RUSH: Let me see if I understand this. On the one hand, we have over here “Barack Hussein Obama! Mmm! Mmm! Mmm!” who has (with the help of his party, the Democrat Party) unleashed untold damage on America, particularly the private sector economy. We have somebody who’s created a new entitlement, which is going to fundamentally forever change the relationship between citizen and government in a way never contemplated by the Founding Fathers of our country.
We have rampant unemployment, underemployment — more part-time and temporary workers getting jobs than are getting full-time jobs. We have no end in sight to the economic misery that people face. It has all been done systematically and purposefully for the last 3-1/2 years, and there’s no end in sight to it. What we’re hearing is the promise of more. We have the president of the United States openly saying that if you’ve done anything worth anything in your life, you really haven’t done it.
Everybody else did it; they didn’t get the credit.
You are successful either because you’ve stolen labor or you have stolen money or you have stolen something else. And it’s time now for you to give back. We’ve got the president who has never earned a paycheck, who is disdainful of the private sector in his own books. He has been surrounded by Marxists, Leninists, and avowed communists. They have been his mentors, his educators, the people who have influenced him. He’s never earned a paycheck in the private sector. He wouldn’t know the first thing about it.
On the other hand, over here we have Mitt Romney, who is Mr. Milquetoast, Mr. White Bread. He saved the Olympics. He started Bain Capital. He was the successful governor of Massachusetts. There’s not a hint of scandal or lawlessness anywhere around him. But what do we have? We have “Mitt Romney is a felon” now. “Mitt Romney is a felon. He’s got offshore bank accounts. He’s hiding money. He’s not paying his proper amount of taxes.”
We are supposed to take this and debate it.
And on our side, some of us sit around and say, “Mitt, you better release your tax returns! Mitt, you better deal with this! Mitt, you better do that. Mitt, you better do this. You better respond to what they’re saying, Mitt! You better come clean, Mitt.” Our guys are saying this. On the other hand, we aren’t supposed to say diddly-squat about Obama because that will irritate the independents or it won’t work ’cause the media is not on our side. We can’t go on offense.
The truth is, Romney is not a felon.
He’s not hiding anything.
But we’re supposed to debate that! We’re supposed to take it as though it’s a legitimate charge and refute it, and tell Romney to get his tax returns out there. But we can’t say anything about Obama. So Obama can launch, in his campaign, a series of lies that we have to accept and take seriously in debate. But if anybody on our side decides to go on offense, it’s bad. My question is: “Then how do we campaign?” Somebody tell me!
If we can’t say that while Romney was out creating jobs and building a company and saving the Olympics, Obama was blowing a little weed and snorting coke in school…? If we can’t say that — if we’re not supposed to say that, and if we’re not supposed to say that Obama is purposefully doing damage — how are we supposed to campaign? On what basis, then, do we deserve to win this election? I want to know how. How are we supposed to win this, if we are to accept every premise they put out?
And because we are honest and forthright people, whatever premise they put out, we will deal with it intellectually as the smart people we are, and then we will refute it… The point is, they can lie about our guy all day long; we accept it. But we can’t even tell the truth about their guy! So would somebody tell me how we’re supposed to win the election? If they can lie about us and we accept the lie, and we tell ourselves we’ve gotta debate the lie and refute the lie and do it in a way to satisfy our intellectuals, fine.
But we can’t tell the truth about Obama.
If we gotta deal with lies about our guy, and we can’t tell the truth about Obama, how do we run the campaign? I need some extraordinarily expert political consultant to tell me how we do this.
Now, compare the level of outrage in the media over Sununu’s remarks… And there is outrage. There’s outrage over Sununu’s remarks and there’s outrage over my remarks, the remarks I made yesterday. Folks, I don’t think we can equivocate any longer. There’s only one explanation for this.
When you go out and say, “If you have a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,” and that’s part of a larger sound bite where you basically attack the credibility, the achievements, the accomplishments, the character of successful people? What else explains this other than a disdain for this country? What else explains it other than a resentment, a dislike, and maybe even a hatred for the country as it was founded?
What else explains it?
Okay. You say that and all hell breaks loose. The media says, “It’s racist! It’s guttural! It’s inappropriate!” Meanwhile, they can go out tell lies about Mitt Romney all day long, and that’s perfectly fine, and we shouldn’t respond to that. No! “In fact, Mitt, get your tax returns out!” Every list of prominent Republican names I can tell you says, “Get your taxes out, Mitt!” So, let the Democrats set the agenda. Let them go ahead and establish the premise under which our campaign is gonna be run.
“Yeah, because that’s how we’ll prove to the independents (or whoever we’re trying to prove it to) that we’re nice people.”
I hate this.
I hate the assumptions going in that Republicans don’t like people and are supporting Big Business. Everything’s out of whack. It’s 180 degrees out of phase. You compare the level of outrage from the media over Sununu’s remarks to the lack of outrage over Obama’s campaign calling Romney a felon. There no outrage! There’s just, “Well, you’ve gotta deal with it.” In fact, ladies and gentlemen, let me find it here. I put it near the top of the Stack, I think. It’s a piece by Chris Cillizza in the Washington Post.
Here it is. Right here my formerly nicotine-stained fingers. And, by the way, the media know that what Sununu’s saying is true. The media know that what I’m saying is true. Obama was a pothead. Big time, for a long time. They also know that the Bain charges are lies. But it doesn’t stop them from being outraged at Sununu. They give the Obama campaign a pass. “Mitt Romney’s Unsolvable Bain Problem.”
Chris Cillizza, one of the many full-time Obama flacks at the Washington Post, claims in his story that “Romney’s Bain problem” is “unsolvable.” He begins his piece of journalism this way: “Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney continues to struggle to get out from under questions regarding just when he departed from his job at Bain Capital. And thereÂ’s reason to believe that he wonÂ’t be able to solve his Bain problem anytime soon.”
He doesn’t have a “Bain problem.”
There is nothing “unsolvable” about Romney’s “Bain problem” because there is no “Bain problem.” There is only a lie that has been knocked down by every reputable fact-check organization and news outlet, as well as by the Democrats’ own local paper: The Washington Post. This “problem” is invented! It is manufactured by the Obama campaign’s Truth Team. It’s being ginned up by his lickspittle lackeys in our one-party media.
“Mitt Romney’s Unsolvable Bain Problem.” Yep, “thereÂ’s reason to believe that he wonÂ’t be able to solve” this! What’s he supposed to do? He left Bain in 1999. That’s it. He wasn’t there in 2001. He wasn’t there in 2000. He left in 1999. What do you mean, “unsolvable problem”? Yeah, he can’t solve this anytime soon. This is what the left calls logic, by the way. You make something up totally out of whole cloth, then you proclaim it to be true.
And then you say, “By the way, there no way Romney can fix this.” And they’re right. They’re not gonna let him fix it. The truth isn’t what this is about. Why is it “unsolvable”? Why is this an “unsolvable” thing for Romney? Well, “because of the seeming contradictions about when he left the company — and the exotic nature of his financial life,” says Mr. Cillizza. That’s why it’s “unsolvable,” because of the “seeming contradictions about when” Romney left Bain.
There aren’t any contradictions about when he left. And the exotic nature of his life?
You know whose lifestyle has an exotic nature is Obama’s. He can’t pay for anything that he’s doing. Well, he can’t afford very much of what he’s doing. If other people weren’t paying for Obama, he wouldn’t be able to live 80% of his lifestyle, if we weren’t paying for it. Talk about an exotic financial life. So you have here another shining example of professional propagandist at work. There are no contradictions about when Romney left Bain Capital. There’s no problem. There is not a problem, so therefore there’s not a Bain problem, and therefore there’s not a problem that needs to be solved. There isn’t a problem. The date Romney left is well established in legal documents. Romney’s finances have been in a blind trust since 2003.
We never heard any of this kind of talk when John Kerry ran for the presidency. John Kerry is five times richer than — well, Kerry’s wife is five times richer than Romney. At the time, Kerry was probably the richest man to ever run for the presidency. And John Kerry had a history of Cayman Island accounts that were not done by a blind trust, by the way. And we never even got to see a single one of Teresa Heinz’s tax returns. But the news media never mentioned Kerry’s wealth, not once, because they are so busy trying to figure out what to do about the truthful Swift boat vets’ campaign attack. But even Cillizza admits in his piece where Romney has an unsolvable problem, he says, yeah,
“most independent fact checkers agree that Romney had no involvement in BainÂ’s day-to-day operations after 1999.”
Somehow, though, he still has a problem that’s not solvable. It says here that the issue’s been made fuzzy so it won’t ever go away. It’s fuzzy. Yeah, it’s fuzzy. Yeah, he left in 1999, but there’s some fuzziness about it. So this is what passes for journalism now in the Washington Post. It doesn’t matter if the charge is untrue. It doesn’t matter if the charge is true. Somebody can make it fuzzy, that’s good enough for them to constantly repeat it ’til the stupid and uninformed believe ’em.
There’s not a problem to solve. The whole thing’s made up. The whole thing is manufactured. It’s working like a charm. Meanwhile, they live and triumph on a lie and a series of lies. But we’re told, don’t tell the truth about Obama. Well, then, fine, somebody who’s an expert campaign consultant who has a track record of winning elections, somebody tell me how we do this, then.
RUSH: Bruce in Sullivan, Indiana. Hi, Bruce. Thanks for waiting. Great to have you here.
CALLER: Rush, it truly is an honor. I hope you never get tired of people telling you that because it truly is an honor to speak with you today.
RUSH: I appreciate that. Thank you very much.
CALLER: My comment was about this success business model that the president, he believes that hard work and intelligence doesn’t support to that, so, you know, I started applying his illogic to a couple different scenarios. And when I thought about how he addressed the nation when we killed bin Laden, I wonder why he thanked SEAL Team Six because, by his using his logic, weren’t they people that were in the right place at the right time? Wasn’t it the people who trained them and the people who manufactured the helicopters, and the people who made their Kevlar vests and their rifles, wasn’t they the people that actually —
RUSH: Well —
CALLER: — you know, using that premise.
RUSH: Now that you mention that, I mean, Obama praised SEAL Team Six, but he did say I and I and I. And he clearly wanted to leave the impression that he essentially pulled the trigger.
RUSH: That he’s the one that made the decision. That he’s the one that had the guts. They just executed the brilliant order that he conceived and so forth. And he had to thank SEAL Team Six. It’s a military unit. Going in he knows that as a Democrat he’s looked at as a dove, so there’s a calculated risk that he’s willing to take in also crediting the SEALs. By the same token, you come by these analogies. If government is always the real reason you made it, how come government is never the reason something fails?
CALLER: Exactly. I heard the other day somebody say that Romney needs to realize that he’s in a UFC fight, and I agree. Not only does he need to realize that he’s in the fight of his life, but he’s not only fighting the guy across the ring, he’s fighting everybody in the room. So I can’t understand why they’re so passive and going with what you’ve been saying during your show today about how it’s time to take the gloves off and leave everything on the table. And, you know, like this issue with releasing records and this. Why doesn’t the Romney campaign say, “Okay, you want to know about me, fine, let’s meet next Thursday. You bring all your school records, you bring all these things we’ve been trying to get for five years that you’ve been holding and we’ll release it all together.”
RUSH: That’s what Trump is advising him to do. You want to see my tax records? Fine, let’s see your transcripts from Columbia and Harvard, let’s see all this stuff.
CALLER: Exactly. And just put it right back on ’em every time. Every time they come up with something, because I don’t believe Romney has anything to hide, let’s do it.
RUSH: Well, the wizards of smart on our side say that that’s not the way to do this, that that kind of thing will backfire.
CALLER: Well, I don’t see the logic. I mean, I could see it would backfire if Romney went out there by himself and released it ’cause the media would spin it, but if he invites Barack to stand on a stage with him and they release everything together, I think there’d be a such a media firestorm.
RUSH: Okay, let’s take the occasion of your call, let’s listen to the new Obama ad, which basically says that Romney is a tax evader. This ad ran on Obama’s campaign website, BarackObama.com and the YouTube channel. The ad is entitled, “Makes you wonder.”
OBAMA: I’m Barack Obama, and I approved this message.
ANNOUNCER: Tax havens, offshore accounts, carried interest. Mitt Romney has used every trick in the book. Romney admits that over the last two years he’s paid less than 15% in taxes on $43 million in income. Makes you wonder if some years he paid any taxes at all. We don’t know because Romney has released just one full year of his tax returns. And won’t release anything before 2010.
ROMNEY: You know what? I put out as much as we’re gonna put out.
ANNOUNCER: What is Mitt Romney hiding?
RUSH: That’s the Obama ad. And I think I read during the program today, and I don’t know if this is accurate. It was in quotes. I read something about Romney saying, “I’m just not gonna give ’em tens of thousands of pages to pick through. I’m just not gonna do it. I’m just not gonna give ’em 10,000 pages to pick through. Let ’em go ahead and speculate all they want, but I’m not gonna give ’em 10,000 pages to pick through,” knowing what they’ll do with it. So he’s rolling the dice. I’ll withstand these ads. So last night on Hannity he talked to James Carville. Carville’s got a new book out called It’s the Middle Class, Stupid. And Hannity said, “President Obama’s blaming Fox News, talk radio, me, Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, everybody but himself for his own policies. Do you not say, in some way, James, the man has failed?”
CARVILLE: If you are asking me what- what- what- what- what- what- what should have happened, whether they put a provision in there, sure, why not. I mean, somebodyÂ’s going to be president for three-and-a-half years, would you go back and say, “Well, do you disagree with this?” Well sure. But overall I think this PresidentÂ’s done a – done a doggone good job. Has he made some mistakes? Of course he has.
RUSH: What did he say there? He really got tongue-tied, stammering and stuttering after hearing my name in the question. (imitating Carville) “B-b-b-b, if you’re asking me, b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b-b, shoulda happen. Whether they put a provision in there, sure, why not. I mean, somebodyÂ’s going to be president for three-and-a-half years, would you go back and say, ‘Well, do you disagree with this?’ Well sure.” See, folks, I know James Carville. He’s got a wife, Mary Matalin. He’s got kids. The family left Washington because of what’s happening to the schools there. They relocated to New Orleans. Now, you can’t tell me that in quiet moments of solitude in his home in the Big Easy, you can’t tell me he sits there and listens to Obama say, “You gotta business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that.” You can’t tell me Carville agrees with that.
I can’t imagine Carville would run out and say that himself as a surrogate on the campaign trail. (imitating Carville) “Yeah, yeah, that business out there, you didn’t do that. Everybody knows you had nothing to do with that. Somebody else made that happen. Everybody knows that.” Yeah, well, what about your campaign business? “Well, yeah, I would have been nothing without Bill Clinton. If Bill Clinton hadn’t hired me, I’d-a been nothing. I’d still be eating gumbo.” I don’t believe he believes this. But his job is to get Democrats elected, that’s what he’s gotta do. And he’ll probably get mad at me for speculating what he really believes in.
Last night on Anderson Cooper 119 he interviewed David Axelrod. And Cooper said, “Are there parallels in your opinion between the Bush campaign, what he did to Kerry, and what your team is doing to Mitt Romney right now? Basically try to define him based on what’s considered by his campaign a strength?”
AXELROD: No, because what was done back then was to take a guy who was a certified war hero and to suggest that somehow he wasn’t, and that was grossly unfair. People don’t really know Governor Romney, even though he’s run for president twice, is because he’s never told them who he is. He’s never told them what motives him. He’s never put his own experience into any kind of framework that people could appreciate. And the real question to address that campaign is why did they feel that simply running negative ads against the president from the beginning was sufficient?
RUSH: This is surreal. These guys are the architects of negative ads. Anyway, what Axelrod’s saying here is, we’re not Swift-boating Romney. Swift-boating is telling the truth about somebody. The Swift Boat vets were telling the truth of their service with John Kerry and how he was unfit and how he was lying about it. The Obama campaign is lying about Romney, which is what they think Swift-boating is.