Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Rush Limbaugh’

Classic video clip of Rush Limbaugh obliterating woke virtue-signaling in 1993 is still as relevant as ever

By PAUL SACCA | November 07, 2022


Twitter @EndWokeness Video Screenshot

Like Blaze News? Get the news that matters most delivered directly to your inbox. SIGN UP

In a video clip from nearly three decades ago, the legendary Rush Limbaugh was able to obliterate the concept of virtue-signaling, and did so in 45 seconds.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines virtue-signaling as: “The act or practice of conspicuously displaying one’s awareness of and attentiveness to political issues, matters of social and racial justice, etc., especially instead of taking effective action.”

According to an article in the Boston Globe, the word “virtue-signaling” first surfaced in online message boards in 2004. In 2015, The Spectator published an article titled: “The awful rise of virtue signaling.” Google Trends shows the term “virtue signaling” was not really used until the summer of 2017, and the term exploded in June 2020.

Rush Limbaugh categorically understood the concept of the virtue-signaling way back in 1993. He not only grasped the dangerous flaws of virtue-signaling, but he could effectively lampoon the concept before anyone had a name for it.

Don’t miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship. Listen to The Rubin Report now.

In the 1990s, there was no Facebook to put a filter on your profile photo or Twitter to put pronouns in your bio to show you support the “current thing.” So people would wear ribbons to flaunt their moral high ground on a myriad of different causes.

For instance, orange ribbons are associated with leukemia, yellow to raise awareness for missing children, lavender to stand against urban violence, and blue ribbons are often worn to protest bullying. In the 1990s, a red ribbon was worn to raise awareness for HIV/AIDS.

In 1993 near the height of the AIDS epidemic, some people felt pressured to show their support for those suffering from HIV and AIDS by wearing a red ribbon on their clothes.

The Hollywood actors wanted to show the world how much they care about AIDS by wearing red ribbons. In 1993, the New York Times described the 65th Academy Awards audience of actors as a “sea of red AIDS ribbons.”

The Los Angeles Times noted, “When Billy Crystal emceed the Academy Awards on Monday night, we were surprised to see that he wasn’t wearing the red ribbon that symbolizes AIDS awareness.”

“The next morning we heard several radio shows abuzz with the to-wear or not to-wear (an AIDS ribbon) controversy,” the Los Angeles Times remarked, and added, “Radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, for one, called Crystal ‘the bravest man in Hollywood’ for not feeling like he had to follow the herd.”

Limbaugh set out to use the ribbon controversy to expose how feckless and shallow virtue signaling is.

During an episode of his syndicated television show in 1993, “America’s Anchorman” obliterated woke virtue-signaling.

Limbaugh pinned six different-colored ribbons on his suit, and satirically boasted to the studio audience, “Because I’m wearing these ribbons, I care more than any of you about anything. And these ribbons say so.”

The iconic radio host instructed his viewers to look at their own lapels, and then asked, “When you look down, what do you see?”

He answered his own question, “You don’t see anything, because you’re not wearing any ribbons.”

El Rushbo then explained how not wearing the ribbon meant that you were not as virtuous as those who did.

“It means you’re a bigot, it means you’re a racist, it means you’re a sexist, it means you’re a homophobe,” Limbaugh rattled off. “It probably means you’re a white guy, it probably means you’re a European, and you and you alone are responsible for all the ills of America.”

He then triumphantly proclaimed, “But I’m not, because I’m wearing these ribbons. I care more than you.”

The audience erupts into laughter over the absurd premise.

The classic video clip of Limbaugh destroying liberals for virtue-signaling resurfaced on Sunday. The old clip from 1993 went viral and racked up more than 700,000 views on Twitter in less than two days.

Nearly 30 years later, Limbaugh’s lesson on virtue signaling still holds true.


It Doesn’t Matter That Voters Hate Joe Biden If Democrats Can Rig Elections



Joe Biden

Just a month before the 2020 election, radio host Rush Limbaugh commented that Democrats “resent the whole premise behind elections. Look, they don’t believe they should have to persuade anybody to agree with them … The modern-day Democrats have to go through the motions of campaigning, and they have to go through the motions of trying to win the hearts and minds of voters. But they resent the h-ll out of it. And in their world, it’s the one thing standing in their way: This need, this requirement to win elections. And I’m just telling you: As soon as they can figure out a way to eliminate elections, they will do it.”

Today, Democrats are engaged in a full-court press to pass legislation that would brush state election safeguards aside and codify the shenanigans of 2020 into federal law. They’ll nuke the filibuster if they can, a step never taken previously for high-priority legislation but pursued now for a bill that nobody is marching in the streets for. Anything to cement themselves into a permanent position of power.

As Joe Biden himself said, “It’s about election subversion, not just whether or not people get to vote. Who counts the vote? That’s what this is about, that’s what makes this so different from anything else we’ve ever done.” Indeed.

Voters Aren’t Clamoring for Democrat Priorities

It’s hard being a Democrat lately. Just ask Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. After promising to hold a vote to eliminate the filibuster and force through passage of their “voting rights” bill by Martin Luther King Jr. Day (January 17), he had to push it back again. This, of course, comes on the heels of a stinging defeat of the Biden administration’s Covid vaccine mandate by the Supreme Court. That failure was preceded by the “Build Back Better” bill being stalled in the Senate, perhaps for good.

Party leaders are upset, but the truth is that voters are not enthusiastic about much of this. There are no marches for mandates. Nor is there any grassroots demand for Build Back Better or the federalization of state elections. And a recent poll found that support for the filibuster has only grown since Democrats began their push to eliminate it (now by a 53 percent to 27 percent approval to disapproval margin).

Democrats Mistakenly Double Down

Democrats may fail at policy, but they’ve always been reliably competent at the game of politics, zeroing in on votes with great precision. Have you noticed they haven’t been themselves lately, though? Even after taking a shellacking in statewide elections in Virginia and New Jersey last November, a moment when sane politicians typically learn from defeat, they instead doubled down. In her usual well-reasoned manner, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., commented after the electoral bloodbath that Democrats were beaten, not because of the president’s agenda, but because they hadn’t done enough to “excite, speak to, or energize a progressive base.” Never mind that voters knew what was at stake — and clearly rejected it.

One would have thought that older and more seasoned politicians might have guided the young House member back to reality, but the ragin’ Cajun himself, James Carville, only sparked her outrage in saying that “stupid wokeness” had cost the Democrats. James comes from the era of old-school politics, one that abided by the cardinal rule: “Never piss off voters.” He’s surely aware of its corollary: “If you do, then turn back – ASAP.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should know better, but she responded, “no, no,” when asked if the election results in Virginia and New Jersey would cause Democrats to rethink their plans. Full steam ahead.

Democrats Out of Touch

The president lamented that his big ticket bills hadn’t been passed before Election Day, and then concluded, “but I’m not sure I would have been able to change the number of very conservative folks who turned out in red districts that were Trump voters.” For a politician who’s been in public office for nigh 50 years, that kind of logic seems disturbingly unhinged. How exactly does one surmise both that the party’s losses were due to not passing the big agenda soon enough (AOC’s position), and that it would not have mattered anyway because, you know, the red wave was coming? Excuses, blindness, or something else? It’s hard to tell.

We’re left to ponder: Have Democrats lost the ability to navigate public opinion? Does it even matter to them anymore? With the midterm elections just 10 months away, and the polls moving away from Democrats, will they continue to walk off the electoral cliff or bring themselves back to reality?

No Compromise

President Bill Clinton, who also saw his party shellacked in a midterm, acted in the way that sensible politicians normally do. He called up the new Republican speaker of the House and asked how they could work together. The result was a Democrat president signing on to welfare reform and abandoning his unpopular quest for government-run universal health care. Voters rewarded him with re-election.

Nothing seems to faze Joe, though. No compromise ever seems possible. There are, of course, times it’s noble to dig the heels in. Faced with an approaching enemy, Winston Churchill proclaimed, “Never give in, never give in, never, never, never — in nothing, great or small, large or petty — never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense.” So where is the honor and good sense in ignoring voters who now give this president an embarrassing 33 percent approval rating?

Instead of finding common values to unite the nation, Biden calls those who disagree with him a bunch of racists. “Do you want to be the side of Dr. King or George Wallace?,” Biden pontificated in a speech pushing his “voting rights” bill. “Do you want to be the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor? Do you want to be the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis? This is the moment to decide, to defend our elections, to defend our democracy.”

Churchill battled the Nazis. Biden battles half of the country who simply disagrees with his party on a matter of policy — that is, who should control state elections — and whether we should suddenly abandon a Senate rule that’s existed for more than 200 years.

Not the Will of the People

Instead of being the moderate voters thought he was and simply calling up Republicans to find common ground legislation, policies for which voters would reward him, Biden remains ideologically ensconced in a White House driven by leftist special interest groups — venturing out to speak only to his own party’s caucus. Facing a headwind of opposition, he told the group of fellow Democrats on the Hill, “I don’t know that we can get this done … but I know one thing, as long as I have a breath in me … I’m going to be fighting to change the way these legislatures have moved.” Perhaps that’s the problem, Mr. President. You’re pushing a process rather than the will of the people.

Real Clear Politics notes that “it isn’t accidental that, in the generic ballot … the Democrats’ current vote share is 42.8%, nearly mimicking Biden’s.”

And “what does [RCP’s model] tell us about 2022? … a Republican-controlled Senate starts to come into the picture when Biden’s job approval falls to around 51% and becomes the most likely outcome at around 48%.” Biden is now at 42 percent approval in the RCP average, and that math should be clear to Democrats — but somehow, they seem unconcerned.

Maybe there’s a logical reason, a method to their madness. After pulling off the statistics-bending, six-fold swing-state wonder in the wee hours of election night 2020, perhaps Democrats now have reason to believe they’re no longer accountable to voters. Public opinion and polls become meaningless when you control the election process, when the courts turn a blind eye, and when the media blocks any honest inquiry.

Rush was right. Democrats are now working harder to change the election system than to change your mind because, as their actions demonstrate, they don’t care what you think. They just want to win.

Bob Anderson is a partner and CFO of a hotel development company and a former aerospace engineer who worked on the International Space Station and interned in Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) at the Pentagon. He is also a licensed commercial pilot.

Today’s THREE Politically INCORRECT Cartoon’s by A.F. Branco

A.F. Branco – RIP Rush Limbaugh

RIP Rush Limbaugh the GOAT of talk radio has passed away today Feb 17, 2021, at 70.

RIP Rush LimbaughPolitical cartoon by A. F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – On Loan From God

Rush Limbaugh has passed on but is important that we keep his legacy alive by spreading the Truth.

Rush Limbaugh Torch of TruthPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – A Pain in the Burro

Trump found a new place to set up his new office of Former President, rent Free.

Trump in Democrat’s HeadsTrump found a new place to set up his new office of Former President, rent Free. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

Rush Limbaugh Dead At 70, Wife Announces

Reported by SHELBY TALCOTT, MEDIA REPORTER | February 17, 2021


Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh died Wednesday after battling lung cancer, according to his family. His wife Kathryn announced the news on his radio show, Fox News reported. Limbaugh’s death follows his announcement in January 2020 that he was diagnosed with Stage IV lung cancer. Throughout his battle, Limbaugh continued hosting his radio show, “The Rush Limbaugh Show.”

Shortly after his diagnosis, former President Donald Trump awarded Limbaugh the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2020. The surprise award at the State of the Union address led to the radio host tearing up as then-first lady Melania Trump placed the medal around his neck.

The Presidential Medal of Freedom is the highest award given for a civilian.

Limbaugh launched “The Rush Limbaugh Show” in 1988 and it became the most listened-to radio show in America, according to Fox News. He would go on to become one of the most well-known figures in conservative politics and media.

“I wasn’t expected to be alive today,” Limbaugh told listeners during his last show of 2020. “I wasn’t expected to make it to October, and then to November, and then to December. And yet, here I am, and today, got some problems, but I’m feeling pretty good today.”

Limbaugh’s producer Bo Snerdly updated fans earlier in February after Limbaugh was absent from the show for one week. Snerdly said the staff was continuing to pray for Limbaugh over what the radio host previously described as a “death sentence.”

Limbaugh is in the National Association of Broadcasters Hall of Fame, as well as the Radio Hall of Fame. He was a best-selling author and appeared on TIME’s 100 Most Influential People in the World list in 2009.

Prior to his cancer diagnosis, Limbaugh learned he had an autoimmune disease that affected his hearing beginning in 2001. A few years later in 2003, Limbaugh went into a treatment facility for an addiction to pain medication, according to Fox News.

Limbaugh also worked on ESPN’s “Sunday NFL Countdown” for a short time in 2003, but resigned after comments he made about an NFL quarterback sparked backlash.

“We love people,” Limbaugh told the crowd. “When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don’t see groups. We don’t see victims. We don’t see people we want to exploit. What we see — what we see is potential. We do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work. We do not see that person with contempt. We don’t think that person doesn’t have what it takes.”

Rush Limbaugh Says America is Headed Toward ‘Secession’ After Presidential Vote Steal

Reported by

Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh sees a grim future for the United States after the stolen presidential vote and the total institutional collapse of the nation. Limbaugh says that he sees the country on the road “toward secession,” with America being bitterly divided and roughly half the nation openly reveling in corruption and celebrating grotesque election fraud reminiscent of a third-world despotism.

“So during the obscene profit time-out mere moments ago, Mr. Snerdley, the Official Program Observer, peppered me with a question,” Limbaugh said during the Wednesday edition of his titular radio program.“Mr. Snerdley is asking if we’re ever going to be able to win. And he’s talking about elections. Votes,” he continued. “Are we ever gonna be able to win without taking back some of these cities? He’s talking about blue cities like New York, Philadelphia.”

“I thought you were asking me something else when you said, ‘Can we win?’ I thought you meant, ‘Can we win the culture, can we dominate the culture,’” Limbaugh added.

This is when Limbaugh dropped the bombshell that he thinks the United States is likely no longer salvageable as a nation.

“I actually think — and I’ve referenced this, I’ve alluded to this a couple of times because I’ve seen others allude to this — I actually think that we’re trending toward secession. I see more and more people asking what in the world do we have in common with the people who live in, say, New York? What is there that makes us believe that there is enough of us there to even have a chance at winning New York? Especially if you’re talking about votes,” Limbaugh said.

He added he has read blogs recently detailing “how distant and separated and how much more separated our culture is becoming politically and that it can’t go on this way.”

“There cannot be a peaceful coexistence of two completely different theories of life, theories of government, theories of how we manage our affairs. We can’t be in this dire a conflict without something giving somewhere along the way,” Limbaugh warned.

Although he is pessimistic, Limbaugh has not given up on the idea that conservatives can achieve national victory even amidst the most daunting odds.

“I still haven’t given up the idea that we are the majority and that all we have to do is find a way to unite and win,” he said.

Limbaugh added that the biggest problem “is the fact that there are just so many RINOs, so many Republicans in the Washington establishment who will do anything to maintain their membership in the establishment because of the perks and the opportunities that are presented for their kids and so forth.”

By joining in with the criminal vote steal to destroy the Bill of Rights and Constitution, the Democrats and other fraud enablers shown themselves to be enemy combatants. Secession may be the only answer for these sinister interests to be brought to justice. Limbaugh may be onto something.

Rush Limbaugh Gives Harrowing Health Update

Reported By Jack Davis | Published October 20, 2020 at 6:54am

In February, the legendary broadcaster revealed he had advanced lung cancer but vowed to stay on the radio as he battled the disease. Limbaugh said in May that his treatment was physically grueling but that he would not stop fighting. As recently as July, he said he was hoping the treatment would give him “extra innings.”

But on Monday, Limbaugh told his audience that the latest results show the cancer that had been stymied is growing once again, according to a transcript of his remarks posted on his website.

“From the moment you get the diagnosis, there’s a part of you every day, OK, that’s it. Life’s over,” he said. “You just don’t know when. But when you get that diagnosis, I mean, that’s … So, during the period of time after the diagnosis, you do what you can to prolong life, do what you can to prolong a happy life. You measure a happy life against whatever medication it takes.

“And at some point you can decide, you know, this medication may be working, but I hate the way I feel every day. I’m not there yet. But it is part and parcel of this.“It’s tough to realize that the days where I do not think I’m under a death sentence are over. Now, we all are, is the point. We all know that we’re going to die at some point, but when you have a terminal disease diagnosis that has a time frame to it, then that puts a different psychological and even physical awareness to it.”

He said that when he went to the doctor last week, “The scans did show some progression of cancer. Now, prior to that, the scans had shown that we had rendered the cancer dormant. That’s my phrase for it. We had stopped the growth. It had been reduced, and it had become manageable.”

Limbaugh said the results were in some ways inevitable “because it is cancer. It eventually outsmarts pretty much everything you throw at it. And this, of course, this is stage four lung cancer.”

Later he noted that “stage four is, as they say, terminal. So we have some recent progression. It’s not dramatic, but it is the wrong direction.”

The results mean that Limbaugh’s treatment is being adjusted “in hopes of keeping additional progression at bay for as long as possible.”

Many on Twitter saluted Limbaugh.

………………………………………….“I try to remain committed to the idea what’s supposed to happen, will happen when it’s meant to. I mentioned at the outset of this — the first day I told you — that I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ,” he said. “It is of immense value, strength, confidence, and that’s why I’m able to remain fully committed to the idea that what is supposed to happen will happen when it’s meant to.


Today’s FOUR Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Little Big Man

Mike Bloomberg needs a booster stool to level the Democrat primary playing field or maybe rise above the rest.
Bloomberg Booster StoolPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Decorated

Vindman fired from the White House for good reason. President Trump can’t trust him.
VindmanPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco

A.F. Branco Cartoon – U.N. Human Rights Sham


U.N. Human Rights CouncilThe U.N. Human Rights Council is made up of human rights violating thugs who are against Israel. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Prayer Request

Rush Limbaugh has been diagnosed with lung cancer, so we pray for his speedy recovery. Our nation needs him now more than ever.
Prayers For Rush LimbaughPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Rush Limbaugh Pays Tribute to Orson Bean and Andrew Breitbart

Posted by Pam Key | 

URL of the original posting site:


Syndicated conservative talker Rush Limbaugh discussed the legacy of actor Orson Bean and his son-in-law Andrew Breitbart upon his return to his show Tuesday after receiving medical treatment for his lung cancer.

Limbaugh said, “I want to talk about the Oscars for just a second, not the awards themselves. I read the TV rating at an all-time low for this show, the Academy Awards show. And the real thing I want to talk about is Orson Bean. Orson Bean is how I want to get into this. Orson Bean was a healthy, vibrant 91 years old living in California, and he was hit by a car over the weekend and killed. He was a legendary television and movie performer. And he was a conservative. He oftentimes spoke of the Hollywood that existed when he was coming up. It was a Hollywood that loved God and a Hollywood love America, and he lamented it’s demise. He was the father in law of Andrew Breitbart.”
He continued, “Andrew Breitbart from California was a born and bred radical leftist d no other option. That’s just the way he came out of the womb. That was his surroundings. That was his universe. He fell in love with Orson Bean’s daughter, and that, of course, necessitated Andrew hanging around with Orson Bean. And one day — I’m really going to truncate this story— one day at Orson Bean’s home Breitbart saw a copy of my first book on the shelf, ‘The Way Things Ought to Be.’ And he started chiding, ‘What the hell are you doing with that? Why you know in the world would you have a book written by some fascist, right-winger on your bookshelf where anybody could see?’ The story goes that Orson Bean said, ‘Andrew take that book and read it, just read it.” Didn’t say anything else just, ‘Take the book and read it, Andrew.’ And Breitbart did. He took the book and read it. Because of the book started listening to this program on KFI Los Angeles. And became a full-fledged 180-degree convert to one of the most prominent conservative, cultural, pop-culture activists the movement has ever had.”
He added, “He was effusive in his explanation for how it happened my book. It wouldn’t have happened had it not been for Orson Bean. I had I mention this a couple of times over the years and express my gratitude to Orson Bean. I was just — I got a note. I was in the hospital over the weekend, and I got a note, ‘I’m sure you’ve heard about Orson Bean.’ I hadn’t heard about anything because I’ve had been out of it. So that is when I learn what happened to Orson. Reading about it, I found myself reconnecting with this story, and the Orson told the story interjected with Andrew Breitbart’s own words. It’s a tearjerker. And it happened to coincide with the other day the Academy Awards were going to be presented, and that show was an absolute disaster. I just couldn’t stop thinking about how Orson Bean was correct in describing how Hollywood used to be. It used to be every bit Red White and Blue, God, apple-pie America as anyone of us are.”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

Rush Limbaugh issues chilling statement regarding ‘Cold Civil War

Posted By Paul Duke |

It is fairly obvious that our nation is currently divided in ways that we have never before experienced in our modern era, and the danger that this poses cannot be overstated.

We, as Americans, are sadly dreading the time that we have to spend with one another out of a fear that politics may become a part of the conversation.

The mainstream media certainly deserves their fair share of the blame for this, with their constant and catalytic cacophony of drivel being streamed into our homes at a blistering pace.  They want us divided, as it makes us far easier to exploit for their fiscal gain.

But there is an enormous danger in all of this, and radio host Rush Limbaugh knows it.

“The media is not media. It’s just Democrats who work in the media, and the whole group of ’em is aligned. And what we are in the middle of now, folks, is a Cold Civil War,” Limbaugh said said on his radio show.

The radio host didn’t stop there, either.

Limbaugh put forth that the “Cold Civil War” encompasses overturning “the election results of 2016” and  “protecting and defending” the Washington establishment.”

“Their careers, their fortunes, their corruption. There are terribly big stakes involved here for these people. And Trump is on the cusp of overturning it and exposing it,” Limbaugh said.

The bitter divide in our political realm has already spilled over into violence on the streets of our great nation.

Groups such as Antifa have turned protesting and civil unrest into a sport, taking aim at not only conservative voters and Trump supporters, but also journalists like Andy Ngo who was brutally beaten while attempting to cover a series of disturbances by the group in Portland, Oregon just weeks ago.

STABLE GENIUS: El Rushbo Thinks Trump Just Beat Acosta At His Own Game

Written by Wes Walker on August 13, 2019

You know those press ‘sprays’ Trump keeps doing on the WH lawn? Rush Limbaugh says its an example of Trump winning … yet again!

Ask yourself a question — how long has it been since you saw one of those annoying Jim Acosta exercises in grandstanding?

They were almost a daily event at one point there, right? But they’ve pretty much dried up.

In fact, most of us have all but forgotten about that sad little glory hound, haven’t we?

How is that even possible when the President is talking to the press almost every single day, sometimes for 90 minutes at a shot?

El Rushbo has it pretty much figured out:

But you know one of the things I noticed? You know, there’s no White House press briefing anymore. They don’t do ’em. They don’t get together in the pressroom at 1 o’clock every day with the media asking questions. Guess what we don’t see now? We never see the media on TV. We never see them. Trump has totally taken away their star turns.

He comes out of the White House on the way to the helicopter, he takes questions on the way, but the camera is always on him. We never see the Drive-Bys. All we do is hear them. And I’m telling you, they sound like a bunch of spoiled-rotten, impolite kids, all of them shouting their inane questions at the same time. But you never see their faces. Trump has taken away their face time in context of White House press briefings.

Now, throw this picture up, Brian. We put a picture here in the switcher. For those of you watching on the Dittocam, this is what I’m talking about.

This is what it looks like now. Trump leaves the White House on the way to the jet. That’s the Drive-By Media, the press gaggle, shouting their questions. You’ll hear it in a minute. “Mr. President! Mr. President!” They’re shouting like a bunch of little spoiled rotten kids. But none of them are on TV anymore. He has taken that away from. This is a still-shot photo. This is not a video still shot. The only shot that was made available on TV today of this press availability was straight on the president from behind that gaggle of Drive-Bys.

We’ll post this at shortly so you’ll be able to see it there. Not all of you are watching on the Dittocam. But this is not happenstance. It’s not accidental. This has been done purposely, you know, they had these people like Jim Acosta and April Ryan and the rest of these egomaniacs showing off in the pressroom simply trying to make names for themselves.

Who could ask the rudest question? Who could express the greatest amount of disgust for Sarah Sanders and Trump? So they simply took it away from ’em, and this is what the press gets now. And they are not on TV. And, believe me, particularly for the television Drive-Bys, being on TV is everything. Face time is everything, and the Trumpster is artfully denying them that which they love.
Source: Rush Limbaugh

For all their mockery, Trump beat them at their own game. He took the driver’s seat and deprived their antics of any oxygen.

I Stand With Rush: Time To Take Action

Written by Lloyd Marcus on July 8, 2019

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh passionately responded to a column which warned of a growing anti-Americanism in our country. Rush told his millions of listeners, “We are facing it right now, not 10 years from now.” Rush said do not misinterpret his concern to mean he has lost hope and given up on saving America. He said to view his rant as a clarion call for all who love our country to take action. Rush explained that he is not encouraging violence, but to simply start saying, “No!”

In essence, Rush is saying to stop passively permitting spoiled brat anti-American leftists to trash our flag, pull down historical monuments, demonize patriotism and our Christian founding. Stop allowing leftists to poison the minds of our youths with hatred for their country.

I share Rush’s frustration, particularly as it relates to my fellow black Americans.

Due to their criminal activities involving illegal drugs, two beloved black millennial relatives are in the hospital. One was severely beaten and the other is fighting for his life. Both young men live in Baltimore which is one of the cities controlled by Democrats, plagued with record levels of black on black crime.

Frustratingly, both young relatives are infected with Colin Kapernick’s, Democrats’ and fake news media’s bogus negative view of America. They believe being black in this awful racist country justifies them doing whatever necessary, legal or illegal, to survive.

Both young men were raised with Christian principles and values. If my dad, Dr Rev Lloyd E. Marcus was still alive, they would be too ashamed to look him in the eye. While I hold my relatives accountable for their bad behavior, it is unarguable that allowing Democrats, public education, entertainment and social media to fill our youths heads with hatred for their country has reaped devastating consequences.

Unfortunately, several members of my family are infected with leftists’ anti-Americanism and hatred for Republicans and Trump. At a family gathering, I was tempted to stand in the middle of the room and proclaim, “Do y’all know Democrats want to kill babies, especially black babies, even after they are born? Do y’all know blacks are experiencing historic financial prosperity thanks to President Trump?

Along with allowing leftists to infect our youths with anti-Americanism, we are passively watching the swift transformation of our culture away from biblical morality. LGBTQ enforcers are abusing our children while cramming their evil agenda down our throats.

Many Christians still do not comprehend the tyrannical aggressiveness of the LGBTQ movement. A Christian minister friend of 30 years stopped speaking to me for writing articles about LGBTQ aggression. He is deceived by leftists’ manipulative false narrative that says not embracing the LGBTQ lifestyle means we hate them. The truth is not embracing their sin means we love them.

Christian relatives instructed me not to post my articles exposing the LGBTQ war on gender and Christianity on their Facebook pages. Meanwhile, a shocked relative approached me at a family picnic. The relative said when they offered a 7-year-old boy at the picnic a toy motorcycle, he said he didn’t want it because he is a girl. The relative noticed the lad was wearing a girl bracelet. Apparently, his parents are complicit in his gender confusion. I told the relative, “This is what I have been warning you guys about. This is the outrageous child abuse allowed to happen in our public schools.”

When my wife Mary read me this headline, I assumed it was fake. Sadly, it is not. “Kids Can Handle the Kink.” A deranged sex therapist said not only can children handle witnessing explicit sex acts during gay pride parades, but it is also beneficial to their healthy development. 

A devastated gentleman emailed me: “My granddaughter, who is not yet 15…began displaying the LGBT banner on Facebook, declared herself transgender, erroneously said the Bible is a bunch of myths written by bored old men, erroneously said the Catholic Church condemns all gay people to hell, literally told me to get my head out of my ass, and then unfriended me on FB. Gee, I wonder where she got those ideas.” His granddaughter’s mother also ended her relationship with him.

The evening of July 4th, our nation’s birthday, I watched a Youtube video of the Statue of Liberty song. Sadly, the lyrics are not embraced by far too many young Americans today.

“I’m so proud to be called an American

To be named with the brave and the free

I will honor our flag and our trust in God

And the statue of liberty”

I stand with Rush Limbaugh, folks. It is time that we take action to take back our country. It is time that we say no to anti-American traitors and anti-biblical cultural assassins.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American

The UK Guardian declared prolific writer, singer and songwriter Lloyd Marcus the Tea Party Movement’s most prominent African American; seen on Fox News, CNN and more. Rejecting hyphenating, Marcus is renowned for proclaiming, “I am NOT an African-American! I am Lloyd Marcus AMERICAN!!!” Marcus is Chairman of Conservative Campaign Committee PAC. It’s mission is to elect conservative candidates across America.

Limbaugh: Kaepernick-Nike Shoe Saga Proof NFL Kneeling Not About Police Brutality — ‘He Opposes Honoring the Flag’

Written by JEFF POOR |

URL of the original posting site:


Tuesday on his nationally syndicated radio show, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh argued that former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s opposition to Nike’s so-called Betsy Ross footwear was proof Kaepernick’s kneeling was not about alleged police brutality but animosity toward the American flag.

Nike pulled the product line based on Kaepernick’s opposition, which came because the footwear featured the Betsy Ross flag.

Partial transcript as follows (courtesy

The Washington media-political complex, if you will, authors the daily script. It’s one-sided. How does Nike let one person sway them into ditching an entirely already-made shoe, featuring — by the way — a flag designed by Betsy Ross. Now, did not Kaepernick tell us when he began kneeling — as a barely-could-get-on-the-field bench rider for the San Francisco 49ers. Did he not tell us that he was kneeling to protest police brutality? Did he not tell us this? He did! That’s all it was. He was protesting the fact that the cops were shooting people like him.

That the cops are shooting black people and women and minorities first. It was all about the cops. Except it wasn’t! It was about the flag all along! He was taking a knee because he opposes the country! He opposes the national anthem. He opposes honoring the flag. This proves it! They always lie. They always lie to us. They hide so much of their real core. Even when they are in the process of displaying it, they still deceive. And there was the media and the Democrat Party applauding the guts and the courage of the forever untalented bench retired, Colin Kaepernick.

Then the media led the charge demanding that NFL owners hire the guy every time they had a starting quarterback that’d get injured, and none of the NFL owners wanted the hassle. Nobody wants somebody anti-American on their team, certainly not as starting quarterback. The media does, though! The media wants Kaepernick starring… Not starring. He’s not capable of that. They want him playing for some team so that they can carry the narrative through every NFL game he’s playing — and then, of course, he’ll get other players to join him ’cause they’ll want to shine in the spotlight.

The NFL then can be presented as an anti-American institution and the people leading the anti-Americanism will be made heroes. We’ll be told that they are very courageous.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Limbaugh: Mueller Investigation a ‘Cover-Up,’ Meant To ‘Distract Everybody’s Attention’

Reported By Randy DeSoto | Published February 18, 2019 at 11:17am  | Modified February 18, 2019 at 11:20am

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh said he believes special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation was launched to “cover-up” the misdeeds within the Justice Department, including the FBI’s attempted “coup” against President Donald Trump.

During an appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” Limbaugh was asked to respond to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s account that he was involved with a discussion with Justice Department Deputy Director Rod Rosenstein in May 2017 regarding invoking the 25th Amendment to have Trump removed from office.

Fox News host Chris Wallace asked the commentator why he described this revelation as evidence of a “silent coup.”

“Because these people are unelected,” Limbaugh answered. “They took it upon themselves to overthrow the election results of 2016, ignoring the potential real collusion and conspiracy between Democrats and Russians to undermine the Trump candidacy and the Trump presidency.”

“We’re losing sight of what happened here,” he continued. “People unelected simply because they don’t like the guy’s hairstyle or where he came from decided the American people’s decision was invalid and began a systematic process to get him thrown out of office. This is a silent coup.”

Limbaugh contended that those involved in these discussions are the ones who ought to be under investigation and going to jail.

“The Mueller investigation, I believe, is a cover-up of all of that. It’s to distract everybody’s attention,” he said. “This is one of the greatest political hoaxes that has ever be perpetrated on the people of this country.”

The conservative icon said the prosecution of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and others affiliated with the campaign for process crimes is all “designed to make it look like there was some kind of collusion between Trump and Russia.”

Limbaugh noted that no one has been prosecuted to date for the stated purpose of Mueller’s probe, which was to examine Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 election, including whether the Trump campaign colluded with Moscow. Many political observers, including Fox News host Sean Hannity, have pointed to the special counsel’s apparent lack of interest in investigating the origin and use of the so-called Trump Russia dossier as proof that Mueller is overseeing a one-side, agenda-driven probe.

The dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign, was reportedly used to help obtain FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.

Limbaugh said that a primary goal of Mueller’s investigation was to be the vehicle used to justify impeaching Trump, but now it is aimed toward the 2020 election and driving down the president’s approval numbers.

Trump tweeted on Monday, “Wow, so many lies by now disgraced acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe. He was fired for lying, and now his story gets even more deranged. He and Rod Rosenstein, who was hired by Jeff Sessions (another beauty), look like they were planning a very illegal act, and got caught.”

He added in a second tweet, “There is a lot of explaining to do to the millions of people who had just elected a president who they really like and who has done a great job for them with the Military, Vets, Economy and so much more. This was the illegal and treasonous ‘insurance policy’ in full action!”

The Department of Justice’s inspector general released a report last April concluding that McCabe “lacked candor, including under oath, on multiple occasions in connection with describing his role in connection with a disclosure to the (Wall Street Journal)” in violation of FBI policy, and that his “disclosure of the existence of an ongoing investigation in the manner described in this report violated the FBI’s and the Department’s media policy and constituted misconduct.”

The OIG made a criminal referral to the DOJ regarding McCabe’s alleged lies to federal investigators.

In March 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe based on the OIG’s findings two days before he was slated to retire.

McCabe came under increased scrutiny following the release of text messages by the inspector general in December 2017 between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

In the texts, Strzok described Trump during the 2016 campaign as a “loathsome human” and an “idiot,” and found the prospect of him being president “terrifying.”

Page, who was having an affair with Strzok, texted him, “There is no way (Trump) gets elected.”

Strzok then replied, “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office … that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.

“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

Andy” apparently referred to McCabe.



More Info Recent Posts Contact

Randy DeSoto is a graduate of West Point and Regent University School of Law. He is the author of the book “We Hold These Truths” and screenwriter of the political documentary “I Want Your Money.”

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco

Rush Limbaugh 30 year anniversary

Rush Limbaugh’s 30 year anniversary today. I started listening to Rush Limbaugh around 1990. I can’t say in words how much I appreciate his impact on our society and give him a large amount of the credit for saving our country from the ravages of the leftist mainstream media.

Rush Limbaugh 30 year anniversary


A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

Chilling Rush Prediction: The Left Will Try To Stop Elections Before All’s Said & Done

Reported By Cillian Zeal | July 16, 2018 at 11:26am

Free and fair elections have always been a hallmark of American democracy. But will they always be? Rush Limbaugh thinks there’s a very good chance they won’t.

Rush was answering a caller to the show last week who said that the media didn’t understand why Republican voters would stick by President Donald Trump, particularly given his nomination of federal Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

“I think you’re right — and the media, of course, is missing it,” Limbaugh said. “The media thinks the exact opposite is happening. They think … Like CNN today spent the whole morning bashing Trump as somebody out of place, and doesn’t know what he’s doing, embarrassing the United States on the world stage at NATO, and they think Trump voters are gonna see it the same way and start regretting the way they voted for Trump.

“These people have no idea,” he continued. “It’s amazing to me — and you’re right about this. It’s amazing just from a professional standpoint.

“If you’re a political consultant, political professional at all, and you’re on the losing side of an election that you thought you were gonna win in a landslide, it would seem to me that the first thing that you would want to do is find out who it is that beat you,” Limbaugh said. “’Who are these people that voted for Trump, and how did we miss ’em? How did this happen? Why did our polling not show that Trump was this popular?’

“They haven’t done that at all. They’ve made no effort to understand the Trump voter in whatever state.

“They have made no effort to understand why they can’t break this bond that exists between Trump and his voters. They continue to condescend to these people. They continue. Either on MSNBC or CNN or in the pages of The New York Times or Washington Post, they continue to mock them, make fun of them, provoke them, insult them, what have you. All the while doing news stories in such a way that they really believe that they’re going to separate Trump’s voters from Trump.”

Limbaugh said to the left (and the anti-Trump right), it comes down to “ways have to be found to beat them and overcome them, but not persuade them and talk them, you know, into abandoning Trump. Well, I don’t know, but that just doesn’t seem to make much sense in the world of politics.

“I’ll tell you, folks, I’ve made this prediction once. I’m gonna make it again here. It’s a long, long-term prediction. This is nothing rooted in any particular conspiracy theory I’ve heard, because I don’t ascribe to those. But it is becoming clear … It’s becoming clear to the left that the only thing standing in their way now is elections.”

Limbaugh went on to describe a show on CBS (I’m pretty sure he’s referring to “The Good Fight”) in which a character played by Margo Martindale illustrates his point.

“She was telling everybody about, ‘we have to win 2018. We have to win. We have to win. We have to.’ Now, obviously that’s a mantra. But the way she said it, it made me realize: One of these days these people are gonna realize that the only thing stopping them here is elections.

“If they can find a way around that, then they don’t need to worry about appealing to people or getting out the vote or coming up with ways to convince people to vote,” he continued. “If you look at the way the radical left is going with this intolerant bullying and intimidation of anybody who disagrees with ’em, and the desire to stop any expression of any alternative view or way of thinking?

“But I’m telling you that they’re gonna start thinking this way, because in their perverted worldview, the biggest problem they have right now is they’re losing elections. And their way of thinking is, ‘Well, we got a get rid of elections then.’ If elections are the problem, rather than figuring how to win ’em since that’s becoming problematic for ’em, ‘We just gotta find a way to get rid of ’em.’”

Limbaugh said that you could “(g)o ahead and laugh. Tell everybody I said that someday the left is gonna conclude that elections are the problem, but I’m telling you what. What do you think open borders, mass amnesty is about?

“If American citizens won’t vote for you, then make sure a bunch of people get into the country who will. Don’t doubt me on this, folks. These people have such an entitlement and quest for power that leaving it up to public opinion among a bunch of dolts and uninformed, uneducated hicks?

“That’s not gonna happen,” he concluded. “That’s not gonna be allowed to happen for very long.”

Will this happen? Not tomorrow, and Rush certainly doesn’t believe it’s coming soon. But when the ends justify the means, and when the ends involve winning at all costs, why bother with elections?

And when you think they won’t change the way the game works, just look at the move regarding the Electoral College when they couldn’t win that.

Cillian Zeal is a conservative writer who is currently living abroad. He became a staunch right-winger at the age of three: While watching a clip of Ronald Reagan, he told his mother (to her great horror), “Mom, I’m a Republican.” Except for a brief, scarring and inexplicable late high-school dalliance with Ralph Nader and his ilk, he’s never looked back. Aside from politics, he enjoys spending time with his wife, literature (especially British comic novels and modern Japanese lit), indie rock, coffee, Formula One, and football (of both American and world varieties). He is the proud owner of a very lazy West Highland white terrier and an extraordinary troublesome poodle mix of indeterminate provenance.

Rush Limbaugh Says 1 Person Is Taking Over The GOP


URL of the original posting site:

Advertisement – story continues below

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh made a bold statement on his program about Steve Bannon and the current state of the Republican Part y.

Limbaugh believes Bannon, the former White House chief strategist, is taking over the roles and responsibilities meant for GOP leadership by enforcing conservatism onto Republican candidates up for re-election.

“I think what Bannon is doing is slowly but surely taking over the role of the Republican Party,” Limbaugh said Wednesday. “The Republican Party is obviously not with Trump on balance — you have some in the House who are — but the Republican Party on balance is not with Trump.”

Steve Bannon played a major role in then-candidate Donald Trump’s presidential victory upset last year and led the formulation of White House policy in the months that followed. He was Trump’s campaign chairman during the 2016 election and later served as a White House chief strategist — leading the nationalist wing of the administration.

After abruptly leaving the administration in mid-August, Bannon returned to his prior position as executive chairman of Breitbart News. Since leaving the White House, he made it clear he would use his position as a media executive to support insurgent conservative candidates running primaries against establishment GOP lawmakers.

Advertisement – story continues below

Bannon already appears good for his word.

In the special election in Alabama to fill the Senate seat once held by now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Bannon went against the Trump administration with his endorsement of Roy Moore. Bannon supported the successful candidacy of Moore, a controversial former judge, in a move that was at odds with Trump, who campaigned vehemently for Moore’s opponent, Sen. Luther Strange. By election day, it wasn’t even close. Moore bested Strange in the GOP primary by almost double digits. Moore now heads into the Alabama general election, where he will likely win in a state that leans red.

The primary results demonstrated the power of Bannon’s support.

The leader of Breitbart is not stopping with the Alabama special election. Bannon has recently announced he is expanding his GOP targets, adding Republican Sens. Deb Fischer of Nebraska, John Barrasso of Wyoming and Orrin Hatch of Utah to his hit list.

> In Wyoming, Bannon is pushing Erik Prince, the brother of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and founder of major security contractor Blackwater, to challenge Barrasso, CNN reported. 

> In Utah, Hatch may very well retire on his own. If he does, former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is reportedly eyeing a run in the Mormon-majority state. If that happens, Bannon is ready to run a candidate against him.

According to a source close to Bannon, this is just a “partial” list of elections he is looking to influence.

Bannon is already working to knock off Republican Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake and his beleaguered campaign for re-election. Nevada Sen. Dean Heller and Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker are also on Bannon’s radar.

“Some people make an argument that there really isn’t a Republican Party left. I mean, there are people who call themselves that and they go out and raise money and they raise a lot. But whereas the party used to be known for one, two, or three very serious things, they’re not anymore,” Limbaugh added on his radio show.

The conservative talk radio host believes Bannon and others are trying to keep the identity of the Republican Party alive by enforcing such standards onto them by way of primary challenges.

Rush Limbaugh Read Trump Wiretap Story, Made Grave Discovery


URL of the original posting site:

Advertisement – story continues below

On Monday evening, the political world was blown wide open when a bombshell report emerged revealing former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort had been wiretapped — and, even worse, that his conversations with President Donald Trump may have been recorded as a result.

Of course the liberal media has been quite slow to admit that the revelation proves Trump’s infamous allegations in March that he had been wire tapped at New York City’s Trump Tower weren’t quite as insane and unfounded as they claimed.

Speaking on his show Tuesday, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh explained that he believed this revelation is actually “worse than Watergate,” according to a transcript from

“This is much worse than Watergate, folks. That was a third-rate burglary that went awry,” Limbaugh said. “Trump was called a liar. He was mocked for tweeting about Trump Tower being wiretapped.”

Limbaugh went on to explain that it appears that former President Barack Obama and former FBI Director James Comey spied on a rival political campaign — possibly in an attempt to sway the election.

“Now we know, ladies and gentlemen, that Obama and James Comey’s FBI wiretapped the head of a political campaign,” Limbaugh said. “This is bigger than Watergate. The phone lines and other aspects of life that were wiretapped and surveilled were that of Paul Manafort, the first campaign manager for Donald Trump.”

We should point out that right now there is no proof that Obama ordered the wiretaps, or that this was done to sway an election. The wiretaps on Manafort preceded his work with the Trump campaign, and actually weren’t in place for much of his time as manager. But that doesn’t change the accuracy of Limbaugh’s essential point.

“What the government’s doing is bigger than Watergate. Nixon never did any of this. He may have dreamed about it, and he may have gotten drunk and talked to people, but he never did this. Nixon never actually used the IRS to penalize enemies, but Obama did. Ever heard of Lois Lerner?” Limbaugh asked.

This wiretapping revelation raises serious questions that need to be answered. Multiple high-level Obama officials, like former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, insisted before Congress that there was no wiretapping (or claimed they weren’t aware of any).

Clearly, that wasn’t the truth.

This is one of the biggest political bombshells to drop in a long time. If Obama was spying on Manafort for political reasons, the ramifications could be extreme. The American people need answers, and they need them now.

H/T PJ Media

From the Rush Limbaugh Radio Show: “The Republican Obamacare Betrayal”

Commentary by Rush Limbaugh | July 31, 2017

URL of the original posting site:

RUSH: Exclusive, right on time, as night follows day, we can always count on a push poll like this. From Reuters: “Exclusive: Majority of Americans Want Congress to Move on From Healthcare Reform.” Of course they do!

So here comes the failure by the Republicans to repeal and replace Obamacare. Fat repeal, skinny repeal, straight repeal, repeal and replace, replace but don’t repeal, whatever it is, up in flames, up in smoke, and wouldn’t you know, Reuters has gone out and surveyed people in New York and Boston and LA, wherever, and found people that think Congress should move on.

“A majority of Americans are ready to move on from healthcare reform at this point after the U.S. Senate’s effort to dismantle Obamacare failed on Friday, according to an exclusive Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Saturday. Nearly two-thirds of the country wants to either keep or modify the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare, and a majority of Americans want Congress to turn its attention to other priorities, the survey found.”

Now, here’s the next paragraph in the Reuters story: “Republicans have vowed to dismantle the Affordable Care Act since Democratic President Barack Obama signed it into law in 2010, and it appeared they finally had their chance when Republican President Donald Trump took office in January. But the law, which helped 20 million people obtain health insurance, has steadily grown more popular.”

Like hell it has. But here we go. Obamacare more popular than ever, Republicans hated and despised. And that may be, but not for the reasons the Reuters implies here. Obamacare hasn’t helped 20 million people obtain health insurance. And here’s another thing about this CBO score. I have intended to mention this the past couple or three days and just never got around to it.

The CBO score. We gotta get rid of the CBO. The CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, is one of the primary obstacles to any legislation being passed, but particularly health care reform. You remember when the media and the Democrats were just breathlessly excited when they released the CBO numbers that repealing and replacing Obamacare would cause 22 million Americans to lose their health insurance? Do you know why that would happen? It was because repeal repealed the mandate that people had to buy it.

It wasn’t because the government was gonna come and take it away from you. It wasn’t because what you had was going to be canceled. It wasn’t because the insurance companies were then given permission to tell you to take a hike. It was simply the CBO statically, not dynamically, statically concluded that if you take away the mandate, the federal law requiring citizens to buy insurance, that 22 million people would lose their health insurance.

In other words, the CBO said that 22 million people would cancel their policy. Well, that’s not what they said. That’s the end result. That’s how it would have had to happen. Because nobody was gonna take anybody’s health insurance away, and nobody’s health insurance was gonna be canceled. And yet the CBO is out there screeching that 22 million people will lose their health insurance. “No, we can’t do that, that’s horrible, that’s inhumane, that’s no compassion.”

No, no. It was simply the CBO guessing that if people didn’t have to buy it, they wouldn’t. Which may make sense. How many people have bought this rigmarole simply because the law requires them to? How many people have actually engaged in this and gone and petered around inside one of these exchanges to come up with an Obamacare policy because they had to?

So the idea that removing the mandate requiring them to buy it is a good thing! It is a reinstallation, if you will, of the degree of liberty and freedom we had before Obamacare. Before Obamacare, you didn’t have to have it. Everybody wanted it, but you didn’t have to go buy it. No matter what it costs, you didn’t have to buy it. So the CBO says 22 million people will lose their health insurance. What a gross misstatement of what would actually happen. And of course with the absence of critical thinking being taught, nobody concluded the correct thing.

By the way, that’s a wild guess number. The CBO just assumed that people would lose — i.e., that’s the wrong word — CBO just assumed people would cancel their policies if they didn’t have to buy them. What does that tell you? Well, it tells me that somebody in Congress thinks a lot of people are buying health insurance that don’t want it, and the first chance they get they don’t have to buy it, they’ll get rid of it. Which is a good thing. And it ends up being portrayed as heartless and cruel and typically Republican, when in fact it was a good thing. And it didn’t have any relationship whatsoever to people’s health care or health insurance.

And yet that statistic, released the way it was, with the wording as it was, led to a lot of people not supporting it because they envisioned insurance companies canceling people, because, yes, that’s what insurance companies do. All companies would rather their customers get sick and die than have to cover them and pay for them. Big Tobacco wanted to kill the customer. Big Oil wants to destroy the planet. Big Pharmaceutical doesn’t want to cure disease. Big Coal, all they want to do is pollute the rivers. Big Box Retail, all they want to do is rip people off.

You take your pick. Whatever major industry we’re talking about, the Democrats have demonized ’em. And now the health insurance providers are such that if they don’t have to provide it, they won’t, when in fact it wasn’t about that at all. But back to the wording of this story. Obamacare did not and has not helped 20 million people obtain health insurance.

Now, Reuters writes this as though Obamacare provided a freebie. Obamacare provided an entitlement. Yes. Because people who couldn’t otherwise afford it because insurance companies are mean were given subsidies in order to be able to buy it because the law said they had to, but corporations are so mean that they price it out of people’s reach, and that means that Obama made it possible for people have it, which is a stack of coal.

You know how many people are on Obamacare right now? What is the number that you know? Pick a number. The number of Americans who are actually on Obamacare. I have a number here that is hard to believe. In fact, I ought not use this number because I don’t think it’s right, but it’s not far off. The number I have here is eight million people on Obamacare. That can’t be right.

But the point is, Obamacare is nowhere near covering everybody. It’s a giant myth that Obamacare came along and magically created health insurance opportunities for people that didn’t have it. And it’s also not true that the Republican repeal would take health care away from people who wanted it. So many lies and so many just straight distortions here. The majority of people who are on an Obamacare policy had insurance anyway before they signed up for Obamacare. And there are a few million more on Medicaid thanks to the Medicaid expansion. But the Medicaid expansion is not health insurance.

It’s also a lie that Obamacare has steadily become more popular. Nothing could be further from the truth. If that were true, more people would be signing up for Obamacare, but they aren’t. If that were true, the insurance companies would be lowering premiums because so many people would be signing up. If that were true, so many different state exchanges would have more than one provider.

If Obamacare were actually growing in popularity, we wouldn’t be reading stories that it’s about to implode — and it is — and is going to leave several people without even an exchange to go buy a policy. The enrollee number has been stuck at eight million since 2014. In fact, the number of people who have signed up is almost a third of what this CBO assured us would have signed up by now.

The CBO predicted 22 million people would sign up for Obamacare by this time, since 2010. The number here is eight million, fewer than eight million. What are we talking about? That’s another thing about Obamacare that was always crazy from the beginning. If it was really about providing insurance for those who didn’t have it — that number is anywhere from eight to 12, and at the top 30 (at the very top 25, 30) million who didn’t have it. Obamacare didn’t fix that, didn’t address that because that’s not what Obamacare was about.

Look, I don’t want to re-litigate all this like we did starting in 2010, 2009 when it was being debated. But I’m telling you: There is so much disinformation out there about this that the Republican Party itself has fallen prey to it. The idea it’s growing more popular, that Americans want Congress to move on from it? Both of those things are not true. Here’s a little cross-tab from the poll that I do not believe:

Among Republicans, 75% said that they would like their party’s leaders to repeal and replace Obamacare at some point, though most listed other issues that would give a higher priority right now. When asked what they think Congress should do next, most Americans picked tax reform and then foreign relations and then infrastructure. Only 29% said they wanted the Republicans in Congress to continue working on a new health care bill.” Republicans. That’s what the poll says. I don’t believe it. But I could be wrong. And if it is true that only 29% want a new bill, it’s because their frustrated and don’t think the Republican Party can get it done anyway.


RUSH: Yesterday… I don’t think I’ve got the audio on this. Doesn’t matter. Jake Tapper yesterday had Bernie Sanders on, and they were discussing single payer. It failed in Vermont. The governor of Vermont tried single payer. It failed, wouldn’t work, and didn’t have the money, and Jake Tapper was interrogating Crazy Bernie about this. “If Even ‘Cobalt-Blue States’ Can’t Make Single Payer Work,” then why in the world does anybody think it’ll work in Washington or anywhere else?

Crazy Bernie did not have an answer when asked why it didn’t work in Vermont. The governor there, Peter Shumlin, did declare the debate over after getting estimates of the projected costs of socialized medicine in California. In California, the state assembly declared that they were gonna go single payer. The California state budget every year is $180 billion. Single payer for California alone would cost $200 to $300 billion, in addition to everything else the state’s already spending. The state budget without it is $180 billion. Single payer: $200 billion, minimum. And you know how they said they were gonna finance it?

A 15% increase in the payroll tax!

Which wouldn’t even get close ’cause people are not gonna sit there and stand for that. Single payer may be the issue where everybody suddenly realizes Washington can’t do it. There isn’t the money for it! What is it we’re $20 trillion in debt? We really, theoretically… Folks, we don’t have the money to do anything with that kind of debt, and yet there doesn’t seem to be any limit on spending, except when something’s this outrageous. The states can’t print money, so there’s no way they can do it. So these states acting as little, miniature laboratories for these great national ideas? It’ll cost $200 billion when a state budget is already $180 billion.

Let me grab a call in before we wrap up the hour. I want to start with Anna in Phoenix. Welcome. It’s great to have you here. How are you?

CALLER: Oh, fine. How are you, Rush?

RUSH: Very good. Very good. Thank you.

CALLER: Okay. You said be brief; I’m gonna be brief. My husband and I were talking about what happened with President Trump saying that he’s thinking about pulling funding for the congressman and senators’ own health care. My husband said, “That probably will not make any dent at all with them. What they care about is getting reelected.” So he said, “What he should do is go out and rally in each of the states where these senators are holding him up and rally to recall them. Do a recall for them, because they’re not doing the job.” What do you think?

RUSH: Well, I don’t know specifically about recall. But I do know that people are seething, and that’s why this Reuters poll of people saying, “Move on! We’re tired of it. Move on to tax reform”? That’s a crock. Now, you say that your husband says that removing the funding for members of Congress and Obamacare would not bother them because all they care about is being reelected. I am here to tell you:

What they did in voting down the repeal and replace of Obamacare tells me they’re not afraid of the voters at all. The voters, of course, is how they get reelected. Now, McCain obviously is not gonna run again. Many of the senators just got elected, so they’re not gonna face voters for six years. A third of the Senate is up in 2018; another third’s up in 2020. But it’s clear — and I have, I think, succinctly and brilliantly made this point on prior broadcasts — that the senators are afraid of something.

But it’s not you. It’s not the voters. They’re certainly afraid of somebody — or else they despise somebody — but they’re not afraid. You know, Ted Cruz said the thing that he discovered that was the most… I mean, he knew it, but to see it in action every day? It blew his mind that the single, dominating thing in every day of a senator’s life is getting reelected, which means fundraising. That’s number one, first and foremost.

Okay, if that’s true, then how do you explain so many Republicans saying “no” on Obamacare? And the Democrats, too. There are a lot of Democrats coming up in ’18 that should be vulnerable because they come from states that went very strong for Trump. And I’m thinking they’re living under the illusion everybody hates Trump, and so they don’t need to worry about that anymore. But they’re not worried about reelection on this. Taking them off Obamacare? Believe me, they tried to except themselves from what they were doing.

That does matter to them.

It’s the craziest thing.


RUSH: Investor’s Business Daily, an op-ed: “Murkowski and McCain Saved Obamacare Just Months After Promising Voters They Would Repeal It.” It may be standard-operating issue now, but I still don’t think people can hear this enough. “Whatever your views on Obamacare, the simple fact is that the GOP Senate voted to repeal Obamacare in December 2015, knowing full well that President Obama would veto the bill. That vote was [purposefully] conveniently timed to give Republican lawmakers the ability to go back to their states and proclaim that they had tried to repeal Obamacare, but were thwarted by a Democratic president. …

“Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, for example, wrote multiple op-eds for her hometown papers decrying what Obamacare had done to her state, and vowing to repeal it, in the run-up to her 2016 re-election. In one [op-ed,] she wrote that ‘the Affordable Care Act has unfortunately become one of the most ironically named pieces of legislation for Alaska in history.’” Lisa Murkowski was one of all these Republicans voted in December of 2015.

For those of you in Rio Linda, it means the next month is 2016, which is an election year. They wanted to be on record as close to an election year as possible that they had sent a vote to repeal Obamacare up to Obama. Damn it, they repealed it. But that’s what you get with a Democrat in the White House. You give us a Republican in the White House and we’ll repeal it. She tells everybody how it’s not affordable. It’s not this and that. It’s not anything it purports to be, and she lays claim to no doubt that she opposes it.

“In a floor speech in May 2016, she claimed that ‘I have consistently supported full repeal of [Obamacare] and have voted to do so on several occasions. I have recognized that it is going to be difficult, if not impossible, to do so with [the Obama] administration.’ She voted for the repeal bill in 2015.” She voted for the repeal bill in 2015 — which, again, was timed purposely to give these people an example to say in their election, “I just voted! I just voted to repeal it. You give us the presidency, and it’s over with.”

Folks, this betrayal ranks right up there with every betrayal that we’ve had. This is in the top five all time political betrayals, the Republicans in the Senate on this. “But this week, Murkowski voted against every single version of Obamacare repeal.” She voted against repeal and replace. She voted against straight up-and-down repeal. She voted against “skinny” repeal. She would have voted against fat repeal if somebody would have come up with that. Yes, she did! She voted against skinny repeal that would have only ditched the individual and employer mandates and suspended the tax on medical devices.

She couldn’t even vote for that. The CBO gave her cover, don’t you know? She said, “I did not come here to inflict pain on people.” What’s that, inflicting people on people? “Well, the CBO said that 22 million lovable Americans will lose their health insurance if…” No. No. Yeah, they said it, but that’s a great big misdirection. The truth is 22 million people may not all lose their health insurance. It was simply the way the CBO chose to portray what they thought would happen if the mandate were done away with.

It’s interesting to me that (chuckles) the Congressional Budget Office thinks if the mandate were taken away, everybody who bought Obamacare would cancel it. What does that say about it? But they chose to portray it as the government’s gonna take it away from you, or your insurance companies are not gonna ensure you. Lisa Murkowski knew better. She knew what it meant. She knew that simply repealing the personal mandate, the employer mandates — simply removing the requirement that you have insurance — doesn’t mean people lose it.

It means they have their freedom back! That’s right. “She even voted against a ‘skinny’ repeal that would have only ditched the law’s individual and employer mandates and suspended the tax on medical devices [like dildos] — a tax that is so harmful to that industry that even uber-liberal Sen. Elizabeth Warren wants it repealed.” (interruption) What, you didn’t think that’s a medical device? (scoffs) , you go… (interruption) You go talk to… (interruption) Well, it certainly is. (interruption) In the right hands?

“Murkowski was joined by Sen. John McCain, who ended up being the decisive vote killing the skinny repeal bill…” By the way, you don’t think that was accidental, do you? You don’t think they waited and gave McCain the last vote accidentally, do you? “Just a year before saving Obamacare, however, McCain was vigorously attacking the law to win a tough reelection campaign. As Politico put it in a June 2016 article: ‘In fight of his political life, McCain hammers Obamacare[.]’

“One of his 2016 campaign ads said ‘Obamacare is failing Arizonans’ and that ‘John McCain is leading the fight to stop Obamacare.’ Last February McCain introduced a bill to ‘fully’ repeal Obamacare and replace it with a ‘free-market approach that strengthens the quality and accessibility of care.’” But McCain was running for reelection then, and so he was having to say things that he knew his constituents wanted to hear. He wasn’t saying things he actually intended to do, obviously. Just like all the Republicans of his ilk.

Once elected, he sang a completely different tune. There’s a YouTube of McCain’s promises. He explains why Obamacare must be repealed and replaced. It was during the 2016 campaign. McCain said in a YouTube video: “For the first time in history a major entitlement reform was rammed through the Congress without a single vote from the other side. I fought for weeks and weeks and weeks against Obamacare. They would not allow us an amendment. There was not a single amendment allowed. No input from the minority party.

“We were the minority party. Now Congresswoman Kirkpatrick” his opponent “wants to sit down and work together. Well, here’s how we work together: We repeal and we replace it.” That’s McCain in a YouTube video last year. “McCain went on to argue that the majority of the American people have ‘resoundingly rejected Obamacare.’ One of the debate moderators asked McCain if it was possible for Congress to try to improve Obamacare rather than to try to repeal it. McCain rejected the idea that it could be fixed and that the only solution is to repeal Obamacare.” This is last year!

This is the very same McCain that happily gave a thumbs down last week. Folks, it is sad to have to observe, but John McCain just proved that everything his harsh critics have ever said about him is likely true, and we know why. We know exactly why. Some people might even claim they understand it. Trump, in one of his early statements after having announced his intention to seek the Republican presidential nomination, when asked about Senator McCain, said he didn’t have a whole life respect for him ’cause he got captured.

Trump says he has more respect for military people that don’t get captured. (sigh) Well, think what you will of that. But you cannot think what you will of that without recognizing the importance of that story to McCain’s political biography. It is crucial to McCain’s biography. Everybody knows it — that’s how crucial it’s been — that McCain was captured after being shot down, that when the Vietcong found out who he was (i.e., the son of a famous Navy admiral), they offered him release and how McCain said no.

He was not going to take early release unless his fellow prisoners would be released — and of course, they weren’t; so McCain wasn’t. That story has been part of McCain’s political biography. Here came Trump inside of two sentences blowing it smithereens. McCain, I just know — as I say, I’m sure many of you can even understand, maybe even agree — has been waiting for the right moment to stick it back to Trump and chose to do it last Thursday as the last vote, thumbs down, killing Obamacare repeal.

So let’s not hear about all this statesmanship stuff. Let’s not hear about all that. That’s maybe applicable to some. Even John Fund at National Review: “Mr. McCain Goes to Washington.” Just let me give some pull quotes from this piece. “McCain’s vote against advancing Obamacare reform represents a complete reversal of the position he won his Senate election with last year. John Merline of Investor’s Business Daily notes that ‘In the private sector, promising one thing and delivering the other could be referred to as “deceptive trade practice.”

“‘For some members of Congress, it’s just another day at the office.’ … Journalists [i.e. the media] rushed to gush over [McCain’s] vote, cast only a few days after a surgery to remove a dangerous brain tumor. The New Yorker’s take was typical: ‘Throughout his political life, John McCain has for many reasons enjoyed bipartisan respect and even reverence: his independence of mind (usually), his candor (usually), his decency, his love of country,’” and all of this is said of John McCain because he regularly betrays his own party.

That’s why the media loves John McCain.

Pence To Limbaugh: ‘Disaster Of Obamacare’ Cannot Continue


Vice President Mike Pence appeared on Rush Limbaugh’s radio program Monday to address the status of the Republican health care bill in Congress, declaring that, “We simply cannot allow the disaster of Obamacare to continue.”

Limbaugh asked Pence about the challenge of passing legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare.

“How in the world can it be this hard when it seemed easy when Obama was in the White House?” Limbaugh asked.

Pence contended that “it has to get done,” adding that Obamacare is “putting a tremendous burden on working families, on small businesses, on the American economy.”

“Every single promise that President Obama made to get Obamacare passed has been broken,” Pence said, later adding, “We’ve seen the cost of health insurance rise in every state across the country, in some cases 200 percent and more.”

Limbaugh challenged Pence to detail the obstacles preventing the passage of healthcare reform, noting that, “We’ve got 52 votes plus yours if necessary, if it comes down to that.”

Pence said that the challenges have to do with “the complexity of this disastrous policy launch,” referring to Obamacare. He claimed that the Republicans’ current heath care legislation “doesn’t do everything that we ultimately want to do. … The president’s committed to ultimately allowing Americans to buy health insurance across state lines, the way they buy life insurance, the way they buy car insurance.”

“Nobody’s talking about that. That’s a great point because nobody is talking about it,” Limbaugh said in response.

Still, the budget rules that the Republicans need follow to pass their legislation with just 51 votes do not allow them to make such a “substantive change in the law,” Pence said.

Despite that shortcoming, Pence said that “in this legislation … we accomplished enormous things,” citing the removal of the individual mandate to purchase health insurance or pay a tax penalty to the government.

“The mandate goes away,” Pence said. “The tax increases go away. Medicaid goes back to the states for the purposes of reform. Health savings accounts are greatly expanded so that people can become consumers in their own health care choices.”

According to Pence, another obstacle impeding the passage of the legislation is the varied opinions of lawmakers.

“Every member of Congress has their own opinion, and this administration — as we did with the House of Representatives — is determined to work with each member to address their needs. But we are very close. If I had one message for your tens of millions of listeners around America, it is: ‘This is the moment; now is the time.’”

Limbaugh and Pence also discussed the possibility of a single-payer health care system.

“Obamacare was designed to implode, in part, so as to further the public’s acclimation for single payer.”

The vice president then referred to former congressman Barney Frank’s answer to a reporter’s question about single-payer health care in 2009.

“They said, ‘How come you’re not supporting single payer?’ He said, Obamacare is the quickest way to get to single payer.’”

Pence also referenced to the “heartbreaking story of 11-month-old Charlie Guard in England — whose single-payer system will not allow his parents to choose potentially life-saving treatment for him — as an example of what could occur in the United States.

When asked by Limbaugh if he would support a clean repeal of Obamacare with nothing to replace it, Pence replied, “We can’t … We simply cannot allow the disaster of Obamacare to continue. It is hurting families.”

“I believe that — with the strong support of the American people — with this president in the Oval Office, we’re going to get it done. We’re going repeal and replace Obamacare. But the time is now,” Pence said.

Limbaugh Praises Trump’s Ability To Bring Out The Worst In Democrats

URL of the original posting site:

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said he is having a good laugh over the firing of former FBI Director James Comey. Limbaugh used the opening monologue of his program Wednesday to discuss how President Donald Trump was trolling the “hate-filled Democrats” and how former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton was being used as political fodder and had become utterly irrelevant.

“The Democrat Party has once again thrown Hillary Clinton overboard. Hillary Clinton is the most cheated-on woman in America by people in her own party, and it’s happened again,” Limbaugh said.

“The Democrat Party and the media have made it clear that she is fodder. She is irrelevant here,” he added. “Two days ago, they were all talking about how Comey needs to be fired because of how he was mistreating Hillary, and the Hillary people were running around claiming that Comey’s a bad guy. And now Comey gets fired, and all of a sudden they do a 180.”

Limbaugh reminded his audience of Trump’s particular ability to connect with his supporters and how the Democrats have completely lost that ability.

“The Democrats do not have such a connection, and I’m gonna prove it to you right now,” the conservative host said.

Limbaugh cited the example of late-night TV host Stephen Colbert, who opened his Tuesday night monologue with news of Comey’s firing. The show was taped in the late afternoon, just after the announcement of Comey’s dismissal. When Colbert announced the news, instead of boos — which is what Colbert was expecting — the audience cheered.

“His audience practically gave it a standing O, and Colbert didn’t know what to do. The audience, which is indicative of liberals and leftists all over the country, thought it was the greatest thing they could have heard because that’s what they’ve been conditioned to do: hate Comey,” Limbaugh said. “They have been told that Comey stole the election from them by dumping all over Hillary. They’ve been told that Comey showed all kinds of favoritism to Trump, so they have been conditioned to literally hate Comey.”

When the audience kept cheering, Colbert remarked, “Wow, wow. Huge, huge, Donald Trump fans here tonight.”

Limbaugh then hammered his point home about the Democrats inability to think for themselves.

“The audience was totally taken aback,” Limbaugh said. “They are insulted. They were called Trump fans! They’re not Trump fans. They’re liberal Democrats. They can’t keep up with whether they’re supposed to hate Comey. They don’t know who they’re supposed to hate.”

Limbaugh said the actions of Democrats since Trump became president are unprecedented.

“I have been following politics, honestly, since I was 10,” Limbaugh said. “I have seen unhinged behavior. I have seen the wild allegations that Democrats make and repeated. I have never seen this degree of collective insanity. I have never seen this degree of so many people literally being out of touch, devoid reality, and unhinged.”

Limbaugh pointed out that even with no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia — confirmed Monday by Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee — the Democrats are just reacting on impulse.

“They are into knee-jerk reactions based on whatever triggers set them off, and they have stopped thinking, they have stopped pondering, they have stopped considering, and they’re just reacting like spoiled brat little kids,” Limbaugh concluded.

Rush Limbaugh: ‘don’t tell me that the CIA isn’t politicized when everything the hell else is’

waving flagDecember 13, 2016 | Authored by

URL of the original posting site:

In what Rush Limbaugh projects could be the president-elect’s “first big mistake,” Donald Trump has been openly critical of sources within the CIA who are suggesting that Russian agents may have interfered with the U.S. election.

“These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,” read a Trump transition team statement on Saturday following the news.

Building on that theme on his Monday radio show, Limbaugh weighed the seeming politicization of everything these days with the fact that most people in the American intelligence community are patriots who want to do what’s right.

So, could anyone at the CIA have a political agenda that defines their actions? As an example, Limbaugh gave his listeners a history lesson on the same topic Trump used in his statement, the Iraq war.

Let’s examine weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. George W. Bush spent two years, ladies and gentlemen, traveling this country, speech after speech after speech explaining his policy, the run-up to war with Iraq, what it would take for Saddam Hussein to avoid war…

But following 9/11, Bush said we’ve got no choice. When we have intel that bad actors around the world might be planning attacks against us, we’re not gonna wait anymore for the attacks to happen. We’re gonna take preventative action. And part and parcel of this was that intelligence agencies all over the world, folks, not just ours, MI6 in the U.K., the CIA, the DIA, the State Department IA, all of these intelligence agencies, Pakistani, allied security agencies, intel agencies around the world, all, every one of them, concluded that there were weapons of mass destruction and Hussein was lying to the weapons inspectors from United Nations.

Limbaugh points out that even Hussein himself didn’t deny that he had weapons of mass destruction, likely because he never believed the U.S. would actually attack. So when we did invade and found nothing, a lot of people were embarrassed and humiliated, including Colin Powell and George W. Bush.

All because of false information from U.S. intelligence agencies. Limbaugh continues:

Okay, so what happened? Do we know? Who lied to who? Did the intelligence agencies not tell Bush there were weapons of mass destruction and Bush ignored ’em and said there were. Or did the intelligence agencies tell Bush, assure Bush over and over for two years, yep, they’re there, were they there and are they in Syria now? We still don’t really know.

What we do know is that George W. Bush’s approval numbers ended up around 30% as a result of all of this. My understanding, my theory is that, quote, unquote, intelligence people who, by definition, are unknown and work in secret can undermine anybody if they set their mind to it. They can promote anybody. They can make anybody they want to look good. They can undermine. They can lie to a president. “Mr. Limbaugh, I can’t believe you’re saying that. These are some of the most patriotic people.” I know. I totally get it. But don’t tell me that the CIA isn’t politicized when everything the hell else is, particularly with this administration.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Scott Morefield 

Scott Morefield is a news and opinion columnist for BizPac Review and the editor of Raising Godly Children. In addition to his work on BPR, Scott’s commentary can also be found on TheBlaze, WND, Breitbart, Staffing Talk, and many other sites, including A Morefield Life, where he and his wife, Kim, share their marriage and parenting journey.

Limbaugh: Abedin’s response to Weiner’s laptop ‘all we need to know that it’s serious’

waving flagBy Douglas Ernst – The Washington Times – Monday, October 31, 2016

URL of the original posting site:

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks with senior aide Huma Abedin aboard her campaign plane at Westchester County Airport in White Plains, Oct. 28, 2016. The longtime Hillary Clinton aide at the center of a renewed FBI email investigation testified under oath four months ago she never deleted old emails, despite promising in 2013 not to take sensitive files when she left the State Department. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik) ** FILE **

Radio host Rush Limbaugh told listeners on Monday that FBI agents will find “something serious” on Anthony Weiner’s laptop based solely on Huma Abedin’s reaction to last week’s political bombshell.

FBI Director James B. Comey informed lawmakers last Friday that agents investigating Mr. Weiner’s text messages with a 15-year-old girl found possibly “pertinent” information relating to the secret email server Hillary Clinton used as secretary of state. Sources close to Mrs. AbedinMrs. Clinton’s top aide — told Politico and The Washington Post that she claimed ignorance as to how the emails arrived on the device.

Mr. Limbaugh told listeners he would “read between the lines” regarding Mrs. Abedin’s reaction.

“This is The Washington Post headline, and it’s from two days ago: ‘Clinton Aide Huma Abedin Has Told People She Doesn’t Know How Her Emails Wound up on Her Husband’s Computer.’ Folks, that’s all we need to know that it’s serious,” the host said. “If there was nothing on her husband’s computer — if these 650,000 emails, whatever number of emails, if there’s nothing to see there — Huma Abedin would be telling people, ‘There’s nothing there. They can look all they want.’ “

“‘There’s nothing on there! I told the truth; I got rid of everything of mine. If this is my husband’s, I haven’t the slightest idea what’s on there, but I’m not worried,’ ” Mr. Limbaugh said Mrs. Abedin would respond if she had nothing to hide.

“She didn’t say any of that,” he continued. “She’s out there telling people she doesn’t know how her emails wound up on her husband’s computer. Now, what they’re trying to do with this — this is the dead giveaway. That Washington Post headline tells me that the Democrats, the Hillary campaign is trying to use Huma’s alleged cluelessness as a decoy.”or a liar

The conservative host said the Clinton campaign’s strategy as the FBI investigates thousands of emails is twofold: They allegedly want to frame Mrs. Abedin as a victim of her estranged husband while showing that she had no intent to commit crimes.

The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday that agents may need to sift through as many as 650,000 emails found on Mr. Weiner’s laptop, a seemingly impossible feat to accomplish before the Nov. 8 presidential election.

Mrs. Clinton’s top advisers and allies have decried Mr. Comey’s decision to go public with the agency’s investigation, with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada saying the director may have broken the law.

“To throw this in the middle of a campaign 11 days out just seems to break with precedent and be inappropriate at this stage,” Clinton campaign manager John Podesta said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” The Washington Times reported.klinton-kane-korruption-clinton-book-corrupt-together-427x600-copy

Limbaugh Makes Beyond Chilling Prediction About The Left If Trump Wins: ‘We’re Gonna See…’

waving flagWritten by Russell Bartlett July 1, 2016

After several tumultuous years of destructive protests, the rise of activist groups like Black Lives Matter, and an increased intolerance of free speech in liberal bastions, at least one prominent pundit thinks America’s civil unrest could come to a head following the upcoming presidential election.

Speaking specifically about leftist efforts to reverse the United Kingdom’s recent vote to leave the European Union, Rush Limbaugh told his audience this week that he foresees a similar backlash — if not worse — to the election of presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump.

And the left’s planning has already started, he said.

“Now, you are not a stranger,” Limbaugh told his listeners. “You know full well how the left goes crazy today protesting things, like in Ferguson, in Baltimore, take your pick, any event. Something goes wrong on a college campus and the media is right there. You add to this the Democrats losing the presidency in November, and my sense is that there isn’t gonna be any peace. There’s gonna be anger. There is going to be rage. There are gonna be lawsuits.”mob rule tyranny

Limbaugh predicted that if Trump wins the general election in November, there will be a stream of legal challenges and demands for vote recounts “no matter how close” the final vote is.

“No matter if it’s a landslide loss for Hillary Clinton, they just don’t put up with it,” the host continued, “and they’re certainly not gonna be of the mind to put up with it in November.”Mob Rule

The fact that Clinton is set to run against an especially divisive candidate in Trump, Limbaugh noted, is not the only reason Democrats will protest.

“Trump will be the icing on the cake,” he said. “It could be anybody. If Hillary Clinton loses, if the left, if the Democrats lose, it won’t matter so much who wins. It’s the fact that they’ve lost, they’re not gonna tolerate it. And there won’t be any condemnation of it.”

After suggesting the media would be complicit in promoting the narrative of those protesting a Trump win, Limbaugh went on to suggest efforts — or at least threats thereof — to nullify the election would spill from courtrooms into the street.

“Even before the election in November,” he said, “I don’t care what the polling data is, I don’t care if the race is supposedly close or not, the Drive-Bys, you’re gonna see it starting maybe a month before, you’re gonna see stories about all the planned riots if Trump wins.”

propaganda machinefight Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Limbaugh Heard The Warning Obama Admin Just Issued, Immediately Exposes What It’s REALLY About…

waving flagReported by Jack Davis April 6, 2016

A new edict from the Obama administration has its roots in race-based thinking and a purpose that lurks below the surface, conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development has issued guidelines saying that because there is “widespread racial and ethnic disparities” in the U.S. criminal justice system, landlords who refuse to rent to convicted criminals could “lack a legally sufficient justification” in doing so. The current Fair Housing Act does not make it illegal to refuse to rent to criminals.

“The Regime has told landlords they cannot refuse to rent to criminals,” Limbaugh said. “Wait ’til you hear why.”

“The presumption is that a great percentage of African-American criminals are actually innocent. They’ve been railroaded. I mean, that’s what the Reverend Jackson wants you to believe … A central point of the civil rights coalition is that there’s a bunch of black men in jail who really shouldn’t be there because they’re not guilty.”

Failure to rent to criminals gives the government a new means of control, Limbaugh said.

You know what this is really all about? You have a landlord that refuses to rent to a criminal, Obama says, ‘No, no, no, you have to because our racial justice system’s been so unbalanced, you’re guilty of racism when you refuse to rent,’ you know what that’s really all about is seizing your property,” Limbaugh claimed.

Limbaugh argued this new law is a hidden agenda against private property.

“What do you think the penalty’s going to be for landlords that fail to follow Obama’s dictates and rent rooms to criminals? You don’t think they’re going to be able to come in and make a play for your land, for your property?” he added.

“And one thing about authoritarian figures, private this, private that, they don’t like anything private. Private property, private guns, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. The more they can take away from you, including your private this or your free speech or what have you. This is who these people are, folks. Don’t blame me. This is who they are,” Limbaugh said.Leftist Giant called Tyranny

h/t: TheBlaze

Picture1 true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

GOP Establishment Club Plots Guerilla Warfare to Take Down Donald Trump

waving flagCommentary of Listen to it Button Rush Limbaugh March 21, 2016


RUSH: There is some news in these upcoming primaries. “Poll: Cruz Within Striking Distance of Trump in Arizona — A poll of Arizona Republicans conducted last week but released today shows Donald Trump leading Ted Cruz 31% to 19%, with John Kasich and Marco Rubio tied at 10%. The most encouraging news for Cruz is that the poll finds 30% of Republicans remain undecided. Late deciding voters have broken against Trump in almost every state that has voted so far.”

Now, 31 to 19, that’s a 12-point split. Factor the margin of error in there three to four percent so you’re looking at seven- or eight-point spread here.  “If enough of these voters and Rubio supporters back Cruz, he could pull off an upset and capture all of Arizona’s 58 delegates.” There are 58 delegates at stake here.  That’d be a big hall.  Now,

“Trump is favored to win Tuesday’s primary not only because of his polling advantage, but also because he has the backing of former governor Jan Brewer.” The former governor is popular.  Of course, immigration’s a huge issue in Arizona, and Trump is personally identified with that issue. But it says here (it’s a Weekly Standard story) that “Trump may have hurt himself among these voters by announcing that he was ‘softening’ his position on immigration in a recent debate and showing himself to be ignorant about the details of his own immigration plan in an earlier debate.”

Now, you have to read that, or listen, take it with a grain of salt because that’s from the Weekly Standard which is William Kristol’s magazine. And the New York Times had a big, huge story yesterday: “Republican Leaders Map Strategy to Derail Donald Trump.”  One of the Republican leaders heavily involved is William Kristol of the Weekly Standard.  In addition to that, we have Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee who said, “I cannot 100% guarantee that one of the three remaining candidates will be the nominee.” He was asked about a contested convention.

“Well, probably not. You know, people like to talk.”

And then he was hit with the bolt out of the sky.  “Well, can you guarantee the nominee is gonna be one of the three?  Trump, Cruz, Kasich?”

“Well…” He started hedging his bets. “Well, I don’t know.  I don’t think I would 100% guarantee that, no.”

And if you read this New York Times piece on Sunday, you’d understand why. “Republican leaders adamantly opposed to Donald J. Trump’s candidacy are preparing a 100-day campaign to deny him the presidential nomination, starting with an aggressive battle in Wisconsin’s April 5 primary and extending into the summer, with a delegate-by-delegate lobbying effort that would cast Mr. Trump as a calamitous choice for the general election.”

That’s the lead.  The story goes on from there.


RUSH:  Where was the GOP’s 100-day plan to take out Obama?  Anybody remember that plan?  Where’s the GOP’s 100 day-plan to take out Hillary Clinton?  Anybody heard of that plan?  Now, that plan doesn’t exist, either, but they’ve got a 100-day plan to take out Trump.

Now, folks, I’m not particularly eager to be repetitive here because there’s so much new every day, but I want to go back, I’ve spent a couple days here trying to make the case with analogies and everything at my disposal to try to illustrate and inform just precisely how the Republican establishment is not going to sit by and let somebody take away from them what they have.

It’s not just their power.  I mean, that’s a large element of it.  But it’s their entire reason for existing.  Positions of standing in one of the only two major political parties in the country, there’s so much tied to it.  Five of the seven wealthiest counties surround Washington, DC.  The networking there, the contacts, the power structure, the ladder of success that you climb there, it’s well laid out.  It’s perfectly structured.

It is a very exclusionary club, and it is not merit based.  Entry into the club is not something you can just apply for and become a member.  It requires breeding. It requires certain pedigrees and resumes and education and so forth.  It has provided a lot of power, a tremendous amount of wealth, huge self-esteem.  These are people that walk around feeling really big about themselves.  There’s a lot of swagger.

People walk around, they feel very happy with themselves, very powerful, very smug, very confident, because the future is laid out, the structure is what it is.  And members are taken care of.  Everybody’s got everybody’s back.  And the idea that something like this could be busted up with an election?  Sorry.  Not gonna tolerate it.  Not gonna even give that a chance.  They’re going to resist whatever effort is made to wrest power from them, to assume their positions or what have you, which is how they see Trump.

So, despite all the talk that you hear — and I think it’s smoke screen talk — from this establishment member or that particular Republican or that consultant or that lobbyist or whatever, despite talk of unity and coming together, believe me, behind the scenes there is none of that.  Behind the scenes all there is is scheming that is designed to protect what they’ve got.  That’s more important than the party winning elections.  Do not doubt me.

So when I saw this New York Times story headlined:  “Republican Leaders Map a Strategy to Derail Donald Trump,” I believe every word of it.  I think there’s probably even more to it than what the story includes.  But here are some highlights.

“Recognizing that Mr. Trump has seized a formidable advantage in the race, they say that an effort to block him would rely on an array of desperation measures, the political equivalent of guerrilla fighting. There is no longer room for error or delay, the anti-Trump forces say, and without a flawlessly executed plan of attack, he could well become unstoppable,” and that is unacceptable.’ 

“But should that effort falter,” should they fail to stop Trump, and his army of supporters, should that falter, “leading conservatives are prepared to field an independent candidate in the general election, to defend Republican principles and offer traditional conservatives an alternative to Mr. Trump’s hard-edged populism. They described their plans in interviews after Mr. Trump’s victories last Tuesday in Florida and three other states.”

Now, if your reaction is, “Well, wait a minute, that guarantees Hillary.”  Exactly.  And they know it, and they’re fine with it.  Hillary Clinton winning maintains the existing order.  The existing order is not based on winning elections.  If it were, half the people in this club would have been thrown out by now.  Half the people in this club are the reason Republicans don’t win elections, and they’re still there, and they’re still members in good standing of this power structure, whatever name you want to give it.

By throwing a third-party candidate out there where principled conservatives can once again vote to guarantee the continuation of socialist Marxism in the United States, that’s considered a wise move.  Because it preserves what’s important to the establishment.

“The names of a few well-known conservatives have been offered up in recent days as potential third-party standard-bearers, and William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, has circulated a memo to a small number of conservative allies detailing the process by which an independent candidate could get on general-election ballots across the country.’

“Among the recruits under discussion are Tom Coburn, a former Oklahoma senator who has told associates that he would be open to running, and Rick Perry, the former Texas governor who was suggested as a possible third-party candidate at a meeting of conservative activists on Thursday.”

So you got that conservative group that met on Thursday that could not come to a consensus, apparently.  This is an entirely different group.  We got the establishment and the conservative groups.  Now, Kristol was not a member of the conservative group.  He’s part of the establishment.  He runs the Weekly Standard.  And I’m sure he thinks, “Who’s gonna read this, who’s gonna want to read this if we’re not in power or if we’re not in charge of the opposition, if we’re not perceived to be in charge of the opposition?” 

“Mr. Coburn, who left the Senate early last year to receive treatment for cancer, said in an interview that Mr. Trump ‘needs to be stopped’ and that he expected to back an independent candidate against him. He said he had little appetite for a campaign of his own, but did not flatly rule one out. ‘I’m going to support that person,'” whoever this group comes up with to stop Trump. “‘and I don’t expect that person to be me.’ Trump opponents convened a series of war councils last week to pinpoint his biggest vulnerabilities and consider whether to endorse,” Cruz or Kasich.

You know what gives this up, what exposes this as not being about the party, why are these people not unifying around Ted Cruz?  You got a guy who is second in delegates. You have a guy who is in the Senate.  Look, it’s a rhetorical question.  I know the answer to the question.  It makes the point.  They don’t want any of these three.  They really don’t want Trump and they really don’t want Cruz.  They’re in a panic, they’ve gotta come up with somebody.  Why, if they were serious about winning and unity, why not, if you don’t like Trump, you want to take Trump out, why not unify behind Cruz?

And the fact that they don’t want to do that should be all you need to know about what really is going on here.  It isn’t about winning the presidency, folks.  It’s another in a long line of reasons of why Trump exists and why Trump has supporters.  You go back to these protests which are not protests, these criminal actions, I will guarantee you that Trump supporters, they are made up of a lot of people, folks.

There’s another thing happening, by the way.  The Trump supporter is being presented as a poor, dumb, uneducated, white working class person who lost his manufacturing job ten years ago and wants to blame somebody for his failures.  That’s who they want you to believe Trump supporters are.  It may be the most disadvantaged group in this country to be a member of today, the white working class.  It seems like everybody’s dumping on that group of people.  The white working class, in their view, in their minds, they’re the ones that have gone off to fight the wars. They’re the ones who have voted the existing Republican power structure into office year after year after year.  They are the ones that pay their taxes.  They are the ones who do the work that very few other people in the country want to do, including joining the military.  And now everybody’s dumping on ’em. 

Prior to joining Trump, you know what they did?  They were Tea Partiers.  And, by the way, the Tea Party and Trump supporters are not monolithic.  They’re not all poor white — look, let me just call a spade a spade.  What they want you to believe is the average Trump voter is an uneducated hick, white trash, upset over his own or her own personal failures looking to blame somebody else and Trump has come along and given them comfort.

That’s not who they are.  Sure some people in that group might fit that description.  The vast majority of them are Tea Partiers.  The vast majority of them are really middle class, some in the upper middle class, who are fit to be tied.  You look at these protests that — criminal actions that are called protests.  I don’t know how to emphasize this.  Since the 1960s, there has been a building anger and resentment at all of these protesters and everything they’ve gotten away with and everything they have destroyed. AMEN

People have sat in their homes and watched this stuff, and they have cursed it.  They have opposed it.  They have wondered why nobody does anything to stop it.  They have wondered why malcontents like this get away with destructive, criminal behavior.  They know it’s not protest.  They know it’s not… These are rent-a-mobs. These are bought and paid for. These are anarchists. These are… They’re a miserable bunch, a miserable lot of collected leftists who are never happy and are never gonna be happy. AMEN

They’re bought and paid for, and for years nobody has done a thing about them.  They have been permitted to become what is seen as an active political force for the Democrat Party.  The Republican Party doesn’t stand up to ’em. It tries to coddle them.  The Republican Party doesn’t do what… Trump comes along and simply isn’t taking it, and it’s another reason why people are supportive of Trump.  I mean, there’s a lot tied up in all of this in terms of reasons to explain Trump’s support so forth.

But the great misunderstanding exists inside the Beltway, a great misunderstanding of just who and what the majority American body politic is, who they are, what they think, what their dreams are. That’s foreign territory to people inside the Beltway.  And they are resented to boot.  The Republican Party had a chance to embrace… I never could understand why they wouldn’t embrace the anti-Obama coalition, Obamacare.  There was a built-in majority waiting for the Republican Party to join and become a majority.

And then the Tea Party came along, and they wanted no part of the Tea Party.  The Tea Party presented an opportunity to once again become the majority party, and they wouldn’t unite with the Tea Party.  What do they expect to happen when they reject their own voters, when they reject people that want to support them over and over again, when they mock them and laugh at them and make fun of them? What do they think’s gonna happen when somebody like Trump comes along?  Picture1


Die true battle Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Commentary by Rush Limbaugh: “What You Talkin’ ‘Bout, Tillis? Republicans Begin to Fold on Scalia’s Replacement After Just Two Days!”

 February 17, 2016

URL of the original posting site:


RUSH: You know, the situation Obama out there blasting the Republicans for threatening to block his Supreme Court nominee? He says it goes against the Constitution.  I can’t go through a day without just blowing up and at the same time laughing at it. You talk about hypocrisy, the hypocrisy of Obama, Chuck Schumer, all these guys on Supreme Court nominees? It’s blatant, in your face.  They know it’s not gonna come back and bite them.
They know the hypocrisy charge, even if it sticks, is never gonna harm them.  But with Obama saying opposing his nominee goes against the Constitution — which, of course, it doesn’t. But the real question is: Why should Obama be so concerned about what the Constitution says about appointing someone to the Supreme Court when he doesn’t want whoever he appoints to follow the Constitution anyway?

He’s gonna find somebody who’s gonna rewrite the Constitution.  That’s his criteria.  He’s gonna find somebody who will make law from the bench, like John Roberts has been doing, not somebody who’s gonna interpret the Constitution.  So what does he care what the Constitution says?  As far as that is concerned, he doesn’t care what the Constitution says anyway when it comes to things that he wants.  Ever heard of executive orders? Executive actions?


RUSH: Now, I remember. It was shortly after we learned of the death of Justice Scalia, it didn’t take but minutes for the politics of his replacement discussion to get going. And Mitch McConnell put out this statement, said that the president should not make an appointment and should not have the right, opportunity, whatever, in a lame duck year like this. And I had a lot of people on Saturday, “See what Mitch did, man, that was great, Mitch came out there, Mitch really hammered them.” On the golf course Sunday, a friend, “Did you see what Mitch did, Mitch really hammered them.” I said, “Wait a minute, Mitch didn’t hammer anybody. Mitch said ‘should.’ He didn’t say ‘would not’; he said ‘should not.’ There’s wiggle room there.”

“No, no, Rush, you’re –” both my friends on Saturday and Sunday on the golf course, “You’re misinterpreting this. I’m not reading it the way you are, Rush.” You see, folks, in my world I’m never right. In my personal world I am never right. It’s a badge of honor to show me to be wrong. My life is a perpetual never ending competition. My personal life. I’m telling these guys, “You are replacing your intelligence with hope. You hope that Mitch is gonna hammer ’em. You hope the Republicans are gonna hang in there. But what is the experience we’ve got over the last seven years?” Well, it didn’t take long.

We now have Chuck Grassley (paraphrased), “Whoa, I’m rethinking this. Maybe we will conduct hearings.” And then Mel Tillis… (Nope, I take it back. That’s the country singer.) Thom Tillis, North Carolina. (paraphrased) “Oh, I think we don’t want to look like obstructionists.” And there it is, folks! There it is! (paraphrased) “We don’t want to look like obstructionists.” That’s translated: “We have to cross the aisle on this. We have to show the people we can help make Washington work.

“It will harm us if we are the agents of gridlock, and the government is not working.” So when Tillis said, “We can’t appear to be obstructionist,” that means this firm, “There’s no way” lasted about a day. And now we’re to the possibility of hearings. And now it’s all, “If Obama nominates a moderate…” Even Obama said he’s not gonna nominate a moderate! Somebody in the Drive-Bys went and asked Obama, “The Republicans say they might be willing to work with you if you no time a moderate.”

“Moderate?” He laughed. “I don’t know what that means! I’m gonna nominate somebody qualified.” Translation: “I’m gonna find the nearest socialist I can and I’m gonna ram it down their throats. Get your popcorn ready. Moderate? Are you kidding me? I don’t do moderate!” But here are the Republicans. So I just… I tried to warn everybody not to confuse your hope with what you think you heard. I even got into an argument with Snerdley! He thinks that Mitch McConnell…

large“He was dead serious! This is different, Rush. It’s the Supreme Court.”

“Different? What’s different about it?” I asked him the question: “What does Mitch McConnell want more than anything in the world?”

And Snerdley got it. “He wants to stay majority leader.” That’s true, and whatever has to happen to make that happen, bank on it. I can run through a scenario where they conduct hearings and an Obama nominee gets confirmed before the election. I can run through the scenario. You want me to run through the scenario before the program ends? I can go… (interruption) Yeah, part of you wants me to do it; the other part of you doesn’t want to hear it, right? (interruption) All right. ‘Cause you’re… (interruption) All right. So we’ve got that.


Die stupid Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Limbaugh: Trump Lost Iowa with Pledge to ‘Deal’ with Democrats

waving flagby Joel B. Pollak2 Feb 2016, 2 Feb, 2016 2 Feb, 2016

URL of the original posting site: 

Limbaugh was careful to praise Trump for leading the media fight: “We have a very strong outsider in Donald Trump, who is showing the way in illustrating how to oppose the establishment and what not to be afraid of.”

However, he said that Trump erred by promising to compromise with the left:

“In a Republican primary, you do not win if you’re going to sound like a liberal Democrat criticizing Ted Cruz. And it wasn’t just health care. How many of you remember (I pointed this out when it happened) Mr. Trump pointing out that you can’t do anything if you can’t make deals, can’t cooperate? Part of his criticism of Ted Cruz is he’s hated; nobody likes him. Trump said, “I can do deals with’

“Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Pelosi. I know these people. I like these people. Schumer? I can do deals.” No, no, no, no! We don’t want to do any more deals with these people. We want to beat those people. There are many things that harm Mr. Trump, but not showing up at the debate is not one of them.”

This author offered a similar analysis at the time Trump made the remark a week ago, saying he had given Cruz a “closing argument”: “What Trump misses is how much the conservative base loathes both the GOP establishment and the Democrats. Trump’s pledge to be a deal-maker is also poorly timed, coming at a moment when Cruz is challenging his conservative credentials. Trump has yet to resolve those doubts: it is too early to talk about deals.”

On Tuesday, citing exit poll data, Limbaugh argued that conservatives candidates had done best in Iowa–clearly placing Trump outside of that group.

“This is asking people, “Does this candidate share my values?” This is an ideological question, in my estimation. I think this indicates that 5% of the voters that went in there last night and caucused think Trump shares their values as a conservative. Thirty-eight percent think that of Cruz, and 21% think that of Rubio. Now, if you add Cruz and Rubio, if you add their totals, you get 51% of the vote….’

“That’s 51% of the vote. Trump 24% of the vote. If you want to you can add Ben Carson, who’s demonstrably conservative, and you’re up to 60% of the vote in the Hawkeye Cauci was for conservatives. It works every time it’s tried, is my point. Conservatism wins every time it’s tried. When somebody tries to fake it, real conservatives are gonna spot it and it isn’t gonna fly.”

Limbaugh later added that while Trump had excited voters, and provided a “vessel” for their anger at Washington, Cruz had helped give voice to that anger in the first place, aiming it at Obamacare and the establishment.

In addition, Limbaugh talked up the prospects of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who finished a strong third behind Cruz and Trump in Iowa. While he was becoming the establishment’s preferred choice, and erred by participating the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, he was one of the candidates that he could support, Limbaugh implied.

Trump used early support from talk radio and other conservative media to help build his campaign, though some seem to have expected that Trump would fade or bow out in favor of Cruz.

Regardless, the Iowa result virtually ensures a good season of ratings and traffic–and reaffirms conservative media’s high importance to the Republican primary.

no more rinos Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Young Boy Stands Up For Trump- Then His Teacher Does Something Sickening In Response

waving flagReported by Kevin Whitson January 25, 2016

Western Journalism has reported in the past on liberals who target conservatives’ exercising of their freedom of speech, as well as freedom of the press on college campuses. Now, according to one 11-year-old caller to the Rush Limbaugh show, liberals are apparently going after pre-teens’ exercise of their freedom of speech.

An 11-year-old named Matthew, whose last name has not been released, spoke to Limbaugh on his radio show Friday. According to Matthew, his teacher asked for students to write the names of visionaries on the board. Some students wrote down names like Pope Francis and Rosa Parks, but Matthew chose Donald Trump. The student said he was immediately accosted by his teacher, who demanded that he erase Trump’s name from the board.

Matthew said his teacher then asked him what Trump ever did for anyone. He responded by saying that Trump was a successful businessman, and had built many beautiful buildings all around the world. He defended his view that Trump was a visionary, specifically mentioning his plans to close the borders by building a border wall with Mexico, and to put an end to ISIS.

Matthew had to erase Trump’s name, and was taken aback by the experience. He also said his classmates called him an idiot for supporting Trump.

“And she made me erase it. I’m thinking like, ‘Wait, why is…? I thought I had freedom of speech.  I mean, an anchor baby gets citizenship. Why don’t I?’ I kind of got mad after that. And people are targeting me, they’re saying, ‘Donald Trump’s sucks and you do too,’ and I really don’t know what to do,” he recountedATTA BOY

Stating that he didn’t want to disobey his teacher, Matthew told Limbaugh, “Well, she forced me to erase it because I didn’t want to disobey the teacher. But, I mean, I don’t exactly like backing down that much and I was kind of disturbed by that.”

Limbaugh encouraged Matthew to stay strong: “Well, it’s an honor to have you in the audience, and there’s no question about that. You’re very, very mature. Your parents gotta be so proud of you. You just continue to stay — I can’t believe I’m saying this to an 11-year-old — you just stay dedicated to what you truly believe, understanding that all kinds of people are gonna insult you or tell you you’re wrong.”

Different Free Speech Ideologies Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Limbaugh on Omnibus: Disband the GOP, Let the Democrats Run Things Because It Is Happening Anyway

waving flagby Jeff Poor 17 Dec 2015

&amp;amp;lt;div&amp;amp;gt;Please enable Javascript to watch this video&amp;amp;lt;/div&amp;amp;gt;

“The Republicans squandered that – they gave up the power of the purse,” Limbaugh said. “And the reason they did that is for some inexplicable reason they are literally paranoid, scared to death of even being accused of doing something that would shut down the government. So to avoid even the accusation that they were going to or would even ever think of shutting down the government – they signaled whatever Obama wanted to spend, he would get because they figured that had less damage to them politically than the allegation that they were shutting down the government.”

Limbaugh pointed out the continuing of funding for ObamaCare, Planned Parenthood, climate change and the effort to locate Syrian migrants to the United States in addition to expansion of certain visa programs.

“This is causing some people to wonder if they just dreamed all that stuff about Boehner resigning,” he said. “And then other people are wondering if they dreamed all that stuff about Republicans winning the largest number of seats they’ve had in Congress since the Civil War. We had two midterm elections in 2010 and 2014, which were landslide victories for the Republican Party. The Democrat Party lost over a 1,000 seats nationwide in just those two elections. People went to polls in droves wanting exactly what was rubber stamped last night, or what will be, stopped. Instead, they showed up in record numbers and they turned out and they just defeated Democrats down the ballot.”

“In the process, they elected Republicans to stop this,” Limbaugh continued. “And now the Republicans have the largest number of seats they’ve had in Congress since the Civil War. And it hasn’t made any difference at all. It is as though Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is still running the House and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) is still running the Senate. Betrayed is not even the word here. What has happened here is worse than betrayal. Betrayal is pretty bad, but it is worse than that. This is out and out in our face lying from the campaigns to individual statements made about the philosophical approach – Republicans had to do all this spending. There is no Republican Party. We don’t even need a Republican Party if they’re going to do all of this. Just elect Democrats. Disband the Republican Party, let the Democrats run it because that’s what’s happening anyway.”

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

no more rinos resusucation Tytler cycle cdr modified 071712 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Trump’s “Nutty” Proposal Is Already the Law of the Land — and Was Used by Jimmy Carter During the Hostage Crisis

Excerpt from Rush Radio Show

URL of the original posting site:

December 09, 2015


RUSH: Here is number eight US Code 1182, inadmissible aliens (; Section B;(3)).  This law was written in 1952.  It was passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress, House and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president.

“Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president.  Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.” 

Over here, everybody in the establishment in the political class, Republican, Democrat, media, you name it, is all claiming that what Trump said is dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous, unconstitutional, while it is the law of the land.  And it was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out of the United States, but he actually did more.  He made all Iranian students already here check in, and then he deported a ton of ’em. 

There is precedent for everything Donald Trump has said he wants to do.  And if you listen to the wizards of smart in this country and our political establishment, you will think that this stuff is just unheard of, it’s almost unspeakable, it’s just indecent.  Here we have in the establishment the reputed best and brightest, the smartest. We’re not even qualified to be in their company no less.  And they’re dunces on this.

In November the 1979 United States attorney general had given all Iranian students one month to report to the local immigration office.  Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas, 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the United States, 1979.  When this law, inadmissible aliens I just read to you, which I’m gonna be reading a lot to you today to the point you’re gonna get tired of hearing it, but you won’t forget it. 

This law was passed in 1952.  Do you know what was going on in 1952, among other things?  There was no immigration in 1952.  It was shut down.  Immigration was shut down 1924 to 1965.  And why did we have this?  What was the need for this in 1952?  Oh, yeah, we had rampant illegal immigration. I’m talking about we suspended legal immigration from 1924 to 1965, but we were being overrun in 1952 like we always are.  We’re the last great hope of the world.  That law was written to allow the president to keep undesirables out and to kick undesirables out.  There’s no mystery.America are you paying attention


RUSH: I’ve got to remind you of something here, folks.  The Jimmy Carter stuff that I just told you about, all of these statements that Jimmy Carter made were made in public, and the announcements that he made that he was gonna send Iranians home, Iranian students home, that they had to report to immigration, they had to confirm they were here legally, those who weren’t were sent back. They put a moratorium on all Iranians being allowed in the country back in 1979.

Carter did that publicly.  He announced it in public, and he announced it proudly.  Cookie has been scouring our archives and all of the other archives that are out there to try to find Carter audio.  But she can’t.  And the reason is, the networks are not digging it up and playing it for anybody.  The networks have it, is the point.  There is video of Jimmy Carter making these announcements.  ABC, CBS, NBC, the odds are, have video of Jimmy Carter, just as they do of Reagan and Nixon and all the way back to Kennedy, when television started, they’ve got it.  They’re just not interested in finding it. They’re not interested in dredging it up and playing it for anybody.

These are not proclamations on a Friday night document dump where nobody was paying attention.  Carter proudly announced these maneuvers in public.  And the Drive-Bys, if they were doing their jobs, would be digging into their archives trying to find this.  But it’s not in their interests, because right now they’re all trying to say that what Trump has proposed is unconstitutional, it’s ugly.  What Trump wants to do is dangerously ugly.  It ignores the law, it ignores the Constitution, and it feeds into our worst impulses.  It feeds into the worst aspects of who we are, just ugly.  In fact, it’s not, it’s been used before. It’s been United States law since 1952.  Get back to that here in just a second.  I got another salient point to make about that, but I want to tell you about SurveyUSA.  Now, listen to this.

They just completed two surveys in cities near San Bernardino.  Their focus was on Trump’s declaration that the United States should block any Muslims from entering the country.  In both of these cities near San Bernardino, the majority of adults polled supported Trump’s proposal.  In fact, more than a third of adults in both of these cities strongly agreed with the idea that Muslims should be barred from entering the country.  In both cities, more people strongly agreed with the idea than strongly disagreed.  You combine the “strongly agree” and “somewhat agree,” you combine that, and you are well into a majority of people who agree with Trump on this. 

There was a partisan split, as you might expect, but even among Democrats, more than a quarter of them answering the poll strongly agreed with Trump’s idea.  When have 25% of Democrats agreed with any Republican idea?  Can you recall?  When have 25% of Democrats ever agreed with any Republican proposal?  The Washington Post is the source for this.  The Washington Post reports the results of SurveyUSA’s data, and the Washington Post notes that both of these towns heavily voted Obama in 2008 and 2012.  And a majority clearly now agree with Trump.

So here again, number 8 United States Code, inadmissible aliens.  “Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by president.  Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may, by proclamation,” meaning he doesn’t have to go back and get a new vote.  This law empowers him to stand up and do what Jimmy Carter did.  “He may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary –” until next week, until next year, until whenever he wants “– suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.” 

Now, apparently our armchair constitutional scholars inside the Beltway think that United States code must be unconstitutional, ’cause they’re running around saying it’d be unconstitutional what Trump is suggesting, ridiculous, you can’t do that, it would be horrible.  It’s right there in the United States statutory law.  The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, written and passed by Democrat-controlled Congress and signed into law by a Democrat president.  Trump’s proposal is legal because all of our immigration laws have always barred some groups of people based on their actions or ethnicity or nationality.

The very first US immigration law was the Chinese Exclusionary Act of 1882.  Then there was the Anarchist Exclusion Act of 1903, which we have discussed on this program.  But this has reminded me of something.  A couple of weeks ago Obama went on TV, as he is wont to do, and said (imitating Obama), “We do not have a religious test for people entering our country.  It doesn’t matter what they believe.  We have freedom of religion in this country, whatever amendments since then.  And it’s the law, it’s our law, and we cannot ask people about their religion, and we certainly cannot use what they say as a reason to keep –”  And I was forced to remind everybody that not only can we, we must, because it is also American statutory law.  We must ask immigrants seeking asylum what their religious beliefs are.  We have done it.  We continue to do it.  Here’s why.

The primary reason most refugees give for seeking asylum is that they are fleeing religious persecution in whatever war torn place they’re coming from.  During the interview process, it is required that we investigate that.  “What religion are you?” we ask.  They must tell us.  Based on what they tell us, we then examine whether or not there is indeed persecution of that religious belief in the place where the immigrant, the refugee, is coming from.  We dealt with this a couple of weeks ago.  Obama said you could never have a religious test for refugees, and we showed that a religious test is actually written into the statutes that govern refugees and asylum. 

You know, the thing is here, folks, whether we’re talking about the hard left or the progressive left or these RINO type Republicans and the commentariat, these people are actually making up a new Constitution and body of law as they go along based on how they feel.  So Trump comes along, they do not know about this law.  They obviously don’t know it or they wouldn’t be making fools of themselves saying what they’re saying.  They don’t know the law exists.  Trump proposes that we put a moratorium on Muslims entering the country, and they just have a conniption fit and they talk about how it’s violating the Constitution and it makes a mockery of our system and it makes a mockery of our values and this is not who we are. They’re just telling us how they feel, but they are certainly not knowledgeable of the Constitution.  They’re making it up.

Tom Brokaw is one of many out there claiming what Trump wants to do so is unconstitutional, it’s in violation of United States law, it would never stand up in court.  He doesn’t know what he’s talking about, but he certainly is letting us know how he feels about it and making up his own law and his own Constitution as he goes, as they are all doing. 

So as a result the last thing that they want anybody to do is actually look at what the law of the United States is.  And they certainly don’t want us looking at the history of this country because they certainly do not want us finding any precedent for anything that, in this case, Trump has suggested.  So now we have the soap opera, the daily soap opera that is the narrative of the day written by the media in Washington, and we’ve got the same thing about history.

We have the daily narrative, the daily soap opera script about what US history is and what it isn’t.  Every one of these people that are denouncing Trump are living in fantasy land, and they’re doing so with an out-of-control ego and superiority and supremacy about themselves that they are untouchable intellectually. They’re smarter than any of us. They know; we don’t.  They are clueless about what they are talking about, and they are presented before us as the opinion leaders we should know, believe, love, and trust.

This is why — again, my friends — we wrote Rush Revere’s Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans.  It’s to tell the truth of the American founding, truthful American history written for eight- to 11-year-olds. The latest book came out in October, Rush Revere and the Star-Spangled Banner.  This is one of the many reasons why that whole project exists and why we’ve taken it on, and why we’re so grateful it’s doing so well.


Truth The New Hate Speech War on Christians We have been torn apart In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

waving flagWho’s The Whiner?

Where’s the Diversity, Democrats?

waving flagOctober 16, 2015 Listen to it Button

URL of the original posting site:


RUSH: Open Line Friday. So Mary Jo in Grand Rapids.  It’s great to have you with us.  Hello.

CALLER:  Hi, Rush.  Thanks for taking my call.

RUSH:  You bet.

CALLER:  I’m calling about the presidential Democratic candidates, and I am — Democrat candidates.  And they are constantly speaking about a life of “equality” and “diversity.”  But ultimately, they are living a life of elitism.  As I watched those five candidates up on the stage — all over 60, white, one female — I compared that to the Republican candidates who are numerous candidates under 60, Indian, Cuban, an Italian female.  It’s… The difference is staggering.  And if people would just stop and think.  But the problem is that those who follow the Democrats are exactly that: They’re followers. They’re told not to question.

RUSH:  Well, they react to what they hear.  The Democrats preach a good game of diversity and fairness, equality, and all that, and the people eat it up. And they mean it, and they also believe it when they are told the Republicans are racist, sexist, bigot, homophobes.  And as you say, when you look at the Republican debate field you see practically an element of every possibility in this country, ethnically.  You’re right. You have Cuban and Canadian ethnicity.  He have African-American. You have white rich, you have white poor, you have white middle class.

You have African-American middle class. It covers the gamut.  There’s all kinds of diversity.  And yet the reality of what people see is over shadowed it might not have by years and years and years of the Democrats in the media accusing the Republicans of not being diverse and hating everybody who isn’t white.  Yet when you look at the Democrats all you see is white. All you see is aged — seasoned citizens in most cases.  You don’t see minorities, ethnic or otherwise, and you can’t say Hillary is minority because women…

There’s no way that she could be tagged as a minority.  She had five people up there: Four men, one woman, all white, all over 60, not exactly diverse.  But you want to hear the piece de resistance on this?  I am not making this up.  The Washington Post watched the same debate you and I did.  They saw Bernie Sanders: Aged white guy.  They saw Lincoln Chafee: Dumb, close-to-aged white guy.  They saw Hillary Clinton: Aging, obviously, white woman.  They saw Jim Webb, and in Jim Webb, you kind of say, “What’s he doing here?” 

But still you saw an upper-middle class, almost-aging white guy.  And then Bernie Sanders: An obvious seasoned citizen, bitter and angry white guy.  The Washington Post saw all of that, too, and it didn’t register.  The Washington Post wrote a story going after CNN for not having diversity in the moderators!  No.  I’m not making this up. The Washington Post went after CNN in an article on Wednesday titled, “Where were CNN’s black and Latino moderators all night?”  The Washington Post accused CNN of “talking a big game about equality and inclusion but broadcasting just the opposite.” 

originalSo when the Washington Post saw the same debate you and I did they missed the fact that every Democrat was old and white.  And instead they focused on CNN and they saw Dana Bash, and they saw Anderson Cooper.  Hell, CNN had more diversity than the Democrat candidates had.  They had a woman, they had a gay/homosexual. Besides, there was Anderson Cooper and Dana Bash and who…? Did they have somebody else that was moderating or just those two?  Seems there were three people last… Oh, there was an Hispanic guy.  There was an Hispanic guy asking Hispanic-related questions. 

Oh, yeah, Don Lemon, a black guy.  He got in… Well, he got to read a question off Twitter or Facebook. But at least he got some face time.  That’s exactly right.  So the Washington Post sees Don Lemon, black guy; Anderson Cooper, Dana Bash, white; Hispanic guy. You had homosexual in that group. And they accused CNN of not being diverse, and they miss entirely the Democrats on the stage.  You’ve gotta be trying to get that story.  I mean, how do you…?  I mean, ridiculous.  But they go after CNN and give every Democrat on that stage a pass.  Mary Jo, I appreciate the call.  

This is Tom in Baltimore, you’re next.  Great to have you on Open Line Friday.  Hello.cropped-the-conservative.jpg

CALLER:  Hi there.  It’s great to be on the show again.  I talked to you as a Rush Baby, and I just wanted to say what an honor it is as a Rush Baby to be able to talk to you.

RUSH:  Thanks very much.  I appreciate that.

CALLER:  My point here is this.  After watching the Republican debate I saw that many of them did have good conservative points to make.  But overall there was a lot of infighting and a lot of areas where they were not presenting themselves as conservatives.  There were many that stayed conservative the whole debate.  But they overall were not unified.  They did not present themselves as an ideologically pure conservative party.  But if you compare the Republican debate to the Democrat debate, they all presented themselves as supporters of big government or reduction in individual freedom, redistribution of wealth.  They all presented themselves as that.  And in that way, I feel like Democrat Party is very ideologically pure and unified, and they use that power to their advantage when they’re trying to create legislation.

RUSH:  Well, there’s no question.  Look, this cuts both ways.  I mean, you can say the Democrats are in lockstep, and they are.  On the Republican side, you could say they’re not monolithic.  There’s all kinds of different points of view welcome in the Republican Party, i.e., the big tent, that we’re not exclusionary of people.  But that doesn’t seem to persuade anybody.  It doesn’t seem to say to people, “You know, the Republican Party is pretty good.  They allow all kinds of different ways of thinking.”  That doesn’t seem to work.  The Republican Party’s actively trying to suppress conservatives, Tom.  And the Democrats are indeed unified on the fact that you and I are not qualified to lead our lives.  They must do that for us.


WE MUST NEVER FORGET  In God We Trust freedom combo 2

We’re Erasing Western Civilization

waving flagFrom the  Rush Limbaugh Radio Show October 06, 2015


RUSH: I have three stories here. The headlines are enough. “Workers Remove Ten Commandment Monument from Oklahoma City Capitol Grounds at 10:30 p.m. to keep protesters from demonstrating.” Next headline: “Pork Products Face Workplace Ban for Being Offensive.”

The next headline: “School Cancels America Day.” Fourth headline. Do you know what the fastest growing language in the United States is? Nope. It’s Arabic. Fastest growing, not the most spoken. “Fastest Growing Language in the United States Is Arabic.” Here’s another headline: “World’s First Lesbian Bishop Calls for Church to Remove Crosses and to Install Muslim Prayer Space Instead.” There is a creep, creep, creep, creep, creep that is happening throughout Western nations, Western cultures, and Western civilization countries.

It is a creep, creep, creep, creep, creep through various means. Illegal immigration, normal immigration, intimidation, political correctness, what have you. But Western civilizations are pretty much in the process of erasing themselves, in my view, anyway. The people who wish to erase Western civilization in many cases are not even firing a shot. Some are, such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda and all that, but the legal immigrants are not firing a shot. La Raza’s not firing a shot. A number of the domestic upheavals in this country are happening not because of any kind of force.

They’re happening because of political correctness, fear, intimidation, you name it. First story. UK Daily Mail: “A granite monument of the Ten Commandments that has sparked controversy since its installation on the Oklahoma Capitol grounds was being removed and will be transported to a private conservative think tank for storage. A contractor the state hired began removing the monument shortly after 10:30 p.m. Monday. The work comes after the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s June decision that the display violates a state constitutional prohibition on the use of public property to support ‘any sect, church, denomination or system of religion.'”

We are a Christian nation with a Judeo-Christian ethic. Were founded and established that way, and we are erasing ourselves. We are allowing it to happen under the guise of religious freedom, except it’s not religious freedom that’s making this happen because the religious freedom is also under assault and could be said to be suffering defeats. Try employing your religious freedom if you’re a county clerk in Kentucky. Try using your religious freedom if you’re a pizzeria or a bakery or what have you in Indiana, southern California, or Colorado.

You’ll find that your religious freedom doesn’t mean anything. But in the name of religious freedom, the Ten Commandments monument must come down so as not to offend anybody who doesn’t believe in them. It used to be our country. I mean, this is how the United States was founded. The melting pot. I guess the people who believe this country was founded in an immoral way, is immoral, is unjust, and has been for over 200 years, must engage in all this to erase its history of racism, slavery, discrimination, or whatever.

In other words, the United States has been flawed from the get-go, and it’s time now to fix it. And every precept and principle on which the nation was founded was discriminatory, bigoted, or what have you, and so must not stand. The melting pot used to be people coming here wanting to become Americans. Now it seems like people are coming here trying to erase America — and many who live in America are actually doing the erasing. Next headline, Breitbart: “Communal Workplace Kitchens…” Communal workplace kitchen?

largeWhat is a “communal workplace kitchen”? Does that mean like our little kitchen in here? I mean, we’re a workplace. It’s the “communal” that has… What is that, communal? Does it mean we have to open it up to people outside the office here? (interruption) Well, whatever it means, here’s the story. “Communal workplace kitchens may soon face a ban on pork products like sausage rolls and ham sandwiches over fears that they are offensive to certain faiths.” See how guilty we are, folks? Ham sandwiches is a sign of the bigotry that this nation is, always has been, and has become.

“New guidelines posted by…” This is I think a UK story, but whatever. It doesn’t matter. I mean, the things happening at Western nations in Europe are tantamount to happening here, too. “New guidelines proposed by CoExist House, a US- and UK-based interfaith group,” which means it’s a leftist group disguised as religious group. “CoExist House, a US- and UK-based interfaith group, urge employers to consider the rules of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism and Sikhism, as well as new religions like Scientology. It warns bosses to be sensitive to worker’s religions before allowing ham products to be stored or prepared alongside other products.”

You know whose jealous about this is the vegans. The vegans! They’ve had to share refrigerators with meat-eaters — and all of this time, all they would have had to do was make a religious argument about it, and the meat people would have had to remove their stuff, leaving the fridge exclusively for the use of the vegans. Now here come these other religions, saying, “We don’t like pork. We don’t like ham. You gotta get it out of the fridge. You can’t even have it in the kitchen if we’re gonna be there!”

And we’ll say, “Okay, okay. We’ll get rid of it.” The Brits are saying, “Fine, we don’t want to offend you. Instead saying, “Screw you, what you do…? Screw you!” They’re taking it out. “The group also suggests that alcohol should not be served at corporate events in case it upsets the feelings of members of certain faiths. Andy Dinham, professor of faith and public policy at Goldsmiths, University of London, is preparing the guidelines that will be put forward to employers this week.

“Prof Dinham told the Sunday Times: ‘It would be good etiquette to avoid heating up foods that might be prohibited for people of other faiths. ‘The microwaves example is a good one. We also say, ‘Don’t put kosher or halal and other … special foods next to another [food] or, God forbid, on the same plate.'” You cannot do that. October 5, 2015, Fox News: “Patriotic teenagers in Jackson Hole, Wyoming showed up to class Wednesday waving American flags in defiance of educators who canceled ‘America Day’ over fears it might upset students who don’t consider themselves to be American.”


RUSH: I want you to listen to this lead again. “Patriotic teenagers in Jackson Hole, Wyoming showed up to class Wednesday waving American flags in defiance of educators who canceled ‘America Day’ over fears it might upset students who don’t consider themselves to be American.” I guess, ladies and gentlemen, it’s too late to ask what non-Americans are doing at a school in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, or why American taxpayers are paying to educate non-Americans and then why we are deferring to non-Americans who are offended by the American flag in an American school?

largeYou know what this really epitomizes? This illustrates the difference between immigrants in the past and those of today. Immigrants in the past came here to be Americans. They loved the American flag. They wanted that flag to fly above them. They revered, respected, and on the other hand that flag. They could not wait to assimilate. They could not wait to become citizens. They could not wait to wave that flag as their own.

They would have jumped at the chance to engage in an America Day. Why do we even need an America Day in the first place? Well, regardless, immigrants of old would have jumped at the chance to participate in a day celebrating America, but today immigrants students who are not Americans are offended, don’t want to see the flag, and what do the school administrators do? “Okay, okay, okay, okay! Don’t shoot! We’ll take it down. Don’t bomb! We’ll take it down.”


RUSH: One little tidbit about Jackson Hole, Wyoming, America Day was part of a homecoming tradition at the high school. Students would show up to class either waving American flags or wearing red, white, and blue clothing. And many different students felt singled out, odd, they’re not American, and they just felt weird, and they felt inferior. They felt here’s Americans celebrating, very unfortunate. So the school says we’re trying to be inclusive and safe and make everybody feel welcome.

Safe? I tell you what, without — well, I can’t say they’re not firing shots, but it’s fear. We’re in a total defensive, fearful position. “Okay, okay, okay,” and we engage in this under the guise of being open-minded and politically correct, but it’s fear. Anyhow, from Breitbart, world’s first lesbian bishop. By the way, folks, all this other political stuff, we got the political news, we got Biden talking to Maureen Dowd about his son saying, “Run for president.” It seems to be big news. It’s captivated the attention here of the Drive-Bys. Donald Trump dropping in the polls got everybody, I mean you wouldn’t believe the orgasms in the Republican establishment and the media taking place over that, and some other things out there.

You know, all of that really — I know it’s important. It’s secondary to me that this stuff — I mean, we can sit around and debate, you know, what people say running for president and all that, but while all that’s happening this cultural deprivation and rot and the erasing of Western civilization is happening right under our nose, right in front of our eyes. I mean, we’re looking at it. We’re not only looking, we’re enabling it.

“The Bishop of Stockholm has proposed a church in her diocese remove all signs of the cross and put down markings showing the direction to Mecca for the benefit of Muslim worshippers. Eva Brunne, who was made the world’s first openly lesbian bishop by the church of Sweden in 2009, and has a young son with her wife and fellow lesbian priest Gunilla Linden, made the suggestion to make those of other faiths more welcome.”

A, she cannot have a son with her wife. But I’m the one that’s gonna get in trouble for pointing that out. It’s not biologically possible. But, anyway, again, don’t want to make a big deal out of that. Is this what Muslims do in their mosques? Do they take down all references to Mecca and put up the cross with directions, say, to the Holy Land? Can you go into a mosque and see the cross with directions to Jerusalem or Bethlehem? I don’t think so.

“The church targeted is the Seamen’s mission church in Stockholm’s eastern dockyards. The Bishop held a meeting there this year and challenged the priest to explain what he’d do if a ship’s crew came into port who weren’t Christian but wanted to pray.” Okay, fine, as though they couldn’t find a place.


RUSH: What happened? What happened to the woman that just…? (interruption)You just took her off the board. What was she gonna talk about? (interruption) Is that what it was? (interruption) No, it was something else. It was something else. Well, I wish she hadn’t gone away. I should have said she was coming up next. It was Fast and Furious. I’ve got a story here in the Stack that was gonna relate to what it was she was gonna talk about. Anyway, David in Santa Barbara, we’ll go to you. How are you doing, sir? Welcome to the program.

CALLER: Thanks, Rush, and mega dittos from the liberal bastion of the left.

RUSH: Great to have you with us. Hi.

CALLER: Thank you. My point is that I think what should happen next with canceling the America Day, is that the parents should go to the school board and demand that the principal or whoever else was involved in canceling this be terminated, because there’s nothing that scares a politician more than thinking that their constituency is going to turn on them.

RUSH: You know, I totally agree. Let me tell you, it’s not gonna happen, and this is one of the problems. I have told this story I don’t know how many times. The reason it’s not gonna happen is because the parents are afraid that when they leave, that the teacher is gonna give their kid a bad grade and ruin their future. That’s the leverage and control the schools have over the parents. I’ve told you all about this. A woman told me often that her daughter went to a school who had an American history class, and there was no history taught.

This course every day was nothing more than this teacher, a woman, bashing George W. Bush. It was “current events” right from NBC, ABC, CBS. It was nothing but bashing conservatives, bashing Bush. There was no history. It was nothing but current events. And the teacher, in order disguise what was going on, gave the students… She had to give history exams ’cause there have to be tests and so forth. She gave them the answers to every history exam that supposedly was given. The students didn’t complain because, hell, they were given the test!

largeAll they wanted was get the A and get out of there. I asked this woman, “Why didn’t you do something! I mean, this is outrageous what’s happening. You’ve got an activist that’s taken over a history course. Why do you do something about it?” “I don’t want my daughter penalized. Nothing’s gonna happen to that teacher. All of these parents can go in; nothing’s gonna happen to that teacher. The school board’s gonna defend the teacher. The principal’s gonna defend. All that’s gonna happen is that my daughter is gonna get F’s.”

So nothing’s done about it.

A lot of people complain.

That’s not the only story. I hear countless examples of this kind of thing happening in school, and your example here out in Wyoming of what needs to happen is, “Somebody needs to go and tell the principal X, Y, and Z if this doesn’t stop.” They’re not gonna do it, because they think their kids are gonna get harmed — which is ironic because their kids already are being harmed by what’s going on in the classroom. But grades are everything. Grades is how you get into Harvard or whatever college you want, grades is how you end up impressing other people in town. “My kid gets A’s,” or whatever, and the near afraid of grade punishment.

So they just don’t say anything.

And the leftists continue to get away with it all.


RUSH: Even if the parents go to the school board members who are elected, and the school board then tells the administration and principal, “You gotta stop this,” the kid whose parents show up is still gonna get punished. That’s what the parents think; that’s why they don’t do anything.


In God We Trust freedom combo 2

BREAKING: Rush Limbaugh Makes Massive Announcement About Ben Carson

waving flagURL of the original Posting site:

GOP presidential candidate and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson has taken a lot of heat for comments he made on this weekend’s “Meet the Press,” in which he stated that he “would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.” While Carson’s comments have drawn an uproar — the Council on American-Islamic Relations has called for Carson to withdraw from the race — it’s also sparked a discussion on the possibility of political Islam within the American system and its potential dangers.Why should I care

One of the people supporting Carson’s position has been radio legend Rush Limbaugh. On his Monday show, Limbaugh said that the U.S. Constitution and Muslim law are incompatible.

“If you look into Shariah law, you will not find any consistency with the U.S. Constitution,” Limbaugh said.

“Shariah law is the law which is used to behead women in Islamic countries who have been raped,” he explained. “Shariah law is the reason women in Islamic countries can’t drive. Shariah law is so inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution. Ben Carson could not be more right.’

“And the question he was asked was in that context.  ‘Well, do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution?’” Limbaugh continued. “Well, Shariah law isn’t.”

Carson made the statement when “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd asked the candidate whether a candidate’s faith is relevant.

“I guess it depends on what that faith is,” Carson replied. “But, if it’s inconsistent with the values of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the Constitution, no problem.

“I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation,” Carson continued. “I absolutely would not agree with that … Congress is a different story, because it depends on who that Muslim is and what their policies are, just as it depends on what anybody else says, you know.”

This elicited plenty of fury from media figures, as well as a call from the Muslim Brotherhood-linked CAIR group for Carson to withdraw.

“We call on our nation’s political leaders — across the political spectrum — to repudiate these unconstitutional and un-American statements and for Mr. Carson to withdraw from the presidential race,” CAIR national executive director Nihad Awad said.Why should I care

Islam is NOT culture of deceit and lies 95b119e45c50cbea1e7a4fbfa33415f3 In God We Trust freedom combo 2


More From The “Thousand Words” Files

waving flag anyone who supports abortion atheism Bills-Speech defaced defend the rights of conscious fascism fetus for everyone frank-m-davis-5901 freedom of speech fund Hypocrisy lion body parts my 23rd abortion Rush-FB1 Safe-Six Side-Deal-600-LI ticking Vid-Kid-590-cdn Why I stopped performing abortions In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Activists Plan to Burn American Flags in New York City Ahead of Fourth of July

A group calling for the immediate disarmament of the New York Police Department plans to burn American flags in a Brooklyn park on Wednesday, just days before the Fourth of July holiday. “Disarm NYPD” announced the “Burn the American Flags” event on Facebook, inviting individuals to join the organization at Fort Greene Park to “set fire to this symbol of oppression.”

An American flag burns during a 2011 protest in Pakistan. (ASIF HASSAN/AFP/Getty Images)

Organizers said accused Charleston shooter Dylann Roof wasn’t an “isolated actor,” but a “product of a consistent pattern of state-sponsored terrorism and radicalized dehumanization in America.” The event originally was aimed at burning the Confederate flag, but later changed to focus on the stars and stripes.

“There will be no peace until we tear down this system of oppression,” the group wrote on Facebook. “It isn’t enough to take the flag down; we must put an end to white supremacy once and for all.”

Image source: Facebook

After the event attracted online attention, “Disarm NYPD” defended the event in an online statement.

“We find it a sign of the times that people can care so much about a piece of cloth, while at the same time be so quiet about black churches being burned all over the country,” a post on Facebook said. “Perhaps this is the great difference between us and the so-called ‘patriots’. While they express their loyalty to symbols, we express our loyalty to the lives of the oppressed.” “We do not believe the ideals of America are anything to be revered.”

It continued, “We do not believe the ideals of America are anything to be revered. We are building something that will be much better than America. While the so-called patriots yell that we should just leave, we instead choose to dream. We dream of what real freedom looks like: freedom from paramilitaries occupying our communities, beating and killing our sons and daughters; freedom from our communities being destroyed by the speculative capital of gentrification; freedom from mass surveillance; and freedom from systemic racism.” 

“So, we will burn the American flag, a symbol of oppression and genocide, and in the same action, dismantle our stunted, cynical expectations of what is possible in the world,” the group’s statement concluded. “The current trajectory of history is unsustainable. It is completely unrealistic to desire things stay as they are, and more unrealistic, even abominable, to desire to ‘go back to our roots’. We, the dreamers, are the true realists. We know things can’t continue this way, so we commit to building a better world. A world better than America.”

According to the “Disarm NYPD” Facebook page, the group’s mission is to “take away power from the powers that be.” The group calls for the immediate disarmament of the NYPD and demands the “demobilization of the police form our neighborhoods.”

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan expressed contempt for the American flag last week, telling hundreds gathered in a D.C. church that it is a symbol of racism and needs to be brought down.

Last Tuesday, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh made a prediction that the American flag would “come under assault” after the Confederate flag. At the time he said, “Do not doubt me.”

freedom combo 2

The Left’s Moral Relativism Has Eaten Our Culture Alive — and Conservatives Have No Political Strategy to Stop It

June 26, 2015 Listen to it Button

URL of the Original Posting Site:


RUSH: Look, I know everybody is trying to understand this, and everybody’s trying to explain it to each other. Everybody’s looking to everybody else for a deep meaning, an explanation that makes sense. Because none of what’s happening makes sense to people. So what’s going on? Well, hang in there. I’m going to give my shot at this today, folks.

The EIB Network and Rush Limbaugh, get ready. Oh, yeah, that too. Open Line Friday, which could be juicy today. This is where we try to emphasize callers a little more than we do Monday through Thursday. Never know how it’s actually going to play out. But the rule is on Friday whatever you want to talk about, have at it. Telephone number is 1-800-282-2882. And the e-mail address

Ladies and gentlemen, not to be — I don’t even know what the word is — dismissive, the outcome of this case today has never been in question. The fact that the Supreme Court was going to find gay marriage as they did should not be a surprise. It doesn’t mitigate the result. I mean, just like yesterday we could all predict what was going to happen with Obamacare, but being alive and seeing it happen and living through it, the reality of it, it’s crushing. Same thing here.

The only question on this one was going to be the vote, was it going to be 5-4 or 6-3. It turned out to be 5-4. Now, everybody’s looking for an explanation. Everybody’s reading dissent opinions. Everybody’s consulting. A lot of people calling each other, emailing each other, “Gee, what?” I can’t tell you the number of people who have sent me e-mails with a simple theme, the same theme. “How do you persevere? How can you go on the radio today? What in the world, how do you even know anybody’s going to be listening? Do you realize, all seems lost, what in the world is there to say?”

Well, I’m here, and I’m going to do my best to put this into some sort of perspective. One thing I’m not is in a state of denial. I think there’s a lot going on, and to try to put them in any kind of priority, “Okay, this is the worst and then this is the next worst.” That’s a futile exercise and ultimately meaningless. But I think, folks, you can almost include Obamacare in this. In this decision today, the court legalizing gay marriage, this is in a way Roe v. Wade all over again. The country was involved.

As Scalia pointed out in a dissent, there was a pretty robust debate going on, state by state, over gay marriage. It’s now been shut down. So once again, five justices have forced a way of life on people, and many of them disapprove of it, do not support it, and have not had a chance to vote on it. So I think we’re faced with a future where a culture will continue to be roiled much as it has been since Roe v. Wade.

I’ve heard commentators today on all the cable networks, and they run the gamut. One of the seemingly common themes among some quasi, so-called conservative commentators or analysts is, “Hey, these are just people and they just want what’s been denied them,” and it goes on and on. “They just want dignity and respect. It’s not asking for much, they just want –” and it’s not about that in all cases. The rule for gay marriage is not about joining anything, it’s about redefining.It HasNever Been About Marriage

I mean, if the move for gay marriage was about joining, then a couple that walks into a bakery and wants a cake baked for their wedding and proprietors say, “No, it’s against our religious beliefs to support gay marriage,” then the gay couple would leave and go find some other bakery to bake their cake. But that’s not what happens. They go to court and they try to get that bakery shut down, or that photography studio shut down. So it makes me dubious of this idea that there’s just an effort here to join the majority. There’s clearly an effort underway to up-end and redefine and punish.

Take a look at what happened in Charleston, South Carolina — by the way, all this comes under an umbrella, which I’ll explain. There’s a singular theme for all of this that’s happening. And maybe even pretty much a — though you may not agree with it — singular explanation for it. But after the shooting in Charleston, look at how quickly that became a Republican event. And look at how quickly people moved to banish the Confederate flag.

The Confederate flag had nothing to do with anything involved with the Charleston situation. It had nothing to do with it. It was totally unrelated. An opportunity was made, seen and acted upon by the Democrat Party to move their agenda forward. The Republican Party was totally unprepared for it. The conservative movement was totally unprepared for it, was left to either join it or be humiliated and held up for ridicule.

Now, I think in the case of this gay marriage decision today, the answer to this sadly is not going to be found in politics or policy, because the problems and the truth go way beyond that. I think we’re dealing with a culture that is under assault and is deteriorating rapidly. The truth is that all this transcends the Constitution. I think there is a spiritual war going on where truth is no longer truth. There is no objective truth. Everything is relative now, particularly morally. Words have no meaning. Words can be whatever the most forceful group of people want them to mean. Whatever the most intimidating group of people wants a word to mean is what it will mean.Truth The New Hate Speech

So the door’s open for liberals and oligarchs to do whatever they want to do. And I don’t know that politics or legal solutions alone are the remedy for what is happening. To me, a bigger casualty than the healthcare debacle and the socialism aspects of Obamacare is the assault on the Constitution and an even bigger casualty still was on the truth itself. Words no longer mean anything. They’re just tools for liberals to accomplish whatever ends they want to accomplish.

Now, I’m going to get into some of the words from dissenting justices on the case today, the gay marriage case, because they’re poignant, and they get to a point, make a great point. But I’ll tell you, folks, everybody’s trying to understand the difference in John Roberts, his decision today, his opposition to gay marriage compared to what he wrote yesterday for Obamacare, is incoherent. The two don’t make any sense side by side. I have a theory.

I think I know or have a good idea of why Obamacare survives, amnesty survives and will survive, and I think it’s basically fear. Fear of being the one, anyone in history, who dared oppose or repeal anything accomplished by the first African-American president. I think that has created a paralysis in the Republican Party and in the conservative movement and at the Supreme Court and at Congress and at the Senate. I think it’s pervasive and I think it’s going to be forever. I think that fear is going to survive long after Obama has served his terms of office.


In other words, the effort to repeal Obamacare in, say, 2017, 2018, I don’t know who is going to have the guts to actually do it. Somewhere along the line somebody is not going to want their name attached to it because the historical notation that X was a leader in the movement that repealed the act of Obamacare brought to us by the first African-American president. My point is, I think there is more fear than we have ever understood. I think there is a paralysis-type fear brought about and brought on by the election of the first African-American president.

It is made even more intense by the fact that people can see what the media does to you if you dare stand up in opposition to Obama. And Obama has made it clear that after his terms in office are over he’s not going anywhere. He’s going to have a residence in Washington and one of the reasons for that is to protect his legacy. If anybody makes a move to repeal anything, whatever it is, and we’ve still got a year and a half. I told you in January of this year, folks, buckle up, these next two years will be unlike anything you’ve ever seen. They’re starting out that way. We’re now six months in. And it is the case.

But here’s the thing, folks. When you get right down to it, everywhere I look today — yesterday, the day before, last year, the year before that, the last decade, the decade before that. Everywhere there’s conservative anger — everywhere — over everything that’s happened. Today the anger is at the Supreme Court. Yesterday the anger was at the Supreme Court. And that’s all there is, is anger. There’s never anything done beyond expressing the anger. There aren’t any policy reactions.loose both

There aren’t any efforts whatsoever to deal with the assaults and the attacks that are relentless and daily from the left. I mentioned Charleston. I mean, here you have a horrible, sad event in Charleston, South Carolina. And within minutes it became the fault of the Republican Party! It became the fault of the conservative movement. The media, as per usual, began looking for any evidence that Dylann Roof had any tie whatsoever to the Republican Party.

They focused on the Confederate flag. It became yet another daily march of the Democrat leftist agenda, which has — as its number one objective — to eliminate political opposition in this country. I’ve said it for the past two days and I’m going to say it again. The biggest threat that Obama and the Democrats have is us. They fear us more than they do ISIS or the Iranians or whatever, because they view us as able to take away from them their power via elections.

They’re not worried about ISIS taking their power away; they’re not worried about the Iranians doing that. So we must be destroyed. We must be attacked and annihilated and rendered irrelevant. The Dukes of Hazzard, for crying out loud! A television show, because the Confederate flag was on the roof of the car, comes under assault. There never is any strategy to deal with this. We know what’s coming — at least I do! I’ve made a career here out of warning everybody what’s coming, and there never is…

inconvenient truthThere doesn’t ever appear to be any awareness of what’s coming and there certainly isn’t any strategy to deal with it. And that is one of the reasons why I know you’re frustrated and maybe despondent. You have invested in everything you think you can do. You’ve donated. You’ve purchased. You’ve voted. You’ve gotten out the vote. You’ve done everything you can. You have called. You have emailed. You have faxed.

You have let your opinions be known, and you hear everything you want to hear during campaigns — and that’s the last time you hear it. The fact of the matter is a Republican Congress is helping Obama build his power base by not stopping any of it, by not opposing any of it. I continue to see no opposition strategy. Gay marriage, Obamacare. Both of these, particularly Obamacare, the best I can tell the Republican strategy has been, “We’re not going to fight Obama because he’s the first black president.

“We’re just not going to do it. Say what you want, conservative voters, but we’re not going to do it. There’s no future in it. The media will kill us. They will call us racist. We’ll let the Supreme Court deal with it.” For military base closings back in the late ’80s, Congress would go out and hire Blue Ribbon commission members — former Congressmen, retired people — to do this and that, to do the heavy lifting of closing military bases rather than get their fingerprints on it.

Campaign finance reform?

Same thing.silent - Copy

Everybody you talked to in the Republican Party said, “It’s unconstitutional. We can’t support that!” President Bush signed it. They said, “Let the court fix it.” The court didn’t fix it. They found it constitutional. “We’ll let the court deal with Obamacare. The Supreme Court will fix it. We’ll go to the court. We’ll sue. That’s what will happen.” And we keep losing every time we go to the Supreme Court because we do not have a political strategy. Nor is there a political will to even devise a strategy.

Everything is, “Wait until the next election. We’ll get them in the next election! We’ll get them in 2017.” We have a year and a half to go until 2017! Who knows what kind of destruction will take place between now and then? But yet, folks, there’s a conservative apparatus all over Washington, DC. There are conservatives everywhere. There’s an entire TV network made up of ’em. Conservative talk radio is made up of conservatives. There’s no shortage of conservatives. They’re everywhere.

We’ve got conservative think tanks here, think tanks over there. We’ve got conservative analysts; we’ve got conservative advisors. They’re everywhere!

Raising money…


Writing books…


Nothing changes.


RUSH: It’s Open Line Friday. I’m going to go to the phones, and the only way to do this is to be disciplined about it. I say provocative things all the time, and I’ve just gotten started today, folks. Hang in there. Be tough. That was just the open monologue. That was just warming up. I’m going to go to the phones, though. Ovi in Orlando. Great to have you on the program, Ovi. Hi.

CALLER: Actually, it’s O-z-z-i-e, like Ozzie and Harriet. (chuckles)

RUSH: All right.

CALLER: But in any case, I was going to disagree with you a little bit. I don’t think Republicans are so much afraid of challenging what Obama does because he’s the first black president. I think the real issue for Republicans is they don’t know what to do with those 30 million Americans that — if they change Obamacare — would be uninsured.

RUSH: Ozzie, they’re not insured now. Ozzie, they’re not insured now.


RUSH: Obamacare is an absolute disaster. Obamacare deserves to have been thrown overboard years ago. Obamacare is destructive. Obamacare is going to destroy people’s ability to end up with disposable income in their lives and get ahead. Obamacare is an absolute disaster like much of everything this administration has brought us. It has not insured any significant millions of uninsured. Now, I understand the theory.Complete Message

The theory is, “The Republicans don’t want to throw Obamacare overboard because that means they’ll have to fix it.” That’s exactly my point! I made the point yesterday that the conservative movement has become not a party of opposition, not a movement of opposition, but a movement of fine tuning. And what does it fine tune? Democrat proposals! Democrat ideas! Instead of rejecting them, instead of throwing them overboard and proposing to the American people — who are smart enough to understand — alternative ideas, we fine tune socialism and call it conservatism.

Sorry, that’s not the answer.


RUSH: By the way, here we are right on schedule. Right on schedule. Here is a headline from the Washington Examiner: “Poll: 72% Fear lost forever - CopyEconomic Crash, Concern ‘Highest Ever’.” What the story is about, if you read it, the GOP pollsters are telling Republicans, “You’ve got to let go of those social issues, they’re killing you. It’s the economy, stupid people, you’ve got to drop the social issues.”

It is my contention that Republicans aren’t doing a damn thing on social issues. The Democrats are the ones forcing social issues on everybody. Today, the latest example, it’s the Democrats forcing these things and average, ordinary Americans are trying to defend what they believe in. There is no aggressive behavior on the part of Republicans or conservatives. Everybody is in a defensive posture. Everybody is just standing by trying to hold on to what they believe in and what they have left.

Every bit of the aggressiveness, every bit of the offense, every bit of whatever is being undertaken is from the Democrat Party. And yet, here we go, the Republican candidates for president are being told, “Get rid of social issues, let them go. It’s the economy, the economy is the way to win.” And letting go of the social issues is how our culture is being corrupted. It’s another one of these things that’s 180 degrees out of phase. And the social issues, I know what it is, folks, I know, I know. It’s a bunch of moderate Republicans who think they’re losing on abortion.

They’re losing on everything. And they just don’t know it. They’re losing on everything. You think they’re winning on the economy? We live in the most disastrous economy since Jimmy Carter, and the Republicans may be winning elections. Is there any pushback on any of this? There’s a lot of talk. There’s a lot of requests for donations. There’s a lot of fundraising going on. A lot of people promising you that they’re enacting policies or thinking about policies and they’re going to do this and they’re going to do that. The moment of truth comes and they don’t do it, and they kick the can down the road because it’s not the right time.Tree of Liberty 03

It’s never the right time. There isn’t any opposition. Those of you that are feeling lost today, those of you who feel like it’s over, you’re at your wit’s end, we’re winning nothing, we’re losing everything, you’re still the majority. That’s what’s got you so bedraggled. That’s what’s got you so ticked off. You’re still the majority. You know it. Less than two percent of the population is bullying its way through the country and nobody is doing anything to stop it because of fear or what have you. And that’s what’s got you upset.

What good is winning elections? That’s the big truth. The big, final, ultimate act is going and voting and you succeed in winning landslide victories in 2010 and 2014, what have you got to show for it, nothing. That’s why you’re mad. Tired of feeling like losers? Tired of feeling like there’s no recourse. The way the game is being played right now there isn’t. The Supreme Court, throw them in the mix, depending on the issue, and they’ll pretend they are the federal government, lock, stock and barrel. The other two branches don’t even count and don’t even matter.

A story from yesterday: “Christian Farmers Fined $13,000 for Refusing to Host Same-Sex Wedding Fight Back — The owners of a small Dofamily farm in upstate New York fined $13,000 for discriminating against a same-sex couple for refusing to host a wedding on their property are fighting back.”

Too bad they’ll lose, especially with the court’s decision today. All resistance to the militant gay agenda now is just officially just a rear guard action. It’s a lost cause, like the Confederacy. Pretty soon, like the Confederacy, all this is gonna be a hate crime to even remember.

“In an appeal filed today before an appellate division of the New York Supreme Court, a lawyer for Cynthia and Robert Gifford, owners of Liberty Ridge Farm near Albany, N.Y., argued that when finding them guilty, the court did not consider their constitutional freedoms and religious beliefs. ‘[The decision] violates the Giffords’ free exercise of religion, freedom of expressive association, and freedom of expression protected under the United States and New York Constitutions,'” according to their lawyer. Plus it was their property.

There isn’t a freedom of religion in the US anymore. Not for Christians. That’s the point. “The Giffords were found guilty of ‘sexual orientation discrimination’ by an administrative law judge,” and have been told that they must attend sensitivity training classes.


Big Gay Hate Machine A LIST FOR FREEDOM let them take arms - Copy freedom combo 2

NAACP Loses Battle to Silence Black Pro-Lifer Who Bashed Its Pro-Abortion Stance

waving flagReported by Steven Ertelt, May 19, 2015, Washington, DC

URL of the Original Posting Site:

The NAACP has lost its legal battle to silence a black pro-life writer who parodied its pro-abortion stance by referring to the NAACP as the “National Association for the Abortion of Colored People.”Which kills more blacksAfter blogger Ryan Bomberger published his article at LifeNews, the NAACP threatened to sue and Bomberger over the column that took the civil rights organization to task over its abortion position. The NAACP is upset about a column Bomberger wrote at LifeNews titled, “NAACP: National Association for the Abortion of Colored People” and a legal battle between it and Bomberger ensued.

Last year, a judge issued a ruling in the NAACP lawsuit against Bomberger. The judge indicated that Bomberger had no First Amendment right to lampoon the NAACP by calling it the “National Association for the Abortion of Colored People” in an effort to mock its pro-abortion position and opposition to pro-life legislation.

Today, the federal 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned that decision and ruled in favor of full free speech rights for its timeBomberger, his group the Radiance Foundation, and Judge Harvey Wilkinson wrote the opinion on behalf of the three-judge panel that unanimously ruled against the NAACP.

The ruling upheld Bomberger’s and LifeNews’ “expressive right to comment on social issues under the First Amendment.”

“We vacate the injunction against Radiance entered by the district court and remand with instructions that defendant’s counterclaims likewise be dismissed,” the court ruled, adding that it rejected the NAACP’s attempt to “obstruct the conveyance of ideas, criticism, comparison, and social commentary. Political discourse is the grist of the mill in the marketplace of ideas.”

As far as calling the NAACP the “National Association for the Abortion of Colored People” – the appeals court even went as far as saying Bomber’s piece at LifeNews wasn an inventive and effective parody. “Biting, surely; distortive, certainly; Radiance’s ploy was nonetheless effective at conveying sharply what it was that Radiance wished to say,” it said. “The use of the satirical modification of the true NAACP name was designed, as many titles are, to be eye-catching and provocative in a manner that induces the reader to continue on.”

Before the decision, Bomberger said he was surprised the venerable civil rights group would sue him, a black pro-life person. “This lawsuit should be shocking to any American who values truth and the First Amendment,” explains Bomberger. “The irony is painful. The NAACP is suing me—a black man—for exercising my Constitutionally-guaranteed right to free speech.”

Rush Limbaugh has parodied the NAACP’s name since Clarence Thomas’s Supreme Court confirmation,” Bomberger points out. “But the NAACP hasn’t sued a wealthy broadcaster, with an audience of millions, for parodying them every time he refers to them. I’m honored they feel threatened by a small, life-affirming organization’s illuminating words.”

The ACLU has officially sided with The Radiance Foundation stating: “…the right to parody prominent organizations like the NAACP is an essential element of the freedom of speech.” The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which joined the ACLU in the Amicus Brief, expressed deep concerns “because a decision holding [The Radiance Foundation] liable for trademark infringement threatens a huge range of expression…Judge Jackson’s decision misreads both trademark law and the First Amendment.”

Bomberger says the real problem is not his free speech but the NAACP’s abortion advocacy. “Abortion doesn’t advance people of color,” he said. “The NAACP is on the wrong side of this human rights issue, and they are wrong to try to silence our free speech, too.”Gruber-Abortion

Following the piece, the NAACP sent Bomberger, the director of the Radiance Foundation, and LifeNews a threatening letter claiming infringement on its name and logo for including it in the opinion column. The letter accuses Bomberger and his group, the Radiance Foundation, of “trademark infringement” over an ad campaign that exposes the NAACP’s pro-abortion position. Stating that while “you are certainly entitled to express your viewpoint, you cannot do so in connection with a name that infringes on the NAACP’s rights,” the letter demands a response within a self-imposed time period.Liberalism a mental disorder 2

In response to the letter, Bomberger asked a federal court to declare that the First Amendment protects his and the Radiance Foundation’s exercise of free speech and that his speech does not infringe on any of the NAACP’s trademarks or other rights. The lawsuit does not seek any damages.

In its countersuit, the NAACP’s counterclaim denies that the NAACP is pro-­-abortion or has even taken a position on the issue.

Despite the fact the LifeNews article in question simply parodied the NAACP’s name, criticized the organization’s documented pro-abortion actions, and used the NAACP’s unaltered logo to identify the civil rights group the judge refused to dismiss the case as a First Amendment issue. Although the NAACP took offense at the article, Bomberger has frequently spoken out about the NAACP’s pro-abortion stance and its ignoring how abortion disproportionately targets black unborn children. The NAACP recently came under fire for opposing a bill to ban abortions based on race.

“The damage done is the loss of over 15 million black lives to abortion,” Bomberger, an adoptee and adoptive father., told LifeNews previously before the ruling. “How can the NAACP possibly claim neutrality over the abortion issue if they’re financially profiting from annual sponsorship from the nation’s largest abortion chain?”mommy can you feel me

Despite the NAACP suit, Bomberger says the Radiance Foundation’s abortion awareness campaign will continue to expose failed leadership in the black community on the issue of abortion. Abortion alone has taken the lives of over 16 million black children. For every 100 live births in the African American community, another 77 are aborted. African-American teenage abortion rates are more than twice as high as the national average, according to a new study. The African-American abortion rate, according to the study conducted by the Guttmacher Institute, is 41 per 1,000 women among the 15-19 year old age group. The national average abortion rate is 18 per 1,000 women among 15-19-year-olds.National death rate percentages

Alliance Defending Freedom allied attorney Charles M. Allen with the Glen Allen, Va. firm Goodman, Allen & Filetti PLLC is defending Bomberger and Radiance in U.S. District Court in The Radiance Foundation v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division.

OARLogo Picture6

Limbaugh: What About Freedom to Love If ‘I Love Jesus’?

By Greg Richter, Wednesday, 01 Apr 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site:


One of the rallying cries of opponents of Indiana’s religious freedom law is that people shouldn’t be discriminated against because of “who they love.” But radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh flipped that around on his show on Wednesday.
Critics of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act say it allows people to use their religious beliefs to discriminate against gay people. Proponents say it only allows business owners to refuse to perform their services, such as at same-sex weddings, if doing so is a violation of their faith.

Limbaugh noted that gay-rights advocates argue against the law saying, “Why are you so upset just because of who people love? … It’s discriminatory to care about who people love . . . Why are you objecting to it?” more evidence

Limbaugh said the phrase works both ways, because people who have strong religious convictions love their Lord. “I can tell you right now, I could mention I love somebody and it wouldn’t be accepted,” he told his audience. “I would be called a bigot and any number of other bad names. All I would have to do is say, ‘I love Jesus Christ.'”


Why Liberals Love the Enemies of Israel

Transcript from the Rush Limbaugh Show

By Rush Limbaugh, March 19, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site:


RUSH:  Let me see if I get this straight.  The Obama administration and the American media can spend money and run campaign ads designed to turn out the Israeli Arab vote, and that isn’t racist.  No, no, no.  That’s perfectly fine.  But then Netanyahu coming along with his allies pointing out that Obama and the Democrats and the media have targeted the Arabs and therefore trying to get his own base to turn out, that’s racist?

How can Netanyahu responding to what the Democrats are doing be considered racism and what the Democrats are doing not be racism?  This is getting… This has been out of hand for I don’t know how long.  The Democrats are throwing down the race card and getting away with it because there’s too much fear in retaliating to it, against it.  There’s too much fear.  Everybody’s frightened in the elected political class to do something about this.  But it’s long been out of hand.  It’s perverse.  It’s destructive.

There’s nothing positive or uplifting or inspiring about any of this, contrary to the claims of Democrat PR.  They’re the ones that started all this. They’re the ones that targeted money and ads to turn out the Arab vote.  Never once did anybody think that was racist. So Benjamin Netanyahu responds to it by pointing out the left is targeting the Arab vote and trying to get his base to turnout to counter that, and all of a sudden that becomes racism?

It’s all the same race Middle East anyway.  It’s all Semitic.


RUSH: Here’s Thomas “Loopy” Friedman, the New York Times.  This really is absurd.  This is alternate universe.  This is two different worlds in which people live.  The idea that racism was a factor in the Israeli election, the very idea is flat-out absurd.  Well, you see, the Democrats can never lose on the merits.  No, no.  And Barack Obama can never actually be rejected by people either here or in Israel.  No, no.  There has to be some explanation when he loses, and it can’t have anything to do with his policies.  It can’t have anything to do with his meddling.

My guess is that a bunch of Israelis were fed up with the American president interloping in their country trying to ambush an election, influence it, for his own personal desires, not the United States’ best interests and certainly not Israel’s.  Obama injected himself into that election for his own personal reasons, whatever the heck they are.  There had to be some Israeli backlash to that.  Probably not as much as you’d think, but there had to be some.

But it doesn’t matter.  On any given day the Democrats never lose.  They either have tricks played against them, somebody cheated, or the race card was used, or the War on Women took an unexpected turn or some such thing, and then their allies pick up the ball and run with it.

I want to ask you a question that I asked you yesterday.  Have you ever stopped to think, in this whole Middle East peace process — and remember that’s all it is.  It’s a process that never ends.  It’s a process that recycles and repeats.  It’s a chess game and the game never is won or lost.  The pieces keep being moved around by different players, depending on the American administration and the Israeli prime minister and whoever’s running the show at the PLO or Fatah or whatever they call themselves on any given day, Hamas, Hezbollah, you name it.

The Middle East peace process is an industry unto itself.  It’s not designed to be resolved.  The Middle East peace process does not have an achievable objective.  We’re all being lied to about this. We’re all being strung along.  My whole life there’s been no change in it.  We’re all roped into believing that there’s a solution to this, with words, with the right people, doctors, nurses, clean water, whatever, speeches, you name it.  There aren’t any such solutions, and there never are to conflicts like this.

Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force, not by the aggressive use of process.  This is made especially and abundantly clear in this case because there is no such thing as a two-state solution.  I don’t know how much time you out there as individuals pay attention to the Middle East peace process.  I wouldn’t blame you if you didn’t pay much attention at all, ’cause it never changes.  It’s the same thing.

The news on the Middle East peace process does not change from administration to administration, from person to person, from year to year.  Oh, you might have changes that appear to be different, like this two-state solution business, or when the Israelis finally decide to accept the idea of a Palestinian state.  But then whenever something like that, which some people would consider progress is made, guess who undermines it?

Hello, Yasser Arafat.  Hello, whoever is running the show in negotiations against the Israelis, because they do not want a two-state solution.  There is no two-state solution.  There’s a one-state solution.  A two-state solution actually means the end of Israel.  Go take a look at the Hezbollah charter.  Take a look at things stated by Yasser Arafat when he was around.  Doesn’t matter who.  You’ll see, take a look at Iranian caliphate.  No matter where you go the objective is wiping out the Jewish state.  It doesn’t exist anymore, and neither do the people who at present live in it.

That’s the objective, that’s the only objective.  There is no desire to live side by side in peace and tranquility and mutual respect and all of that.  There is no such possibility resulting from negotiation.  Just never gonna happen.  I dare say the people involved in it know it.  But the Middle East peace process has become a career.  The Mideast peace process is something that when you’re 15 you say, “You know, I want to work there. I want to work there for life.  I want to become a diplomat working at the Middle East peace process.  I want to be a career appointee to the Middle East peace process so that I am there no matter who the American administration is, president is.”

This whole thing is a joke.  What makes it — obviate the two-state solution?  Well, the demand for right of return.  Right of return is incumbent on a two-state solution.  Right of return means that anybody who wants to call themselves a Palestinian anywhere in the world has the right to come back to whatever they designate as the Palestinians state.  And, by the way, the Palestinian state is going to be what Israel is now or there’s never gonna be a deal.  And who’s gonna make that deal?

Who in Israel is going to negotiate the end of the nation?  You know, now that I ask that, I can see that that could happen if you elect the wrong Israeli leftists.  Israeli leftists are the equivalent of the current Republican leadership in this country. Just as the current Republican leadership’s scared to death of the Democrats, scared to death of the media, the Israeli left is scared to death of Iran. Everything you hear about the Republican leadership not criticizing Obama:  We don’t want to provoke him. We don’t want to make ’em mad. We don’t want to anger the independents. We don’t want to turn away the independents. We don’t want anybody getting mad at us. We don’t want the media criticizing.

Same thing.  The Israeli left is the same way, except their objective is placating Iran.  They’re neophytes who believe that these people can be appeased.  The right of return eliminates any possibility of a two-state solution or existence.  Besides that, none of the militant Arab population wants a state of Israel.  So all this is academic, is my point.  Obama inserts himself in this process. Actually, in the internal affairs of Israel, he inserts himself personally and professionally. He throws down this notion of the race card. He starts the whole thing with the race card. Bibi responds to it and Bibi’s accused as the only one that plays the race card.

But I need to ask you, do you ever wonder why the Democrat Party in this country, whoever, be it Bill Clinton, be it Barack Obama, be it John Kerry, I don’t care, be it Dianne Feinstein, I don’t care, pick one, why are their allies the Palestinians, and why are the Israelis, which is the ally of the United States, why are the Israelis tied, at least at present with Netanyahu as the prime minister, to the conservative or Republican Party?  Why is that?  That’s more understandable.  Shared values, foreign and domestic, same worldview, same Western civilization roots.

But why, no matter what Democrat you mention, no matter what Democrat’s ever in the White House, or whatever Democrat’s secretary of state, whatever Democrat ends up anywhere, why are they always simpatico with the Palestinians?  And there is an answer to the question.  Without going into it in great detail, it’s no more complicated — I mean there is ideology involved.  There’s a common ground.  Leftists will find their friends anywhere around the world.  They do not have to be American.  They do not have to be domestic in any way.

But aside from their ideological commonalities, and there are some between the Palestinians and the Democrat Party, when I say — Hamas, Hezbollah, there’s another reason for it, and that is they feel sorry for ’em. They feel sorry for ’em like they feel sorry for the African-American population in America.  They actually look at the Palestinians and they see a bunch of people worthy of pity.  “Oh, these poor guys, look at ’em, nobody wants ’em, they’re outcasts. They can’t get along with anybody,” and they look at the Israelis as the big, evil white — even though they’re not — majority.  Israel is the equivalent of the biggest enemy that the Democrats can muster in American conservatism or in the American Republican Party.

It’s really no more complicated than that.  Well, it is actually because there is ideological common ground as well between the enemies of Israel and the Democrat Party in this country, but in large part it’s really no more complicated than the evil tyranny of a majority and the poor, helpless, put-upon, discriminated-against minority and people of color.  And, as such, the Democrats look upon these minorities not with respect.  They look upon them with pity and the bigotry of low expectations.  They’re people that can’t do anything on their own.  They’re people who can’t survive on their own.  They’re poor people, they’re just incompetent and inept, and they need a champion.  They need somebody speaking up for them. They need somebody defending them.

The Democrats rush to the cause, make themselves look big and magnanimous, and there’s something magic about always opposing the majority, even when you’re it.  You disguise the fact that you’re in the majority, you blame others for being the majority, and you rip ’em to shreds every day just because they are.  And just because they’re the majority they’re intrinsically corrupt.  They’re automatically cheating. They’re automatically corrupt. They’re automatically ingrates because they are the majority.  And, as such, they’re incapable of being sympathized.  They’re incapable of anybody having empathy for them because they’re just evil.

In the liberal worldview it does not really require any more detail than that, but there is.  There are other reasons to explain why the Democrat Party and the American left is simpatico with the enemies of Israel.


RUSH:  Here’s Thomas “Loopy” Friedman.  This is last night on CNN’s Erin Burnett OutFront.  Her question was, “You wrote today that Netanyahu went for the gutter with the comment to supporters that Arab voters were coming out to vote in huge numbers.” Would you please explain that to us, Mr. Friedman?  How can that be Netanyahu going for the gutter?

FRIEDMAN:  Netanyahu, to save himself, took votes from even farther right parties. And now he is saddled with the way he did that, this kind of race baiting. And at the same time with throwing out the window of his election bus the whole notion of a two-state solution. The people who are happiest tonight, who are high five-ing and toasting themselves with endless Allahu Akbars is the Iranian regime in Tehran. Iran wants a one state solution, so there is a constant grinding between Israeli settlers and Palestinians. Nothing makes Iran happier than Israel opting for a one state solution

RUSH:  Ladies and gentlemen, that is just flat-out wrong.  It is dangerously wrong.  It is arrogantly misinformed.  And this guy is the Bible to everybody who reads the New York Times.  In terms of foreign policy, Thomas Friedman is the Bible.  And this is dangerously, embarrassingly, every bit of it wrong.  There never will be a two-state solution.  These people are living in dreamland.  They have no concept of the dynamics of anything that they do.  Just like when they raise taxes they don’t understand when people are able to avoid it.  They don’t understand when people try to find ways not to pay the new taxes.

There’s never gonna be a two-state solution because the Palestinians do not want that.  And how anybody with even one half the IQ of a pencil eraser doesn’t understand that is literally beyond me.  And then we hear this other bromide here, “Well, he took votes from even further right parties.”  So?  They were registered to vote.  So what, where they came from.  What makes them so evil that they are further right?  How does that matter?  Where does “further right” equal “evil”?  Except in this man’s upside down world.  But that’s not even the point.  The race-baiting?

If anybody race-baited it’s Barack Obama and whoever ran that campaign for him over there.  They are the ones who pointed out the need to turn out the Arab-Israeli vote.  And, by the way, what is racist about that any?  There is no racism in this.  Only in the convoluted, upside down world of liberalism can people of the same race be somehow tagged as racial minorities.  It’s just inexplicable.  So race-baiting, when the first people that did it were people that are Friedman’s allies.

The first thing, they run all these fraudulent polls telling everybody Netanyahu’s gonna lose, and then they run all these stories claiming they’re gonna really turn out the Arab-Israeli vote.  Well, that’s no different than turning out minority votes in this country.  The opposition party is gonna do something to counter it.  It’s called free and open elections.  It’s called campaigning.  Except when the left comments on it, somehow, if you don’t just sit there and let them beat you, if you don’t just sit there and give up and let them beat you, you’re engaging in racism.  It’s sick.


RUSH:  In fact, it’s not even a one-state solution that the Palestinians want.  It’s not a one-state solution the Iranians want. I’m picking up where I left off ’cause I got offended.  I was interrupted, but I couldn’t do anything about it.  What we’re talking about here is a final solution, and the final solution is, there is no Israel and there are no Jews living where Israel is now.  That’s the objective, and this is never gonna gets solved on the Palestinian side, the Iranian side, and the Arab side, ’til that happens.  Pure and simple.  If that ever happens, you’ve got a solution.

And how they gonna do that, folks?  How’s that solution?  If that were to happen, how is there no Israel, and how are there no Jews living on the land that is now Israel, how does that happen?  You think somebody’s gonna negotiate that?  You think somebody’s gonna come along in the Middle East peace process and agree to that?  You think the United Nations is gonna pass a Security Council resolution that everybody’s gonna vote for that wipes Israel, as it exists, off the map and put the Jews that live there somewhere else?  Preferably in the Mediterranean, is what the Palestinians want.

Do you think that’s gonna happen?  That hasn’t an iota’s of a chance happening unless there is a military conflict that Israel would lose, which is how conflicts like this have traditionally been solved throughout human history.  This two state, one state, Thomas “Loopy” Friedman here, this is idiotic.  I can’t believe that — well, yes, I can.  Because this the process to them, this is all that matters is the process itself.  The fact that it never solves anything is part and parcel of it.

The process is where you get to show how smart you are.  The process is where you get to demonstrate your brain power.  The process is where you get to demonstrate where your allegiances lie.  The process is where you get to identify who the bad guys are and who the good guys are so that you can be a good guy. The process is where you get to identify racism and bigotry and sexism all over the place.  The process is whereby you establish your credentials as some sort of expert.  The process is meaningless.  The process is worthless in terms of its stated objective, and that’s a solution, ’cause there is no solution, except a final solution.

Now, the Israelis would be fine and dandy with a negotiated Palestinian state, except they know that that’s not what the Palestinians really want.  And therefore, how do you negotiate seriously when you know what they claim to want isn’t true, when their stated objectives are not what their real objectives are, when you know what their objectives are.  Their objectives are your elimination.  And so it’s insolence, it’s disrespect to the American president, Barack Obama, when you stand up for your own nation’s existence?  It’s insolence, it’s disrespect when you dare to win your own election?

The opposition, by the way, being aided and assisted by Barack Obama.  And let’s remember once again, spending money, targeting other resources, running campaign ads to turn out the Arab vote in the Israeli election, that was the American Democrat Party, that was the American president, Barack Obama. That’s the advice that the Herzog campaign got. That’s how the money was spent over there.

American money was spent targeting objectives, resources, and running campaign ads at Israeli Arabs, designed to get them to turn out and vote.  But that wasn’t racist.  In the magic of Democrat Party politics, that wasn’t racist.  To target ads and resources at Arab-Israelis, oh, there’s no racism in that.  Don’t you dare accuse us of racism.  But Netanyahu and the Likud Party responding to it, defending against it somehow is racist?

This stuff has to stop.  This is nothing but pure destructive.  There’s nothing inspiring, there’s nothing uplifting, there’s no good that comes of this.  And then these brainiacs like Thomas “Loopy” Friedman toss in their five cents and tack on with their: Oh, yeah, he kind of race-baited there, Netanyahu.  Yeah, yeah, he race-baited.

How in the hell, again, when everybody there is of the same race, how do you race bait?  And then Netanyahu committed the real offense.  He went out and he appealed to the even farther right parties.  Oh, that’s really low.  That’s really the scum of the earth, those further-right parties.  We can’t put up with that.  And then after all of this, Obama still lost in a landslide.

So there’s gonna be a price for this, and that price is gonna be we are gonna abandon Israel at the UN, and we are going to assist the Iranians.  We may put sanctions on Israel now and lift them on Iran.  I mean, imagine Eddie Haskell with nuclear weapons and the Beaver keeps beating him.  That’s what we’re looking at here.  We’ve got a man-child, an immature child, spoiled brat who’s had his way his whole life, been treated as something special his whole life, and his life recently is a series of humiliations, from losing the automatic bid for Chicago to get the Olympics.

I could go down a list of things that were supposed to be slam dunks that Obama has lost and this is just the last straw.  So now everybody’s gonna pay for this act of insolence.  I feel like I’m watching Game of Thrones here and the 15-year-old king wants to start chopping off heads.  And everybody’s afraid to say no to the 15-year-old king ’cause it might be their head that gets chopped off.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu is doing everything he can to save his state, save his country, save his people.  Even people in Israel who don’t like him miss this.  But that’s what his objective is.  But I’m telling you, don’t fall for this two state, one-state solution garbage.  It’s the final solution.  By the way, one of the biggest jokes here in Friedman’s comment is that the Iranians are sitting over there giving themselves a bunch of high fives as in Allahu Akbars.  That I’d like to see.  I’d like to see the mullahs high fiving each other wherever they live.  “Hey, Ayatollah Khamenei, high five me, Allahu Akbar!”  Can just see this.  This is the picture that Friedman paints, and that they’re happy about this, they’re happy Netanyahu.  Of course they’re happy.  Because they want a one-state solution.

What one-state solution is he talking about?  What one-state solution would make the mullahs in Iran happy?  How are the mullahs in Iran kept happy with Netanyahu winning?  The only way that makes sense is if the mullahs in Iran know that the Middle East peace process has no end, by definition, by design, and it doesn’t.  You know why?  They need an enemy.  Just like the Democrat Party needs a demon, needs an enemy, needs a vilan, so do those guys, and Israel is made to order.  Israel can never, ever be allowed to participate in a solution, ’cause Israel’s the bad guys.  They can’t ever do anything good.  They can’t ever do anything noteworthy.  They can’t ever do anything laudatory.  That would blow everything sky-high.

The Israelis must always remain the bad guys, and, as such, there will never, ever be a solution until they get their nuke, and then look out.  And that is what Netanyahu knows, and anybody with common sense knows.  And it doesn’t take much common sense.  All it takes is the courage to believe what the Iranians have told everybody, from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Ayatollah Khomeini to the Ayatollah Khamenei, to whatever ayatollah, whatever mullah, whoever you want to talk to, that’s their stated objective.

ISIS, you name it, that’s their objective.  And that, the elimination of Israel and the expulsion of the Jews from that real estate, that is the objective, and that is the only solution they’re interested in, and that is the final solution.  It’s not a one-state, it’s not a two-state, it’s the final.  And nothing short of that will ever be acceptable.



You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet

By Listen to it ButtonRush Limbaugh, December 17, 2014

URL of the Original Posting Site:


RUSH:  I was just asked a question, ladies and gentlemen.  Does this mean that you can now go to Canada and buy a Cuban cigar and bring it back home?  I don’t think it means that yet.  We are still here trying to figure out what happened.  And, by the way, I need to remind you all of something.  This is chump change compared to what’s gonna happen the next two years.  I have warned all of you people, I have warned you that these last two years of the Obama administration are gonna actually be what he would have done if he’d had total control and did not have to worry about the Constitution the first two years.

You’d better look out because today is just a smidgen example.  All these memos, executive orders, rewriting, overwriting, ignoring the US Constitution.  Wait ’til we sell Iran the nuclear bomb.  Wait ’til something like that happens.  You haven’t seen anything yet.  This Cuban thing, this is chump change.  Yes, yes, yes, I’m joking, but I’m trying to illustrate a point by using excessive exaggeration.  You haven’t seen anything yet.  This is just the beginning.  This is just a teaser, appetizer, for what is on tap the next two years.  Everything Obama thinks this country’s guilty of and needs to apologize for, he’s gonna take care of.  Cuban embargo, our fault, shouldn’t have happened, We’ve devastated the Cuban people, it never made any sense, it’s a relic, and it comes from a part of the American past which is not honorable, all that kind of stuff.

Get this.  You may not know this yet.  The Regime has made an official move.  Are you ready for this?  The Obama admin, the DOJ is actually beginning the process of eliminating police officer shootings from grand jury proceedings.  In other words, police officers will no longer benefit from the equality clauses in the US Constitution.  In other words, if there is another police shooting, the local prosecutors will not be able to slough it off to a grand jury.  Grand juries will not be permitted to handle those.  They’ll be held directly by the DA or the state attorney or whoever else.  That’s a denial of equal access laws and the Regime is just gonna do it, gonna probably announce it with a memo.  And nobody’s making any move to stop Obama on this.


RUSH:  So I checked the e-mail during the break, as I always do.  “Rush, where’d you see that story on Obama and the grand juries and the cops?”  It’s at (The Hill‎: WH Task Force to Review Grand Juries’ Handling of Police Killings).  Here’s the headline:  “White House Task Force to Review Grand Jury’s Handling of Police Killings” — A White House panel is examining whether grand juries are the best way to review the use of deadly force by law enforcement in the aftermath of controversial decisions not to indict police officers who killed unarmed black men.

“‘One of the things that we will be looking at as a task force is independent review of these kinds of cases and how should that take place,’ Philadelphia police chief Charles Ramsey, who is co-chairing the panel, told NPR’s Morning Edition on Tuesday. … ‘Is a grand jury, for an example, the proper way of doing it, with the district attorney’s involvement and that so forth?’ he asked.”

So this White House panel, handpicked by Obama, wants to take away police shooting cases from grand juries.  So what happens to equal protection under the law?  Aren’t cops American citizens?  Aren’t they almost on the same level as illegal aliens?  So why deny them equal protection under the law by denying them the ability for their cases to be heard by a grand jury?  But that’s not all.

The White House panel also wants to force local cops to undergo training.  This same White House panel that wants to take away police shooting cases from grand juries is demanding that local cops undergo training.  The task force admits that they can’t tell cops, police departments, what to do. But they in effect say that they can threaten to withhold federal money from police departments to make the states and counties do their guy bidding.

Which is exactly what the federal government’s done to get control of education, if you must know.  The way the Feds control curricula is to deny federal funds for things like the school lunch program, or to threaten to. Therefore they get their fingers in the curriculum and education, which is a state and local province.  So I’m telling you, folks: These next two years, you’re gonna see things like this pop up all over the place, and it’s gonna be machine gun-type cadence: Rat-tat-tat. Delusional

They’re gonna be one after another, and every social injustice that Obama and the left think is occurring in this country, they are going to address it and fix it with the implementation of Alinsky-type leftist liberalism with the stroke of a pen.  It’s all gonna happen, predicated on the notion that the US and the way it was founded was unjust and immoral, unfair, unequal.

And finally — after 200-some-odd years, finally — somebody is gonna come along and get it right.  It’s gonna be frequent, and you’re gonna feel overwhelmed, and you’re gonna be looking to the Republicans in Washington to stop it, and they’re not gonna have the slightest idea themselves what’s happening.  You’re gonna look in vain at our nation’s capital hoping somebody there would stand up to stop this.

Those who do, such as the Ted Cruzes and the Rand Pauls and the Mike Lees — those who do stand up and try to stop whatever happens — are going to be come under assault and attacked as kooks and freaks and maniacs and uncooperative and all the other insults.  That’s the way the game is now being played.


&amp;lt;a href=”;prngenre=conservative_talk;prntype=web;prnpage=interior;pos=;sz=575×100;u=prngenre*conservative_talk!prntype*web!prnpage*interior!pos*!sz*575×100;ord=123456789?&#8221; target=”_blank” &amp;gt;&amp;lt;img src=”;prngenre=conservative_talk;prntype=web;prnpage=interior;pos=;sz=575×100;u=prngenre*conservative_talk!prntype*web!prnpage*interior!pos*!sz*575×100;ord=123456789?&#8221; border=”0″ alt=”” /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
 Blog wishes

Related Links

Video: Rush Limbaugh: ‘There is a Grievance Politics in this Country that is Tearing Our Country Apart’

December 8, 2014 By

Rush Limbaugh, the top voice in America for conservative talk radio, recently appeared on Fox News Sunday to addressrush2 the politics surrounding the recent deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson and Eric Garner in New York.
Right out of the gate, Limbaugh spoke candidly about the nature of the protests that have engulfed America and noted, “There is a grievance politics in this country that is tearing our country apart.”
Limbaugh noted that the “grievance politics” are constantly augmented and though President Obama could do much in the way of offering a unifying message, continues to use his pulpit for the further division of this country.
The interview is fascinating with many astute observations about the nature of racial politics in America and who is using and abusing this serious issue to further a political agenda.

Click below to watch:

Blog wishes

Holder Goes Full-Scale Hamas: Cops Are Occupying Force in Neighborhoods of Color

Listen to it ButtonRush Limbaugh of the Rush Limbaugh Radio Broadcast

December 02, 2014

URL of the Original Posting Site:


RUSH: This is really fascinating what’s being attempted here in St. Louis and in Ferguson.  It’s not by any means the first time, but this is the most brazen that I can recall.  We have an event that happened.  We’ve had hours, days, weeks of evidence and testimony. It’s been corroborated. The liars were discovered and thrown out. We know what happened.  Yet that wasn’t the desired result, and so that result doesn’t count and it’s being rebuilt into a new problem, and the problem in St. Louis is the cops.

The problem in Ferguson is the police.  If you doubt me, listen to what Eric Holder said.  This is more outrageous than what Obama said, ’cause Holder takes Obama’s comments… Basically what Obama said is that Ferguson demonstrates racism is everywhere in America and now he, Obama, is on the case and he’s finally gonna deal with this and he’s gonna end it.  But Eric Holder decided to add to or to build on Obama’s claim that Ferguson demonstrates that racism is everywhere.

Here’s what Holder said:  “Problems we must confront are not only found in Ferguson; the issues raised in Missouri are not unique to that state or to that small city.  We are dealing with concerns that are truly national in scope and that threaten the entire nation.”  What happened here?  Again, they want to make it look like this happens every day, multiple times a day.  They’re painting a picture here that innocent young blacks are assassinated by cops who are hunting.

Multiple times.

“It happens frequently, and this is the last straw.  We’re not gonna put up with this any more,” even though it’s rare.  It doesn’t happen with anywhere near regularly, which is one of the reasons why this one made such news.  But, anyway, the truth has been learned, and it’s not what was desired. So Eric Holder says, “In the coming days, I will announce the updated justice department guidelines regarding profiling by federal law enforcement.’  

“This will institute rigorous new standards and robust safeguards to help end racial profiling once and for all,” and here is the money quote: Our police officers cannot be and cannot be seen as an occupying force, disconnected to the communities that they serve.”  So Eric Holder has now gone full-in Hamas.  Cops are now an occupying force.  Cops are not peacekeepers.  Cops do not keep the order. com03police_state

Cops do not protect the innocent and property. 

The cops are an occupying force in neighborhoods of color all over the country.  “Problems we must confront are not only found in Ferguson…”  Isn’t it interesting that that’s the exact way this bunch talks about Israel, folks?  They talk about Israel as an occupying force with Hamas and other terrorist organizations being the victims, and the Israelis are the mean-spirited, extremist, racist occupying forceEvil is Good

Now Eric Holder has gone all-in with the cops being the same thing, and he wasn’t finished.  Eric Holder said, “Problems exposed by Ferguson threaten the entire nation.”  He was speaking at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta.  He said, “The nation needs to confront the broken relationship between group after group in this country.”  Now, let’s see.  What’s happened here in the last six years? Liberalism a mental disorder

Gays got gay marriage, Hispanics got amnesty for illegals, and African-Americans apparently are gonna be able to riot without anybody stopping them if they want to.  Apparently they’re gonna be able to engage in civil disobedience and the excuse is gonna be offered, “Well, it’s just their feelings. The president said they don’t feel right, they don’t feel welcomed.  They don’t feel like they’re part of the community.” 

We all got screwed with Obamacare, so everybody’s getting something from this Regime.  The problems of Ferguson Missouri are radical leftists in the government and the media distracting from the destruction of free market separation of powers. So, yes, problems exposed by Ferguson do threaten the entire nation, but not in the way Obama and Holder are discussing.  Now, I have here, you might think, an unrelated story.  I want you to listen very carefully.  This is from the Wall Street Journal.

Let me read to you the headline.  The story’s from yesterday.  Spree of Newark Violence Spurs Action by Mayor, Police.”  Listen very carefully, folks. “Newark, New Jersey, officials on Monday vowed a crackdown on violence after a bloody Thanksgiving weekend that left three dead and multiple people injured in 11 shootings. Mayor Ras Baraka said in a news conference, ‘Our mind-set is it’s an emergency here in our city. 

“‘This is the first time we’ve had all these shootings to this extent: 11 shootings, three dead, multiple injuries.’  The spate of violence illustrated a broader challenge for Newark, which has long been one of the state’s most dangerous cities.  But the long Thanksgiving weekend brought a level of gun violence Newark hadn’t seen in some time, Mr. Baraka said.  Officials said they were worried about losing gains made against crime earlier in the year now.”

Now, you say, “Okay, what’s the big deal, Rush?” 

Well, hang on here.  In the first place, no protests are being planned for the three dead over the Thanksgiving weekend.  The president and Eric Holder haven’t talked about this at all.  We have three people dead, 11 shootings.  There is no talk of problems in the community.  There’s no talk of needing to sit down and have a confab at the White House to figure out what went wrong and how to fix this.  But if you read the rest of the story in the Wall Street Journal, do you know what the reaction from the leaders in the community is?

Do you know what their solution to the problem is?  (pause)  Take a guess.  (pause)  Everybody’s calling for more cops.  Everybody is calling for more police!  The Obama administration in Ferguson and in St. Louis are trying to portray the police as the problem. 

  • The police did not burn down anybody’s building. 
  • The police did not destroy anybody’s business. 
  • The police did not rob a convenience store. 
  • The police didn’t get in a fight with themselves and try to abscond a weapon and use it against each other. 

None of that happened.

So the Regime in Ferguson is trying to blame everything that went wrong on the cops.  In Newark, three people were dead on Thanksgiving Day, 11 shootings, and what everybody there is demanding is more police.  They’re gonna send in more police.  Governor Christie is even gonna send in state highway patrol troopers.  The police are gonna bunker into Newark to protect innocent bystanders from being gunned down in the streets.

Now, wait a minute.  How does that jibe with what we’re being told about what went on in Ferguson?  How can you have three people dead, 11 multiple shootings, and the solution in Newark is the cops?  The solution is more cops.  The solution is more armed troops and uniformed cops to come in and keep the peace and protect things.  In Ferguson, it seems to be just the exact opposite;

  • The problem is the cops. 
  • The citizens don’t feel right. 
  • The problem’s the cops.
  • The problem’s the grand jury.
  • The problem’s everybody else. Liberalism a mental disorder

I thought, if you listen to Eric Holder, the police are an occupying force, in every community.  The problems we must confront are not found only in Ferguson.  The issues raised there are not unique to that state or small city.  Our police officers cannot be and cannot be seen as an occupying force disconnected to the communities that they serve.  I would bet you that before this happened in Ferguson they were not seen that way.  I bet they were not seen as an occupying force.  I bet they’re not seeing that way in too many places.

But in Newark, and you know it’s a Democrat state, and it’s a Democrat mayor, and it’s a Democrat everything, they’ve got out-of-control gun rampage, and the call, the solution is for more cops.  Pull quote from the story:  “Bashir Akinyele, a teacher who works for the Newark Anti-Violence Coalition, said many of the problems stem from poverty and broken families. The unemployment rate is more than 10%, higher than in much of the country, even as the city’s downtown has teemed with new development.” Actually mentioned the true source of the problem:  broken families, unemployment.AMEN

Too bad we can’t work on those to fix, isn’t it?  Why, they’ve actually even identified the problem in Newark:  broken families, unemployment, the Obama economy.  Too bad we’re unable to talk about that.  No, no.  We can’t even get to the root cause because we’re in the process in Ferguson of obliterating the truth, and we’re gonna use everything we can. We’re gonna use Al Sharpton, we’re gonna use the media, we’re gonna use the St. Louis Rams, we’re gonna use whatever we can to rewrite the truth using the power we have to do it.  And we’re gonna portray the cops everywhere as an occupying force, except Newark, where more of them are needed to stop rampaging murderers.

Back after this.


RUSH:  Just a reminder to every police officer in this country, you are being watched, and I’m very serious about this.  Rich Lowry had it right in his column today.  You cops had better keep a sharp eye, because the powers that be are looking to find another cop they can accuse of racial assassination and railroad indict, and convict.  They lost on this one.

Police officers in this country are in dangerous jobs at great risk right now because they have a target on them.  They have a bull’s-eye that is being painted, that’s being drawn by the highest positions of power in this country.  It’s a very dangerous circumstance, very dangerous situation taking place here, folks.  And the cops right now are in the crosshairs of the most powerful forces in this country. com04

They failed to get what they wanted in Ferguson.  They’re gonna find a way. They didn’t really get what they wanted out of Florida and the “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman and all that. They didn’t get what they wanted in the Duke lacrosse case.  They really want a win.  And the cops are the focus, the target for that next win.  Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies




Civil Disobedience in Ferguson Was Planned and Choreographed Beforehand, Not a Spontaneous Riot

Listen to it ButtonNovember 26, 2014 Windows Icon Windows Media

URL of Original Posting Site:


RUSH: I tried yesterday to make a point about this business in Ferguson, and I did not spend enough time actually thinking about how I wanted to say it in order to be the most clearly communicable and understood.  The artificiality of this, and I do mean artificiality.  These were not riots.  These were planned, staged, predicted, counted on incidents of civil disobedience.

This was not a riot.  This did not happen spontaneously. It did not happen because of something that happened unexpectedly that caused people to lose their mind.  They planned it.  It was a strategic plan, and the media fell right in line, predicting it, and counting down to it and heightening tensions.  And so when it happens, it was expected, and therefore it can’t be a riot. The fact that it was expected and still happened, what does it say about the civility of our culture?  What does it say about the overall civilization that we have?

Something about this has just not seemed right to me and I haven’t been able to put my finger on it.  But it’s the same way I felt in the days leading up to the Obama announcement on amnesty, the executive amnesty for the five million illegals.  Here we were told what was gonna happen and the media, in the pre-days and hours leading up to the event, heightened the tension, the anticipation.  We had a countdown to an event we all knew was coming, and that was the Constitution being violated.

When you get right down to it, that’s what the event was.  And it seemed, even though it happened and we knew it was gonna happen, it just seemed surreal.  Everything seemed to happen on a media schedule, on a media timetable.  Everything seemed to happen because of the media.

In other words, it was real, and what Obama did was real, there’s no question about that. But the same thing here in Ferguson.  We knew the grand jury was gonna have a report at some point and we knew that no matter what that grand jury report was, there was gonna be a riot.  So we all sat down and we expected and waited for it. And the only question was how big was it gonna be, as though now it’s just common.  We sit by, almost idly, and accept the idea that we’re going to have civil unrest, civil disobedience, call it a riot if you want, and that it is justified and we’d better try to understand it. It’s now part of the American fabric, instead of being something spontaneous that is an actual reaction to something.

This riot was planned. It was gonna happen no matter what.  How bad it was gonna be was the only thing unknown.  The actions of the authorities to stop it or not stop it, that was an unknown, but we knew it was gonna happen.  Rodney King was not like this, for example.  The Watts riots in the sixties were not like this. Trayvon Martin was not like this.  This has all been staged.  I’m not saying conspiratorially.  I’m not saying the Wizard of Oz is behind the screen, behind the curtain pulling marionette type strings on puppets and this kind of thing. It’s just that there are now certain destructive aspects of the American culture, civilization, that we have just accepted.  We have resigned ourselves to the fact that they’re gonna happen, in a way, legitimizes them, is the problem here.

And the way the media focuses attention on and counts down, builds the anticipation. And the media leading up to it was not, “Will there or won’t there be a riot?”  There was no question there was going to be a riot.  The only question was, how bad.  And here come the experts predicting the degree of badness of the riot based on whatever the grand jury said.  And while it happened, I’m not saying it didn’t happen, I’m not saying it isn’t real, but at the same time there was nothing spontaneous about this.  It was orchestrated. It was planned. It was going to happen no matter what.

It was going to happen independent of events.  We knew the trigger.  All we had to do was wait for the trigger.  That was the grand jury decision and the report and the announcement, and that was it, and we all knew what was gonna happen.  It’s almost as though we’ve come to expect it, and in a way it’s therefore justified, justifiable.  I don’t know, folks.  I can’t put my finger on this.  And again, I’m not alleging conspiracy.  Don’t misunderstand.  I wish I could find a way to — my problem here is I have feelings about this, and I’m not good at describing the feelings I’ve got.  I’m trying to turn the feelings, convert them into thoughts, which is what I rely on.

There’s something about it that, even though it happened and even though I saw it and even though it was real, there’s something about it that seems illegitimate to me.  (interruption)  Well, it was a stunt.  It was preventable.  But nobody made any effort to stop it.  That’s another thing about this that kind of troubles me in the deep, dark crevices of my mind, is this acceptance, okay, it’s gonna happen, it’s justified, whatever, there was no effort to stop it.  The president didn’t even make an effort.  The president fed the rage when he had his 20-minute little speech, when he was split screened with the riots.

There’s a story out there today, by the way, that that split screen shot is gonna haunt Obama for the rest of his — who in the world believes that?  How in the world is that gonna haunt Obama?  If anybody thinks that that split screen TV shot, here’s Obama on one half of the screen supposedly railing against riots and trying to ask for calm, which is not what he really did.  On the other half of the screen is Ferguson burning and people I guess cannot give up the traditional way of looking at politics and political figures in this country.

If that would have been George W. Bush or George H. W. Bush, maybe even Clinton, it might be something that would haunt.  But what was happening on the screen was not something that troubles Obama.  There’s no way that he could be haunted by this.  Haunted by it means it’s harmful.  Haunted by it means he has no credibility.  Well, there he is out demanding and asking for calm and right next to him on the other side of the screen is Ferguson in flames.  That’s not gonna be a problem for Barack Obama.  A, he’s not responsible for it.  B, he wishes it didn’t happen; but, C, his call for calm was perfunctory.

But even without all of that, that split screen image you could practically do that every day with some sector of life in this country in chaos and say that’s gonna haunt Obama.  I mean, why isn’t Fast and Furious gonna haunt him?  Why isn’t Benghazi?  I mean, those things are not gonna haunt.  Why isn’t using the IRS against the Tea Party, why is that not gonna haunt him?  Why is violating the Constitution not gonna haunt Obama?  None of this is gonna haunt Obama because it’s all working, from his standpoint.  All of these are elements of his “success” story in terms of his ultimate agenda of transforming the country.


RUSH:  Look, let me clarify something.  When I say, “There’s no conspiracy,” of course there is conspiracy between all of the groups that were organizing to protest in Ferguson and all over the country.  Of course that was a conspiracy.  What I’m trying to say was that there was not a conspiracy between all of this and the timing of the grand jury announcement and what the grand jury announcement was gonna be.  I’m trying to make a really, really fine point here and I’m not doing it. I haven’t gotten there yet.

I’m talking about fake versus real, artificial versus substance — and a lot of this is not real.  Politics. People think politics is about the way things are, and it isn’t.  Politics is about the way things appear.  And that’s one of the things that bothers me the most.  What’s happening in our… Look at this Darren Wilson interview, the cop.  Do you realize that to whatever group of people we’re talking about on the other side, it doesn’t matter a hill of beans what the facts are? The truth and what is real doesn’t matter.

There’s no way you can convince them. There’s no way you can convince them to care about the truth and what is real.  It doesn’t matter.  It’s a pointless effort.  And to me — the mayor of Realville and somebody consumed and obsessed by the idea of getting truth out and having people understand it and act on it and believe it and behave according to it — it’s really frustrating to know that, to a large segment of this country, none of that matters.  They don’t care what the truth is.

The agenda is all it is.  The appearance, the fake, whatever it takes in order to advance the agenda.

I’m telling you, it’s destructive.  Liberalism is a poison that is rotting this country, every element of it where it is dominant or growing.


RUSH:  Let me try this another way.  I’m sitting down, Kathryn and I, in front of the TV on whatever the night the grand jury announcement happened. This is Wednesday, so it must have been Monday. The days run together in a short week, I get confused.  Whatever night it was.  And we turned on Fox at nine o’clock, and we’re expecting the announcement at nine o’clock, and by 9:20 there’s no announcement. No, we tuned in at eight o’clock thinking the announcement was — we were off by an hour.

Anyway, the announcement finally came, and I looked at Kathryn, I said, “Listen to all these people on TV.  They’re just vamping and filling time and they’re just trying to flap their gums until the real news is made.”  The whole thing, to me, made me feel like I was watching a scripted event.  Now, one of the allures supposedly of reality TV is that it’s real, that there isn’t a script.  That’s why audiences really like it, like The Real Housewives of whatever, or whatever reality TV show. But let me tell you, there is no such thing as improvisation or reality TV.  It’s all scripted.

The only difference in reality TV and other TV is that the writers in reality TV are not members of unions, and that’s it.  The whole thing feels like a scripted event that I know in advance the outcome.  And, therefore, it isn’t news.  And none of it was spontaneous.  We tuned in all knowing what was gonna happen.  We tuned in expecting what was going to happen.  There was not any thought given by anybody to stopping it.  And what happened?  Sheer barbarism.  People’s businesses were destroyed.  That’s real.  Real live bullets were fired at people.  Real live Molotov cocktails were used.

A woman who saved up everything because her hobby, her passion in life is baking cakes, and she’s black, and she has a place in I think a little strip mall or some street in Ferguson near where all this happened.  It was totally destroyed.  She had nothing to do with any of this.  She was in tears the next day.  From her own neighborhood, people from her own neighborhood and who knows where else, showed up and destroyed her little cake shop.

Now, there’s a great campaign on to refund and donate to her to rebuild, and she’s collected, I think before the program started, over 70 grand and she’s happy as she can be, and thank God for that.  But everybody knew this was gonna happen, maybe not that specific thing, but everybody knew it, the governor knew it.  Where was the National Guard?  The governor knew it. Every law enforcement official knew what was gonna happen. There was no effort to stop it.  The only thing that we speculated about was how bad was this gonna be, how big was it gonna be, and we all tuned in to see that.

We all tuned in to see how bad the destruction, how big the flames, how chaotic.  There wasn’t an effort made to stop it.  We were witnesses to barbarism, scripted barbarism that was designed to tear apart the fabric of an American community, and we sat and watched.  And we had pre-advance knowledge.  They could have put the listings in TV Guide.  Your DVR could have scheduled this because that’s how much in advance we knew it was gonna happen.  Just like any other scheduled television show, which is what this was, except it’s not.

Lives were at risk.  People’s businesses were destroyed. Barbarism was on display.  All-out assaults on the American culture and civilization were taking place.  And there was no effort to stop it.  None, nowhere.  The governor of Missouri, in preparing the state, made it look like it was London in World War II on the eve of the German blitz.  That’s the degree to which he made preparations.

And then for some reason the National Guard was not deployed, and we were told that, well, maybe Obama called on the governor, fellow Democrats, “Keep the Guard out of this. I don’t want militarized pictures during my Regime.  I want to do what I want to do without anybody figuring it out with the pictures, so keep the Guard out of there.”  Who knows.  But we’re left to speculate.

But there wasn’t any effort to stop it.  And then the next day we got questions on television, which should be absurd, but instead they were legitimate:  “Did authorities let Ferguson burn?”  It was a legitimate question, sadly.  “Did authorities let Ferguson burn?”  Why?  There was no effort to stop it.  When the Rodney King riots, the Watts riots of the sixties, when those things started, there were efforts to stop them.  I mean, they played out to a certain point, and I don’t know if you could call ’em great TV or what have you, and they were structured and planned and so forth.  Again, nothing is brand-new in 2014.  Everything has a precedent.  But this is destructive in ways way beyond the riot itself.

This is destructive in ways way beyond the damage to Ferguson, Missouri.  This is destructive because there are a lot of casualties here.  Truth, reality, fact, all casualties.  None of that mattered.  None of it matters today to a significant portion of the population, which is hell-bent on tearing down the modern-day order.  And nobody appears to be willing or knowledgeable enough or whatever to stop it.  Instead, it becomes a television show, a scripted television show.  There was not even a cliffhanger.  We knew who shot J.R. before watching the episode.

The whole thing, I don’t know, folks, it just seems we’re being manipulated in ways that we haven’t been before.  We are really being manipulated by a media complex, in its association with the American left and the Democrat Party, and I think I’m instinctively reacting and objecting to and pushing back against that manipulation and saying, “I’m not gonna fall for it.  You’re not gonna get me.  I am not gonna be manipulated by it.  I’m not gonna get emotionally caught up in this because I know that what I’m seeing on TV is not what this is really all about.”

And that’s the bottom line.  None of this is really, when you get down to brass tacks, you strip all this away, this is not about the grand jury. It’s not about Darren Wilson. It’s not even about the Gentle Giant.  It’s about entirely different things that they don’t show you, that you don’t see.  And it’s the ease with which people are being manipulated and the ease with which people are falling for it, to me, is a problem, and it’s very troublesome.  I look all of this, and I think I understand the purpose of it.  I don’t “think” I know; I know what the ultimate objective to all this is.  You know what it is?

At the end of all this, the real objective is to make you think that it’s ludicrous and ridiculous to oppose any of this or speak out against it ’cause you can’t stop it.  The grievances are too real.  The country is too unjust. The country is illegitimate and immoral, and it’s taken 250 years for this to come to light.  But you’d better learn to accept that, and you’d better learn to accept that if you’ve been on the wrong side, i.e., in the majority in this country since it was founded, your day is coming.  That’s what this is about.  And all of these events are just steps taken in that direction.

I mean, listen to Obama and his speech in Chicago.  Here’s the Breitbart story: “Obama Lectures America About the Justified Anger Towards Law Enforcement in Minority Communities — Tuesday at Copernicus Community Center in Chicago, IL, President Barack Obama addressed the riots and protests going on throughout the country in reaction to the grand jury announcement that Ferguson police officer,” blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.  And that’s just BS.  What he did was he went before a black audience, and this is what he said.  “A grand jury made a decision yesterday that upset a lot of people. And as I said last night, the frustrations that we have seen, are not just about a particular incident.” So, you see, it’s not just about that.

And, by the way, the grand jury decision upset a lot of people, they’re justified being upset. Not because this decision might have been wrong, but because of all the previous ones where people got screwed.  You have to understand. We have to step back and understand what happened, those businesses being destroyed, that barbarism, we had better understand that it is legitimate, because a lot of people were upset.  Maybe this decision, the grand jury got it right, but that doesn’t erase all the wrongs that happened before it which still breed all kinds of frustration.

“As I said last night, the frustrations that we have seen, are not just about a particular incident.” See, it’s about a lot of stuff that came before this. “They have deep roots in many communities of color,” the frustrations do, “who have a sense that our laws are not always being enforced uniformly or fairly.” In other words, even though the facts of the Brown case do not support any claims of an unjust shooting, the anger over all the previous injustices is enough to legitimize the anger this week in Ferguson.

And that’s the problem, folks.  There’s no reason for feeling screwed.  There’s no reason, the facts of this case do not support any claims that the shooting was unjust. “Okay, fine.  Well, what about last year?  What about Trayvon Martin?  What about OJ?” And on and on and on. What about Emmett Till?  And it never ends.  So this incident is used to justify and permit all of this barbarism, not based on what happened this week, but all of the years prior, about which nothing can be done now, see.  The events in the years prior, they’re over and done with, and they have deep roots in many communities of color, who have a sense that our laws are not always being endorsed uniformly or fairly. Even though they might in this case, that doesn’t erase what happened in years past.

Like the Trayvon Martin case, in fact, which ended up not being supported by the facts either.  But that doesn’t matter.  The facts of the Trayvon case have been forgotten just as the facts here will be forgotten.  The news media’s early lies will be remembered.  The Duke lacrosse case is a case is reverse.  If anybody ought to be mad about anything and an injustice and so forth, look at that case.  But were there riots?  Was there barbarism? Was there any kinds of acts of destruction that took place over that injustice?

No, sir, no, ma’am, there were not.  And that was a gross miscarriage of justice.  But, you see, that was also justified because, well, they’re white and they played lacrosse?  Come on.  That means they’re rich.  Come on, even if these guys didn’t do it, you know they wanted to. Even if these guys didn’t, you know it’s happened before.  So these guys pay the price, except they didn’t.

So all of this adds up to this country has a lot to account for, it has a lot of prices to pay, it has a lot of forgiveness, it has a lot to make up for, and you better just get used to it.  And they’re getting so accustomed to it now they’re writing a script of all these events in advance. We know what’s gonna happen. Nobody tries to stop it because everybody, “Yeah, you know, we do kind of suck. Yeah, we were kind of bad back then.  Yeah, I guess we do kind of justify this. We deserve this.”


RUSH: I finally want to get to the point I’m trying to make here about how we’re being manipulated, set up, and staged.  We’re watching scripted events portrayed to us as real and really what I think I’m getting at, I know it will never happen, but if you want to reduce some of the incidents of this stuff, get the cameras out of there. Get the cameras out of there.  Get the media out of there.  In a real protest, in a real riot, the media doesn’t know it’s gonna happen before it starts. They show up afterwards.

Everything that happens is real.  But when you have a riot that everybody knows is coming and you’ve got the cameras and you’ve got the journalists and you’ve got blithering idiots like Don Lemon — do you realize what he did yesterday?  He inadvertently tear gassed himself. Putting on his mask he ended up tear gassing himself.  There’s a piece in the New York Daily News — I hope CNN doesn’t get rid of him because we love Don Lemon. We need him here.  But there’s a really, really critical piece of Don Lemon, a media review in the New York Daily News today, about how out to lunch he is.  They even mention he’s the guy that asked the transportation official could a black hole have swallowed up the Malaysian airliner.

But, at any rate, you get the cameras out of there, you get the script writers out of there, get the media out of there, who knows what would have happened; that’s the point.  But we knew it’s gonna happen, cameras show up, and it just makes what happens after, I’m sorry, unreal.  Even though it was real, this is where it becomes a real challenge to communicate what I’m really talking about here, but if the cameras are not there — now, in this case it probably would have worked the other way. If the cameras weren’t there, the media not being there, the protestors would have torched even more to get ’em to show up.  I understand that.

But when you’ve got an event that everybody knows is gonna happen, you take the cameras out there, it’s not real, folks, when it’s all done for the cameras.  And that’s the point, all this is done for the media. Michael Brown was not shot because he’s black. Trayvon Martin did not die because he’s black.  Now, you can’t convince anybody else of this on the other side.  If they accept that, then everything they’re doing is illegitimate, and they’re not going to agree with that point.

So the whole thing is unreal.  The whole thing is not based on reality.  Everything is a set up.  We’re being manipulated to participate in it and we’re told that what we’re watching is real, but you get the cameras out of there, you get the media out of there and stop all the prepub, same thing might have happened, but I’m telling you it would have felt different, it would have had a whole different set of consequences to it.


RUSH:  Glenn Reynolds runs a website called Instapundit. He’s a law professor at the University of Tennessee and has a theory on why Ferguson happened post-election.  You can understand Trayvon Martin, you can understand all these other things about black turnout, but he thinks that Ferguson, Missouri, has nothing to do with any of that.

“It’s not about swing voters. It’s about the base. And it’s not about the Democratic Party’s base, but about certain leaders’ base within the Democratic Party. This may be best understood as an intra-party struggle. Obama is the champion of the urban-black wing of the party, and because of him that wing has been on top. But his star is fading, black voters are beginning to realize that they haven’t benefited economically, and the next Dem nominee — whether it’s Hillary Clinton, Jim Webb, or Elizabeth Warren — will be from the white gentry-liberal wing of the Democratic Party.”

So he’s talking about the different factions within the Democrat Party.  Obama runs the urban black wing, which would be the Congressional Black Caucus and people that are concerned with the inner city, and that Hillary or Elizabeth Warren, Jim Webb, they’re from the white gentry liberal wing of the Democrat Party.

“The riots, the marches, the traffic-blocking are a way of telling them –” the Hillarys, the Elizabeth Warrens, and the Jim Webbs “– that the Sharpton,” and Jackson, “wing is still a force to be reckoned with,” and that this is all about the Sharpton wing of the Democrat Party demonstrating its power and strength to the Hillary Clintons, the Elizabeth Warrens, as a means of “bargaining power between now and 2016.”

And Reynolds says “that’s the only way this — not at all spontaneous — street theater makes sense.” And folks, this was scripted!  Everybody knew it was coming.  Nobody made an effort to stop it.  It was portrayed as spontaneous, but it wasn’t.  And there’s politics at the end of the rope on it anyway, so there you go.




Liberals Try to Cover Up for Obamacare Architect

Transcript from the Rush Limbaugh Show, November 11, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site:

RUSH: This is incredible.  The liberals at the University of Pennsylvania tried to take down the video of Jonathan Gruber saying they had to dumb down the presentation of Obamacare because of the stupidity of the American voter.  They thought they could take the video down and make the issue go away.

You remember Jonathan Gruber. By the way, he’s the architect of Obamacare, and I should say that he’s one of the primary architects of Romneycare as well.  It was in October of last year at the University of Pennsylvania’s 24th Annual Health Economics Conference, and he said that it was crucial that the American people never realize what was really in Obamacare because the stupidity of the American voter would have otherwise killed the law.

In other words, he admitted — and he got applause, he was talking to fellow economists — he admitted they had to lie.  They had to mask and cover the transparency.  They had to lie about what was in it, such as you get to keep your doctor, you get to keep your plan, your premium will come down $2,500.  There are no tax increases.  It’s not gonna cost any more than the Iraq war.  Every lie they told was purposeful because they thought the American public was so stupid they wouldn’t understand the nuance and the liberal definition of need for this law, and that if they had been honest about it, people would never have supported it.

That covers pretty much everything in their agenda, by the way.  If they’re ever honest about their real agenda, they’d never get elected to anything outside of New York, San Francisco and Hollywood.  And they wouldn’t, folks.  And maybe Chicago.  They would not.  It’s not just Obamacare they lie about.  It’s not just Obamacare they think you are too stupid to understand.

So, anyway, the University of Pennsylvania, after the uproar of this getting out, tried to pull it down.  They pulled the video of the event which took place in October of 2013.  And for a time yesterday, if you went to the website at the University of Pennsylvania trying to see the video, you got a message that said: “This video has been removed by the user.  Sorry about that.”  And so that begot a Twitter and Facebook storm.

“Why would Penn pull down a public video that has political implications?”  Was one of the questions.  Because they’re a bunch of liberals is why, and because their truth was exposed.  It was major.  They tried to pull it down.

Anyway, they ended up having to put it back up because they began to look like fools, thinking that they could put back in the bottle the genie that had already been released.  You can’t do that.  So they put it back up.  But it was funny to watch ’em scramble around, folks, like turning on the lights and a bunch of rats in the barn going nuts at being exposed and discovered.  They tried to turn the lights back off and it didn’t work.

Speaking of Obamacare, the Washington Post is, on its best day, hapless.  The Washington Post is an absolute sorry excuse for what it used to be.  But even with that, they continue to set new standards for incompetence and bias and just being plain wrong.  There’s a story by Jose DelReal: “Obamacare Consultant Under Fire for ‘Stupidity of the American Voter’ Comment.” Now, this reporter is obviously just a Democrat with a press pass, which is what most of them at the New York Times and the Washington Post are.  They’re Democrats disguised as journalists. Give them a little press pass, let ’em go there, pretend to be reporters and so forth.

He sells whatever is left of his journalistic soul in this piece.  Let me give you just one pull quote from it, as they’re still trying to put the genie back in the bottle.  Now, remember, this is for their liberal readers, Washington Post, liberal reader base, New York Times, same thing.  They’re trying to calm their reader base. This is not a big deal, don’t worry. Gruber didn’t screw it up for everybody. It’s okay, it’s okay, trying to calm everybody down.

Listen to this quote from the story:  “Gruber’s remarks have been greeted by the law’s critics as an admission of intentionally deceiving the American public about the law in 2010. But given the context of the remarks, Gruber seems to be speaking specifically about how and why the law’s funding mechanisms were framed when the law was being written.”

This guy thinks he’s helping Gruber by saying that, and he is hammering another nail in the coffin.  Jose, that is exactly the point!  People were deceived about the funding mechanism.  That was the key, key, key to getting it passed. How the thing was gonna be paid for was the key to it getting passed.  Oh, and the lie to Bart Stupak about it not funding abortions.

But the way this thing was being funded, the way it was gonna be paid for, the way it wasn’t gonna cost anybody anything, the way it was gonna allow people to keep their doctors and keep their plans and lower their premiums and their deductibles? That was key to this thing getting passed, and he writes (summarized), “Well, if you read the context, if you’re given the context of Professor Gruber’s remarks…

“He seems to be speaking specifically about how and why the law’s funding mechanisms were framed,” lied about.  This guy’s trying to get this guy out of a jam, and he digs a deeper hole!  But remember, he’s dealing with his own liberal-Democrat reader base, and they are looking for holes to be dragged out of.  So they’ll take anything that they can get.  “Economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the Regime’s consultants on the…”

He was not a consultant.  He was the architect, Jose.  He “is under attack from conservatives for comments he made last year in which he seemingly said,” and then he quotes (laughing), “the stupidity of the American voter.”  Seemingly?  Seemingly said?  He didn’t “seemingly” say it.  He stated unambiguously that they had to lie about this thing because of “the stupidity of the American people.”

Actually if you examine that, I think really what he means is, “We had to lie because of the intelligence of the American people.  We had to lie to them, otherwise they would have seen what we intended to do.”  That means they’re pretty smart, when you get right down to it, and that’s what bothers them.  Now, that’s not to say that Gruber and his ilk on the left and in the Democrat Party do not consider you and American voters to be a bunch of stiffs and stupid.

It doesn’t mean they don’t still hold you in contempt.

But what he’s really saying is, “We had to lie. We had to lie, because they’re too stupid… No, they’re too smart, actually.  They would see what really is intended here unless we lie.”  So you relied on what you thought was their stupid gullibility to believe your lie, is what you were relying on. And it’s 2010, so there’s still some residual messianic attitudes about Obama in 2010.  So that’s what they were relying on.

Anyway, it’s CYA time at the Washington Post.  But it’s not over for the bad news about Obamacare.  From the Washington Times: “Obamacare May Not Have Enough Enrollees to Stay Solvent — Fewer than 10 million projected; 13 million needed to stay solvent. The [Regime] on Monday said fewer than 10 million Americans will enroll in Obamacare’s health exchanges this go-around, well short of the 13 million target congressional scorekeepers deemed critical to its economics…”

Meaning: They’ve gotta have 13 million people paying premiums through the nose in order to fund this thing.  It suggests “another rocky rollout in the law’s second year of full operation,” and it’s next week (chuckling) when the mandate hits.  It’s next week when the next wave of unforeseen expenses hit everybody.

“Policy advisers at the Health & Human Services Department estimated that 9 million to 9.9 million people would enroll through the exchanges — or only a slight increase over the 8 million that the [Regime] says were active at the end of the first enrollment period this April. The Congressional Budget Office, which is the government’s official scorekeeper, had predicted the law would need 13 million customers on the exchanges. …

“‘Under the president’s health care law, Americans have experienced broken exchanges, canceled coverage, higher premiums and unaffordable deductibles,’ said Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California Republican and chairman of the House oversight committee… ‘Despite the administration’s habit of moving the goal posts, the fact is Obamacare is simply not delivering the results Americans were originally promised by the president.'”

Neither is anything else, and this the American people know, which explains the election results this past Tuesday.  “The number of enrollees is key, because if too few take part in the exchanges, the pool of customers is too small, and it could skew the economics of Obamacare, forcing insurers to raise premiums and pushing even more people to forgo coverage, choosing to pay the tax penalty instead,” the FINE.

Stop and think of something here.  We have Obamacare.  It was gonna save the day. It was gonna insure all the uninsured. It was gonna make sure that the previous existing condition people were covered. It was gonna be magic, right?  Now, what are we talking about here?  They’re hoping to get 13 million people?

How many people are in this country, 250 million adults, 220?  What is it?  I don’t care, 10 million, 13 million. It’s chump change.  It’s nothing. They got 8.8 million the first go round?  We’re nowhere near mass adoption of this. You know, there’s a new group of people elected in the House of Representatives that just been handed another golden opportunity here.


RUSH:  Here’s the truth of the matter, folks.  If the American people were stupid, the Democrats would still run the Senate and maybe even the House of Representatives. If the American people were stupid.  This, by the way, really grates on the Democrats, believe me, ’cause if the American people were stupid — meaning falling for all the lies — the Republicans wouldn’t have been elected.

It is elitism that is ignorant because it’s arrogant and conceited, and Jonathan Gruber is an elitist and therefore has no idea what life is really like for all the people he’s out there writing legislation for.  All he knows is that they’re stupid, and they can’t deal with the truth.  They don’t know what’s best for ’em. So in order to give them what’s best for them (Obamacare), we have to lie to them.

The American people are just a bunch of idiots.

So lies got Barack Obama elected, twice.  Corrupt politics got Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote.  But this brilliant economist, Jonathan Gruber, wasn’t smart enough to make Obamacare popular.  Imagine that!  If the American people were so stupid, they could have been talked into how wonderfully great this legislation is and they’d been out there signing up.

They’d be going nuts, throwing parties, talking about how they’ve all got free health care, but the American people are not that stupid and didn’t fall for this.  Obamacare has never enjoyed majority public support.  You really can’t outsmart free markets for very long.  Reality eventually sets in and the lies end up uncovered.  Markets work. Be they intellectual markets or economic markets, they work.

But you know what’s really tied up in all this?  The people of this country trusted Barack Obama, and in 2010 they still did.  They thought they had created a moment in world history: Electing the first African-American president in a country that had featured slavery in its distant past.  They trusted Obama.  He was gonna fix everything.  He was a new kind of man, a new kind of politician.

But not to me.

Folks, what’s happened here is exactly why we have to go after the credibility these Democrats — this includes Hillary — before they are elected and it demonstrates itself.

We have to go after their credibility.

We have to just because we know we’re right!

We can’t afford to elect ’em anymore.


RUSH: So here comes Dana Milbank at the fledgling Washington Post, same thing’s happening to them: “Why Obamacare Risks Falling into a ‘Death Spiral’ — So it turns out there is an Obamacare death panel after all.”  See, there is.  There are death panels, but this guy continues to deny the truth.  You’re not smart enough to deal with the reality of what a death panel really is.  Sarah Palin came along and blew the whole thing by correctly naming the advisory board that determines who gets treatment and who doesn’t.  That’s a death panel.  That was one of those truths that the Obamacare architects could not allow out there.  So they had to attack her, destroy her, again, and anybody else that picked up the mantra.

So on the left they continue living in their fantasy world, that Obamacare is not what it is.  And what they don’t understand is the whole country is away ahead of ’em.  This stupid bunch of Americans are way ahead of the Drive-By Media, which is caught twisting and turning in the past trying to save an already ruined presidency.  Well, ruined in the popular way presidencies are judged, presidential approval, blah, blah, blah.  In terms of actual accomplishments that are attached to Obama’s real goal, it’s a very successful administration, transforming the country.  But I don’t want to get too intricate for this purpose here.

Dana Milbank is worried about the Supreme Court.  That’s the death panel for Obamacare.  Oh, yeah.  “It has nine members and it operates out of a marble building directly across the street from the Capitol. When the Supreme Court on Friday announced that it would take up another challenge to the Affordable Care Act in March, it delivered the threat of two mortal blows to the signature achievement of the Obama presidency. First, it raised the possibility that the justices, who narrowly spared the law in 2012, will in June come out with a new ruling that would dismantle the law on different grounds.”

originalYou know what a real threat or fear that the left has about this?  They know that Obamacare is unconstitutional.  They’ve known it since it was written.  Gruber lets the cat out of the bag by saying we had to lie and we had to cover the transparency because of the stupidity of the American people.  In other words, we had to lie in order to get this thing passed, because if people knew what it really was, it wouldn’t stand the light of day, it wouldn’t stand a chance.

The unconstitutionality is the Commerce Clause and the fact that the federal government can’t force to you buy anything.  They can’t force you to buy anything.  So that begot the argument, is it a mandate, is it a tax?  The federal government can tax.  But, no, it’s not a tax.  It’s a fine.  If you don’t buy insurance, we’re gonna fine you.  They can’t!  The Fourth Amendment.  They can’t.  However — and this is the fear the left has — they know that the Supreme Court just didn’t want to go there.  I mean, it was the first black president.  It was a major signature legislation and it was for health care for the poor, and, okay, we’ll look the other way.

So John Roberts did some finagling and found a way to make this thing sound constitutional.  But the left knows that a whole bunch of chicanery took place.  They know they’re hanging by a thread.  They know they’re on thin ice here, and they know that a lot of justices — well, they don’t know, but I suspect they fear a lot of justices have been chomping at the bit for a second go round at this thing, ’cause it isn’t constitutional, folks.  If we were in a totally objective, nonpartisan, sane world, this law would have been struck down inside of three hours of it arriving at the Supreme Court.

The federal government simply cannot demand that we buy things.  It’s right there in the Commerce Clause in the Fourth Amendment.  They cannot do it.  Ways were achieved to mask what is really happening by calling these things fines if you don’t buy it, blah, blah.  So they know they’re hanging by a thread, and they know they may be even on borrowed time.  And now the court, the Supreme Court, decided to hear the case again, this time over subsidies.  This is an area that in an objective, black and white, sane world, the Regime doesn’t have a prayer.

The point of this is real simple.  The only subsidies for Obamacare are available at state exchanges.  Well, as you recall, most states did not set one up, and therefore the people in those states, according to the law, had no way of getting subsidized Obamacare.  And, believe me, subsidized is the only way the vast majority of Americans can afford it, because it’s so damned expensive.  Subsidies meaning taxpayers pay a greater portion of your policy than you do.  So when this eventuated, when the states, Republican governors in these states refused to set up exchanges, that left a whole lot of people out of the subsidies, and that just wasn’t — oh, we can’t allow that politically.  I mean, that would be political disaster for Obama.

He’s out there promising everything’s gonna get cheaper. He’s promising the uninsured are gonna get insured. He’s promising don’t worry about what it costs, gonna be subsidized, except most people don’t live in a state with an exchange.  Oh, no.  So the federal government violated its own law and set up its own exchanges, which, whoever wrote this law, Gruber, stupidly left in that the federal government could not set up its own exchanges.  They had to be set up in the states.

By the way, there was a purpose for that.

That was to shift as much of the cost off to the states as they could to keep the overall final number under that precious $3 trillion figure.  So Obamacare was written in a way to dump as much cost off to the states as possible, and that’s when the governors said, “Unh-uh! We’re not just gonna sit here and accept these new costs.  We can’t print money like you can.”

So they didn’t set up the exchanges.

It’s the unintended consequences. The liberals think the people are just a bunch of sheep and whatever legislation comes down they’re gonna abide by it and not find ways around it.  Well, when they figured out that a whole bunch of people were not gonna be qualified for subsidies, the federal government violated Obamacare and created their own exchanges…

That’s what the Supreme Court’s gonna hear.  The Supreme Court’s essentially gonna hear: Are those subsidies that are being provided by the federal government constitutional? Are they part of the law, or has this whole thing been turned upside down?  As Milbank writes about it, “But even if the justices make no such ruling,” meaning, striking it down, “the very act of taking up the challenge to the law will itself undermine the law.”

So Milbank is in fatalistic, defeatist mode because all the court had to do was take the case and that undermines it.  If they’d have just flat-out rejected it, fine and dandy.  But the Supreme Court has taken the case.  They’re gonna hear it; they’re gonna have an opinion.  It doesn’t matter what the opinion is. The very fact they’re taking the case undermines it.  Why?  Because Milbank and these people know that this thing is a crock.

Gruber and everybody lied about it. They created a bunch of falsehoods in it.  It’s unsupportable economically.  The American people don’t want it! But that doesn’t matter to them.  They want it.  They want you subjected to it, subordinated to it — and the very idea that the court’s gonna look at it again is just gonna create (in the minds of all these stupid Americans) the idea that something’s wrong with the law, and we can’t have that.

“We’ve gotta get people finally accepting this and ignoring this and moving on to other things! The more attention on Obamacare, the greater the opportunity everybody’s gonna find out the fraud that is in it.”  That’s why they’re quaking today. Just the fact that the case is being accepted, taken up by the court, has got them scared to death.  And it has them scared because they know what a house of cards this thing is, folks.

Read more at:



It’s Time to Understand Barack Obama

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT of Rush Limbaugh, November 07, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site:

RUSH: This is classic. And again, not a criticism. It’s an illustration here of communication. Peggy Noonan’s piece in the Wall Street Journal is very revealing, and this one sentence — you know, Peggy, she’s such a nice woman. She really hates all the fighting, and she doesn’t like all the disagreeing, and she really wishes that people would get along. She’s writing here about Obama.

“It is confounding — not surprising but stunning, unhelpful and ill-judged — that the president is instead going for antagonism, combat and fruitless friction.” What she is reacting to here is Obama not understanding that he got skunked in this election. She doesn’t understand why Obama is going to continue to antagonize, why he wants to stay combative, and why he wants to cause this fruitless friction. She’s wondering why can’t Obama understand that he lost, take the meaning that he lost and start working with the Republicans to make a wonderful, beautiful Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood country.

Now, I think Peggy would be one of those who probably disagreed profoundly when I said “I hope he fails,” and to this day she may not even know why I said it. Barack Obama was raised by a toxic blend of Marxists like Frank Marshall Davis, communists like Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and anti-Americans, and among his friends were anti-Israeli militants, anti-Semites, racists and other assorted bigots. These are the people he was influenced by. This is how he was raised. He was raised with a chip on his shoulder about this country.

kingobamafingerconstitution-300x204He’s an angry man. He’s not cool. He’s not calm. He’s not collected. He’s a narcissist. He’s a community organizer, and what do they do? They agitate. By definition, that’s all they do. He’s not gonna slink away. He’s not gonna admit defeat. Did you hear what he said in the press conference? “I’m gonna listen to the two-thirds that didn’t vote.” Hey, Mr. President, the two-thirds that didn’t vote are the ones that walked out on you in all of your campaign appearances the last two weeks before the election. (imitating Obama) “I don’t care. I’m gonna focus on the two-thirds that didn’t vote. Those people are so disenfranchised, so upset, that’s what I’m gonna do.”

So you can sit around and hope that Obama would realize he lost and work to come up with a nice country. That’s not who he is. The point of my frustration is how, six years in, can people not know who Obama is now? But if you’re one who doesn’t know who he is, you’re not gonna understand when somebody says, “The mandate of this election is to stop Obama.”

“That’s needlessly harsh. That’s unnecessarily frictious. Why, we need to compromise, to work together and make the system work.” He’s not interested in that. He is the problem here. We’ve tried working with the guy. The Republicans have bent over backwards trying to show they can cooperate and be bipartisan. It’s one of the reasons they’ve gotten themselves into such trouble over the years.

Cloward Pevin with explanationSo just to be clear, the mandate of the election, the American people, the exit poll data now proves it: stop Obama, stop Obamaism, stop the implementation of policies, for example, that are doing great harm to the free enterprise economy. Stop Obamacare and repeal it. Stop this unnecessary wild spending. Stop illegal immigration. It’s all there. Just enforce the law. Stop Obama. That does not mean do nothing. It can’t mean do nothing, nor did I ever say it means do nothing, nor did I ever say ignore Obama. I’m simply translating for people inside the Beltway what the election results meant. I’m translating for the left so that they know what it meant. They can’t afford for this to take hold again.

Stop Obama and then pepper him with bill after bill after bill that we know he’s gonna veto, but portray hip as the obstructionist, portray him as the guy saying “no.” Portray him as the guy governing against the will of the people because every bill you send up there is accompanied by a poll showing it’s majority support for the American people. Now, I don’t know how you get to “ignore Obama” from that. I don’t know how you get to “that means do nothing,” none of which I said.

But in spite of all this, we still have progress because now we have people on record saying, “Yep, that’s right, we’ve got to stop Obama,” instead of we’ve gotta compromise with him. Remember, that was the context in which I first offered my take on what the election meant. We had Republicans out saying we gotta compromise. The consultants, the media, we gotta work together, we gotta get along, we gotta fix the system.

No, no, no, no. The Republicans were not sent there to compromise. They were not sent there to govern with Obama. They were not sent there to fix anything. They were sent there to stop the things that are transforming and, in some cases, destroying the country.


RUSH: Now, by the way, let me say I realize in my recent illustration of a sentence Peggy Noonan used in her latest column… I said Obama’s raised by “a toxic blend,” I called it, of Marxists, communists, and various anti-Americans to one degree or another. It’s undeniable. Reverend Wright, Frank Marshall Davis, Muala Kahir, whatever the guy the LA Times has the tape they won’t release of some.obama- Marxist tyrant

It’s one of Obama’s buddies bashing Israel at some fundraiser in LA. Bill Ayers? We know how Obama was raised. We know that he wants to transform the country. None of this is a mystery. But the fact that people don’t accept it, that’s what fascinates me. The fact that after six years there are people that don’t want to admit it or don’t see it, it just fascinates me.

But I don’t want anybody to tell me that I’m insulting Obama, because I’m not. These are not insults. These are descriptors. I’m describing him to you. And. And I don’t think it’s confounding. Obama doesn’t confound me and he doesn’t stun me, and the fact that he wants friction and chaos is documented. Why would that change now? These next two years are gonna be potentially worse than anybody is contemplating.

You don’t personally insult a narcissist like the country just did in this election and get away with it. I mean, there’s gonna be, “Oh, yeah? Oh, yeah? You think you’ve shown me? Well, let me show you. You don’t like amnesty? Try 20 million!” I mean, who knows what can happen here? But I’m not making this up stuff up and I’m not being incendiary. I’m being descriptive. It’s who the guy is.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

It’s why the country voted the way they did on Tuesday!

The sooner people figure it out… I can’t fathom not understanding it six years in, but clearly people still don’t get it or don’t want to admit it. But it’s time to get with the program and understand exactly what we’re dealing with here, and it’s unique. It’s not the standard, “He’s just the latest Democrat president. The Republicans are in opposition.” This is far more involved than just that.DO NOT JACKASS

cause of deathWe’ve got the Democrat Party has become radicalized. They’re not just the usual bunch of corrupt thieves and thugs that they’ve always been. There is a radical, radical, liberal element in the Democrat Party which doesn’t need to win elections in order to implement what they believe throughout the strata of this country. That’s the purpose of community organizations like ACORN.

They don’t need to win elections in order to corrupt the institutions they don’t like. Obama, he doesn’t need to win. Okay, so he lost the election. Big whoop! That isn’t gonna stop him from doing what he wants; it’s not gonna stop his fellow community organizers or his fellow liberals. I mean, they’ll take election victories, yeah, hubba hubba, but they do not get stymied when they lose them.

The traditional old hat — the typical union, corrupt-thug, Harry Reid/Pelosi wing of the Democrats– yeah. Now, they get upset when they lose, and there’s hell to pay when they lose. ‘Cause they do everything they do legislatively. Now, they work with the new liberal wing, the community organizer wing like Obama. They work with ’em. Occupy Wall Street.

But Occupy Wall Street and the militant environmentalist wacko movement and the pro-choice wackos, they are gonna continue to be organizing and causing friction and doing whatever the hell they can do to upset things, whether they win or lose. This is what I don’t think is understood, widely understood by a lot of otherwise really smart Republicans.




Democrats in Freefall

MId Term drawing

Posted on October 31, 2014 by Conservative Byte


KerrySpacesuitI’m getting very excited to see all the victories Tuesday night!
Check it out:

The New York Times has a story today about the absolute state of disarray the Regime is. And they even describe — are you ready for this? The New York Times quotes somebody describing the Secretary of State John Kerry as spinning and floating out of control like Sandra Bullock did in that astronaut character she played in the movie Gravity.

They really portray Kerry as not knowing what’s going on and just floating, wandering aimlessly from issue to issue in a genuine clueless state. The story is about how Obama may have to replace some of the people in the Regime because they’re so incompetent.

The AP today: “Dems Rush to Save Suddenly Vulnerable Incumbents — Desperate Democrats are rushing to save suddenly vulnerable House incumbents, even in states where President Barack Obama cruised to double-digit victories, amid fresh signs of Republican momentum less than a week before the midterm elections.

Suddenly? Suddenly vulnerable? There’s been no reason for any recent shifts in the polling. No, the Democrats and their media minions are now just having to admit to reality, see, because what they’ve done, basically, they’ve lied to us for so many months to boost fundraising and early voting. And now all of a sudden it looks like some Democrats are vulnerable, when in truth they’ve been vulnerable for the past two years. But to the media, oh, no, it’s sudden.

The Democrats suddenly have to worry about the three most liberal states in the union: New York, California, and Hawaii. And all of whom, by the way, just happen to have implemented various levels of quarantines on returning Ebola workers. But, regardless, “The once friendly terrain of New York, California, Obama’s native state of Hawaii and adopted state of Illinois all now pose stiff challenges to Democrats who are determined to limit their losses next Tuesday.”

Continue Reading on

 Article collective closing


Rush Limbaugh: TPNN’s Scottie Hughes ‘Called it Exactly Right’ on Hillary’s Immunity to Criticism


September 30, 2014 By

ZRushOn Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh, the voice that reaches millions of conservatives each and every day, piled praise on one of TPNN’s own, Scottie Nell Hughes.
4Hughes, the author the new book “Roar: The New Conservative Woman Speaks Out,” has been outspoken about her belief that the left’s elite and the mainstream media are working to set the stage for a Hillary presidency in 2016. In an interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, Hughes claimed,

“[T]hey’re going to take the playbook that they used in the 2008 and 2012 elections and they’re going to sit there and make this to be a very sexist, chauvinist society. Therefore, when you go in that voting booth, if you don’t sit there and push that button for Hillary Clinton, you’re a chauvinist as well.”

On Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh spoke out on his program and noted that Hughes’ assertion is spot-on. The radio giant recalled how he had long warned that the left would try and insulate Barack Obama from criticism by claiming that to criticize Obama is to give in to our racist ideology as a nation.
Hillary ClintonLimbaugh discussed how the same game is being played now with Hillary and praised Hughes and TPNN for sounding the alarm bell:

“‘First female president! No criticism permitted. Any criticism that’s offered is sexist and part of the War on Women.’ Then after the first woman serves, then the Democrats will nominate the first Hispanic and repeat the whole thing.  ‘First Hispanic president! No criticism permitted.  If you criticize, you’re a bigot.’… 

Last week, Scottie Hughes made an appearance on Fox News’ the O’Reilly Factor where she warned that the progressive mafia, in preparation for Hillary 2016, are starting to establish a narrative that asserts women are under attack and that the sexism danger must confronted.” Scottie is a commentator on Fox, by the way. Scottie Hughes a commentator, and Scottie Hughes out there saying sexism is gonna be the new black, and Hillary is the next protected victim.  

Now, congratulations to Scottie Hughes.  She’s called it exactly right, and that’s why I’m doing the piece.  This is a See, I Told You So, because other people are now beginning to see what’s in store.  ‘The narrative inevitably continues with any legitimate critique of Hillary, when she inevitably runs, is not legitimate because it’s sexist-based. This game was played before or as Mrs. Hughes eloquently put it, “This came right out of the election 2008 playbook.”’ 

So the Tea Party News Network is praising one of its own, but you have heard about this for the past two, maybe four years.  This was easily spotted.  And as I say, when they get around, if they do succeed nominating Hillary or electing her, then the next — after her whatever number of years, eight, 16, 24, whatever. The next nominee will be Hispanic, and just repeat the same thing.  This is how they’re planning on doing it.  

It’s the Tea Party News Network is running the story warning everybody, but you, my friends, See, I Told You So, on the cutting edge.” 

Democrats are living by the mantra of “it’s it not broken, don’t fix it.” The 2008 race card worked very well for them. By exploiting white guilt, liberals were able to craft an ironclad defense- “Those that criticize do so because of an inherent racism.”
Now, with just a minor tweak in the game plan, those that criticize Hillary Clinton can be labeled as a chauvinist.
Kudos to Hughes and Limbaugh for having the guts to call it like they see it.
Article collective closing

Conservatives vs. Sell-Out Politicians: Who Holds the Football?

charlie b
Posted on June 29, 2014

By Tom Walsh
Clash Daily Guest Contributor

The great cartoonist Charles M. Schulz created the iconic scenario of Lucy Van Pelt holding the football for the hapless and trusting Charlie Brown. As Charlie charges the football to kick it, Lucy snatches the ball away at the last second and Charlie falls down. This embarrassment is repeated regularly throughout the history of the Peanuts comic strip with subtle and not-so-subtle differences. (At one point Lucy even gives Charlie a “signed document” only to inform him when the inevitable outcome happens that it wasn’t notarized.)

This scenario has frequently been applied to politics with the Democrats holding the football and the Republicans trying to kick it. Trigger the VoteThis has happened with such regularity that I seriously question its validity. Nancy Pelosi doesn’t hold the football nor does Harry Reid. John Boehner has been holding the ball and the American people are continuingly falling down in the kick attempt.

What other understanding would account for the Republicans’ seeming lack of courage in the face of the opposition? Why do they continually desire to “cross the aisle” and compromise our freedoms away? Why, with a House majority, have the Republicans accomplished little or nothing? In fact they are generally quiet until election time rolls around. One has to seriously wonder if the Republican leadership is perfectly satisfied with being the minority party in Washington and for how long have they been satisfied with this position. Why not choose to get eighty percent of the perks with limited responsibility? Instead of leadership we get a constant litany of excuses: “We don’t have the votes”, “We only have the House, the Democrats hold the Senate and the White House”, “We’re considering taking the president to court”, blah, blah, blah. They all sound eerily similar to “it wasn’t notarized.” In the meantime the country continues to decline, Americans continue to hurt.

The average American is conservative. Does the Republican Party represent the average American? At best they have grudgingly

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

Click on image to see movie trailer and more

accepted our support but judging on how fast John Sununu and George H. W. Bush dismantled his revolution it would seem that Ronald Reagan was, to them, merely a speed bump. Face it; we are not the kind of guests welcomed at the elite Republican Women’s dinners but for decades we suffered through a seemingly endless parade of less-than-thrilling candidates. Oh sure they occasionally dangled one of ours as a vice-presidential candidate but the end result was the same: a declining America and a depressed citizenry.

Columnist Mark Steyn often cites the late Dr. Milton Friedman who said: “I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.”

Unless one could confine all elected representatives in a cage with dispensers for “wise choice” tasty kibble and “poor choice” electroshock this strikes me as incredibly (and uncharacteristically) naïve. The basic problem is the monstrosity that is our Federal government. It’s so large and overreaching that there can be no “right people” or “right choices”. It’s all wrong, horribly wrong.

When the American people were rudely awakened to the unrestrained power of Washington by the Kelo Decision of the Supreme Court they formed political congregations now collectively termed “The Tea Party”. When these organizations of ordinary citizens had the audacity to challenge the political elite and even win they are attacked. In the Mississippi primary run-off of Tuesday June 24th, 2014 the Washington elites poured money into a state campaign and used Democrat voters to push their candidate to a slim margin of victory. This total disregard for the rank and file of Republican voters should demonstrate conclusively that the Republican leadership does not represent the American people. The good news is that in so doing they have freed us to effect what Dr. Friedman desired.

On Rush Limbaugh’s radio show Wednesday June 25th, 2014 a caller from Mississippi who was disgusted with the interference by the Republican elites said he was going to vote for the Democrat candidate in November. Rush said he understood the caller’s desire to teach the Republicans a lesson. He further said: “I don’t think that they are teachable. I don’t. I don’t think the Republicans will learn. They’re defiant.” Exactly. So the answer is not to teach them a lesson, the answer is to expel them from school because they won’t learn and the way to do it is to do so selectively. Don’t vote out Thad Cochran to make him pay for it. There are so many questions as to his cognitive ability he probably won’t understand anyway. Send a clear message by voting out Mitch McConnell and John Boehner.

We must view the political process not as discrete battles but as a war. We must think and act strategically. With the primaries remaining we must support candidates that represent the American people not the Washington establishment. In November we should vote Republican except for Mitch McConnell and John Boehner. Even if it means voting for a liberal Democrat we must remove these two from power.

Afterwards we need to continue to primary those candidates who support the Washington status quo. In election after election we can weed out our representatives. In those areas where it is unlikely that a conservative Republican would win in the general election get involved in the Democrat Party, start making an impact there. “D” or “R” shouldn’t matter, only “USA” should. The Washington feeding trough is full of tasty slops and it’s time we pull their Statist snouts out of it.

Mr. Limbaugh continued to warn about the pitfalls of third-party candidates and is probably still correct at least for the time being. However if we continue to be active in the primaries, effect surgical removals of certain individuals, and become involved in both parties we would be well on our way to having a viable alternative party should we need one.

Who really holds the football? We do.

Image: Courtesy of:



Al Sharpton Demands…Voter ID?


Look at this face. Is there anything “REVERENT” there? Who is he ordained by? I want to stay as far away from that organization as possible.

Looks like ‘Reverend’ Al and the Obama sycophants at MSNBC are not too happy about Rush Limbaugh being named ‘Author of the Year’ by the Children’s Book Council. The frequently unintelligible host devoted a segment of his relatively obscure show to mock the win by the conservative talk radio king and call. Sharpton suggested a recount with the voting children being made to produce a photo ID to make sure there was no voter fraud.hater up

Joining him in this pathetic display of faux journalism was Abby Huntsman, daughter for mega-RINO Jon Huntsman, and Zerlina Maxwell. When asked if there was funny business with the voting and whether kids actually did vote for Limbaugh, Maxwell responded, “Absolutely, 100% kids did not vote for Rush Limbaugh over Divergent, the blockbuster movie and book.” I suppose Zerlina looked into a crystal ball, or perhaps she consulted MSNBC’s own Krystal Ball, to determine unequivocally that kids did not cast votes for “Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans.”  

Huntsman, the faux Republican on MSBNC’s staff, suggested that Rush bought half of the books himself so that he could qualify for the award.

hater up

Maybe ol’ Al is simply jealous that Rush not only writes award winning books, but can also speak eloquently. Based upon Al’s lack of command of the English language, I would imagine he has just as much difficulty with writing as he does speaking.

WATCH Al’s rant, but turn down your speakers a bit. Al’s typical speaking manner is yelling.


Complete Message


Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: