RUSH: Sherry in Cordova, Illinois, welcome to the EIB Network.
CALLER: (talking to someone else in the room) Every day their water bowl, if it needs it. But he doesn’t clean out the litter box. I don’t think. (interruption) Do they really? Oh, they have a doggie one.
RUSH: Uhhh, hey, Sherry, hello?
CALLER: Hi, I’m sorry. Thank you. Okay. I have a question about just — I’ve always felt protected by the Constitution. And how is it that we can stop Barack Obama from doing things that are unconstitutional? Where is the stop for the president just taking over when he thinks he can?
RUSH: Can I ask you a question first?
RUSH: Do you have a litter box problem there?
CALLER: He-he! I’m getting my hair done. I’m sorry. I’ve been on hold for an hour and a half.
RUSH: You’re getting your hair done in a litter box?
CALLER: No, no, no, no! I’m just talking to my beautician about house stuff.
CALLER: (laughing) Sorry, oh my God.
RUSH: That’s okay, I’m just curious. You actually have raised a very interesting question.
RUSH: You really have.
RUSH: How do we stop Obama breaking the Constitution? And it raises an interesting point. Michael Walsh had a piece in the New York Post over the weekend that hit the nail on the head in many ways, and it’s something that all of us have thought, but had a difficult time verbalizing. We’ve taken stabs at it, and I could have taken total credit for this myself, but… (laughing) No, seriously, we play by two different sets of rules, Republicans and Democrats. Wisconsin’s a great example. We did everything by the book. We had a clean campaign. We went out, we elected a governor, he campaigned on some issues, one of them was redoing the way arrangements are made with public sector unions, lieutenant governor got elected, and we won the Senate on that basis. We did it by the book. The guys on the left do not play by those rules. They’ve got a flawed judge, and there’s a great piece, some conservative blog has posted — I got ten seconds to wrap this up and I’m not gonna be able to obviously finish it now in five seconds. But don’t miss this summation because this really does tell us what we’re up against and why we still may be losing this.
RUSH: Well, this is very frustrating. It happens more often than it should. I spent the entire commercial break here looking for something I know is here and I can’t find it. I wish I could remember the name of the blog. It’s about Wisconsin. It’s about the judge. Let me first get this on the table, this judge that shut down the Wisconsin law last week. The blog is about the fact that she has a son or a son-in-law, some family member who is an SEIU activist. This county judge shut down the law, temporary restraining order, the TRO, under false premises. She’s a pure activist liberal. And this blog tries to make the case of why this judge is in trouble and why the Democrats are in trouble because of what she’s done in Wisconsin. And they’re not! It’s not just this blog. I can remember countless times over the last I don’t know how many years reading that Clinton was in trouble legally because he was doing this or that, and he wasn’t.
Now, in a proper and just and moral world, yeah, the judge would be in trouble. We got two different sets of rules by which we play the game, and we’re the old-fashioned traditionalists. We do it the old-fashioned way. We try to first change the hearts and minds of voters. We then engage in campaigns — (interruption) there’s that woman with the green makeup again on Fox and I have got to turn this off or I’m gonna forget where I am and do nothing but stare. I’m turning off the TV. Jeez. We go out and we convince the American people — (interruption) Yeah, it’s a really stupid thing. Now everybody is turning on Fox to see what I’m talking about rather than listening to me. All right, I’ll give you five seconds to find it and then you can come back. It looks like one of the daughters of the women they were writing about in the Wall Street Journal, I guess, I don’t know. Okay, you seen it now? Fine. Everybody back.
We do it the old-fashioned way. We go to the minds and the hearts of the American people. We campaign. We try to persuade them that our ideas and our people are preferred, are better, are what’s needed. We engage in a campaign in the arena of ideas, and on Election Day we win. By contrast on Election Day when we lose, we say, “Okay, we’ve lost, you guys won, and that means something.” They never say that. So they are not bound by the same rules that we are playing. This all started ’cause this woman with the litter box problem wanted to know how it is Obama can get away with breaking the Constitution. He can get away with it because we’re not gonna say anything about it. Kucinich might and Ed Markey might and these guys, but nothing’s gonna happen. He’s gonna get away with it. This judge in Wisconsin, who knows where this is gonna — I don’t know what the judiciary is in Wisconsin. Here you have a judge who clearly has a conflict of interest, who clearly is acting above and beyond her role as a judge, she’s a liberal activist wearing a robe. She slapped a temporary restraining order on the law that was passed in the legislator, and it was legal.
The open nature aspect of the law was not required. They didn’t break the law in doing this. But the judge claims because of the complaint of one liberal activist she has. So we sit here and we’re kind of stymied. And this is what’s bugged me all along when I hear people on our side say the Reagan era is over or start ripping into Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin’s not the problem. None of the Republican presidential contenders are the problem. Democrats, Obama, they are the problem. The judge in Wisconsin, the Democrats, the unions, they are the problem. There is something terribly wrong. The state is outta money. Our nation is out of money. There’s an imbalance about how it’s being spent. There was a campaign. The people voted. Two or three liberals have decided to say to hell with the outcome of an election and are now doing what they can to change that result. We live and die by the outcome of elections, and then after the election’s over, when we win and then see ourselves undermined, what do we do? We don’t know because we don’t play by their rules. We are not subversives. They are.
So we don’t know what to do. All we can do is complain. The media seems to be on their side, and how do they get away with it? A lot of us have known from the get-go that Obama looks at the Constitution as an obstacle and we’ve said so over and over again. It’s an obstacle to what he wants to do, so when he operates on the edges of it, or ignores it, we got people saying, “He’s gonna get caught on this, Obama’s in trouble.” He’s not in any trouble. The judge in Wisconsin’s not any trouble. If there were a proper tribunal, if there were a court with decent people on it who had a proper view of the respect of the rule of law, then, yeah, the judge would be in trouble. But the judge herself doesn’t care about the law. We got a judge who’s looking to subvert the law. Who’s to say the next judge is gonna slap her down? What are the odds of that? I don’t know. I’m just saying playing nice guy isn’t gonna work here. You know, and sometimes relying on the system — they don’t rely — the system gets in their way. They have to subvert the system. Election fraud, voter registration fraud, whatever they do. They are willing. We don’t. We won’t go anywhere near that. Oh, we might have some bad apples here and there that do, but overall, the Tea Party, the conservative movement, whatever. I mean we’re clean and pure as the wind-driven snow. These guys are just the exact opposite.
I’ve always believed and said, ’cause I know it’s true, the aggressor in any conflict sets the rules. It’s gonna be a mistake to sit around and wait for justice in Wisconsin. How much more justice can there be? We had a legitimate campaign. We had a legal and legitimate election. We won. Despite the best efforts of the Democrats to stop the implementation of a legally signed law, it was passed, it was signed, the Democrats ran away, despite all that, it ended up happening, legally, and yet it’s been illegally stopped, and if not illegally, questionably, because the judge is an activist and she’s got a bias. She’s tied to the SEIU. She’s tied to the unions who are negatively impacted by the legislation.
The Michael Walsh piece in the Post said you can sit around and plan on winning elections and doing all this, but if you’re not prepared to deal with these guys on their turf, winning elections isn’t going to matter. And when it boils right down to it, isn’t that one of the things that just really eats us raw, that winning elections doesn’t seem to matter? Even when we win ’em, we win a huge election, a shellacking of the Democrats in November, and we cut $6 billion from the budget in three days, and the day that we crow, the day our leadership goes, “Wow, looky here, look at what we did. We just cut $6 billion from the $1.4 trillion budget; $72 billion was borrowed to keep the government going.” And we’re crowing about cutting six billion? I’ve been doing this for 22 years and the lament I hear most often is, “Why don’t the Republicans do X?” Especially after we win. Because to the left, the government and public money is literally their blood and they’re not gonna sit here and bleed to death. Government is life and death in terms of their survival, and I’m talking pure back pocket, pay-the-bills money. Government enables that for them. That’s where they live. It would be no different than if somebody came along and is just gonna try to take away your salary. You’d fight for it, unless it was your boss firing you. But that doesn’t even stop them.
Tactics to deal with this are plentiful. There’s all kinds of great strategy. The problem is it doesn’t exist in anybody that’s elected. The strategy is all found on talk radio or in the blogs or punditry. And not even all of them. Okay, so Obama is on the edge of the Constitution. How does he get away with it? We alone are offended by it, and you expect magic to happen. “Well, that will be taken care of. That won’t stand.” Yeah, right, won’t stand. It is, isn’t it? Well, for crying out loud, folks, a federal judge has ruled his health care bill unconstitutional, and it is still being implemented. I can really think of no greater illustration than that. They don’t care. Judge says it’s unconstitutional, let’s attack the judge.
RUSH: Here’s that blog story. It’s a Newsbusters story. “Cindy at Fairly Conservative and Mary at FreedomEden broke this story yesterday. RedState, Gateway Pundit, and Doug Ross, among others, have helped promulgate it.” Nothing against any of these people. Do not misunderstand. But it’s all about this. ‘FreedomEden’s Mary writes: ‘Jake Sinderbrand, son of Judge Maryann Sumi, poses a bit of a problem for his mother.’ Sumi is the county judge who on Friday temporarily blocked implementation of the collective bargaining-related law passed by the Wisconsin legislature and signed by Governor Scott Walker.
“You see, Jake Sinderbrand is ‘a former field manager with the AFL-CIO and data manager for the SEIU State Council.’ Both organizations have members who are employed in Wisconsin’s public sector. That’s already a pretty clear conflict of interest…” It is. There’s more. “Maryann Sumi’s husband/partner, as evidenced here and elsewhere, is Carl Sinderbrand (who, as a side note, is also Chairman of the environmental advocacy group Clean Wisconsin).” In other words, she is conflicted all over the place. It says here, this “poses a bit of a problem for his mother.” I wish it did, don’t misunderstand me.
Somebody told me she fled the coop after the ruling and went on “vacation,” quote, unquote. (Not that it would matter.) It may in a fair world, sane world situation, cause her a problem, but it obviously isn’t a problem. She doesn’t care. She knew full well the conflict would be discovered. She didn’t care. Here’s the thing. This Jake Sinderbrand, who is her son, is very nasty. He’s posted borderline obscene comments about Governor Walker and what he did in Wisconsin. He’s a bad, bad activist, an SEIU, AFL-CIO activist. But the thing about it is public sector union dues are a matter of life and death for the Democrat Party.
“Public sector union dues are a matter of life and death for union members. They will die on this hill, and it’s all about money. It’s about nothing else. It’s not even about ideas. It’s about money, and they know they got a sweet deal. They’ve got their hands in the public till, and they get to take whatever they want out of it, and that’s about to stop — and you think any rule is gonna stop ’em? They’re not gonna let any stupid ruling stop ’em. And I guarantee you this judge, whether she feels conflicted or not, it didn’t stop her and it won’t stop her — and who’s gonna do anything about it anyway?
RUSH: Now, this Judge Sumi got the gig because the previous judge recused herself because she did have some ties with unions. That’s how she got the gig.
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.