×

Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




RUSH: Folks, a federal judge has declared Obamacare unconstitutional. The law has been voided and it does not matter. Dick Durbin, all the Democrats, they are still implementing the law. It is as though the Constitution doesn’t matter. The media is not the slightest bit interested in the substance of this. They’re just keeping track of it in the horse race context about how Obama’s showing great courage defying this Reagan appointed judge in the interests of what’s best for the American people. It’s stunning. We apply the test, if this were Bush 43 that were ignoring — let’s say that the Democrats had succeeded and they had found that the invasion of Iraq was unconstitutional, just to pick something. Federal judge says it’s unconstitutional so all operations have to cease. Bush doesn’t cease, can you imagine? That’s all we would be hearing about here. This is not an insignificant item. We’ve had a federal judge rule that the whole law is void.

Now, Dick Turban is out there saying, (paraphrasing) ‘Well, the judge did not issue an injunction. The judge didn’t say stop this.’ The judge didn’t think he had to. A judge affirms murder is illegal. People continue to murder. The judge says, well, I didn’t offer an injunction against murder, or lawyers for the murderers, the judge didn’t issue an injunction. The judge thought the law being voided spoke for itself. If you have any kind of respect for the rule of law this is a no-brainer. I’m just stunned by how little attention it’s getting. It’s just a ho-hummer for seemingly a lot of people.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT


‘Efforts to repeal President Barack Obama’s health care law died a quick death in the Senate Wednesday –‘ this Politico happily writing ‘– but the GOP got a consolation prize — a bipartisan fix to a tax-reporting requirement in the law that was widely panned by businesses.’ I assume that’s the 1099 reporting requirement. The Politico, in interests of great journalism, does not identify the fix to a tax reporting requirement as the 1099 problem. They assume all of their readers over at TIME, Newsweek, and the Washington Post will understand what they’re writing about. ‘A Democratic amendment to repeal the law’s new tax-reporting requirements passed, 81-17, with broad bipartisan support. A Republican amendment to repeal the entire health reform law, meanwhile, fell along party lines, 47-51, in a procedural vote.

Mitch McConnell said just holding the votes is a political victory. ‘McConnell managed to force the roll call on the floor of the Democratic-controlled Senate. And some moderate Democrats are now on the record with a vote in favor of Obama’s signature,’ unconstitutional health care bill. So McConnell forced a bunch of Democrats to say ‘aye’ voting for what has now been ruled to be an unconstitutional piece of legislation. So Politico can say here, full repeal of health law fails, party line, no big deal. It is a big deal. Dingy Harry had vowed this would not happen. That’s why I say, this Egypt thing, folks, the Republicans are doing some really good stuff, some heavy lifting, and it’s not being reported elsewhere because the story of the day, the juice, if you will, is Egypt. So some Democrats, vulnerable in 2012, are on record as supporting Obamacare. Twenty-three Democrats are up for reelection in 2012 and almost half of them are vulnerable, according to polling data that people have now. So figure 12 to 13 of these Democrats are vulnerable, and they had to go on record yesterday. This was not part of the plan.

Audio sound bite time. Let’s go to Harry Reid, Dingy Harry, yesterday in Washington on the Senate floor. This is Dingy Harry speaking about the differences between Democrats and Republicans in the Senate.

REID: Democrats are fighting to modernize our nation’s air travel. Republicans are fighting to repeal the health reform law, ignoring the 80% of Americans who want them to leave it alone.

RUSH: What?

REID: In other words, Democrats want to give passengers the rights they deserve. Republicans want to take away patient’s rights that they already have.

RUSH: By the way, it’s a lame effort, Dingy Harry, to try for the Obama reverb and echo there. It just doesn’t work with your anemic voice. Every time I listen to Dingy Harry, I want to clear my throat. I feel like I got phlegm in there, just listening to Dingy Harry. Did you know that 80% of the American people want the law left alone, the health care law? It’s total BS. They’re defending an unconstitutional law, Dingy Harry trying to score points with passenger rights. Here’s Mitch McConnell on the floor of the Senate yesterday.

MCCONNELL: It’s not every day that you get a second chance on a big decision after you know all the facts. This is that second chance. And for all of us who oppose the health bill, today we reaffirm our commitment to work a little harder to get it right. We can’t afford to get it wrong.

RUSH: So McConnell was giving Democrats like Jim Webb and Claire McCaskill a second chance, change their vote. Claire, by the way, I’m from Missouri, I keep up somewhat with what’s going on there. Her campaign is — what’s the word I’m looking for? It is schizo. It’s inconsistent. She comes out against spending. She’s trying to make it sound like she doesn’t want to side with Obama on anything one day, and the next day it’s the exact opposite depending on who the audience is, and Claire clearly is vulnerable in 2012. Anyway, McConnell said, (paraphrasing) ‘Look, if you guys want to get this vote right, here you go.’ They didn’t avail themselves of the opportunity. Bernie Sanders, this is last night on MSNBC, the host: ‘Senator, how frustrating is this for you to see the bill tied up in a constitutional argument when the provisions that could have been in place, like the public option and other versions of the legislation that were rejected early on by the Democrat leadership, would not have posed any constitutional difficulties?’

SANDERS: One of the ways I want to see it improved is to give states flexibility to provide health care to all people, maintaining very, very high standards but doing it in a more cost effective way. And in the state of Vermont, we are moving forward toward a Medicare for all single-payer system. And I hope very much to be able to get waivers from Congress and the White House in order to allow us to do so. Because I think at the end of the day if you’re gonna provide health care to all of our people in a cost effective way you’re gonna have to get rid of the private health insurance companies and put our money into health care, not profiteering, not administration, not bureaucracy.

RUSH: Who let Bernie out of the cage? Bernie, you’re not supposed to say that yet. Bernie just gave it all away: get rid of the private health insurance companies. We’re gonna have to get rid of and put our money into health care. Not profiteering, not administration, not bureaucracy, which of course is all it will be. So this is Obamacare. This is what it’s designed to be: Single payer public option, yada yada, whatever you want to call it. But they’re not supposed to say this in public, and Bernie Sanders did. I mean it’s one thing when Maxine Waters says we’re gonna nationalize and socialize — everybody just starts laughing. But when Bernie Sanders comes out here and says we gotta get rid of the private health insurance companies then people cringe because that is the agenda. That is the strategery.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here is the Cybercast News Service. Dick Durbin told the Cybercast News Service the regime should absolutely continue enforcing the Obamacare law because the federal judge, Roger Vinson. ruled only that the law is unconstitutional. He had a chance to issue an injunction but he didn’t do so. So we had an unconstitutional law and Dick Durbin, Senator from Illinois says: Hey, yeah, he said it’s unconstitutional, but he didn’t issue an injunction so we’re free to keep on implementing something that he said is unconstitutional. The Cybercast News Service reporter ‘asked Durbin to clarify whether the Obama administration should continue to implement the law. ‘Oh, absolutely,’ said Durbin. …

‘CNSNews.com asked Durbin on Wednesday whether he thinks the Obama administration should stop implementing the health care law. Durbin, a member of the Judiciary Committee, said, ‘Personally, I don’t, because the judge was asked for an injunction, and he didn’t rule that there would be one. So he hasn’t enjoined any conduct or activity. … Judge Vinson, Monday had a chance to not only decide whether it was constitutional but to issue an injunction,’ said Durbin. ‘He didn’t do that.” That’s Dick Turban.

Well, ‘there is a long-standing presumption “that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.’ Judge Vinson says the executive branch must obey. ‘[D]eclaratory judgment is, in a context such as this where federal officers are defendants, the practical equivalent of specific relief such as an injunction … since it must be presumed that federal officers will adhere to the law as declared by the court…’ That’s from Justice Scalia.

‘There is no reason to conclude that this presumption should not apply here. Thus, the award of declaratory relief is adequate and separate injunctive relief is not necessary.’ The law has been voided. The judge specifically says that his decision is ‘the functional equivalent of an injunction.’ He says — the bold text that I just read to you, is from his ruling — ‘An injunction is not necessary because it is presumed the executive branch will obey the declaratory judgment that the law’s voided.’ Let me read it to you again. Judge Vinson… Remember, Durban is running around saying, ‘He didn’t issue an injunction. He didn’t tell us we had to stop implementing the law!’

Here’s Judge Vinson from his ruling: ‘[T]here is a long-standing presumption ‘that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.” The judge said it’s an injunction; here it is. This is ‘a declaratory judgment.’ I’m declaring this unconstitutional. He has done so. They keep on. This is not insignificant, folks. It’s being swept under the rug as though it never happened. Egypt and other stories are being used to hide and camouflage this. This is big.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This