Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: There’s a fascinating story on the Bush tax cuts in the Stack of Stuff today. The Financial Times: ‘Obama’s Promise to End Tax Cuts for Rich Unravels.’ I saw that headline, and I said, ‘unravels? What have I missed here?’ And, by the way, notice 2002, they went be back, they got Bill Clinton, and they got Bill Clinton this time to tell the Democrats, ‘You better vote for health care, you’re gonna lose your seat.’ Clinton’s a kiss of death for Democrats when they go out and get into endorsing, same with Jimmy Carter. They keep going back to these old relics.

At any rate: ‘Nobody in Washington has put it quite so bluntly. But it seems almost certain now that Barack Obama will be unable to fulfill his pledge of reversing George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Last week, Democratic lawmakers returned home to prepare for next month’s midterm elections having failed in either chamber even to put the issue to a vote. In spite of the fact that President Obama made reversing the tax cuts a central pledge of his election campaign — along with ending combat operations in Iraq, a promise he fulfilled in August — the White House was abandoned last week by nervous Democrats to fight alone at the barricades. To the surprise of many, Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker, did not even schedule a vote before Capitol Hill went home.’ And then there’s this at the end: ‘The final and least likely scenario is that lawmakers are unable to produce any compromise and the tax cuts are allowed to expire on December 31.’

The Financial Times says this is the least likely of three scenarios, the least likely. ‘The final and least likely scenario is that lawmakers are unable to produce any compromise and the tax cuts are allowed to expire on December 31. This would set up an early showdown between what looks likely to be a Republican House and the Obama administration in which the newly victorious Republicans extend the tax cuts to everybody and dare Mr. Obama to veto it. In none of the three likeliest scenarios…’ they have two others that they posit here ‘…does Mr. Obama get what he wants.’ So the Financial Times has a story and I think this story might be playing a role today in the stock market and its upward tick. So you have this premise here from the Financial Times that Obama is gonna lose this tax cut war no matter which option takes place.

And then we have this from the Associated Press: ‘Intending to talk about colleges and worker training, President Barack Obama on Monday suddenly found himself in a spirited, election-year debate with a business advisory group about whose tax cuts should be extended and for how long. At a meeting of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein pressed Obama to keep all the Bush-era tax cuts, not just the middle-class cuts the president wants to extend. ‘That would give a boost to confidence,’ Feldstein declared. SEC Chairman William Donaldson added that an extension would allay business and consumer uncertainty.’

Now, from Obama’s standpoint, what do these two neophytes know? Were either of them elected president of the Harvard Law Review because of the color of their skin? What do these guys know? The SEC chairman and Martin Feldstein, versus Obama, and Obama says, what do you clowns know, I’m president, I was Harvard Law Review, you’re a bunch of schlubs. Obama replied to Feldstein and Donaldson that his stand, extending the tax cuts for everybody but the upper 2% ‘would benefit 98% of American taxpayers. ‘You’d think (that) would provide some level of certainty,’ he said.’ Always the glib answer. Never mind that it’s the remaining 2%, it’s actually far more than that when you consider how much of the income tax bite they pay. It’s that upper 2% that pay and drive the economy. So here these two experienced economists telling this neophyte little man-child president, ‘Look, you gotta confidence problem out there. If you extend everybody’s tax cuts, it’s gonna increase everybody’s confidence about the possibility of a future recovery.’ And Obama says, ‘Well, I’m gonna give 98 of people a tax cut. Why won’t that help confidence?’ Because they’re not the people that hire anybody; they’re not the people that go invest. We’re talking about people at 200, 250 grand or above not getting a tax cut. That’s small business, medium size, and large. No confidence, zilch, zero, nada.

Obama either gets it or doesn’t get it, doesn’t matter. I do believe he’s an idiot where capitalism is concerned. ‘Obama also reiterated his view that top-income tax brackets would do little to boost the recovery, since the wealthy aren’t holding off buying flat-screen TVs and other big-ticket purchases for lack of a tax cut. Plus, he said, those tax cuts are unaffordable.’ So he looks at the rich — I’m not kidding you — Obama looks at the rich and says, ‘Look, if they want to go buy a flat screen, they can, whether they get a tax cut or not.’ So we don’t have to give ’em a tax cut because they’re gonna go ahead and get their big screen TV and they’re going to go ahead and drive the economy. And then he said these tax cuts are unaffordable. ‘If we were going to spend $700 billion, it seems it would be wiser having that $700 billion going to folks who would spend that money right away,’ Obama said

I tell you, folks, this neophyte genuinely is an economic ignoramus. Does he think that the supporters of the tax cut extension for all believe that the rich people will boost the economy by buying flat screen TVs, which are made in China, by the way, does he really think… I mean, this is ignorant. That $700 billion he’s talking about, they will use the money that they are allowed to keep to invest in their businesses and save or create jobs, which once upon a time we were told was Obama’s top priority. ‘Obama dismissed the notion that the well-off — he included himself — would simply ‘take our ball and go home’ if they didn’t continue to get a big tax cut.’ He said if they don’t get a tax cut, they’re not going to pout, they’re gonna still be out there. Mr. Obama, our imam child, they have already taken their trillion-dollar ball home and they’re sitting on it, you jackass, and I’m sorry to have to say this, but we have all of this pile of cash, how many trillions is it that the news has reported that companies large and small are sitting on. They’re not investing it in anything. They’re not buying bonds; they’re not buying stocks; they’re not going into hedge funds. They’re sitting on the cash, trillions of dollars. They already have taken their ball and gone home, which is why we have 1% GDP growth and 9.6% unemployment. They’ve already split the scene because they have no confidence, and they’re probably right.

If this guy is this scary, if he is this adamant that they not be confident and that they not have this tax cut extended, which not even a tax cut, it’s just the current rates. Nobody’s taxes are getting cut here. We’re not cutting the richest tax cuts. The 36 rate’s gonna stay 36, or 35. It’s not going to 33. The only thing that’s going to happen is Obama’s gonna raise taxes, but nobody’s taxes are being cut here. They’ve already taken the ball and gone home. They’re sitting on trillions of dollars of cash. And if you go back to Feldstein and Donaldson of SEC, Mr. Obama, ‘extend the cut to everybody and you’ll inspire confidence,’ meaning they’ll take the trillion dollars of cash they’re sitting on and start putting it into play. This is where he’s an ignoramus. They’re not putting the trillion dollars into play because they’re trying to hold onto as much of it as they can before they have it confiscated which is what they think is coming, which is not confidence inspiring. He’s a jackass. He’s an economic illiterate. He’s an economic ignoramus. And that’s being charitable.


RUSH: This is Maureen in Berkeley — yes, Berkeley — California. It’s great to have you on the EIB Network.

CALLER: Hey, Rush! Tea Party greetings from Berkeley, California. I’ve been listening a long time it’s an honor to be here today.

RUSH: Thank you very much.

CALLER: I lived in Chicago for ten years prior to moving out here, and just want to comment and reiterate on your idea that Obama is just clueless. It’s those of us that earned, you know, just over 250 but we’re small business owners, that really we’re driving so many things; and the current uncertainty has just wiped out so many things, we don’t know where to go. My husband and I had two small businesses that we were running in addition to our regular work.

RUSH: Yeah?

CALLER: We employed between five and ten people seasonally and we have folded up shop on just about all of it at this point.

RUSH: Exactly. You’ve already taken —

CALLER: I had to let them go. You know, Rush, is now the time, are we at the bottom of the market, should I get back into things? But I’m so concerned, you know, with having their real estate, that things are not there yet, I don’t know what to do. So we’re just paralyzed.

RUSH: Exactly. You have taken your ball and gone home.

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: You’re not buying big-screen TVs. You don’t know what your future holds but you fear that it isn’t good. So you’re not spending.

CALLER: No. No. We’re at the point where we’re raiding out the good savings that we worked hard to put away for all of that time.

RUSH: By the way, you gotta explain something. I got 20 seconds here. You said that you’re a Tea Party in Berkeley.

CALLER: Well, there’s not many of us. It’s pretty small. We can use one teacup to share and just pass it around.

RUSH: That makes sense, then. I was going to say. And you probably have to meet in private, secluded.

CALLER: Yeah. I did take my son to one event and taught him the grand idea of holding up a sign and being the oddball that was looked at and saying that it was his future being torn away and using it as an educational experience for him.

RUSH: Good. Well, see, the bottom line is, folks: Even in Berkeley the Tea Party is there.


RUSH: Alex, parts unknown, somewhere in New Jersey. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hi.

CALLER: Rush, thanks for taking my call.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: You were talking about contractors and small businesses. I’m a contractor here in New Jersey and I firmly believe that Obama’s laughing ’cause everybody keeps calling and saying how hard it is for us, and we are struggling, and I don’t think he cares. And I think he’s honestly laughing, with the Drive-By Media listening and watching every breath and word you take, they see it, and they’re laughing at us. And that’s what he wants. He wants us to suffer. I believe it’s happening.

RUSH: That would follow if he’s doing all this on purpose.


RUSH: If he’s doing this on purpose, he would have to be unaffected by the suffering. He would have to think you deserve it.

CALLER: Yes. I think he believes that we do deserve it.

RUSH: I do, too. I do, too. I think he believes you’re wealthy, whatever you are, because you’ve stolen it from minorities and the oppressed, you’ve come by it in ill-gotten ways, and it’s about time you paid the price.

CALLER: Well, yes, that’s what he believes but, you know, my parents always told me, become your own boss, strive, take the risk, be your own business owner, and I have, and I am suffering beyond belief.

RUSH: Yeah, because you’ve become a target. Look, you’re an entrepreneur, you’re an entrepreneur and you are successful and that makes you a target of today’s Democrat Party.

CALLER: This is very true.

RUSH: You don’t need them.

CALLER: I do have a small other problem —

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: — I’m actually married to a school teacher, and this is probably a bigger problem, being self-employed, is my wife will not allow me to go to any functions. I can’t go to Christmas parties, Halloween parties, because all her teacher friends are there and I am a very big conservative, and she’s afraid that I’m going to say something wrong, which is a major problem and here’s —

RUSH: Hey. Hey, hey, hey, hey. Welcome to marriage.


RUSH: I mean this is nothing new. Wives are constantly afraid of what their husbands are going to say, and do sometimes. Don’t take that personally.

CALLER: I try not to. My wife now is supporting me as a union employee, it’s disheartening to me at this point, it really is.

RUSH: If she’s supporting you, play by her rules right now.

CALLER: I am, unfortunately I am.

RUSH: Why would you want to go hang around a bunch of teachers at a convention anyway?

CALLER: I don’t. It’s a friendly party, but it’s so hard, they’re somewhat friends, but —

RUSH: We all have to party.

CALLER: Their liberal ways are not my ways anymore, and my wife is slowly changing, you know, towards the conservative way. She sees me suffering, she understands.

RUSH: Yeah, but, you know, it’s written in a contract, wives are always scared to death their husbands are gonna embarrass ’em with their mouths. I mean that’s Adam and Eve.

CALLER: That’s their M.O. I guess.

RUSH: And it’s just the way it is. She wouldn’t be afraid — she could take one of your friends, she wouldn’t care what your friend said.

CALLER: No, correct.

RUSH: Let’s say you were busy and she took your friend and they insulted her friend, that would be fine, actually. If you do it — (laughing) —

CALLER: You’re right. You’re right.

RUSH: It’s kind of like, you know, the old line, the dog ran away from home, gone for 12 hours, don’t know where it went, oh, my gosh, is the dog ever going to come back. Finally the dog comes back. My wife says, ‘Are you okay? Are you okay? Are you hungry? Did anybody hurt you? Come here and let me hold you.’ You try being gone from home for 12 hours, and see what happens, ‘You SOB, where have you been? Why didn’t you tell me?’ See, it’s in the contract out there.

CALLER: I told my dad I would get in to call you before he would. He’s 18 years trying, and I’ve been trying for two. So, Dad in Princeton, I love you, and I won.

RUSH: (laughing) I’m glad you called. Thank you. Thanks very much.


RUSH: Here is Bill in Los Osos, California, welcome to the EIB Network.

CALLER: Hey, Rush.

RUSH: Hello, sir.

CALLER: Hey, this is definitely an honor.

RUSH: You bet. I understand that. Thank you.

CALLER: Well, I realize that. I’m here on the Left Coast, I’m near Morro Bay, between San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay. But my question to you is —

RUSH: Yeah?

CALLER: — the stimulus package.

RUSH: Yes?

CALLER: That Obama said was gonna put people to work.

RUSH: Yes?

CALLER: Was that true?

RUSH: That’s what he said.

RUSH: That’s what he said. In fact, some people just lost their stimulus jobs yesterday.

CALLER: (chuckling) Okay. That was my question, because I’m thinking: ‘How can the government take money and create jobs?’

RUSH: They can’t. The government does not create jobs. The government doesn’t create wealth.

CALLER: Correct.

RUSH: They can only confiscate wealth. They cannot and do not create wealth.

CALLER: That’s exactly what I was getting at and I was wondering. ‘Cause I figured out if they just gave the money out, the 800 million, or whatever it was… Was that right, the stimulus package was $800 million?

RUSH: It’s closer to a trillion, but they had to take it first before they had it.

CALLER: But they don’t have it.

RUSH: They didn’t have it. They borrowed it, printed it or what have you. But they took it and then they distributed it, but it went to unions and teachers and state governments. It didn’t —

CALLER: Create jobs.

RUSH: No. Well, there’s no way it could have.

CALLER: Exactly. That’s what I was thinking. Just give the money out, and that would be 20,000 jobs at 40,000 a year.

RUSH: Yeah, but there would be no jobs.

CALLER: (laughing)

RUSH: It would be welfare.

CALLER: That’s true.

RUSH: It did not — it doesn’t, didn’t — create jobs. Not possible. Your instincts are right on the money. The stimulus package was patronage. It was a slush fund, pure and simple. That’s all it was. Joy in Tampa, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hi.

CALLER: Thanks, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.

RUSH: You bet.

CALLER: I just was calling to… My husband and I are real faithful listeners, and we think you’re great but today we got upset when you called Obama a ‘jackass.’ We feel that you insulted the jackass.

RUSH: (chuckling)

CALLER: He’s been a very trustworthy and hardworking animal.

RUSH: Yeah. They do. I mean you’re right, they carry a big burden.

CALLER: And they probably have a higher IQ.

RUSH: (big sigh) You got me. I have to degree. It was an insult to jackasses.

CALLER: (chuckling)

RUSH: It’s also the symbol of the Democrat Party since back before the Civil War: The jackass, the donkey, the mule. Actually, correct me if I’m wrong on this, but a jackass is different from a donkey, is different from a mule. I think. The donkey is different than a mule. A jackass might be either one. I’m not sure. (interruption) No, I didn’t learn that in school in Missouri. (interruption) Okay, see, I knew that. A mule is the offspring of a male donkey, and the burro… See, they’re different. It’s like the difference between alligator and a crocodile. It’s a difference between a porpoise and a dolphin. You know, they are different. I just don’t know which. But look at all the different kinds of cats there are, all the different kinds of felines. And the zebra. You know, it’s in the mule family, not the horse family. And, no, I didn’t learn this at school. (chuckles) No, no. My dad told all about this as he was explaining Democrats to me.


RUSH: All right, here we go. This is it. I looked it up in the break. ‘The donkey or the ass is a domesticated member of the horse family.’ It is a member of the horse family. I was wrong about that. ‘The wild ancestor of the donkey is the African wild ass.’ Now, a male donkey, or ‘ass,’ is called a ‘jack;’ a female is called a ‘jenny.’ So Ms. Pelosi would be a ‘jennyass,’ and Harry Reid would be a jackass. I don’t know what Barney Frank would be. (interruption) Maybe a jenny jackass. Regardless, we create these questions, and I like to answer all this stuff before the program ends so that nobody goes away with questions unanswered.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This