Republicans Fall for Civility Trick, While Democrats Ramp Up AttacksJanuary 25, 2011
BEGIN TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Yeah, here I go again. I really hate to say it, folks. I've been debating for the last 90 seconds 'cause that's about all the free time I've had here, whether to say it or not. It's unfortunate, but this State of the Union stuff tonight is gonna be a real test of the Republicans' resolve and competence. It just is. I do not want to be critical, you people know that, I really do not want to be critical, but here's Obama setting up one of his themes tonight, which is civility and moving to the center and we've all gotta get along and his guys are already out trashing Paul Ryan, who hasn't said anything yet. He's gonna be delivering the Republican response. I think it's quite telling Michele Bachmann's doing the Tea Party response. We've got two responses going on to this State of the Union show tonight, but I mean Eric Cantor has invited Pelosi to sit next to him at this thing tonight. (interruption) Well, yeah, just about a half hour ago I heard this. What? Yeah, really.
In the meantime, here we go, Salon.com: "The GOP's War Against the Poor and Sick -- The new Republican plan to cut the deficit: Hit poverty-stricken Americans where it will hurt the most." This is the new civility. So here's Obama getting all this credit for saying that we need to get along and get rid of all this horrible talk and so forth, and he cows the Republicans -- they're just reacting to what he and the media are saying. Where'd this idea of sitting together come from? Whose idea was it? Was it Coburn's? Whoever it was, it's all a reaction to Tucson, is it not? I don't really care if it was a Republican or Democrat idea. It might have been Coburn who was the first Republican to agree to sit next to these Democrats. Whatever it is, it's a trick. And it's all reactionary. (interruption) That's right, it was Mark Udall, who's a Democrat. Now everybody's reacting to sitting next to the Democrats, reacting to Tucson, reacting to Obama, reacting to the Democrats, and in the meantime, "The GOP's War Against the Poor and Sick." This is a story by Andrew Leonard, Salon.com, Republicans want the poor to die on the street like they used to.
Listen to this last paragraph. It's absurd and it's insane, but it's quite telling here. You can laugh at it all you want, yeah, it's ridiculous. I got a note from my brother last night, "What did Palin do?" I said, "What do you mean, what did Palin do?" "Well, Frum's out there saying she's forever shot herself in the foot now." I don't know what she did. I'm not aware of anything. As far as I'm concerned, the real concern here is people committing Frumicide. Frumicide is the conservative movement killing itself. I dug into this and I found out that the left's latest charge at Sarah Palin is that video after Tucson, she had the flag on the wrong side, it should have been on her right side, not her left side, so it shows that she's, A, an idiot, B, unpatriotic, C, puts herself ahead of the Constitution and the country. So we get all these calls for civility which we've nailed here as just intimidation tactics to get Republicans to shut up. It's working.
Now, listen to this last paragraph from this Leonard guy at Salon.com. "I'm sure there are plenty of conservatives who want to get rid of Medicaid altogether. If poor old people can't pay for nursing home care then let them die in the street, like they used to." Who is it that's proposed death panels? Obama. Whose health care plan is going to let people die, is going to tell people, "By the way, we're not gonna let you live, we're not gonna treat you"? But forget all that. This is happening in the new era of civility. So we've got this guy Steve Cohen, and the media acts somewhat amused, and you have Sheriff Dipstick, and they act amused and then they're laudatory, Sheriff Dipstick and Steve Cohen, they're not backing down. When's the last time I was ever applauded for my courage in sticking to my guns? It doesn't happen. So Obama gets to occupy this lofty new perch of Mr. Civil, while his minions are out there doing what he is essentially instructing them to do.
"If poor old people can't pay for nursing home care then let them die in the street, like they used to. The Tea Party version of government apparently just doesn't believe in helping people who can't help themselves. For the modern Republican Party, it's far far more important to ensure that those who will never need Medicaid ... get their big fat tax cuts, adding up to $700 billion over the next 10 years." I don't even know who Andrew Leonard is and I don't care. He's probably some new hot to trot graduate from journalism school somewhere, but the GOP's war against the poor and the sick, and what are the Republicans doing? Once again trying to prove that that's not who they are. I don't know folks.
Hi. How are you? Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. Our telephone number is 800-282-2882. The e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.
No, no, no, no, Snerdley, I'm not trying to be negative. (interruption) I can't say stick to my guns? Yeah, guess not. Yeah. Guess I should do a John King of CNN and apologize for that. We're trying here. I did mention moments ago that when's the last time I got any credit for sticking to my guns? That's a no-no. At any rate, here's the deal. Many Republicans were pushed and dragged to the conservative agenda by the Tea Party and other conservatives via that landslide election in November. But let's not fool ourselves here, folks. Two years ago, right after the regime was immaculated, two years ago right after Obama was inaugurated, they were willing to sell out, the era of Reagan was over, gosh, Obama had won, he's the first African-American president, we can't be critical. We gotta sit there and we gotta eat our lunch. I mean it was handed to us, we gotta eat it. We're gonna be in the wilderness for a few years. That was the attitude, and they ended up being saved by a movement not of their making, the Tea Party. Average American citizens who were looking at what the regime was doing refused to put up with it.
They saw their future, their kids' future, their grandchildren's future being spent away, nothing to inherit. And it was not something they were gonna put up with. So here we got the State of the Union show tonight, and seeing signs of some of the old habits, and I hope this is all head fake stuff that is indeed faking me out. But I see this desire to appear to want to get along with Obama, to want to get along with the Democrats. And this is Tucson. All of this is Tucson. And all of the rhetoric from Sheriff Dipstick and the rest of the media, and I guarantee you that there are some people, Republicans in Washington who would do anything that they could not to be tied to anything that might have had anything to do with that incident, which of course that agenda, that whole narrative is being written by the Democrats and the president. We got this folly going on here that Obama's in the midst of remaking himself. Yeah, that's right, becoming a centrist, moving to the center, and nothing could be further from the truth.
Reporters echo White House talking points about Obama moving to the center. Look folks, this is not a good sign. It isn't fatal, don't misunderstand here, but it's an illustration of what one incident -- (unintelligible) -- hell, I don't know. Things can happen overnight in politics and totally upset and change the game, i.e., Tucson. A totally, by the way, nonpolitical event that has been converted into a political event that somehow the Republicans need to go out of their way and say, "Hey, hey, hey, wasn't us, and to prove it we'll sit next to you guys in the State of the Union and we'll go along with this Obama moving to the center stuff." But what's the symbolism of sitting together? All it is is a trick that's been dreamed up by the Democrats to make sure that the vast Republican majority is not seen during the relative standing ovations or lack thereof. So the optics will not show this massive Republican majority in the House of Representatives. So what is it symbolic of? Well, it's symbolic of the GOP playing along, symbolic of the Republicans not wanting to show distinctions, not wanting to draw on the differences.
I mean, look, Republicans don't need to be constantly here at dagger points and all that. But they certainly don't have to become part of a Broadway play, in effect, written and directed by Obama and supporters all for some show. We haven't even gotten to what is said to be the substance of this speech tonight based on what's been leaked. Obama's gonna call for a budget freeze tonight? Well. Well. A budget freeze. The guy who spent us into never-never land calling for a budget freeze, isn't that nice. The Republicans have been calling for reducing spending back to 2008 levels. He wants to freeze everything in place now after he's got it and get credit for fiscal discipline, and he's gonna get it, because the media's wired that way. "Look at Obama. He's really willing to now grab this deficit thing by the throat and shake it to death. This guy is calling for Draconian measures, freezing the budget at current levels." Well, whoop-de-doo. Sorry, folks, that's not the agenda. The agenda is cutting it. The agenda is reducing it. We've called for the spending to be reduced to 2008 levels.
I'm told he's gonna call for a ban on earmarks. Well, I'm sorry, that's hijacking what the Republicans have already done. Has he ever had an original idea? By that I mean something not found in the Communist Manifesto? Has he? Has he had an idea not found in Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals? One thing I know for sure, all this so-called moving to the center, Obama moderating and all of that stuff, he's not gonna give any ground on illegal immigration; he's not gonna give any ground on cap and trade; he's not gonna give any ground on Obamacare. How can a guy who says he wants to freeze spending not also by the very definition here have to freeze Obamacare? Meanwhile, as I said, while all this is going on, the Democrat Party which Obama leads is trashing Paul Ryan in advance of his reply to Obama's speech. And this is what the leftists do. Obama goes out there, he takes the high road, he pretends to be something he isn't and the hacks and the thugs smear and attack. We have a montage. This is Mediscare 1995 all over again. They're trying to make Paul Ryan into Newt Gingrich. This is a montage of what I was just talking about.
BEGALA: We ought to be focusing on Paul Ryan. The budget would privatize Social Security.
CARVILLE: Paul Ryan who wants to get rid of Social Security and Medicare.
SCHAKOWSKY: Paul Ryan is going to exacerbate the problem of money just gushing to the wealthiest of Americans, turning Medicare into a voucher program, cutting Social Security.
O'DONNELL: Paul Ryan, who advocates increasing the Social Security retirement age and virtually dismantling the program.
SCHULTZ: He's radical. They're going to go to people who live on fixed incomes. They want to take health care away.
SANDERS: We need a real national debate on what Congressman Ryan has been saying. The vast majority of the people will say it is insane
RUSH: What's insane here is that Paul Ryan is simply delivering a response, they haven't even heard it yet, and Paul Begala said, "We need to have focusing on Paul Ryan." No, we don't. We need to be focusing on you guys and Obama and how you are being your usual dishonest selves. This is a page from a 30-year-old playbook. (imitating Carville) "Paul Ryan wants to get rid of Social Security and Medicare." Tell me, has anybody proposed this? You look at Paul Ryan and do you see this kind of radical? In the meantime, Chuck-U Schumer on television this morning, "Do you expect, Chuck-U, that we'll hear anything from the president on gun control or any of that?"
SCHUMER: I don't know about gun control. I can tell you this. He's gonna have a speech that in certain ways is like Ronald Reagan. It's gonna talk about optimism and growth and our future, not this dour, sour, we can't do anything right and America's all messed up completely, which I'm hearing from some of my Republican friends.
RUSH: Folks, it's Alice in Wonderland time here. It's Through the Looking Glass. It's Grace Slick and the giant bunny on MTV. (imitating Schumer) "I can tell you this. He's gonna have a speech that in certain ways is like Reagan, optimism and growth." Now, excuse me, Senator Schumer, have you ever, ever characterized Ronald Reagan that way before? Has any Democrat ever characterized Reagan properly that way before? Obama, in order to claim greatness, they have to say he's gonna sound like Reagan? As I said yesterday, go read Obama's books on Reagan. He hated Reagan's ideas. He despised Reagan's ideas. There is not an ounce of honesty in the Democrat Party or in the leftist movement in this country, not an ounce of it. (imitating Carville) "Yeah, we need to be focused on Paul Ryan out there. Paul Ryan gonna take away everybody's Medicare and Social Security. Where's my gumbo?" And the Republicans, folks, in light of all this they're gonna sit next to these people? Why? Just to try to show the world that, "No, no, we're not as bad as what they're saying." Uuuugh.
BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: You know, I have a simple way that the Republicans can proceed on such matters in the future. It's very simple: "What Would Our Voters Do?" You know the old "What Would Jesus Do?" question that people used to ask? WWOVD: What Would Our Voters Do? Would anybody who elected a Republican last November sit next to Pelosi? Would anybody sit next to Chuck-U Schumer? You know the answer. Now, listen to this. Just to show you. This has been in the works for the longest time, to try to suck the Republicans into this sitting-next-to-each other thing. Well, I know what some of you are saying.
"Rush, this is not bad. This is not bad. This is gonna get the independents." They got the independents in November, and you know how they got the independents? They didn't do anything. They just shut up. The independents moved to Republicans 'cause they despised how they were misled by Obama. The independents moved to the Republican Party because they finally saw the fraud that is Obama, that is this regime, that is the Democrat Party. Now, listen to this montage of all kinds of media people and elected officials talking about the State of the Union show tonight.
DANA BASH: (rotunda noise) This is turning out to be like the prom! Everybody is racing for a date.
JOHN KING: (music) It's also being called "date night" or "prom night."
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Who are you going to be sitting next to?
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS: (rotunda noise) ...sit with me at the State of the Union.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR: (rotunda noise) I'm wearing light blue. Maybe he'll have a matching tie.
ANDREA MITCHELL: (sfx/music) It's prom night on the Hill!
LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: It looks like it's prom night.
SEN. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON: I don't have a date.
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Have you picked a date?
SEN. KENT CONRAD: I just asked Kay.
SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN: I always waited too long before the prom to ask for a date.
CARL HULSE: (rotunda noise) It does have a prom night feel to it.
THOMAS ROBERTS: (newsroom noise) Some may think of this as prom night.
SEN. DICK DURBIN: Mark Kirk and I are going to sit together. He's bringing a Coke with two straws.
JACK CAFFERTY: Not unlike a high school prom, all of Capitol Hill is aflutter.
CAROL COSTELLO: Senator Gillibrand and Senator Thune sitting together. (giggles) The prom king and queen?
KEN STRICKLAND: The it couple would be Thune and Gillibrand.
SAVANNAH GUTHERIE: They have one thing in common: Good hair!
RUSH: Somebody out there in the Twitterati just tweeted: "This State of the Union bipartisan seating thing is the political equivalent of a comb-over: Looks odd and fools nobody." I wonder if Eric Cantor will buy Nancy Pelosi a corsage.
"What's so bad about this, Mr. Limbaugh? Are you against civility? Are you against people getting along?"
No. No. I just...
You Democrats don't mean any of this. This is just a show. (groans) Jeez!
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: All I'm saying here is it just appears it happen that the Republicans don't know how to handle all this. I remember one of my observations, if you will, back in 1994 when the Republicans assumed power in the House for the first time in 40 years was: They didn't know what it was like to act in the majority. They didn't know what it was like to have power 'cause they hadn't had it for 40 years. I related it to the perpetual dieter. The overweight guy loses weight and looks in the mirror, but really doesn't believe he's lost the weight. Every chance he gets to look in the mirror he looks at it 'cause he doesn't trust it. He has no experience being thin and just doesn't really believe it. He never has been.
So the weight loss? Eh! You're never confident. You're always looking for confirmation that what happened, happened. And when you're looking for confirmation, then you say, "Well, okay. Who are you looking to for that confirmation?" In our case it's the media, the Democrats? I'm not trying to be negative, but we're reacting to Obama now, we're reacting to the media. We're reacting to the political attacks after Tucson. It's not that I have anything intrinsically against people sitting next to each other, although in this case I know what it is. It is a trick, as we all know, to get the Republicans to go along with hiding their majority.
Which Democrat is gonna sit next to the new monster, Paul Ryan? Here's a guy that wants to cut and wipe out Social Security and Medicare. What Democrat's gonna sit next to this monster? Lest we forgot, Nancy Pelosi would not even meet with Eric Cantor back in June. This in 2009 from The Hill: "Representative Eric Cantor..." I know what some of you are saying, "Rush, we're bigger people than they are." Folks, I get that, but there's a time to turn the other cheek here. This isn't it. Turn the other cheek from position of strength, not reaction. This is pure defense ("d'fense," the correct pronunciation of the word.)
But The Hill had the story back in June of 2009"Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) says he has requested to meet privately with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) this year, but has been repeatedly rebuffed. In an interview with The Hill, the minority whip said, 'I have been told that Speaker Pelosi doesn’t like to meet with Republicans … I would say that is the case in my instance. I have put in requests to meet with her and have yet to be responded to.'" I talked to Michele Bachmann. She's the interview for the next issue of the Limbaugh Letter. I asked her, "Have you ever met Pelosi? Do you ever talk to her?"
"No, she doesn't take with Republicans."
Republicans were not even allowed in half the committee meetings the Democrats held when she ran the place. So I just want to know: Which Democrat draws the task of sitting next to the guy who wants to kill Social Security and Medicare? Who is gonna sit next to Paul Ryan who they say wants to kill old people by cutting Social Security and Medicare? I mean, they are having... What would we call this? You have the speech, then you have a rebuttal. The Democrats used to have the "Prebuttal" to Bush's State of the Union. The Republicans are already experiencing a prebuttal to their rebuttal, which is Ryan.
Now, the other side to this coin is that all of this rhetoric from the Democrats is indicative of the predicament they are in. They're using the same rhetoric that they used back in 1995, when the Republicans won the House, and the Democrats got shellacked. What's funny is they're using it before the Republicans have even said or done much of anything here, particularly as it relates to the State of the Union. What did they use back in 1995? Why did they use it back in 1995? 'Cause they had their asses -- assets, sorry -- handed to them just as they did in 2010. So their reacting the same way, pulling out the same page of the same playbook. I mean, this "Republicans want to kill Social Security and Medicare," that goes back...? (groans) What, to the seventies? Even back further than that.
Now, let's go to The Forehead. Paul Begala. This is interesting, too. Begala was on Anderson Cooper 9 last night, and Anderson Cooper said, "What do you want to hear from the president," Forehead?
BEGALA: Jobs, jobs, jobs. (snickers) I want a drinking game where every time he says the word "jobs" I get to have a beer. Uh, but every time he says the word "competitiveness" I'm gonna want to throw up. I've never SEEN the country more focused on one need, and that is JOBS. And if he's dancing around either with euphemisms like "American competitiveness" or in fact ignoring jobs -- which I can't imagine -- I -- I -- I think that's where he needs to be: I'm gonna talk about the future, and I'm gonna talk about jobs.
RUSH: What is this? I mean, The Forehead is off the reservation here. The Forehead is telling us what he doesn't want to hear from his own president. The Forehead's allegiances are to the Clintons, and The Forehead here is being a little critical. "I don't want to hear about competitiveness!" I wonder if The Forehead wants to hear about "investments" and "civility," 'cause he gonna get a lot of that. That's well known by now. Everybody knows that we're gonna be hearing about "investments" to the point that it will get us sick.
END TRANSCRIPT________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
