Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

Listen to it Button

RUSH: Now, Elizabeth Warren, ladies and gentlemen, on this trade deal. Elizabeth Warren is another one of these lib Democrats that, frankly, the reputation she has for intelligence is grossly overstated and undeserved, as it is for most of these people. Elizabeth Warren is the brilliant Harvard professor who told the rich, “You didn’t build that.” Meaning, their business, the actual building, “You couldn’t build that without us and our taxes, building roads and sewers. You wouldn’t have had anything. You didn’t build that.” And of course it’s applauded.

Well, now comes the Obama trade bill. Turns out Elizabeth Warren was paid up to $90,000 as a witness in a 2000 trade case, and she got $90,000 from the kind of trade case that she now opposes. She has benefited from it in the past, but now she opposes it. The Massachusetts Senator, Elizabeth Warren, “is waging her fight against ObamaÂ’s free-trade deals by seizing on a legal procedure, commonly contained in such trade pacts.” It’s just scrolled out of my view.

Anyway, she was a witness against a Canadian funeral home operator “that was seeking $725 million from the US under the North American Free Trade Agreement,” NAFTA, which is exactly the thing that Warren is now objecting to, being able to do this kind of thing. And the money quote from the story is, “In fact, this was NAFTA’s first major –” it just vanished. Anyway, she is just being totally hypocritical on this and — (interruption) No. I’m sorry. It just scrolled out of view here. I have no control over the scrolling here. It’s timed and it just scrolled out of view. I’ll find this after the break.

We got an audio sound bite here from her, which is from yesterday during a debate on the trade promotion authority. It has nothing to do with the hypocrisy and the trade deal that she was involved in that she now wants to prevent other people — She was called as a witness in a NAFTA trade dispute between the US and Canada over the funeral business, and she was paid $90,000 to be an expert witness. She now wants to outlaw this kind of thing being possible. Here’s what she said, however, about the whole notion of this deal.

WARREN: Believe it or not, it’s a reason I’ve heard people give multiple times. We should keep the deal secret because if the details were made public now, the public would oppose it. Well, that’s how our Democracy is supposed to work. If the TPP is mostly done and the public wouldn’t support it if they could see it, then it shouldn’t become the law.

RUSH: Right. Okay. Now, we know that she’s engaged in hypocrisy because she benefited from NAFTA in ways people would benefit from this trade deal, but she wants to deny them. But that’s a secondary point. She’s coming… Look, it was okay for Obamacare for nobody know, and it’s fine for us not to know what’s in the Iranian deal, right? But the left doesn’t like Obama’s idea of transparency when they’re on the other side.

So now Elizabeth Warren wants to know what’s in this thing. She wants everybody to know, and they’re saying, “Nope, nope. It’s too incendiary.” And there’s a reason why they don’t want us to know. Nobody would support this, folks, which is makes it even the more curious why so many Republicans are trying to save this. But that should not be confusing, by the time you throw the Chamber in and the Wall Street Journal editorial page and the notion of free trade and removing barriers.

If it does that, it will get the support of major Big Business interests. Just reduce tariffs and taxes, that alone is enough to support it. In terms of politics? Why the Republicans want to bail Obama out in a not-too-distant presidential campaign? I haven’t the slightest idea. But they do. You know what I think it’s rooted in, honestly? ‘Cause it makes no sense for Republicans to bail Obama out on this. It literally doesn’t. Not this way.

When you have Democrats running around complaining about secrecy and basically criticizing the exact way Obamacare came into being and criticizing the way the Iran deal is coming into being and the Republicans are the ones that bail it out, I can tell you what I think is the reason. I think it goes back to what we all know the Republican establishment believes that it must show if it’s to win elections. “Bipartisanship and cooperation.” It’s the old McCain argument.

(impression) “The reason you should elect me is ’cause I can cross the aisle! I can work with the other side! I can help to get things done and shake their hands,” and they’re obsessed with this. They think the American people want that. So I betcha the Republican establishment in part… It’s not the total explanation, but they’re looking at Obama’s own party abandoning him, and they’re thinking, “You know what? We’ll help the guy, and the Democrats will see that we actually do want to work with ’em!

“Democrat voters will see that we will work with the president, that we will work with Democrats, that we will be bipartisan.” I guarantee you this is part of it, and it’s silly! Because that’s not what Democrat voters are gonna think. If the Republicans think they’re gonna get credit on Election Day from Democrats for helping Obama on this trade deal — and that’s what they must think. It must be why they are eager to help with amnesty. They must think that Democrat voters on Election Day are gonna remember them.

“You know, those Republicans, maybe what I’ve always heard about ’em isn’t true. Maybe they are willing to cross the aisle. Maybe they will work with us. Maybe they will be bipartisan! I think I’ll vote for them today.” Right. It just doesn’t work that way. But the Republican establishment, it appears, clearly thinks that they can convert Democrat votes to Republican votes by seemingly cooperating with Obama.

And, even better, if it’s on an issue where his own party is abandoning him.

I’m sure there are some Republicans who think that there’s something decent in the bill that is worthy of passage. It’s not gonna be just totally this excuse that they want to show bipartisanship and so forth. They want to show they can govern. But even if that… I’m telling you, the idea that… It be like me, if I thought the way to build my audience was on an issue here and an issue there, agree with Obama, and promote Obama’s cause.

Whatever, pick any issue. No matter what it is. Just to convince the liberals that hate me that they’re wrong and that they might like me the next day? I wouldn’t even dream of it because the first thing that happened is you would fly the coop, and the next thing that would not happen, they would not turn around and start liking me all of a sudden. They wouldn’t believe it. They would think I was pandering to them. It’s just not the way that you go out building a coalition. It’s not the way you build an audience.

But clearly it’s a factor here in the Republican support of this trade bill that apparently is so bad the Democrats want no part of it.


RUSH: So you think I’m wrong about that? Listen to this. It was just last week that Mitch McConnell was bragging about how well he was cooperating with Obama. He called himself and Obama the odd couple. AP even wrote about it. “McConnell pointed out that Obama has agreed to sign a bill giving Congress review power on any nuclear deal with Iran, and this week the Senate will take up a trade bill that is a priority of the president.

“‘A lot of folks like to joke about the odd couple that was Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch,’ McConnell said… ‘But I think Mitch McConnell and Barack Obama may have them outdone. I had to warn reporters not to faint last week before offering the president some praise on trade. I’m even getting handwritten notes from the president these days. He sent one the other day to thank me for supporting the nomination of Loretta Lynch.'”

So, folks, it’s clear as a bell what’s happening here. The Republicans clearly believe this stuff about crossing the aisle, showing that they can make Washington work, that they can govern, that they can be bipartisan. So when the Democrats abandon Obama on a trade bill, here come the Republicans and the reason they’re doing it is to try to convince Democrat voters that they’re not what is said about ’em.

“We’re not racists, we’re not hayseeds, we’re not mean-spirited, we’re not extremists. See, we’re working with Obama! We’re saving Obama. We’re helping Obama get his trade deal.” I don’t know. I guess they think this gonna manifest itself on Election Day as Democrats go to the polls and as they’re about to vote, they say to themselves, “You know what? I remember something! I remember the Republicans really helped Obama. The Republicans are really bipartisan.

“You know what? They didn’t come across as racist or extremists. They’re very nice guys. They really helped Obama with his trade deal. I think I’ll vote Republican! Yep! I’m gonna vote for Jeb Bush. Yep! I’m gonna vote for Marco Rubio. Yep! I’m gonna vote for Ted Cruz ’cause I remember how the Republicans helped Obama with his trade deal. I can trust the Republicans will now be bipartisan and help to make Washington work.” That’s… If you doubt that, don’t.

That is exactly the thinking that undergirds this whole notion of supporting amnesty. They want that on their own anyway ’cause the Chamber of Commerce does, their donors want that. But there is that component of showing they can govern, of showing they don’t disagree with the Democrats on everything. The problem with it is… I mean, above and beyond the obvious problems of selling out. The problem with it is that you must, in your own mind, be occupying an inferior position.

In other words, in order to think that you’re gonna get Democrats investigating you on Election Day ’cause you help Obama on a trade deal, it must mean that you actually believe that the Democrats hate you for legitimate reasons and that you’ve got to show them that they’re wrong. So you’re running around obviously feeling inferior. Whether it’s justified or not, whether you blame the media for it or not, you still think you have to show people that you’re not as mean and racist as the media has stated, and the way you do that is you help Obama pass these bills that not even his own party will help.

But that’s not gonna you one Democrat vote in November, not enough to matter.

I just… It’s high school, folks.


RUSH: Here’s one more Mitch McConnell quote, just to spell it out: “What we do have, however, is common policy ground, on an issue we both think is good for the country. So the Republican majority is going to work with President Obama to get this done, even if we have to do it over the objections of his own party. We’ve both chosen to put policy before party. That’s how politics should be conducted, in my view,” McConnell, in an AP story. Don’t doubt me on this.

Do not. Do not doubt my instincts, along with do not doubt my facts. I mean, that goes without saying. Don’t doubt my instincts. When something appears irrational in politics, there’s always a rational explanation for it. Why in the world, when Obama’s trade deal is flittering away by the wayside because his own party doesn’t want it — a trade deal that should not be authorized because nobody has seen it — do all of a sudden Republicans come along to bail it out and essentially make it possible?

Simple. They really believe this stuff about having to show the Democrats and the media that they will work together with the president, that they do know how to govern, that they eagerly will work to make Washington work. Because they believe that’s gonna get them Democrat voters. Or, alternatively, they believe that’s gonna make the media stop being mean to them, ’cause the media will see that they’re wrong.

“Republicans are clearly able to help and work with Obama.” What really happens is, after the whole thing’s done, the gang of 500 get together wherever they meet and they start laughing themselves silly over how easy it is to boondoggle the Republicans. “Do you realize how easy that was? (laughing) My gosh, did you see Mitch desperate to be loved by us? Oh, my God! (laughing).”

There isn’t any respect that accrues, sadly. There just isn’t. That’s not who the media is, and that’s not who the Democrats are. The Democrats in the media are not there to be agreed with, to have common ground with, to cooperate with. They’re there to be defeated, and if people don’t understand that by now (sigh), then we still have a long way to go.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This