in that sense: not Ivy League educated, doesn’t have the right pedigree, just an average, hardworking, real guy, drives a truck. They’re making fun of him for driving a truck. George Bush drove a truck, and look where that got us. You can’t get any more elitist than this. By the way, President Obama, because of your economic policies, not everybody can buy a truck. There are a lot of people who would love to buy a truck who can’t afford a truck right now. Since Cash for Clunkers expired, almost no one can buy a damn truck and those who can are scared to thanks to your economic policies, coming tax increases. So here we have Scott Brown doing what Obama wants: buying a GM truck. GM needs it, Bam’s union thug supporters at GM need it, Americans need it since we’re all going to subsidize the union thugs’ health care now, and here’s Obama and John Kerry and Martha Coakley slamming Scott Brown on his truck.
So that’s a great illusion of that and I don’t think you need any more. And I guarantee you this is the kind of stuff that behind the scenes kills them. Making fun of somebody because of what they drive? And they jump on my case for some of my absurd humor? All I do is illustrate absurdity by being absurd. I simply tell the truth about these clowns. These people who claim to be the holier-than-thou, who claim to be Mr. and Mrs. Sensitivity, Mr. and Mrs. Compassion, Mr. and Mrs. Tolerance, Mr. and Mrs. Understanding, these are some of the most hateful people around. They are all found on the liberal side of the Democrat Party. Obama got heckled yesterday at his Coakley rally. During the speech he was interrupted by a protester. Here’s that portion of it.
OBAMA: You — (protester screaming) you — you — you need somebody — (booing) you need somebody — that’s all right. That’s all right. No, we’re doing okay. All right. We’re okay. (crowd chanting) I, uh — we’re doing fine. Now, listen. (protester screaming) Now, where were we? All right, let’s go, everybody. Now, listen. Now, more than ever — that’s all right. Hold up, everybody. Hold up.
RUSH: He was totally taken off his game. Lost his place, didn’t know where he was, did not look as if he wanted to even be there yesterday. Didn’t sound presidential, didn’t look to me like he even knew where he was. Just put him on the plane, going to Massachusetts somewhere, after that we’re going to go somewhere else. During this appearance at Northeastern University, Obama tries to hold up his fired-up line from 2008.
OBAMA: Understand what’s at stake here, Massachusetts. It’s whether we’re going forward or going backwards. It’s whether we’re going to have a future where everybody gets a shot in this society, or just the privileged few. If you were fired up in the last election, I need you more fired up in this election. I need you out there working just as hard right now in those final days; I need you knocking on doors; I need you making phone calls; I need you talking to your friends and your neighbors and telling them what’s at stake on Tuesday.
RUSH: Yeah, and what’s at stake on Tuesday is not Martha Coakley — couldn’t care less. What is at at stake is his health care plan and the rest of his agenda. He wants people making phone calls and talking to their friends and neighbors telling them what’s at stake. We have two stories on this. First from The Plumb Line, WhoRunsGov.com: ‘The Brown campaign is hiring scores of paid temp workers from temp agencies to help staff Brown’s get-out-the-vote effort, work that’s typically handled by unpaid volunteers.’ The Brown campaign is hiring temporary workers. We pay people to help with the campaign. They pay people to vote.
And the companion story here, there’s a YouTube video out via the yidwithlid.blogspot.com blog: ‘Martha Coakley Phone Banks Are Empty as She Continues to Slip in Polls… Below is a look at one of Martha Coakley’s phone banks today. Granted there is a mixture of snow and rain, and it is a holiday, but the office is quite empty.’ Below is a look at one of Martha Coakley’s phone banks today, granted the mixture of snow and rain, it’s a holiday, but the office is quite empty. Maybe the morale there is not all that high.’ Obama asked them to staff the phones, get out there, tell people. Meanwhile, Brown is paying people and his phone banks are busy and tied up and being used and hers are empty.
RUSH: This could be the death knell for Martha Coakley. Last Friday on the radio in Boston, Coakley had this exchange with the host.
COAKLEY: Probably if it weren’t so close, Rudy Giuliani wouldn’t have come in, either, and, besides, he’s a Yankee fan. I just want people to know.
RADIO HOST: Yeah, but, now, Scott Brown has Curt Schilling, okay?
COAKLEY: Another Yankee fan.
RADIO HOST: Schilling?
RADIO HOST: Curt Schilling, a Yankee fan?
COAKLEY: No. All right, I’m wrong on my — I’m wrong —
RADIO HOST: The Red Sox great pitcher of the bloody sock?
COAKLEY: Well, he’s not there anymore.
RUSH: Uh, my friends, Curt Schilling responded.
SCHILLING: I will cast my vote for Scott Brown. (cheers and applause) One more thing. For the record, I am not a Yankee fan. (cheers and applause)
RUSH: I mean, that sound bite she just sounded… Obama didn’t know where he was and I don’t think she knows where she is, either.
RUSH: Somebody tell me: How many people have fainted at an Obama rally lately? Big, fat zero, right? Remember all those people fainting at Obama rallies during the campaign? Not happening now. Greetings. Welcome back. It’s Rush Limbaugh and this is the EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. Great to have you with us. The telephone number, 800-282-2882. E-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.
Brown versus Coakley. I really don’t think any of the talking heads — any of the State-Controlled Media or Democrat Party — will truly grasp the profundity of a Scott Brown victory if it happens. And the reason I think that is they’re so focused on health care. ‘Oh no! What’s going to happen to Obama’s health care?’ I have to tell you I think something else is happening here. The Democrats have made no secret of the fact that if Brown wins this tomorrow they’re going to take steps to make sure health care gets done before he gets there to stop it. This cannot bode well for them. David Shuster on PMSNBC asked if Massachusetts Democrats have lost their minds. No, they’ve lost their freedom. They have lost their freedom. This is what the talking heads and the Democrat Party do not realize. They’re so focused on Obamacare.
‘Let’s win one for Obama! Let’s keep the Kennedy seat! Let’s keep the blue state vote!’ They’re missing the real story, and the real story is the pulse of our nation. America is hard-wired for liberty, independence, and freedom from overbearing government. The ABC News/Washington Post poll that was released yesterday proves it. In that poll, 58% want smaller government with fewer services. They don’t want what we have now. The Founding Fathers built in checks and balances. The liberal politicians for life get around that, and they’re trying to get around the checks and balances even now. One of the balances and one of the checks is an election, and they’re still maneuvering to try to make the election meaningless. Our founding journalists had built-in checks and balances on politicians, but today’s pretend journalists are nothing more than liberal propagandists and liberal activists.
So the only real check and balance left is us: The people. We, the People. Tomorrow it will be ‘we, the people of Massachusetts.’ In November, ‘we, the people of America.’ I really think they’re in such a bubble that they don’t understand that this is not just about health care. It’s about far more. It’s about the fact that people do not want this agenda. They do not like a Nancy Pelosi Politburo-style House of Representatives and a Harry Reid Politburo-style Senate, and they don’t like an inexperienced president simply screwing up everything he touches. They don’t like it. They don’t like the agenda, period. Now, to show you that they’re dumb and insensitive and arrogant and conceited, in an interview a couple days ago with the liberal journalist Al Hunt on Bloomberg TV, they were discussing this race. It was Chris Van Hollen, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Chairman.
He’s a congressman from Maryland, and they were discussing such things as Scott Brown’s surge in Massachusetts and the likelihood of the Republicans capturing control of the House this year, and Van Hollen repeated a talking point that I heard from many Democrats all last week — and you’ve heard it, too. You’ll remember when I pass it on to you. Van Hollen said, ‘Why would you hand the keys to the car back to the same guys whose policies drove the economy into the ditch and then walked away from the scene of the accident?’ They are talking about the race to replace Ted Kennedy. Now, if anybody ‘walked away from the accident after driving the car into a ditch’ it is Ted Kennedy. Why would they remind people of that? It’s funny. They’re just dumb and insensitive.
Now, here’s a great indicator. I saw this mentioned, too, in other polling results earlier today. There’s a little blog out there, AJStrata, that I was checking out, and I think this is a good indication. Coakley is down by 16% in absentee voting. Now, in many states absentee voting pretty much tracks with day-of-vote voting. It’s really not that much different in most states. Now, in some states and in some precincts, some counties run by the Democrats, they’ll hold out and see how many votes they need to win a certain election, and they’ll play some games with voter registration and absentees. But Real Clear Politics is reporting that with the 9% of Massachusetts voters who voted absentee (which ended a couple days ago) Brown is winning 58-42 or 16%.
That’s right in line with computations which indicate that Coakley could lose by as much as 10%, depending on who is energized to get out and vote. So if absentee voting is any indication of intensity — and it is; by definition it is — then by this measure Coakley is toast. But one thing concerns me, and that is all the reporting. Even the White House is saying, ‘Oh, yeah, yeah! I think we’re toast.’ The White House is telling CNN: ‘I think there’s no way. Coakley’s going to lose.’ Folks, up in Massachusetts, it could be a ploy to get you to relax, to think it’s already over. I know you’re not going to fall for it but I’m just going to remind you: Don’t fall for it. The weather forecast for today and tomorrow is not good for Boston and much of Massachusetts, which would indicate a low turnout among people who are not highly mobilized, motivated, and energized to get out.
I think in the race up there, turnout probably on the Brown side is going to be very high because I think this has become a cause, not just a race. People want to stick it to the machine. Coakley, ‘Marcia’ Coakley is just a symbol (according to Patrick Kennedy, who called her ‘Marcia’ numerous times yesterday). ‘Marcia’ Coakley is just a symbol of their pent-up frustration against what Brown is brilliantly running against. Brown is running against ‘the machine.’ So the absentee vote I think is a key signal of the enthusiasm gap that does exist up there and no late surge can take away his absentee vote lead. Now, there is a Harvard professor who explained the race: Rosabeth Moss Kanter, a professor at Harvard Business School.
It’s at Politico. ‘Will Martha Coakley win the Massachusetts Senate seat? Yes. Will Scott ‘Who?’ Brown become a national Republican darling and Fox talk show guest? Yes. Can we read the Tea Party tea leaves about next November’s Congressional elections? No. Then why did the race tighten? As an adult-lifelong Massachusetts citizen, let me count the ways.’ This is Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Harvard Business School. ‘The weather has been brutally cold. Seasonal affective disorder has set in, and people are cranky. Grouches want things to oppose, so they can express their general discontent.’ So the reason that Coakley is losing, according to according to a Harvard Business School professor, Rosabeth Moss Kanter, is the result of grouches with cabin fever!
She continues: ‘Coakley (whom I support) has not run a perfect campaign. Brown has come across as a charmer. Coakley doesn’t remind anyone of Ted Kennedy nor can she claim his mantle. So the nostalgia factor doesn’t work in her favor. … These are some of the reasons the race tightened. In the end, however, what matters is not polls but who goes to the polls, so to speak. The Dems have formidable get-out-the-vote machines, especially in Mayor Tom Menino’s Boston. Coakley has a big women’s network, a group with a high percentage of likely voters who are mobilizing their e-mail pals. So Coakley will win, and it might not even be a squeaker.’ That’s from Rosabeth Moss Kanter who says all this polling showing Brown way ahead is just a bunch of grouches who have cabin fever.
It’s totally absurd. That’s why I’m passing it on to you. It is a hundred percent totally absurd. There is no energy. (interruption) It’s Harvard, yes. Look, that’s the machine, too, the elites. This is what people are fed up with, all these people that openly claim, ‘We’re smarter than you. We know better than you. You don’t know what’s good for you; we know what’s good for you.’ We are a people who are hard-wired for liberty and freedom and the pursuit of happiness, and these people don’t get it. I’ll tell you, it’s a condescension, an arrogant condescension that the elites have for average people. You heard it in the sound bite, John Kerry and Obama and ‘Marcia’ Coakley making fun of Scott Brown driving a truck, and yet these people make a play for NASCAR votes every year.
RUSH: Fred Barnes from Weekly Standard, interesting story. Paul Kirk cannot vote after Tuesday, according to Republican lawyers. Republican lawyers say that Paul Kirk, who’s now sitting in the Senate in the Ted Kennedy seat, will no longer be a Senator after Election Day regardless when it’s certified. ‘Appointed Senator Paul Kirk will lose his vote in the Senate after Tuesday’s election in Massachusetts of a new senator and cannot be the 60th vote for Democratic health care legislation, according to Republican attorneys. Kirk has vowed to vote for the Democratic bill even if Republican Scott Brown is elected but not yet certified by state officials and officially seated in the Senate. Kirk’s vote is crucial because without the 60 votes necessary to stop a Republican filibuster, the bill will be defeated. This would be a devastating loss for President Obama and congressional Democrats.
‘But in the days after the election, it is Kirk’s status that matters, not Brown’s. Massachusetts law says that an appointed senator remains in office ‘until election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy.’ The vacancy occurred when Senator Edward Kennedy died in August. Kirk was picked as interim senator by Governor Deval Patrick. Democrats in Massachusetts have talked about delaying Brown’s ‘certification,’ should he defeat Democrat Martha Coakley on Tuesday. Their aim would be to allow Kirk to remain in the Senate and vote the health care bill. But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the US Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period. Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate. ‘Qualification’ does not require state ‘certification,’ the lawyers said.’
Nineteen states are prepared to file suit against the health care bill in the Senate because of the Louisiana Purchase and the Cornhusker kickback and this sort of thing. This is by no means over, by no means is this over. Now, whether the Republicans will actually have the gonads to go out there and file a suit and claim that Kirk has no standing remains to be seen. But, if they don’t, they’re missing a golden opportunity. The people of this country, not just Republicans, the people of this country are fired up. The people of this country want no part of the Democrat agenda. I mean they’re even losing their base over some of this in convoluted ways, but they are. Now, listen to this montage that we put together yesterday in Boston. This is a bunch of reporters talking to people, students waiting to get into the Martha Coakley rally, and you’ll hear a theme here.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So why are you guys here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So what do you all think about Martha Coakley?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: I’m from New York. Eh.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there anybody else here that you’re here to see?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: Um. Not really.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you here today?
STUDENT JAMIE RUDEN: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Anybody else?
STUDENT JAMIE RUDEN: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: See Obama. Anybody else?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there anybody else you came here to see today?
STUDENT VICKIE: No, that’s it.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Anybody else you here to see?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: All right. Is anybody voting in this election?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Why are you guys here today?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: To see Obama.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Anybody else? All right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE STUDENT: Scott Brown.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Scott Brown? (laughing) Thank you.
RUSH: They just heard a celebrity was in town, they showed up to see Obama, clueless on Coakley. And Obama did not make the case for Coakley. He made the case for himself and he’s not on the ballot. CNN’s Ed Henry, I referenced this earlier. This is Sunday morning, State of the Union, John King said, ‘Republicans believe if they win this race, they can tie up the Senate, prevent a vote on health care reform and other issues. That happens to be a fact.’
HENRY: In terms of that fear I was told very reliably that a couple of the president’s top advisors have told senior Democrats they think Coakley’s going to lose. Now there may be some hyperbole in that, it may be about scaring the base, you know, turnout, just going down, but the way I’m hearing it is that there is real genuine fear inside the White House that she’s going to lose, that’s going to have dramatic implications not just on health care but beyond.
RUSH: And again, Ed Henry may have a point, they could be putting this news out trying to frighten the Democrat base into showing up. I don’t think that’s gonna work. You know, it’s kind of being too cute by half. What’s missing here from the Obama side is any desire to save the Obama agenda. See, this is what’s missing. There’s no desire to save it. The desire is to stop it. Martha Coakley would not be in trouble if there were a desire to save this agenda. We can look at the polls on health care, 36% of the people want it. Over 50% do not, nationwide. In Massachusetts it’s the same, pretty similar. The energy to save health care is not there. The energy to save the Obama agenda is not there. The magic has been lost. All of that’s gone. People aren’t fainting anymore at Obama rallies. Wall Street is looking at Massachusetts as the place where the American economy could be saved from the Pelosi-Obama socialist agenda. This last Friday on CNBC, Jim Cramer, who’s in the tank for Obama after a brief flirtation outside the tank (the Obama administration really came down on him, on the Jon Stewart show), so Cramer got his mind right, so he’s in the tank for Obama but nevertheless said this.
CRAMER: We could have a gigantic rally off a Coakley loss and a Brown win. It will be a signal that a more pro-business, less pro-labor government could be in front of us. Hey, would you say it is more childlike, perhaps? No. We can never be as capitalist as the communist Chinese. How about a little less like the old Soviet Union? Yeah, that would be more like it. Pelosi Politburo emasculation, everything from the banks, which are usually in the Democrats’ penalty box, to the oils which are despised by this administration for being carbon could be propelled dramatically higher, all of this Tuesday night.
RUSH: That would be a fascinating thing if it happens, if all of these interesting stocks and these areas of business skyrocket up because of a Coakley loss and an Obama loss. Cramer still has a job, oh, yeah, he got his mind right, oh, yeah. He drifted off the reservation. You remember, after Santelli started the Tea Party movement, Cramer got on board, and then he made the mistake of going to the Jon Stewart show and Jon Stewart pummeled him into embarrassment and submission. So he got his mind right, went back to CNBC, became one of the biggest shills for Obama and he has been ever since. But he’s talking about stocks going through the roof, business rebounding if there is a Coakley loss, which equals an Obama loss because of a Brown victory.
RUSH: I was happily wrong on Friday, ladies and gentlemen, when I warned — I didn’t predict, but I warned of a possible hit piece on Scott Brown over the weekend from the Boston Globe. None was forthcoming. There hasn’t been one. In fact, a couple of stories in the Globe, one by somebody that’s been in the tank for ‘Marcia’ Coakley all this time, pretty much concedes it to Scott Brown. It’s interesting.
‘Race is in a Spinout,’ Boston Globe columnist: ‘[Marcia] Coakley made a jaw-dropping –‘ I know it’s Martha but Patrick Kennedy called her ‘Marcia’ all day yesterday. I know the Democrats did their hit piece with the rape ad, but that would be about effective as Martha Coakley running an ad saying that the Haiti earthquake is because Scott Brown knows George Bush. She is the one that has the explaining to do on letting sexual predators go scot-free and not be charged, she’s the one that has the explaining to do when she was prosecuting attorney, attorney general, she’s got the explaining to do on that kind of stuff. People in Massachusetts know all about that.
‘Martha Coakley made a jaw-dropping declaration earlier this week at the only live televised debate in Boston that she has deigned to do. She said, and I quote, ‘I’ve traveled the state and met tremendous people.’ If she did, it was under the cover of darkness, with an assumed name. Because if she had really traveled the state, if she had taken the time to meet voters, Coakley wouldn’t be in the position she finds herself in now, heading into the final weekend of this special election campaign in a perilously close race against a GOP state legislator nobody had heard of a mere six months ago. Back in December, Coakley beat her closest opponent by 19 points in a primary in which she got stronger by the day. She strolled into the general election with high name recognition, strong favorability ratings, and as the Democratic candidate in a state that hasn’t elected a Republican to the Senate since 1972. It looked as if it would be impossible to lose. So what did she do? Apparently, she’s tried to accomplish the impossible. Literally, she all but vanished. She refused to debate on TV unless it was exactly on her terms. She went days without venturing out in public. When she did appear, it was typically to accept endorsements from elected officials or union heads in front of supportive crowds.’
Anyway, this is the Boston Globe and this was on January 15th, and it’s a prelude to throwing her under the bus. Listen to this. It’s the final three paragraphs: ‘Prominent Democrats in Boston are privately seething at the candidate and her campaign. First and foremost, they see the immediate impact defeat could have on the health care overhaul. Beyond that, they fret about the seismic impact a Republican victory in Massachusetts would have on Obama’s national standing. And they are nearly despondent about what a defeat would mean to Ted Kennedy’s legacy and memory. We’re at an amazing point right now in which nobody knows what will happen Tuesday. And it’s not because of anything Coakley did, but because of everything she didn’t.’
Jake Tapper, on his ABC blog: ‘Martha Coakley: A Democratic Canary in a Coalmine? — Political operatives say the Senate race in Massachusetts between Democratic state attorney general Martha Coakley and Republican state senator Scott Brown is too close to call. But the fact that President Obama felt the need to fly to the Bay State to campaign for a Democrat in one of the most Democratic states in the nation speaks volumes about the ugly climate for Democratic candidates. Coakley has run an imperfect campaign and has had a rough couple weeks. But, as one senior White House official acknowledged to me, ‘in Massachusetts, even after a rough couple weeks the Democrat should be ahead.’ Polls have Coakley and Brown neck and neck.’ So it’s despondency and depression in the State-Controlled Media.
Now, the AP has an interesting story here: ‘Coakley Hopes for Historic Win in Kennedy Seat Bid.’ Would somebody explain to me what the historic bid would be? What is this historic win? The headline should be: ‘Coakley Poised for An Historic Loss.’ What is so historic about this election is this, they say: ‘Coakley, hoping to become the first woman elected to the US Senate in Massachusetts, said she always expected a tough election.’ So AP, shameless propagandists in the tank, ‘Coakley Hopes for Historic Win in Kennedy Seat Bid,’ because she’ll be the first female elected to the Senate from Massachusetts. As I say, the more apt headline: ‘Coakley Poised for An Historic Loss.’
RUSH: Hey, get this: The Democrat mayor of Quincy, Massachusetts, has endorsed Scott Brown. ‘James Sheets a six term Democratic mayor of Quincy today endorsed Scott Brown for United States Senator. He released the following statement via the Brown campaign: ‘Despite being a lifelong member of the Democratic Party, I am endorsing Scott Brown for Senate, as I know he will always represent Massachusetts with an independent voice in Washington,’ Sheets said. ‘Martha Coakley has repeatedly stated she would cast the critical 60th vote for the current health care proposal that would slash Medicare funding by nearly half-a-trillion dollars and dramatically impact the care so many seniors rely upon in their final years. As our United States Senator, I am confident Scott Brown will only support legislation that will benefit his constituents, and this is why I will be voting for him on Tuesday.” That’s pretty big, the Democrat mayor of Quincy, Massachusetts, endorsing Scott Brown. Here’s another Democrat sinking with the Obama albatross, a new TV ad that ‘Marcia’ Coakley is running.
OBAMA: Martha knows the struggles Massachusetts working families face because she grew up with those struggles. She’s fought to the people of Massachusetts every single day. As attorney general, she took on Wall Street and recovered millions for Massachusetts taxpayers.
RUSH: She did?
OBAMA: She went after big insurance companies and took on predatory lenders.
RUSH: She did?
OBAMA: This is what Martha Coakley is about. Every vote matters! Every voice matters! We need you on Tuesday.
COAKLEY: I’m Martha Coakley, and I approved this message.
RUSH: Now, what’s the problem with that ad? Snerdley, what’s the problem with that ad? You tell me right now. Three…two…one. What’s the problem with the ad? The problem with the ad is that people in Massachusetts do not hate the insurance companies right now. The health care plan that they’re saddled with there is not the fault of the insurance companies. It was passed by the state government. Obamacare is a mirror image of it and it costs more. They don’t hate Wall Street. People in Massachusetts do not hate Big Oil. People in America do not have the same enemies that Barack Obama has. They simply don’t. The Democrat Party’s number one enemy right now is you, the people, and the places where you work. There’s no other way to say this. If you’re an insurance agent, you’re evil. If you work on Wall Street at whatever job, you are in the crosshairs. If you work in an oil company of any size, you’re in the crosshairs. If you work at a pharmaceutical company or a pharmacy, you are in the Democrat Party’s crosshairs. Everywhere you work… If you are in a small business, you are in the Democrat Party crosshairs. Taxes are going to be increased. Obama and the Democrats are targeting these businesses. If you have a job, you are in the crosshairs of the Democrat Party, and the people of Massachusetts have figured it out.
RUSH: Now, there’s another sound bite to explain the elitist arrogance of people like ‘Marcia’ Coakley. This is from Fox25 in Boston this morning. She was on television and the host said, ‘Sixty-one percent of the people that respond to that Suffolk poll say they don’t think the government can afford this health care plan. Are they wrong?’ Now, listen to her answer.
COAKLEY: They are wrong, because the plan, if you look at it, over the next ten years will be cost neutral from the budget office but what’s more important, Gene, is what it does is it changes the way we think about health care. We’re going to do more screening early on; we’re going to get those kids who are going to have diabetes; we’re going to do cancer screening. We don’t have a health care system that works now. We only fix people when they’re stick already and it costs too much, and it’s hard to measure that, and it’s also a little complicated.
RUSH: So it’s too hard for people to understand, it’s just a little too complicated. We do not have a ten-year cost neutral plan for the budget office. We have a trick, Ms. Coakley. The trick is that taxes begin immediately, the so-called benefits, the spending doesn’t start for four years. And that’s how they arrive at budget neutral over ten years. But it’s nowhere near budget neutral.
RUSH: Ardis, Redondo Beach, California, great to have on you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. I’m honored to speak to you and a million thanks for all you do for everyone, keeping us educated.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: I have a complaint. On January 9th I sent out my absentee ballot for the Massachusetts election and Saturday it came back into my mailbox here. And the only thing I can figure while I’m waiting here is where they have the return to go back to my hometown in Chicopee, Mass, they said it is stamped so light that it didn’t get read in the post office. And I’m wondering if that’s deliberate because I’m a registered Republican.
RUSH: I don’t know. How can they know you’re a registered Republican just from your absentee ballot without opening your envelope?
CALLER: Well, but because I’ve always been, you know, when they mail it out, but I just wondered because, where it has my address —
RUSH: Well, it could be. Look, these are Democrats, you know, and they’re desperate. It could well be that they looked up your address, found out you’re a registered Republican and sent it back. I mean it is a union at the post office — hell, I don’t know. With Democrats you cannot reject this kind of thing. You just can’t. It may sound implausible, it may sound impossible, but you just can’t reject it out of hand. In the old days you could. The absentees that have been counted so far, Scott Brown has a 16-point edge, 9% of the vote so far is early absentees.