RUSH: Jayne in Soda Springs, Idaho. Great to have you on the EIB Network, Jayne. Hello.
CALLER: Hello, and thank you for taking my call, and thank you for being there because I don’t know what we’d do without you.
RUSH: Thank you, madam, very much. I appreciate that.
CALLER: Do you remember the first Rush Tea Party in 2007?
RUSH: The first “Rush” Tea Party in 2007?
CALLER: Yes, sir.
RUSH: Refresh my memory about it. The first “Rush” Tea Party?
CALLER: Yes. You started it in 2007. It was the first Tea Party, I think. We mailed pink slips to Washington, and the amnesty bill was defeated.
RUSH: Oh?
CALLER: We even saw mail trucks with bags and bags of —
RUSH: Yes, I remember this now.
CALLER: — pink postcards.
RUSH: Yes, yes, yes. I now totally remember this. You’re very kind out there, Jayne. You… (interruption) What, Snerdley? What are you talking about? (interruption) She is right. What…? (interruption) I know, she is saying that that was the genesis of the Tea Party movement —
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: — is mailing in all these pink slips. The amnesty bill was defeated and that finally was when the House Republicans broke from Bush. They were heading into the midterm elections and they were heading into the campaign. Everybody’s trying to say, “Where did the Tea Party start? It had to start somewhere,” and we’ve always said, “No, it just effervesced. It’s a natural creation here of opposition to Obama.” What Jayne is suggesting here is that I, El Rushbo, am the actual titular head of the Tea Party. Something, of course, I would never claim for myself. I think the great thing about the Tea Party is there’s not a single person that you can take out and destroy the Tea Party.
It is made up of the essence of grassroots. Tea Party is the people who make this country work. People, in many cases, (it’s both parties), who had never been involved in politics before. Speaking of all this, here we have a great sound bite. It’s audio sound bite number 13. Mark McKinnon ran Bush 43’s media. Now, as you know, Mark McKinnon is one of the architects of the new No Labels bunch, which the No Labels crowd is a bunch of disaffected liberals, and they know that being called “liberals” is the kiss of death. It’s a losing thing to be called “liberal.”
So No Labels, these are people (sniveling), “Can’t we…? Can’t we just…? Can’t we just talk to each other as human beings and stop categorizing ourselves, ’cause we’re really holding ourselves back?” McKinnon was on MSNBC today on Scarborough’s show and Willie Geist asked him a question about amnesty. He said, “It’s gonna come up on the presidential election. It’s been on the back burner lately but it’ll start to rise to the surface. We saw it yesterday, the politics of it now coming out; the president courting Hispanic voters. You made a point, Mark, that as a Republican we can stay on this path and watch demographics and the country run away from us.” I don’t know what the question is. I don’t know what it means. But McKinnon did and here was his answer?
MCKINNON: In 2000 when President Bush ran, we realized that in order to win — and assuming we got all the sort of typical votes that we got — we had to get 40% or 41% of the Hispanic vote, which he got. Four years later we realized fairly early on if he got the exact same number of Hispanics we would lose because of the growing demographic. We had to get 43%, and President Bush got 44. John McCain got 29% of the Hispanic vote. Republicans are not gonna regain the presidency on that kind of a path.
RUSH: Okay. So you see how the No Labels group is…talking about “the Hispanics.” Is Hispanics not a label? Certainly is in political context. But here you see: The Republicans simply can’t win without them. This is the No Labels group advocating for Republicans to get on board with immigration “reform.” Now, I guarantee you what’s gonna happen with this. Above all, above all the other substance — and don’t doubt me on this — supporters of this from all over spectrum (both parties, wherever they come from) are going to bend over backwards to make sure this is not called “amnesty,” even if they have to put things in this bill that directly contradict amnesty. They know that that word will kill it.
That’s what to look out for: Anything to avoid that label.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here’s Steve in Pensacola, Florida. You’re next on the EIB Network, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Mega dittos, Rush, and if “Rush is right,” Rush on, Rush on.
RUSH: Thank you very much, sir.
CALLER: My question is: How can they justify, being on the Pakistan border, and we have — if my numbers are right, Rush — 24,000 or more people since 2004 have died on our own border. It’s not about letting people into this country to “work.” It’s about these drug dealers that are coming in and setting up shop in all these cities, and we can’t protect our borders or allow the state to protect their own borders?
RUSH: Well, there are some that are coming in to work, we know that, but there’s also a huge drug trade that’s going back and forth. In fact, we’re running sting operations and giving them guns. But, no, what did you say about (Obama pronunciation) “Pok-ee-stahn”? In your opening, you said something about the Pok-ee-stahn border.
CALLER: Well, the Pakistan, and the Afghani border. Having them on the border patrolling, keeping Al-Qaeda out of Pakistan, and here we are, can’t keep —
RUSH: Oh! Oh, oh. You want to know why we’re sending the military to try to keep the Tal-ee-bahn in Ahf-gahn-ee-stahn so they don’t move into Pok-ee-stahn —
CALLER: Correct, and we can’t do it to drug dealers.
RUSH: — but we won’t employ similar effort here to protect our own borders?
CALLER: Correct.
RUSH: That’s because Obama wants a welfare state here! You have two different foreign policies at play here. He doesn’t want a big fence; he doesn’t want more Border Patrol agents (that actually are effective). He wants a bigger welfare state. He needs more dependents arriving here. It’s inarguable, folks. I get the question. Obama is more concerned about Pok-ee-stahn’s national sovereignty than he is concerned about America’s. No question about it.
Arthur in Beaumont, Texas. Hello, sir. Thank you for your patience. It’s great to have you with us today on the program.
CALLER: It’s an honor. You know, everyone seems to be missing the point. The Republicans aren’t gutless; they’re not aimless. They don’t want to be the majority;, they don’t want to win. I mean, they showed that after the ’94 election. You took the words right out of my mouth earlier. The only people that hate conservatives more than Democrats are Republicans.
RUSH: What do you mean, “They don’t want to win”?
CALLER: Well, they’ve got the same power, the same influence, the same graft, the same money, everything, and they don’t have to do squat. The conservatives upset the applecart in ’94.
RUSH: Ohhhh, I see where you’re going with this.
CALLER: They did it again in 2010. The Republican establishment like Mitch Daniels —
RUSH: (laughing)
CALLER: — Lindsey Graham, they don’t like it.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: — Rick Santorum, they don’t like it back there.
RUSH: Yeah, I gotcha there. (laughing) Folks, here’s what he meant. (laughing) Winning is a hassle! That means you gotta govern, that means you gotta work, and that means you take the lion’s share of the blame. Why win? Go there, be in the minority. You still get to participate in all the perks, you still get all the graft, you still get to play all the funny money games, you still have your own little universe of power, but you can’t do anything because you’re a loser and so really you don’t get blamed for much. All you gotta do is put up with your own voters being ticked off at you once every two years and you go back and collect the graft.
You cozy up with the lobbyists; they take care of you under the table. “Let the Democrats run the show! Let them have all the hassles.” Yeah. His theory is that if the Republicans win, then they have to put up or shut up. If they lose, they can just go through the motions. (laughing) He took the words right out of my mouth — or his mouth, he said — and the establishment Republicans, they get ticked off ’cause conservatism is what wins, and that’s what they don’t like. That’s his theory. The reason they don’t like us is because we win, which causes ’em trouble. They gotta work too hard. They gotta take more arrows. The media is meaner to ’em, so forth and so on.
I can understand it.
END TRANSCRIPT
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.