http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/10/23/speakstakes_paul_ryan_situation_remains_murkySpeakstakes: Paul Ryan Situation Remains Murky
October 23, 2015
Listen to it Button
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay, on the Paul Ryan for speaker of the House situation. This remains fluid, and it remains somewhat murky, a little confusing. Here is the latest that I had in the Drive-By Media about this. Reuters story: "Paul Ryan Announces Candidacy for House Speaker -- Republican Representative Paul Ryan officially jumped into the race for speaker of the US House of Representatives on Thursday after nailing down crucial endorsements from conservative and moderate factions."
They quote Paul Ryan as saying, "I believe we are ready to move forward as a one, united team. And I am ready and eager to be our speaker." Now, folks, I want to remind you for those of you who weren't here yesterday -- I should have done this before starting. Let me set this up again, just a belief. I mean, I can't prove any of this, but it's based on what I've learned over the years here and combining that with my natural instincts.
See, I don't believe that what we hear from day to day really just spontaneously happened that day in all cases. And this Paul Ryan for Speaker circumstance I think has been managed behind the scenes long before anybody ever first heard of it. And I think that there is an objective to it. The donor class wants what the donor class wants, and the donor class is not gonna be denied. They give that money to these people for a reason, and they give that money to these people in part to make sure the elections don't matter if they don't have to matter. The money is given as an insurance against you and how you vote.
Now, we know what the big Republican donors want. That's been reported. They want, among other things, amnesty. They want comprehensive immigration reform. The Democrat donors want it, too. The two sets of donors supposedly have different reasons for wanting it, but both parties want it. The Democrats want amnesty, obviously. It's a voter registration drive for them, and it maintains their permanent underclass that they need of people constantly in need, constantly dependent and willing to vote for Santa Claus to satisfy their dependence.
The Republican side of this is oriented toward big-money donors who, it is said, want to be able to hire people and pay them as little as possible. The cheap labor. That goes against everything that we as Republicans stand for and believe. We believe just the opposite, that being paid well is a direct result of working hard and how much you prepare, desire, ambition, and all of that, and now we find out that our own party seems to be working with people to sabotage that whole notion in exchange for a job pool that's basically unskilled, and in many ways uneducated, and therefore unable to demand high compensation. So that's contradictory for us. Conservatives and Republicans think that we have people on our side that are oriented that way.
We have always believed that the Democrats are into people earning as little as possible 'cause they end up becoming dependent. Then we find out so much has been stood up and stand on its head. We now know the Democrat Party is the party of the rich. The Democrat Party the party protecting the rich, particularly the financial market rich and the Hollywood rich and the Wall Street rich; and yet the Republicans continue to be blamed for only caring about the rich. So put all that in the hopper. We know what the donor class wants, and it's not just illegal immigration.
We also know that the donor class wanted the Iran deal, because they want Iran as a market. They didn't like sanctions being placed on Iran because Iran is in need of modernizing a number of things, like its national airline. They're using age-old equipment. When they were under sanctions they couldn't buy any replacement aircraft or anything else, legally. Not just for their nuclear program, but anything. So we came to find out some airplane manufacturers were very happy to see the Iran deal happen because it lifted sanctions. And the lifting of sanctions immediately provided the Iranian regime with $150 billion, not all of it may be spent on financing terrorism. Some of it might be spend to buy new airplanes or new cars, buses, whatever the hell it is.
So we find the Republicans didn't stand in the way of the Iran deal, either. In fact, they came up with the Corker Bill that was designed to make it look like they were putting up obstacles but in fact they weren't. So when we know all of that, much as it's hard to digest and as difficult as it is to accept, we know all of that, then we are treated to John Boehner supposedly getting frustrated and saying no mas, no mas, getting out of there. And now we've got supposedly a crisis. Oh, my God, oh, my God, who's gonna be the next Speaker? And then one day we're told Paul Ryan.
My only point is that it didn't happen that way. Washington news is a script. Washington politics is a script. It is written for people in Washington, in the media, and people in political parties, those that are famous and have a role in talking and reaching the public, they have roles to play. The short version of this is that I think, you know, Ryan had these two demands. And I think these demands were dealt with long before anybody ever heard about them. His demand was that he be elected unanimously by the Republican caucus. He didn't want any disagreement. And that was to further unity.
And the second thing he wanted was to eliminate the House rule written by Thomas Jefferson that speakers can be recalled. And the third thing, he didn't want to have to travel on weekends. He wanted to be able to maintain his time with his family. Now, that was presented to us in one day. My contention is this was all done days and maybe a week prior, the negotiations, the expressive Paul Ryan telling people what his demands were, people approaching him to do this, and that processes were put in place to make those things happen. So that takes us to this. Well, let me close the loop on it.
Here's the dream, from the Republican donor side. The Republican donor side is that Jeb Bush or, if not Jeb, somebody else acceptable to the Republican establishment, gets elected president, Paul Ryan is Speaker of the House, and the donor class thinks that if they can make that happen, that within 12 to 18 months their entire agenda will be implemented. And that's why Trump is a problem, and that's why Ben Carson is a problem, because either Trump or Carson put an obstacle in the way of the agenda happening. And I think it takes a while to write that script. I think it takes a while to put all these pieces in place. And by the time the news is reported to us, that Ryan is gonna be Speaker but has these demands, I think it's already been dealt with. We're just not told that.
Now, the latest news is that Ryan has offered concessions to the House Freedom Caucus. This would be the conservatives or the Tea Party caucus in the House of Representatives. And here they are, Ryan has agreed to delay a discussion about reforming the procedural motion used to removing a House Speaker. He has not eliminated it, according to The Politico. He has agreed to delay discussion, meaning he's open to taking the job without the guarantee that that procedural motion would be eliminated.
Okay, now, hold your horses. Given what I've just said, is that really what's going on, or is that just what the soap opera tells us, is that just what the script is? You have to ask yourself this. Paul Ryan is approached to be Speaker. He says, "Only if," and lists three things. Those three things are announced and a firestorm erupts. A couple days later we get this story. "Well, he's willing to delay this provision that would do away with the procedure for getting rid of the Speaker." Why? Why? He must really want the job then. I mean, the demands were what they were, and now with just a little bit of opposition or anger he's willing to back off of one of them? Why?
Is he really backing off of it, or is there another way that perhaps they can get this done while it appears he's walking away from it? I mean, the demand is what it was. The demand is outrageous, that he be voted for unanimously and that they get rid of the rule that says they can get rid of Speakers. But yet he's willing to compromise on that? Why? What happened? What changed? Did it look like he wasn't gonna be supported? And I thought he didn't want it anyway unless he could get all that? So what happened? Why back off of this?
Then you ask yourself, is he really backing off of it, or is that just the news? And then you have to ask yourself one other thing about all this. You know, there's a whole other party in the House that votes on these things that we're not hearing a thing about. Where are the Democrats on this provision that you can't get rid of a Speaker? It's just been assumed that because the Democrats are in the minority that they've got nothing to say about it. But the Democrats know that someday they're gonna be in the majority. Are they gonna want to be saddled with the suspension of the rule that allows members to recall a Speaker?
This is very, very strange to me. You make the demand and it's made almost as a nonnegotiable thing. It's a demand almost of somebody that really does not want the job, but if you're gonna make me take it, you're gonna have to do this, this, and this, otherwise I'm not interested. This is a list of demands that you make that you don't expect to get, and on that basis you say, okay, thanks, but no thanks, I don't want the job. But then all of a sudden, no, no, he does want the job. He really wants to be Speaker, and he's willing to back off of that for a while.
Yeah, well, until when? No, I'm sorry, I'm naturally skeptical here. That's all this is. I don't know anything. I'm just skeptical. Intelligence guided by experience. And then there's this story TheHill.com: "Group Seeking to Curb Immigration Goes After Ryan -- A leading advocate of tighter restrictions on immigration has launched a campaign to prevent Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) from assuming the Speakership. NumbersUSA, which advocates for tougher laws governing both legal and illegal immigration, is warning that Ryan's past embrace of certain legalization benefits for people in the country illegally -- benefits critics deem 'amnesty' -- makes him unfit for the post."
So we see that it isn't universal acclaim, yet people want it to appear that it is. Anyway, it's just very, very fluid out there, this whole situation where we're trying to replace Boehner. I just can't help but wonder if, as is the usual case, there's more going on here than we know that is not being reported, but that is known.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay. So I just got a great question in the e-mail. "Rush, in your scenario you said that the Republican donors, they want Jeb or whoever from the establishment as president, Ryan as speaker, and in the first 12-to-18 months they get their agenda implemented. What happens if Hillary wins, Rush? What then?" Folks, that's easy -- "What happens if Hillary wins?" -- and you better be prepared for that right now. If Hillary Clinton wins, the first thing on Election Night... They won't even wait 'til the next day to say it. If Hillary Clinton wins, the Republican Party will come out en masse, and they will say, "See?
"We told you we need to do comprehensive immigration reform right now or we will never win back the White House." That's already built in. If Hillary Clinton wins, no matter who the Republican nominee is, that's what the RNC and that's what the Republican establishment is going to say. They're gonna lay the loss off on you, because you stood in the way of them doing amnesty. And once again, conservatives will be blamed for Hillary winning. That's already written. That's already done deal. The one thing that stands in the way of all of this, Donald Trump or Ben Carson. If either of those two being the nominee, it just gums up everything that is on the easel right now, in terms of the agenda.
END TRANSCRIPT
