Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: We’ll get to the Democrats in a minute. Yeah, I watched it. And, folks, I have to tell you, I sit there and I watch this stuff and I alternately laugh, sometimes uproariously, other times I’m incredulous. I cannot believe it. And then I catch myself and I have to tell myself that 30% of this country believes this garbage that they’re hearing. And that sobers you up. So we’ll get to all of this in a minute.

Now, a lot of people have, without credit, of course, picked up on my observation yesterday that Trump could end up doing for Baltimore what he did for the NFL. They didn’t use the NFL as the example. I think if they had done that it would have been obvious they were stealing. So they modified it and said, “You know what? Trump calling attention to this might actually end up helping Baltimore fix these problems.”

And then Trump, they say, stepped in it. Trump blew the whole plan, Trump blew the whole opportunity by beginning to ask where the money that’s been sent to Baltimore already went! We’ve already sent gobs of money to Baltimore. None of the problems have been addressed. And so Trump starts asking, “Where did it go?” implying that it’s in the back pockets of a bunch of corrupt people.

Well, official Washington said that was a big mistake. If you’re Trump and you’re really serious about fixing Baltimore, you don’t start throwing allegations around about where previous money has gone, and you certainly don’t bring Elijah Cummings into that. The hell you don’t! That’s exactly why Trump was elected! Because that is the question. It was the question in New Orleans with Katrina!

The federal money that taxpayers provide that gets sent to all these places doesn’t get used to improve anything, and yet the people involved seem to get… Elijah Cummings has a net worth of $1.2 million on a congressional salary of under $200,000. And that’s low, by the way, compared to what some members of Congress end up having as a net worth on a congressional salary.

But it is the question, it is the question. It’s what everybody wants to know, and if you don’t fix the corruption first then you can send any amount of money you want into any blighted area and the blight is gonna remain. And I maintain that this is how people in Washington are out of touch.

The thinking is this. “Well, if you really want to be productive and if you really want to help Baltimore, you certainly don’t start by accusing the people in Baltimore of graft. You don’t accuse them of doing something with the money.” The hell you don’t! It’s the whole point. Am I wrong about this? This is the whole point. “Well, now, Rush, you might be missing this one, Rush.” I can hear some of you talking. “You might be missing this one, Rush. We don’t want to necessarily provoke these people.”

Do you think Trump, when he says things like that, is offending a majority of Americans? I’m gonna tell you, it’s the exact opposite. If you understand why the Tea Party came into existence, if you understand why Donald Trump was elected, then you will totally understand and agree. “But, Rush, it’s crazy to start insulting these people you’re gonna have to work with.” He didn’t name any names. He just talks about where’d the money go? It is a central question that people in this country have had for a long time, the level of corruption.

You know, you’ve got this big stash of money in Washington. The people that live there all want to get their hands on as much of it as they can, they come up with ways — like Obama’s stimulus — can I tell you what it really was? And there was no doubt about that. What that really was was a campaign contribution to the Democrat Party. I know some of you, “What’s that, Rush? How’s that?” Let me explain it to you.

Barack Obama can’t walk over to the Treasury or send his Treasury secretary over there and say go cash a check to the DNC for $800 billion. So how do you do it? Well, you create this stimulus plan. And you tell everybody that it’s gonna rebuild the roads and bridges and it’s gonna modernize the schools, and it’s gonna save jobs, it’s gonna do all this magical stuff. Everybody applauds. “Yay. Stimulus. Yay.”

Then you track where the money goes, you find out no new schools got built or modernized, there isn’t any infrastructure improvements going on. You find out the money went to union workers. The vast majority of the stimulus went to union workers. Remember, we’re in a recession in 2009 coming out of the financial crisis. These people were able to stay employed.

What happens with union people, the money they earn? A portion of it is deducted before they ever see it. And where does that deducted money end up? It ends up as campaign contributions. And so you have a money-laundering operation of sorts where Obama comes up with a stimulus. Most of the money goes to Democrat union members who then send that money on its next voyage to the unions, who then send a portion of it in campaign contributions to the DNC and various other Democrats.

They don’t get all of the $800 billion in the stimulus. I mean, some of it has to go to places where it’s visible and trackable. But a lot of it ends up back in the DNC. But go look at Obama’s stimulus. Look at all that was promised. Roads and bridges rebuilt, schools modernized, and then check how much of that was actually done, and you’ll find zero. Ah, they might have modernized a roof on some immigrant detention center.

They might have done something so that they could point to it and say, “See! See what the stimulus did!” But why do we need ongoing infrastructure improvements if Obama’s stimulus did the magic that it did? Speaking of Obama’s stimulus (if this doesn’t help you set the stage and remember things…) grab audio sound bite number 1. I’m gonna go back to October 29 in Detroit, interestingly enough, where the Democrat debate was. That debate last night, if you add up… Somebody did this.

If you add up all of the spending in every Democrat program promised last night, do you know what it would equal? $200 trillion! (laughing) $200 trillion! (laughing)


RUSH: So let’s go to audio sound bite number 1.

You’ll remember this if you have been a long-term listener at the EIB Network. October of 2009, in Detroit. You know, Obama, at this point… This is after the stimulus. There’s another plan. Obama is offering residents in certain cities rent-free something, deposits or something on a few number of housing units. These people have to show up at City Hall and get in line and apply for the free whatever it was.

And of course, there’s not enough to go around because the Democrats can’t give everybody everything, be it health care, be it housing, be it an apartment, or what have you. So our man in Detroit at the time, Ken Rogulski with WJR, went down and talked to some of the people in line waiting to get whatever freebie Obama was offering. It was the equivalent of stimulus cash that was gonna be used for a housing allowance. See if you remember this sound bite…

ROGULSKI: Why are you here?

WOMAN #1: To get some money.

ROGULSKI: What kind of money?

WOMAN #1: Obama money.

ROGULSKI: Where’s it coming from?

WOMAN #1: Obama.

ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get it?

WOMAN #1: I don’t know, his stash. I don’t know.

WOMEN: (laughing)

WOMAN #1: I don’t know where he got it from, but he givin’ it to us, to help us.

WOMAN #2: And we love him.

WOMAN #1: We love him. That’s why we voted for him!

WOMEN: (chanting) Obama! Obama! Obama! (laughing)

RUSH: It coming from Obama’s stash! Now, that’s 2009. That is ten years ago. Is not this group of people still waiting? The Democrats have been promising ’em free this and free that, and they’re still waiting for it. If you look at the Democrat debate last night, it was just an extension of this: Obama giving people cash for some kind of housing allowance. Now the Democrats are promising everybody in their party everything. Now in the big debate after the debate, the Drive-By Media is doing its best…

See, they know. The Drive-By Media is doing its best to tell people who watched that debate last night that they did not see what they saw. “No, you didn’t see a bunch of extreme leftists. You saw a moderate debate last night. You saw a moderate focus on issues. You saw the moderates winning over and triumphing. You didn’t see radicalism last night!” The Drive-By Media knows. Even John King! We’ve got the sound bite coming up. John King was funny on CNN after the debate.

(sputtering) “I… I… I’ve never seen anything like this! I… I’ve never — never seen this degree of extremism. I’ve never seen this degree of radicalism. I’m not saying they can’t win! I’m not! Anything can happen. I’m not saying it can’t win. I just don’t know. Nobody knows. I’ve never seen anything like this.” They were all scared to death over what these Democrats did last night. But CNN’s the sponsoring entity! They can’t come out and rip it to shreds. So John King was trying to say, “This was a dud. But, hey, it could win.

“It was so bad, I don’t… I mean, I’ve never seen anything this extreme, but I’m not saying it can’t win. Nobody knows. It could possibly win.” Just couldn’t close the deal. We’ve got Politico, we’ve got the New York Times, all kinds of people who are saying (sputtering), “You… You… No! This was not, uh, radical extreme socialism on display! This… Uh, look at the people that did really good and made points last night. The people that did the best, they’re moderates.” Ha!


RUSH: Walt in Cleveland, where they’re all excited over the new Browns this year. How are you doing, Walt? Great to have you.

CALLER: Hey, great to be here. Congratulations on 31 years.

RUSH: Thank you, sir.

CALLER: You know, congratulations to our president with Jon Stewart for the New York firefighters. That shows you that people can work together — and, you know, our president is sick about it. He’s visceral. But calling the city — a city where they have bad problems, which a lot of our cities do, it’s a scary truth. I know you would agree, and we need more money for that. You think of our cities. Like, if he would stop the war games coming up next month and take that money and do something else with it and show North Korea it’s a sign of peace, for example.

RUSH: Well —

CALLER: Why not do that.

RUSH: If we stop next month Social Security payments we could —

CALLER: No, people paid into that! You can’t do that.

RUSH: Okay. Well, then take away people’s Medicare.

CALLER: No, I’m not talking about that —

RUSH: No, no.

CALLER: I’m talking about taking the money that we’re gonna spend —

RUSH: No, you want to take the money from the military. This is the way it always works. Our problem… I’m not gonna agree with your premise, ’cause when anybody says to me, “I’m sure you can agree with that,” that’s where my red flags go up. Nobody speaks for my agreement other than me. I’m the one who knows what my next syllables are. Nobody else. Nobody speaks for me and nobody agrees for me. Don’t take it personally. It’s a technique that a lot of people use.

“I’m sure you’ll agree that…”

“Oh, yes, of course!”

No! And I don’t agree with the premise that they need more money! You agree to that premise and you fall into a trap. They’ve got plenty of money. These cities and towns have more money than you could sneeze at. It’s the way it’s allocated and it’s where it ends up. The idea that there are insufficient funds for some of these problems is just bogus. We have incompetence, and we have corruption that prevents money from being allocated in many cases as intended.

Look at the levees in New Orleans. You know, Hurricane Katrina did not cause rainfall flooding that damaged New Orleans. It was the levees that failed after the hurricane had long passed through the city. Despite the fact that the levees had been bought and paid for to be rebuilt and strengthened, they weren’t. The money never ended up being used on the levies, but it went somewhere. The problem is not lack of resources. There’s too much liberalism in these cities!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This