RUSH: This is an anniversary, and I want to take you back three years ago, February 17th, 2009.  Barack Obama had been in office barely a month, not even a month, was getting close, but less than four weeks, and he announced the stimulus, the Porkulus bill.  And just as we have been doing all week, going back to our archives, playing for you sound bites of me on this program predicting what was going to happen and having it illustrated that I was right the on money, I want to do it again.  I want to take you back to this program February 17th, 2009, the day of the Porkulus, I want you to listen.  You heard it back then, but this is to jog your memory as to what I said was in store for us because of this bill.

RUSH ARCHIVE:  I'm an eternal optimist, which is why it would be a mistake to say that the stimulus bill's gonna wipe us out.  What is more proper to say is that we now have elected a president and we have a Congress made up of extreme radical leftists, and they're gonna take aim at capitalism.  And it's gonna be an epic battle.  Will they be able to fundamentally transform this nation into what would have officially technically be called a socialist nation?  The stimulus bill by itself is going to do tremendous damage down the road.  The question is will it do damage immediately.  Is this stimulus bill large enough to overcome the capitalist entrepreneurial tendencies of Americans.  This thing is gonna get signed in one hour.  If we don't see unemployment drop in two months, we can say it didn't work, and we're gonna proclaim it loudly that it didn't work.  If we don't see a bunch of new schools being built; if we don't see a bunch of roads and bridges being repaired, above what's already happening, we're gonna say, "Hey, this isn't working."  Because I'll tell you what's gonna happen, when the economy rebounds, for whatever reason, and it will not be the stimulus package, but we have a totally in the tank sycophantic, they're gonna die of anal poisoning someday media that cannot wait to credit Barack Obama for any -- the smallest little economic uptick.  The fix is in, folks.  The fix is in to make this guy the most successful, the most rapidly successful president ever.

RUSH:  And they tried.  They did everything they could.  That stimulus bill was portrayed as the single greatest piece of legislation to come down the pike since the New Deal.  Well, it's three years into it, and we know it was an abject failure from our standpoint.  From his, it was a total success.  It was a resounding success.  Yesterday, in Washington, there was a budget committee hearing, House of Representatives passed Paul Ryan's 2012 budget for fiscal year 2012.  Paul Ryan's budget seeks to drastically limit government spending next year and in years to follow, but the vote on the measure, which, by the way, imposed $5.8 trillion in spending cuts over the next ten years, $5.8 trillion in real spending cuts came after a clear sign that at least half of the Republican caucus supports even tougher spending cuts.

Now, try to imagine the media explosion if a Bush official made the following statement.  At this committee hearing, Little Timmy, the tax cheat, Tim Geithner showed up, and he said Obama's a failure. (paraphrasing) "We have no plan for reducing the deficit."  He admitted it, up front, boldly.  He said, "We're not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem. What we do know is we don't like yours."
That's what the Treasury secretary said to a congressional committee yesterday.  Funny, shocking.  After three years the regime tells us they have no solution to the deficit.  Not only, folks, do they have no solution, they have no intention, no desire.  They're gonna spend and spend and spend and, if he's reelected, he's going to spend and spend and spend.

He wants to go down in the history books as the guy who finally cut the United States down to size, the guy who finally showed the United States what it has been like for the rest of the world because of the United States.  If he's added $5 trillion in these three years, he'll add another $5 trillion in the next two years if he's reelected, and then guess what?  When we get to 2017, 2018, whoever is elected then will have to deal with this.  At that point, will it all be academic and too late?  By that time, if the Supreme Court finds the health care bill constitutional, we're gonna be living in such a drastically different country anyway, will it matter?  We're already heading down the pike where the number of people working is reduced.

I got a very scathing and angry e-mail yesterday from a subscriber to my Rush 24/7 website.  The guy said, "You don't know what you're talking about.  You keep saying that they've reduced jobs.  It's not that they reduced jobs, you keep missing it.  What's happening is people are losing jobs." Let me try this again.  They are simply eliminating jobs from the universe of available jobs.  They just, in December alone, they just erased 1.2 million jobs.  They just said there are that many less jobs to get.  Businesses have closed, however you want to imagine that being defined.  Those jobs are gone.  Fini.  They're not waiting to be filled; they're gone.  Just 1.2 million of them.  This is the labor force participation rate.  And the only reason this unemployment rate is in the 8% region is because they have reduced the number of jobs against which they are comparing the number of people looking and the number of people who have stopped looking, the total number of people out of work for whatever reason.

If the same number of jobs were available today as there were when Obama took office, and that's about two million plus, the unemployment rate would be close to nine and a half percent.  Gallup says the real unemployment rate actually is 9%.  The CBO has said we're going to be facing 8% unemployment throughout until the year 2014.  That's, again, with jimmied numbers, I guarantee you.  But here comes Tim Geithner: "We're not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem. What we do know is we don't like yours."

They have no intention of dealing with this.  Unemployment is higher today than when the stimulus bill was signed three years ago.  When the stimulus bill was signed, unemployment was 7.2%, but something people forget, if you go back and look starting in November of 2008 after the election you will see the number of people applying for unemployment benefits shoots up over 400,000.  It actually started with the election of Obama.  With the election of Obama, small businesses began to downsize.  They knew what was coming.  The people with skin in the game, i.e., people who are putting money to work, investing capital, they knew what was in store, at least in a broad-based way.  Unemployment actually started skyrocketing upon Obama's election, but when the stimulus was signed, it was 7.2%.  Now it's 8.3, down from a high of nearly 10%.

I don't know how anybody can look back over these past three years... it's like a couple days ago, maybe it was yesterday, I said, "Is Obama ever going to get blamed for anything?"  Is anything going on in the economy ever going to be said to relate to anything he's done?  As far as he's concerned and the media is concerned, no.  This is all the result of Bush.  Still today, it's all the result of Bush.  He hasn't done anything.  It's just now that the economy, in their estimation, is starting to kick back in, it's finally working.

It was so bad, it was worse than we knew, and now our policies are finally starting to take hold.  The reason he's not touting the stimulus is because nobody wants another one.  The stimulus, go out and poll it, and you'll find it negatively polls.  He's not campaigning on anything to do with the economy.  Oh, he's out there trying to get people psyched up about it, but this whole campaign right now is based on contraception, another lie, misrepresentation, based on social issues.

RUSH: All right, today is one of those days. I'm gonna have to go back to our archives. Everything I predicted, pretty much everything back in December, is now starting to happen in full force.  And the whole point of it is to depress you and dispirit you, like the unemployment numbers looking magical now, Obama's approval numbers looking magical now. The Republicans look like blithering idiots now.  In fact, Ed, grab audio sound bite number one.  This is what I warned you about back on December 20th.

RUSH ARCHIVE:  I have warned you this kind of thing is going to happen.  The unemployment number is going to precipitously drop and it's going to get close to 8% by next November.  Just mark my words.  That's in the can.  It's in the cards.  Also, Obama's approval number now is up five points over the last three months or some such thing. So here we go. Approval number is up. I'm just warning you now not to get dispirited.  I'm warning you now not to think that the actual emotion or passion for changing course, defeating Obama, repealing Obamacare, it is ratcheting up.  It's not weakening. It's not tiring. It's not getting lazy.  People are not giving up, but you are not gonna see that evidence. You're not gonna see evidence of that passion or energy that you have and that your fellow citizens have for change.  You're not gonna see it.  What you're instead going to be told is that, "Wow, look at Obama's approval numbers -- wow.  And unemployment, look at the number, coming down, oh, it's all coming together."  That's gonna be combined with Obama, as he's saying now, as I predicted he would say, "It's worse than we thought it was. They didn't tell us how bad it was."

RUSH:  All of that is from December 20th, all of it, and don't you feel that way?  Did I not tell you how you were gonna feel, did I not warn you, do not succumb to this?  I know it's hard.  I've got a Rasmussen poll result today.  Rasmussen.  This is not Gallup.  This is not ABC. It's not CBS/New York Times. It's not NBC/Wall Street Journal. It's not ABC/Washington Post.  Rasmussen.  I guarantee you, this poll is gonna be put on the equivalent of every Democrat locker room.  Fifty-two percent say it's better for the GOP to work with Obama than stand on principle.

Rasmussen: "Most voters still think Republicans and Democrats in Congress are out of touch with their respective party bases but now believe it’s more important for the GOP to work with President Obama than to fight him." Rasmussen.  Now, I know you're saying, "But, Rush, maybe you're wrong.  Maybe we are dispirited and maybe all this good news for Obama is real, and maybe the takers do outnumber us, and maybe we ought to feel like moving to New Zealand.  Come on, Rush."  I'll tell you when it's time to move to New Zealand.  No, not yet.  It's only February.  All of this is predictable, is my point.  Everything that's happening in the media today, everything Obama is doing, was totally predictable.  And because it's predictable, so is this polling result.  But it's only February.

Who knows what's gonna happen with the economy.  My gosh, four-dollar gasoline is headed down the pike, maybe five-dollar-a-gallon gas.  Obama's gonna try to spin that as evidence of a good economy, but he's also proposed raising taxes on the oil companies.  It's in his so-called budget.  Now, that budget's never gonna see the light of day.  It's not intended to because he wants to run against a do-nothing Congress, but there's nothing stopping the Democrats, they control the Senate, there's nothing stopping them from proposing a tax increase on Big Oil.  You've got Obama proposing to reduce the nuclear arsenal by 80%.  The Republican primary process, I mean this is starting to get under a lot of people's skin.

There's another thing I predicted to you that is starting to happen.  You got Democrats out there that are talking about the year of the woman as though it's 1992 all over again, all about this contraception stuff.  You know, the news about Santorum is so predictable, that Santorum wants women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.  There are even some conservatives, so-called conservative bloggers and media people that are joining in that chorus because they're for Romney.  The conservative blogosphere for Romney is joining with the left-wing attack on Santorum.  TIME Magazine yesterday, there was a story, Michael Scherer, I think that's how he pronounces his name, I'm not sure, but there's a one-hour video of Santorum talking about all this, and the TIME Magazine guy urges his readers, he has the link to the video, he says, "Start here," 17 minutes into it.  Seventeen minutes into it?  Well, what's in the first 17 minutes that you don't want us to see?

If you watch the whole video, and you have the whole thing in context, you learn that Santorum is not trying to get the federal government and doesn't support and would not do, would not have the federal government get on a contraception kick.  It just wouldn't happen.  But if you take some of what he says out of context, as you can with anybody, you could make the case, if you skip the first 17 minutes, and the pro-Romney people in the conservative media have skipped the first 17 minutes because they want to take Santorum out.  So, in the meantime, we are where I told you yesterday.  The people still watching videotape from last Saturday at the Beverly Hilton hotel involving Whitney Houston. Those people try to put as many notches in their belt every night.  Their lives exist, getting up, finding somebody to have sex with, maybe somebody else, then going to bed, getting up and repeating it. You tell them that a Republican wants to take away their birth control pills and they don't care what else is going on.  And this is what the objective is.

They try to screw as many people as they can before they go to bed, get up and do it again.  You know the people I'm talking about.  The bottom line, let me put it to you this way.  The news media is now calling the so-called controversy over Obama's birth control mandate a culture war.  Don't forget who started this.  Obama started this by requiring the Catholic Church, well, not the church, but schools and so forth, to pay for this, to pay for everybody's contraception, to pay for everybody's abortions, to pay for all the abortion related stuff.  Don't forget last week.  And of course there was an uproar and an outcry and Obama ostensibly heard it and said, "Okay, okay, I'll make the insurance companies do it," and everybody said, "Good, good, we beat Obama back, good."  No, we didn't.

The president just unconstitutionally mandated that insurance companies now provide free -- by the way, this group that gets up, tries to screw as many people as they can every day and go to bed and do it again, they believe in free.  They think there is something free.  Anyway, Obama got all this started.  Now, there is a culture war.  The news media is calling the controversy over Obama's birth control mandate a culture war.  They are using that phrase all over cable news, culture war.  I have to hand it to 'em.  They set this up back in January with Stephanopoulos and that Republican debate in New Hampshire.  They set it up.  None of this is real.  Do you understand, none of this really happened.  "Romney, do you support contraception?"

"George, what are you talking about?"

"Do you -- I'm just asking you theoretically, do you --"

"George, the states could do it, I suppose, but nobody wants to, George," said Romney.  They went back and they found this one hour interview of Santorum and, ergo, we're in the middle of a culture war.  But may I ask you to do something?  Look around, look at the abysmal state of our culture.  We are in a period of cultural depravity and rot, and everybody knows it.  Are we not?  Now, the Democrats would love for that to become an issue because they think that that isolates the pro-lifers, the hicks and the hayseeds that come to the forefront of the Republican Party, people that live in the South, people don't know how to have the right kind of lunch packed for their kids in North Carolina. Gotta have federal agents to see that kids are eating properly.  That group.

The Democrats and the media chomping at the bit, champing at the bit, whatever the hell, eager for this whole culture war thing to surface, because what does it do?  It takes everybody's attention away from the ongoing economic destruction.  I don't care about the unemployment numbers today, and I don't care about the so-called improvement in jobs and Obama's approval numbers.  They desperately want people's attention off of the economy and Obamacare and the culture war.  They think they can go back to their archive pages and bring that issue back, and they think it's a slam-dunk winner for them.  But is the lack of free birth control really the most important social issue facing the country today?  I don't think so.

In fact, something tells me that if the upcoming election could be decided on social issues, the Republicans could win that in a landslide because we're on the right side of the culture war. The problem is we're scared to death of it! The Republican establishment wants no part of it. They want no part of the culture. They want no part of social issues. They have been ticked off about this. I've told you the story about how some establishment guy approached me in the Hamptons in the '90s. He had his index finger poking me in the chest and said, "What are you gonna do about the Christians?"

I said, "What? I'm just here trying to have a cigar after dinner."

(shouting) "What are you gonna do about the Christians?"

"What are you talking about?"

"They're destroying us! We're never gonna win the presidency with Christians and this pro-life stuff. You've gotta get them off of it. They listen to you."

I said, "They're only 24 million voters. You wouldn't win jack without 'em."

It turns out the guy's wife was constantly nagging him about abortion and so were these other establishment guys' wives nagging them about it. So the Democrats are trying to revive this. Ain't no doubt about it. None whatsoever. So I guess we'll discuss it along with other stuff that's in the news today, but this poll from Rasmussen: 52% say it's better for the Republicans to work with Obama. You know the bad thing about this? Republican leaders in Congress are gonna see this. Remember, Rasmussen is considered to be Republican. If there's a Republican poll versus a Democrat poll, Rasmussen is a Republican poll. So the Republican leaders in the House and Senate, they're gonna see this.

"See? See? See? They do want us to work with Obama! They do want us to cross the aisle. They do want us to have a moderate candidate!"

That's what they're going to get out of this. (interruption) Well, the payroll tax cut extension, they... (groans) I wish you hadn't brought that up 'cause I'm really ticked off about it. That's textbook how (speaking of screwing) to screw yourself. As I say, I'm gonna explain all this. I'm just here in our first segment setting the table. A corresponding poll, there's a Gallup poll out. Yesterday, Gallup said the real unemployment number 9%; the real underemployment number is 19.1%. So while the regime is claiming that the unemployment rate's gone down to 8.3%, Gallup says it is at 9%. The difference is Gallup uses raw numbers, not seasonally adjusted numbers. I'm starting to believe that "seasonally adjusted" is just code word "for manipulated to help incumbent presidents."

It's not just Obama. I think "seasonally adjusted" is designed to help the establishment, both parties in power, currently, in Washington. Then they went out and they talked to some small-business people. They asked 'em... I mentioned this yesterday, too. Of small businesses making $20 million a year annual or less, 85% say: Nope, not hiring anybody. And Gallup went out and they asked, "Why are you not looking for new employees?" And the answers were: Health costs and government regulations. So in the real world where the pedal hits the metal, where the rubber meets the road, nothing has really changed. But in the media and the polling data and on cable news?

You would think, folks, that it's 2008 again and we're dealing with The Messiah and all is lost. But it isn't the case. Everything is happening according to predictable plan. Folks, I am not a seer. I'm not Nostradamus. I just know liberals. That's all. I'm able, on December 20th, to tell you what is going to be in the news on February 16th because I know liberals, because I know the media. I don't have any clairvoyant talents or abilities; I just know liberals, and, if I can predict it back on December 20th, what it means is I can predict manipulation. I can predict how they are going to be acting. Nobody can predict what's actually going to be happening in the real world the next day or the next week, but you can predict what liberals are gonna do, regardless what reality is.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: On this Santorum interview, you may have noticed that there is not a transcript. At least there wasn't mid-morning today, and I couldn't find one yesterday. There is no transcript of the Santorum interview, the TIME Magazine interview, the link where the writer says, "Join this interview at 17 minutes in." Right. There is no transcript because, if you read what Santorum says in that interview, it is perfectly clear that he's expressing his private feelings; that he would not try to impose his views on the public through legislation. He says plainly that he would never try to do that.

Now, what's being said about Santorum (by the media and by conservative bloggers who are for Romney) is that Santorum is gonna try to impose his moral values on the country from the White House and via legislation. And he would not do that. Now, he might try to lead on it -- use the bully pulpit, make speeches on it -- but in terms of legislating his personal morality, would never do it. So it's a non-story! But they found enough in there they can take out of context to make it sound as though what Santorum can't wait to do is get elected president and then outlaw contraception and abortion with an executive order.

That's what they want people to believe that he's going to do.

RUSH:  Have you seen the headlines on the tax deal, folks?  The payroll tax extension deal?  The deal that puts $40 a month, a whopping $40 a month, in people's pockets?  Headline, here it is in TheHill.com:  "Republicans Retreat on Tax Cut."  Other headlines:  "Republicans Cave on Tax Cut."  Another headline:  "House Republican Leaders Agree to Payroll Tax Holiday Extension Without Offsets."  The news is that Obama has rolled the Republicans once again.  That's the headline.  And the Republicans, God bless 'em, no matter how hard they try to gain the approval of the Drive-By Media, it's just never gonna happen, and I don't understand how they do not learn this.

Hi, folks.  How the heck are you?  We're here behind the Golden EIB Microphone.  Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.

So the Republicans reach across the aisle, and what happens?  What does Obama do?  He tells the country they might be lying.  He trusts the Muslim Brotherhood more than the Republicans.  Have you heard about the Muslim Brotherhood?  The Muslim Brotherhood's out there, and by the way, folks, they're not who you think they are if you think they're some peace-loving group from the Middle East.  Get this.

"Essam el-Erian, a top Muslim Brotherhood official, has warned that any cuts in US aid to Egypt would violate the US-brokered 1979 peace agreement with Israel and could affect Cairo's peace treaty with Israel."  So this guy, the top Muslim Brotherhood clown, is warning that America should understand that what was acceptable before the revolution is no longer acceptable.  And this is all music to Obama's big ears.  Egypt was Obama's first big address after taking office.  So the Obama Brotherhood is laying down the law in Egypt.  He's got a greater affection for these guys than he does the Republicans.

I don't know where to begin on this.  I really don't know where to begin.  I do not understand why somebody doesn't characterize this payroll tax cut for what it is, gutting Social Security.  Because it is not being, quote, unquote, paid for.  "House Republican leaders said Monday that they will support extending the federal payroll tax holiday through the end of the year without demanding spending cuts to pay for it, a concession aimed at averting another po­litically damaging showdown in Washington.  The House leadership could offer a pared-down measure to extend the tax cuts later this week. But the top three GOP leaders backed off previous demands that the tax break’s extension be accompanied by spending reductions to shore up the finances of the Social Security program."

So the payroll tax cut is a whopping $40 a month, and the Republicans were holding fast, but you gotta find a way to replace what you're gutting. The Republicans, for as long as I've been alive, have been accused of gutting Social Security.  Here's Obama doing it, Obama and the Democrats are actually doing it, the payroll tax is the only funding mechanism for Social Security, and this continuing tax cut is -- look, if they want to do it, fine and dandy.  I'm just telling you, from a political standpoint, it's a gold mine here, and they're not using it.  The Republicans instead decide to reach across the aisle, they want to show that they can compromise, they want to show that they can get along, and Obama and his media minions just slap them down.

I looked at all the headlines today, and they're all about how the Republicans have retreated on the payroll tax extension, how they have caved and they just can't win.  If they stand firm and demand that this tax cut be paid for, then they're called stubborn, they're accused of standing in the way of progress.  And, if they compromise, they're accused of retreating, of caving.  I guess it's one explanation for why they're so gun-shy. I guarantee you they're shocked.  Everything they did was to get positive media spin, and they're not getting it.  There's no other reason to do this, compromising, getting along, what have you, other than to get positive media spin. But aside from all that, the ignorance about the payroll tax cut extension is just appalling.  The White House has provided a perfect example on Twitter.

Now, the White House tweeted about an hour ago. They tweeted this: "I'm asking the American people to keep their stories coming. Tell us what $40 means to you. Use the hash tag #$40, President Obama." So Obama sent a tweet out there -- and he did this little appearance: "It only happened because of you. You need to keep telling Washington what $40 means to you. It means a tank of gas," and, by the way, we got the sound bite coming up. Gasoline prices are going up faster than ever. Normally they go up around May for the summertime, but gasoline prices are going up and may reach $5 a gallon. Obama is saying: Yep, good news! It's a sign the economy's coming back. It's a sign the economy's growing: $5 gasoline.

He's gonna try to turn that into a positive. I've been watching the Obama campaign with great interest. Including this outrageous budget, which is simple irresponsibility. It's not even really a budget. This is Obama in a so-called budget (really a campaign document) laying out what his dream is. Now, I have noted and I have mentioned over the past two decades: When liberal Democrats run for office, they sound like conservatives. They do their best to hide who they really are. You know it and I know it. That's not happening now, or just happening on a couple things. Like on this tax cut thing Obama's trying to sound conservative, supporting a tax cut, trying to hide his socialism and so forth. But for the first time do you understand we're facing something that, in my mind, on balance is true. And it's relatively new.

These guys are running as the socialists they are! They're running as the big-spending, big-debt-busting liberals that they are. They are running on this. They are running on their plans to totally transform, change, and destroy the country's economy as it exists. They're running on that! They're not even trying to hide it now. There are just a few exceptions to it, the payroll tax holiday being one. Any time Democrats run on a tax cut, you understand that there's something really other than what appears to be on the surface going on. But for the most part they're not even trying to cover it. Obama's not trying to camouflage what's going on: Big government everywhere, telling you what you have to buy, what you can't pay for it, what you will pay for it.

All this unconstitutional stuff, it's in your face. It is in your face, and it's fascinating to me. If they're doing it this way, if this is how they're gonna run for office and run for reelection, what must it say about what they think the country is or where the country is? This is going to bear watching. Anyway, the ignorance about the payroll tax extension is appalling. The White House, Obama, puts out this tweet, "I'm asking the American people to keep their stories coming. Tell us what $40 means to you. President Obama," and this was the first response. It was from some guy named "ScareBaby." That's how he identified himself! The first response to Obama's tweet: "$40 a month means I can pay my Internet bill and keep my tiny small business alive."

That was the first response and the White House retweeted it. Now, of course, it's BS. Nobody actually sent that. That's a White House-generated response. And do you know how I know? You may not know how I know. But this is the level of ignorance that we have that is associated with this. Mr. ScareBaby cannot possibly have a small business and get this payroll tax cut. The self-employed don't get it. If you are self-employed, you know it. This doesn't even apply to you. There is no payroll tax cut for the self-employed. So Mr. ScareBaby here says, "$40 a month means I can pay my Internet bill and keep my tiny small business alive." The White House retweets it. If he has a small business, he's self-employed, and this 2% payroll tax cut only applies to employees. Not him.

In fact, maybe I ought to report this disinformation to Obama's new "truth team." He's got new truth teams out there. You heard about this? In every state, he has truth teams. They're out there to counter the lies and misinformation about the regime that pop up, and this is not new. What was the first thing like this they had? (interruption) Yeah, what was the name of the website? I can't remember the name of the website. But, anyway, it's just an extension or an expansion of that. So Mr. ScareBaby, this is obviously not a real person. This is somebody in the White House getting this Tweet ball rolling. Minor, minor point.

We got audio sound bites on this. I want to tell a little bit more about the Republicans and what they're doing. You know, this is not by any means the end of the line for what the Republicans are doing. This highway bill (snorts) may as well be an Obama stimulus bill. This highway bill is a Washington-spending stimulus bill, and it's being misnamed the highway bill, and it's the Republicans that are behind it. It's mind-boggling. It literally is mind-boggling to watch this. (interruption) Yeah, "Fight the Smears" was the name of that first website. So we got $5-a-gallon gasoline on the way. Obama says that's great news! That's a sign of economic growth. I just wonder. You go to the grocery store. I know you do.

You go to the grocery store; you buy the same things. Let's just say pretty much the same thing every week or how often you go. You know it's costing more. You know the cost of living is going up. You know economy is not growing. You know that your wages, your income, is not keeping up with the cost of living. Five-dollar-a-gallon gasoline, this stuff means something -- and to sit here and herald a $40-a-month tax cut, and to talk about how meaningful it is? The sad thing is, it IS meaningful to a lot of people! Forty dollars, in this economy with what Obama has done, is meaningful. That's how bad things are.

It just breaks my heart to see what's happening to this country, to watch it happen right in front of our eyes and expect there to be certain degree of outrage from people on the same side you're on. I'm reading people describe Obama's budget, and they're all describing it as outrageous, but that's it. It dies after that. It dies after the description. There's no action that is associated with the criticism of this, as though it's just politics-as-usual. No different than any other time in our American history. If everything happened that Obama wants in this budget, folks, it's over. It may be over anyway if Obamacare's fully implemented.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: By the way, I'm told something. Remember this Obama tweet on the White House twitter page for people to respond about what $40 a month means to 'em with the payroll tax cut extension, and the first one that responded was somebody named Mr. ScareBaby?

And ScareBaby said: I have a very small business and $40 will help me with my Internet bill or whatever. And I said, "ScareBaby, you're an idiot. You're self-employed! You don't qualify for the payroll tax cut." No self-employed person gets the payroll tax cut. You gotta be an employee. If you're a small business owner -- a "very" small business owner, a "tiny" small business owner -- you're not an employee. Well, guess what? ScareBaby posted on the Democrat Underground that she's upset because I'm "sliming" her. It turns out Mr. ScareBaby is a woman and says, "I got slimed by Rush today on his show. Need your help." So somebody from the White House is feeling that I'm sliming them. ScareBaby.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Hey, ScareBaby? I understand you're trying to find tape of me saying what I said about you. I'll say some more about you. You are the Democrat mascot: ScareBaby! The Democrat Party's entire political agenda depends on fear of pregnancy. Stop and think about that. Not to mention literally terrorizing babies in the womb. Fear of pregnancy. Stop and think what the Democrats are putting out there.

RUSH: Obama put out his budget this morning, a week late and a trillion dollars short.  You'll be shocked to hear, ladies and gentlemen, that Obama's budget actually increases spending.  I know I was shocked when I saw that.  Well, based on what he's said in the past.  You take him at his word, what he said in the past, this is outrageous.  You guys are just now getting your lunch delivery?  Boy, am I glad I don't depend on that.  Jeez.

Anyway, his budget increases spending, and there are only two areas where there are spending cuts in Obama's budget, which is DOA.  It's a total fantasy.  It isn't going anywhere.  You wonder why he even put this thing out 'cause it's just gonna get slapped down.  Even Democrats are slapping it down today. But the two areas where the Obama budget has real spending cuts are in defense and just found another cut, that's the postal service.  Obama's budget proposes cutting back mail delivery to five days a week.  You may think, "Big deal, Rush, that's not a big thing. Nobody gets real mail anyway."  Wait a minute.  That's not gonna be a very popular budget cut.  How many Americans rely on government checks?  How many of Obama's constituents rely on government checks?  It's a big number.

Now, I really don't know this.  I'm embarrassed I have to ask.  Does the government mail out checks anymore, or are they direct deposit?  Both.  Okay, so the people who do receive checks, this is a cutback.  It could have an impact, minor, but at least it's possible.  According to the new Obama budget, the national debt will be $1 trillion higher in a decade than previously forecast.  Now, he usually gives his budget some kinda name.  His first budget was called "the new era of fiscal responsibility."  I kid you not.  I don't know what he's calling this one, maybe Occupy America.  Maybe this budget is Greece 2.  Have you seen what's happening in Greece?  They're rioting. They're burning restaurants, shops, storefronts.  But the wrong people are burning Greece down.

Once again, the legitimate investors, bondholders and so forth who have been told that they're only gonna get 30% of what they put back in, they're the ones that ought to be burning the place down.  The students and the freeloaders are the ones actually committing the arson, which is understandable.  They've been raised to believe all of this stuff that government's there to provide for them, all they have to do is grow up.  They don't even have to grow up.  The reason for government is to provide them things, to give them everything that they want.

But you have to wonder why they even bother to print this thing, this budget.  It's a fantasy.  Everybody knows it's deader than dead on arrival.  Harry Reid won't even allow it to be voted on.  He doesn't want this budget to see the light of day.  He doesn't want anybody to even see this.  You may have forgotten, last year Obama's budget was voted down in the Senate 97 to zip, and that wasn't even an election year.  So I don't know why they bother to put this on paper.  You would think they'd want to hide the evidence.  Now, three years ago Obama promised that he would cut the deficit in half in three years.  Let's go back to the audio sound bites.  This is February 23rd, 2009 in Washington.  This was during the open of the presidential fiscal responsibility summit.

OBAMA:  We cannot and will not sustain deficits like these without end.  Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation.  And that's why today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.

RUSH:  Now, I know what some of you are saying.  "Rush, everybody politician lies about stuff like this.  Why in the world are you wasting time with this sound bite?"  The reason I'm not wasting time, the reason I'm re-airing this is because it's an illustration.  And remember what the avowed purpose of this program is, aside from the business aspects that have to be met.  Once you get past those, if those don't happen, the rest of this is academic.  But once you get past those, if I had to say, if I had to express this program in the form of a mission statement or what have you, it would be to create a large, participating, voting, informed public.  Real change happens at the ballot box, and the change at the ballot box that happens as a result of an informed, sizeable, voting public is real.  It's substantive.  There is mandate attached to it.

Now, I don't think that's idealistic at all.  That is, in fact, how this was all intended when the country was founded.  It was also understood by the founders that not everybody would be participating, that not all voters would be informed.  That's why voters didn't elect the Senate in the founding of the country.  It was well understood by the Founders that there would be a bunch of ne'er-do-wells or people that didn't care, people that would rather watch the Grammys than learn about what's going on in the country.  Did you watch the Grammys last night?  Kathryn watched the Grammys last night.  I didn't watch 'em, but I saw a list.  I've never seen so many awards.  Anyway, there are people that would rather do stuff like that and read Us magazine or In Touch, whatever, keep up with celebrities.

But the bottom line is, for those that pay attention, we actually want to increase that number, and we want to increase the number of them who are informed.  And going back to 2008, the presidential campaign, remember how Obama portrayed himself, remember how he was portrayed by the media.  Messianic.  We had never before seen a politician like this.  Someone who told the truth. Someone who was capable of uniting all the people, all the various divisions in the country. Somebody who was going to restore respect for America around the world. Somebody who was going to get rid of all the traditional harangues that take place in our political culture.  Of course what's happened is we have the most divisive president in our lifetimes, the most partisan president in our lifetimes, and we have a president who couldn't tell the truth about the budget and spending to save his life.

So it's important to go back and listen to him promise all of these things about budgets and spending, because he's running a campaign this year that is the equivalent of him saying, "I've not been in the White House yet.  Nothing that's happened, taken place, have I had anything to do with."  He's running a campaign, in a sense, that's gonna replicate what his 2008 campaign was.  The last three years happened but he had nothing to do with it.  That's going to be his approach.  That's why it's important to go back and listen to this stuff.  As more and more people start to get interested in this, the election year, as more and more people start to pay attention, as more and more people want to start measuring past promises, past projections against reality, the one thing that has to happen here is this election has to be about Obama.

I don't care who our nominee is, this election must be about Obama and what he has wrought and what the future portends if he's reelected.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: "Are people waking up?" Are they realizing who Obama is, or are they not? Is the outrage temporary? Is it temporary and personal, and therefore forgettable once it's been dealt with, or is it systemic? The same thing with the budget question here. It's the reason why we go back and dredge up a sound bite from February 23rd of 2009 at the White House. Listen to it again. Here is Obama promising to cut spending. He says we can't keep spending this way. We've got to balance the budget. We can't kick the can down the road! Everything he's done, he said in February 23rd, 2009, barely a month into his term, wouldn't. He said that none of what has happened was going to happen.

OBAMA: We cannot and will not sustain deficits like these without end. Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation.

RUSH: Right, right.

OBAMA: That's why today I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.

RUSH: Well, it's not possible. And there it is again: "The budget deficit [I] inherited." This man has spent, already, the budgets of 2013 and 2014. They're already spent, the entire federal budgets. That's what his deficits have equaled. That's how they've added up. I want to also tell you what I said in response to this. The day Obama made this pledge February 23rd, 2009, I, your host, El Rushbo, said this...

RUSH ARCHIVE: [E]verything I heard him say is a lie or sounds like a lie. Everything I heard him say is the exact opposite of what he has done or is going to do. He then, after giving this lecture on pay as you go, don't spend what you don't have, and we're making great progress towards responsibly living within our means -- and this is how community organizers work -- he then released the group in the East Room into their breakout work study groups. He said, "I want you to not only identify the problems. I want you to come up with solutions. I want you to talk to yourselves about the problems and about the solutions. I want you to talk to people in other breakout groups. I want you to talk to me and my team, and then," this is the best part of this, "report back later this afternoon with your results." (laughs) So, to set stage here for you, Obama convenes this summit, this Fiscal Responsibility Summit. Everybody in the room knows that everything he says at them is jaw-dropping incredulous unbelievable. Then he dispatches them to their work groups, and at the end of the day they're supposed to go back and report the solutions. Do you realize, folks, in three hours Barack Obama will have solved the nagging problem of fiscal irresponsibility. It's going to be fixed by -- well, three hours and 20 minutes, so five o'clock. By five o'clock Eastern time, the problem is solved.

RUSH: That was the game being played: "Breakout study groups." That happened a lot in the first six months of this regime's first term, and it was all four show. It was all on television. Remember, this was The Messiah who had just been elected! I mean, the media was still having on-air orgasms. Obama was being covered practically 24/7, at least during the business day. It was nonstop on the cable nets. All it is was seen. He sends people out to their "breakout groups," has them come back, solve the problem, and the people in the hinterlands say, "Okay, problem is gonna be fixed! I can forget it. Finally we got a guy is gonna fix the problems." Okay, it's three years later now, and it's time to remind everybody: Problems are worse and getting worse and there's no end in sight as long as he remains in the White House.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You want a laugher? Obama's budget predicts federal revenues will rise by 17.5% in fiscal 2013. Federal revenues will rise by 17.5%? Federal revenue is not gonna rise. With all of the tax increases planned and all of the money that will be taken out of the private sector with Obamacare implemented, there's not any way that federal revenues will rise by 17.5%. Also, unemployment will not be above 8%. So the 2013 budget is an absolute laugher. It is an entire joke. The new budget projects gross federal debt rising to $17.5 trillion. That is 107% of GDP.

Now, everybody's out there talking about (at least they were before the CPAC weekend), "The Tea Party's dead. The Tea Party's faded away. The Tea Party's just gone away. The Tea Party lost all of its momentum. The Tea Party's lost its energy." That hasn't happened, and it's gonna pick up whatever energy it left off with, and it's gonna grow. It was spending and debt which was responsible for the Tea Party forming in the first place, and this budget that Obama has put out is just outrageous because it is a blueprint of what he would like. It's not gonna happen, but it's a blueprint of what he wants.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, folks, this statistic that is in the budget. The new budget projects gross federal debt rising to $17.5 trillion in FY '13. Not only is that 107% of GDP, the budget is gonna grow at more than $2 trillion next year, is what that means. Currently, the federal debt is $15.3 trillion, and some might say we've reached debt limits and expanded, so we're up to $16 trillion. Regardless, the debt is going to go up more than $2.2 trillion. That's almost twice as fast as Obama has been increasing the debt per year so far. He's going to double the rate of increase of the debt with this budget. And remember... We just picked one sound bite, but you go back to the first three months of 2009 and you can find all kinds of examples of Obama (even after the first three months) talking about how we gotta get our fiscal house in order.

We can't keep spending like this! We've gotta get it in control. And we knew what was happening. We were all being set up for tax increases. Now, politically it just didn't work out for Obama to raise taxes the past three years. And even a year and a half ago, a little less than a year and a half ago, the "dead skunk" Congress or the dead whatever it was, that December meeting of Congress when Obama decided to not let the Bush tax cuts sunset. He knew that raising tax rates at that point would do horrible things, wreak all kinds of havoc on his reelection. He knows what tax increases do. He knows that they are a brake. (interruption) Yeah, the "dead duck session." The lame duck, dead duck, whatever it was.

Obama knew that raising taxes back then two Democrats ago, would be damaging to his reelection. 'Cause he knows what tax increases do. They retard economic growth. So, knowing full well they retard economic growth, the fact that he intends to raise taxes and double the debt is as great an indicator as you need of what his intentions are for this country and our budget and our overall structure. He knows exactly what he's doing. This is not somebody "in over his head." This is not some well-intentioned little plebe who has no clue what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing. He was in Annandale, Virginia, this morning at Northern Virginia Community College where he went out and talked to a bunch of college kids (who have been raised and educated on far-left socialism since they were in the third grade, if not sooner) to explain his budget to them. We have three sound bites.

OBAMA: The budget that we're releasing today is a reflection of shared responsibility. Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. That's not fair. It doesn't make sense at a time when we've gotta pull together to get the country moving. I don't need a tax break. We don't need to be providing additional tax cuts for folks who are doing really, really, really well! Do we want to keep these tax cuts for wealthiest Americans or do we want to keep investing in everything else: Education, clean energy, a strong military, care for our veterans? We can't do both! We can't afford it. Some people go around, they say, "Well, president's engaging in class warfare." That's not class warfare. That's common sense!

STUDENTS: (applause)

OBAMA: That's common sense.

RUSH: It's total class warfare. It's all lies, it's all misdirection, it's all misrepresenting what is happening. Everything from Warren Buffett and his secretary on down on that list. "Do we want to keep these tax cuts for wealthiest Americans or do we want to keep investing in everything else: Education, clean energy..." Clean energy is nothing more than crony capitalism! It's a total scandal. Obama's clean energy endeavor is nothing more than scandal central. Strong military? He's cutting the defense budget! He is weakening the military! Nothing the federal government is doing regarding education is improving it. Kids aren't learning. They're being indoctrinated with a left-wing agenda, and it's more intense than ever. "Care for our veterans"? This from a man who disdains them? Here's the next bite.

OBAMA: Warren Buffett's doin' fine, I'm doin' fine. We don't need the tax breaks. You need them. You're the ones who have seen your wages stall. You're the one[s] whose costs of everything from college to groceries has gone up. You're the ones who deserve a break. And we don't begrudge success in America; we aspire to it. We don't envy the wealthy, but we do expect everybody to do their fair share.

RUSH: All right, I can't... Just stop the tape. This is such a crock. The percentage of Americans who are paying taxes in this country: The top 1%'s paying close to 30%. The top 5% are paying close to 60%. The top 10% are paying almost all the taxes. It's just absurd. To say that they're not paying their fair share? This is about envy! He's telling one group of Americans, a bunch of college kids who have no future because of him, that they're suffering because of millionaires and billionaires. It's disgusting! This is what he hopes to win reelection on. He's banking on the fact that there are more people who'd rather sit around and do nothing -- become wards of the state, become totally dependent on him -- than there are people who would like to seek their dreams, be the best they can be, go out and pursue happiness. That's what he's banking on, folks. He is explicitly banking on the fact that he can be reelected by a dependent class that outnumbers a working class. And by "working class" I mean anybody that earns a dime or ten million dimes. That's what he's banking on. Here's the next bite.

OBAMA: Americans understand if I get a tax break I don't need and the country can't afford, then one of two things are gonna happen: Either that means we have to add to our deficit --

RUSH: Wait a second! Stop it. Three sound bites in a row where Obama's focus on him, like Clinton. (impression) "Hey, I don't need a tax break. Ha! I'm rich now. I... I don't need it." This is nothing more than a ploy, as expressed earlier by me (brilliantly so if I might add) on this program. The reason filthy rich leftists run around and talk about how they don't need a tax cut and they're willing to pay more taxes: It's how they keep college kids like the people in this audience off their backs. The Kennedy family perfected this. They're rolling in dough, and yet everybody thought they were kind and compassionate, that they hated their wealth. And that they felt guilty over it and so they are gonna go out and make sure nobody else got wealthy like they did because it wasn't fair and it's un-American to have that kind of money.

That's what these people are trying to do. Let me tell you: Americans do not run around and say, "If I get a tax break I don't need and the country..." That's not how Americans think. Producing, working Americans don't think that way. They don't talk that way. I have never... Well, I can't say "never." But the number of wealthy people I've known in my life, I can count on less than one hand the number of them who say to me, "I don't need a tax cut!" Practically everybody who works in this country that I know (and I know a lot of people) is focused on how they can keep more of what they earn, not how they can find a way to give it away! Most people I know who work are not eager to let Obama have it. They're not running around feeling guilty about it. They're running around scared that somebody like Obama's gonna come take it from them. They're looking for ways to hide it!

They're looking for ways to shelter it from people like Obama.

People do not run around and say, "If I get a tax break I don't need and the country can't afford..." Nobody that's responsible talks about what the country can't afford. The country can't afford Obama! The country cannot afford Pelosi. The country can't afford Reid. The country can't afford any more Democrats. The country can't afford any more socialists. We can afford and we can accommodate -- and we should celebrate, we should encourage -- the creation of wealth via hard work. Damn right he's trying to stigmatize that, and he's trying to guilt people. So when Warren Buffett comes along, "I don't need this tax cut. I don't need it. I'm all for getting rid of the estate tax," that's just so that you don't someday march on Warren Buffett's house and try to take his money. The filthy rich in this country... I've had so many people ask me, "How come these guys, Rush, are all talking about how they favor tax increases?" I say it's all a game. It's to keep the peasants with the pitchforks away from 'em. It's all phony.

There's not a one of these guys who got where they are by agreeing with what they're saying now and by behaving the way they talk now.  Warren Buffett didn't get where he is with policies, philosophies, and business practice that are reflected by his current language.  Just the opposite.  So all these filthy rich people who talk liberalism and who try to make people think they live liberalism, they're scared.  They want an insurance policy.  They want a moat around their homes and their businesses that you can't cross in anger.  So that's how they do it.  They speak of disdaining wealth.  They talk about how they don't need any more tax cuts, while they go out and try to earn even more, and Warren Buffett fights current tax bills that he has.

Warren Buffett's not beaten a path to the IRS saying, "How much do I owe you?"  Warren Buffett is in a battle with them right now.  They're telling him he owes more than he wants to pay.  But publicly Warren Buffett wants you to think that he goes to the IRS every day and writes a check because he feels so bad about earning so much and being taxed so little.  It's all absurd.  It's all a lie.  It's all class envy.  Obama's speech today to these students at Northern Virginia Community College proves that Occupy Wall Street is already running our country.  They already occupy the White House.  That kind of thinking is already running this country.  Here's Obama talking to a bunch of college kids talking about their wages stalling?  They don't have any wages.  They're not earning anything yet, and if they do, it's part-time.  They've not entered the full-time workforce yet.  This is a community college.  He expects everybody to do their fair share except the half of us who pay nothing.  They're not gonna do their fair share.

They're gonna continue to sit there and do nothing and receive the rewards for it, because in Obama's world, they're victims.  They don't have anything because the rich have stolen it from, except Warren Buffett who hasn't stolen it from 'em because Warren Buffett doesn't think he needs a tax cut so he's cool.  I don't know how many, but I'll guarantee you of these kids in this audience today very few of them are paying income tax.  Some of them earn enough probably to have to pay some income tax, but it's insignificant.  He's promising the takers that he's gonna take even more from the producers.  That's what the speech is.  That's what his campaign is.  Obama is seeking reelection with the votes of the takers, and he's promised 'em that he's gonna take even more from the producers.  That's what we're watching.  That's what he thinks he can win reelection on.  That's where he thinks the country is.  By design, that's where he wants the country.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  You know, Warren Buffett's secretary pays a lot more for food than Obama does, and she pays a lot more for rent or housing than Obama does, and Warren Buffett's secretary probably pays more to travel than Obama does.  What's fair about that, Mr. President?

RUSH: Rick Santorum, one night, three victories.  CBS has the story: "Santorum Stunner: Sweeps 3 GOP Contests."  I've taken a gander throughout the Republican media, conservative media, and all over the place, and they are shocked.  They're literally shocked.  The Republican establishment had no idea this was percolating out there.  I can't believe how insulated they are.  I mean I know they're insulated. I know they're "inside-the-Beltway." I know they have their own world in which they live, but to look at the reaction they're having today, to see how shocked they are that Rick Santorum has come out of what they thought was an impossible position equivalent to nowhere, is an incredible thing.  And we're gonna look at this in some detail.

Of course, the Drive-Bys are crediting me for this.  You know, it's about time to put a stop to this.  I know why they're doing it, and the real reason they're doing it is because they think they have this kind of power.  They think they have the power, and in some cases they do with certain audiences.  But they think they have the power to launch Obama from nowhere to the presidency, and it could be argued that they did play a significant role here, and so they think that of themselves.  So a Republican candidate comes along out of nowhere.  First it was Newt, now it's Santorum.  It can't be the candidates.  It can't be that Santorum's connecting with voters.  It can't be that, no, no, it can't be that Santorum's resonating with Republican voters, the conservative base. It can't be that the conservative base just isn't happy with Romney. It can't be any of that.  No, no, no.

It has to be that the Republican base is a bunch of mind-numbed robots sitting out there waiting for marching orders from me.  (interruption) Well, while it's fun, Snerdley, while it's fun to sit here and tweak these people, and while it's fun to listen to their sound bites, which we're going to do today, and it's fun to listen to them talk about how I'm responsible for it, never forget that I have the most profound respect and admiration the people in this audience.  I know full well that conservative voters, by and large -- there are always exceptions to things -- are intelligent, they're engaged, and they're clearly able to make up their own minds, and they do.  It may be a mixture of both.  But still, it's fascinating to watch because all of these conservatives sneak up.

The one thing, it's never gonna stop bothering me, this notion, this template, if you will, that conservative voters are a bunch of idiots and can't make up their own minds.  They sit around and wait for marching orders.  That's been one of the templates to describe this audience ever since this program started in 1988.  It's insulting, it's demeaning, and it impugns these people, and I think it's a mistake because the Republican Party had better understand here that the people who are not voting for Romney are not doing it because I'm telling them to, or because anybody else is telling them to.  They're doing it because they genuinely have a problem with Romney.  And they're doing it because, in Santorum's case, as I've been saying the past couple of weeks, if you're looking for a conservative who is the least corrupted, who has the least number of periods of wandering off the reservation, if you're looking for a conservative who's never sat down with Nancy Pelosi on the couch for any reason, you get Rick Santorum.  And people know this.

Now, one of the things that could explain Santorum's sweep yesterday -- there are a number of things, but one thing that could explain it is people have to think that the guy can win.  That's what the base is telling us today.  They think Santorum can win.  There may be some protest votes in this, but the establishment had better wake up and understand that Republican primary voters are doing this not just to stick a finger in the eye of the establishment, not just to be frivolous here.  They're sending a message.  They sent a message with Newt in South Carolina, and I told you then that Newt was the vessel for that message and that vote, the South Carolina primary victory that he had after the confrontation in the debate with Juan Williams.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: We'll take a brief time-out, come back and listen to a bit of Santorum's speech last night in St. Charles, Missouri. And after that we have a bite from Trump, who says, "I don't get this whole Santorum thing." Just last week he goes out and endorses Romney, and now this! Santorum sweeps three states.

There are a lot of people scratching their heads. And... (interruption) No, I wasn't surprised by this! I'm not surprised by this. It's one of the reasons that I haven't been panicking throughout all of this. I think I have a pretty good understanding and idea where the Republican base is. If they're given the opportunity to vote for what they think so important, they'll do it. Coupled with, "Is my vote gonna be cast where somebody can actually win?" I think people thought Newt could win. It's one of the reasons they voted for him. People are gonna say, "Well, you know, Santorum can't win. Everybody knows he's unelectable." We've been hearing this. Every one of our candidates is "Unelectable! Can't be elected!" It doesn't matter who, other than Romney. We've been told this by our side, our establishment, and by the Democrats and the media as well.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: When you see somebody running for office, I don't care who it is, for the presidency, do you think you know why they want to be president?  Isn't it amazing -- (interruption) you don't wonder?  (interruption)  Well, okay.  Well, that's the point.  We're left to assume why these guys want to be president.  The last time I can think anybody was asked was when Roger Mudd asked Ted Kennedy back in 1980, and we got the forerunner of that gibberish at a Clinton fundraiser in the nineties.  He had no answer for why he wanted to be president, no answer for why he was running.  It strikes me that there aren't very many candidates who are asked that question point-blank.  So we're left to assume.  Like Snerdley was just shouting at me in the IFB.  "I know why Obama wanted to run.  He wants to totally change this country.  He doesn't like the way the country was founded.  It's his job to transform it."  Yeah, we're left to assume that, and I think we're right.  But he wasn't asked.  At least not that I recall.

Now, sometimes they'll say, "I want to be president of this country for X, Y, Z."  But put on the spot with the question, it doesn't happen.  So when you look around, do you know why Newt -- I'm just asking, I don't have an answer here.  These are rhetorical questions.  I'm asking you, this audience as voters, when you watch a Republican debate, do you have any idea why Ron Paul wants to be president?  Do you have any idea why Newt wants to be?  Did you know why Bachmann wanted to be president?  Did you know why Rick Perry did?  I'm just asking.  The reason I'm asking is because I think when you listen to Santorum, you know.  He's answering the question without being asked, and it's in that little quote that I read to you about freedom and what's at stake in this election and this country.  That's his "why."

That's his answer to the question why he wants to be president.  It's a powerful thing.  Here's what he said, "I'm not the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.  I'm the conservative alternative to Barack Obama.  I care about the very rich, the very poor. I care about a hundred percent of America.  Ladies and gentlemen, freedom's at stake in this election.  America's honor is at stake."  When you hear that, you have very little doubt what it is that's motivating or inspiring Santorum.  Let's go to the sound bites.  We have four of them here from St. Charles, Missouri, at Santorum headquarters last night.

SANTORUM:  Wow.  Conservatism is alive and well in Missouri and Minnesota!  Thank you all so very, very much it is great to be here.  I just can't thank the people of Missouri.  We doubled 'em up here and in Minnesota!  Let me just thank God for giving us the grace to be able to persevere through the dog days and blessing us and blessing our family. My wife Karen here, what a rock. I mean what a rock through these last few weeks.  We have had more drama than any family really needs, and she has just been an amazing rock and a great blessing to me, and I just want to thank you in particular, my sweet, for all you've done.  Thank you.

RUSH:  Here's the next excerpt.

SANTORUM:  I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't listening.  Why would you think he would be listening now?  Has he ever listened to the Voice of America before? (crowd yells "No!") No, why?  Because he thinks he knows better.  He thinks he's smarter than you.  He thinks he's someone who is a privileged person who should be able to rule over all of you.  But we have a different message for him.

RUSH:  Rick Santorum talking about Obama. Obama, he's not listening tonight.  He thinks he's better than we are.  I think that nails it, by the way.  I think Obama is one of these narcissistic egomaniacs, superiorist who actually does think he's better.  The bitter clinger comment is an example.  When Obama looks at everybody he has to look down his nose to see us.  In the next bite, this is Santorum saying he's not the conservative alternative to Romney. He wants to be the conservative alternative to Obama.

SANTORUM:  I hope you have been listening to our message, because if you listen to our message and you found out that on those issues -- health care, the environment, cap and trade, and on the Wall Street bailouts -- Mitt Romney has the same positions as Barack Obama.  And in fact would not be the best person to come up and fight for your voices for freedom in America.  Ladies and gentlemen, I don't stand here to claim to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.  I stand here to be the conservative alternative to Barack Obama.  (crowd chanting)

RUSH:  It's the standard slogan at these rallies, "We pick Rick," that's always the slogan, got all fired up.  Santorum is also very fluent in the language of conservatism.  It's natural.  It pours out.  And explaining, for example, the theory of limited government is second nature to him.  He doesn't have to be taught it. He doesn't have to have it written for him. He doesn't have to be briefed and he certainly doesn't have to be tutored right before he goes out to speak about it.

SANTORUM: The president over the last few years has tried to tell you that he -- in fact, the government -- can give you rights. The government can take care of you and provide for you. They can give you the "right" to health care like in Obamacare.

AUDIENCE: Nooo.

SANTORUM: Well, look what happens when the government gives you rights. When the government gives you rights, unlike when God gives you rights, the government can take them away. When government gives you rights, the government can tell you how to exercise those rights. And we saw that just in the last week with a group of people -- a small group of people: Just Catholics in the United States of America.

AUDIENCE: (applause)

RUSH: Yep. It just flows out of there. Now, there was a piece today from the Independent Women's Forum, Charlotte Hays. I am familiar with this group. Members of this group have often referred to me as Braveheart in a political sense, although it was not Charlotte Hays. But they're a conservative bunch. They sorta created themselves as the alter ego of the feminazis. They appreciate strong men. They want strong men. They desire a role for strong men in relationships and in the world, in politics and all of this. They're a good bunch of people. So this is from Charlotte Hays, posted at eight o'clock this morning.

"If you think Rick Santorum can get independents, go for it, folks." So once again, here we have this notion that we can't win this without winning the independents, and conservatives can't win the independents. It's a group called the Independent Women's Forum, and they identify themselves as conservative. "If you think Rick Santorum can get independents, go for it, folks. Senator Santorum, who enjoyed a magnificent triumph in three states last night, deserves a lot of credit, as he would no doubt be the first to tell you, for hanging in there. He has been impressive in recent debates. And a grateful nation thanks Mr. Santorum for seemingly having dispatched Newt Gingrich back under his bridge..."

That means he's a troll. Newt's a troll. He's lurking under the bridge there, comes out every now and then for a debate. (interruption) It is snarky. That's my point. But "at least for the time being" we thank Santorum for dispatching Newt "back under his bridge." "But last night was not good for the Republican [P]arty," writes Ms. Hays. "I think the voters last night were acting like my favorite Cousin Harry," she says, "who yearns for a 'real conservative' and refers to Mitt Romney as McCain," and then she writes in parenthesis: "(a McCain presidency is looking pretty good right now; it was during the campaign, not a presidency, that McCain lost his nerve)," end parenthesis.

So this little paragraph here is chock-full of stuff. She's ripping people (paraphrased): "Oh, yeah, yeah! A McCain presidency is looking pretty good right now!" I actually could make the case that the party, the Republican Party would be far worse off today with McCain having won. But that's for another time. Back to Ms. Hays here. "Mitt Romney speaks conservatism like a second language -- that is because it is a second language for him. Is that such a bad thing? Sure, he needed somebody to tell him not to flaunt that coveted Bob Dole endorsement.

"He needs to quickly absorb some of the language and ideas that are first nature to movement [conservatives] (e.g., Walter Williams is good on the minimum wage, Mitt). I hate it when others beat me to ideas that I’ve been playing with, but William Tucker did the other day, proposing that Romney, with his temperament, could be another Ronald Reagan. With a conservative Congress, the sky is the limit. In a way, Santorum has replaced Gingrich as the conservative feel-good candidate. As I said, if you think he can win in November, be my guest. I worry that he doesn’t have the kind of broad appeal needed to beat even a disaster like Barack Obama."

Now, you might ask yourself... By the way, I said I "know" the Independent Women's Forum. I don't know Charlotte Hays. If I've met her, I don't recall. Rick Santorum is not rallying support because of a cult of personality. As I pointed out in the previous 45 minutes of this program, he's rallying support because he's the last real conservative still standing. He's running enthusiastically as a conservative. The issue is not whether he has "broad appeal." It's whether conservatism has broad appeal and can win over converts with the strength of its arguments, which get clearer.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This whole thing with Charlotte Hays here: Either conservatism is what it is and you support it, or it isn't. Santorum is out... I don't care if you can say, "No delegates assigned." Three states! He swept three states. If the establishment's right, Romney should be winning everything now. It should be over, folks, and it's not. Romney's not sweeping everything.

So now the latest is, at least from Ms. Hays... Again, I don't know her. This is really not even a criticism of her. This is more an opportunity to illustrate a point. Santorum is out rallying support because he's the last real conservative still standing, and he is running as a conservative. He's not cloudy about it at all. There's no doubt about what and who Santorum is. So the question isn't: Well, does he have broad appeal? The question is: "Does conservatism -- properly explained, cheerfully proclaimed have broad appeal? Can conservatism win over converts with the strength of its argument?" And there's no question that it can! It does every time it's tried.

The problem is it's not tried enough in electoral Republican politics. But the last time it was overwhelmingly successful was Reagan. We've been through time and time again how much the establishment doesn't like that. They just don't like conservatives and they don't like conservatism, for all the reasons that we've stated. But in times like these? One of the reasons you want down-the-middle, straight conservative is because of the opportunity to contrast it with Obama. Times like this are when conservatism becomes crystal clear to people that don't understand it or have never had it explained to them or don't quite think ideologically in their lives. It's the greatest opportunity ever to explain conservatism to people. It explains itself! As times get more dire, and as Obama becomes more stridently left, conservatism comes into focus.

Now, if you are a conservative and you don't believe that that's true, then why be a conservative?

If conservatism has to be modified or moderated somehow, why be a conservative? So there's a lot going on with this. There is a lot that establishment types could learn and go ahead and use from this experience and this example. I know it gets frustrating, folks, having to constantly teach. You look at the left, and they don't have to teach it. Liberalism is the most gutless choice you can make. You see some suffering and go, "Oh, gosh, I hate that!" Oh, you're a liberal and you've got a big heart. You got compassion. You've done nothing but see it. You've done nothing but say you saw it. You come along with ideas to fix it, and that's when you get opened up to all these charges and you have to take an intellectual foray into understanding what this is about.

RUSH:  No, Dawn, I haven't voted yet, and I haven't voted yet for a reason.  So that I wouldn't come in here and be goaded into telling people who I voted for.  The Politico tried that late yesterday afternoon.  But I'm ready for all comers. (interruption) Yeah.  Jonathan Martin sent me an e-mail: "Has the most important conservative in Florida figured out how he's gonna vote?"  It's been pressure packed.  I can't tell you.  This whole situation, if you're not careful, can lead to uncomfortable moments with people.  See, now they're asking me, have I figured out who I'm going to vote for.  Yes, you are next.  If I tell you, "Yes, I've figured it out," then you're gonna say, "Who? Who?"  You're gonna keep badgering me all day.

Hi ya, folks, Rush Limbaugh here, the godfather of radio as it's written in Politico today.  Telephone number on the day of the Florida primary, 800-282-2882, the e-mail address ElRushbo@eibnet.com.

I'll bet a lot of you have forgotten Florida is being punished for going early in the primary process.  Normally Florida would have a hundred delegates that would be appointed today, but they've been cut in half.  Only 50 delegates in Florida for the Republican convention this time around because they wanted to go early.  They jumped the line and the establishment wasn't crazy about it.  So I'm minding my own business -- Colin Powell, I'll betcha he doesn't get the kind of pressure I'm getting.  Do you think Politico e-mailed Colin Powell, who is the titular head of the Republican Party, and said, "Okay, who is the godfather of talk radio voting for, who did you tell him to vote for?"  Do you think Colin Powell is getting this kinda pressure?

I'm minding my own business, and even yesterday while minding my own business I was, nevertheless, bothering a lot of people.  Just my existence was bothering a lot of people.  And I get an e-mail from my old buddy Jonathan Martin at the Politico.  He wanted to know if I decided who I was going to vote for, so I wrote back, "Not yet."  He writes back, "Does that mean Romney is still possible?"  I wrote back, "All three are possible."  Then this is the next line in the Politico -- that's all I said, "Not yet.  All three are possible."  And I told him this because there's no way I'm gonna tell the media who I'm voting for.  I decided to reply to the e-mail, which probably was a bonehead mistake, I put myself in this position.

Anyway, I responded to it.  He's asking me who I'm gonna vote for, and if I give him a name pro or con, then I'm in trouble. I'm in trouble I don't want to be in.  So when I say, "All three are possible," it's simply my way of telling him, "I'm not gonna tell you who I'm voting for, and I'm not gonna give you any indication one way or the other who I'm voting for.  So all three are possible."  Well, when Politico ran the story last night, the people who think that I love Newt were all over me.  The people who think that I should be for Romney were all over me for not committing to it.  Then there were the people, "It sounds to me like you're supporting Santorum. What the hell?"  I mean I got bombarded.

So it was a bonehead move to answer the e-mail, but I was sitting there, and I was in the middle of something, and my natural inclination is toward politeness.  It's a shame one of the tried-and-true virtues, manners, politeness, seem to always get a person in trouble.  Have you ever noticed that?  The virtues of manners and politeness could get you into trouble.  Well, trouble, I mean a situation you'd rather not be in.  Anyway, so back to the Politico piece here, and it's written by Jonathan Martin.  It shows up in the Burns and Haberman blog.  It shows up on his byline, but not on his blog.

Anyway, "'Not yet,' he wrote when I asked if he had figured out who he was supporting tomorrow.  'All three are possible.'" Here's the next line: "He didn't say it, but it seems Limbaugh has qualms with both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum."  And I had not said anything to indicate that.  I don't know that I have said anything to indicate that on the radio.  I mean I've been critical of all of these people.  As the day comes and goes, and as it is warranted, I have been critical of all three of 'em.  Probably less so of Santorum, but I have not been less critical of the other two or more critical.  How do you write, "He didn't say it, but it seems Limbaugh has qualms with both Gingrich and Santorum."  Well, that line, I guess it's wishful thinking.  That line, coupled with the line where I had said all three are possible, can you imagine the avalanche I got yesterday?  I mean I was inundated from friends, and then I went to ElRushbo@eibnet.com, the public e-mail box, and I'm sure it was tweeted all over the place.

"The godfather of conservative talk radio has taken up for Gingrich as the former speaker has taken fire from pro-Romney Republicans.  But Limbaugh has also spoken out against Gingrich's Bain-bashing and had nice things to say about Rick Santorum.  Just as with other conservatives who like the former Pennsylvania senator, though, Limbaugh doesn't want to waste his vote."  I didn't say anything about that.  "After a caller Monday made a lengthy case for Santorum, Limbaugh cut him off and asked: 'So tell me why he's there at 13 percent.'"  Now, that was not a rhetorical question as it seems it's being reported. This person has just given me a top down resume enhanced, "I voted for Santorum." Okay, why is he at 13 percent?  I wanted to know, really, what does the voter think.  It was not a rhetorical question, "Okay, then why is he a loser at 13 percent?"  That was not the question.  Didn't ask it with that tone.

You know, wait till Trump finds out that he's not Florida's most influential voter.  The Politico says I am, that's what it says here.  "Florida's most important undecided Republican voter," it's a story about me.  Wait 'til Trump hears about this.  That's the kind of stuff that they say about Trump.  I'm gonna hear about it.  I'm gonna hear about that from Trump.  He'll call, "You want to go play golf?" I'll say, "Yeah." He'll say, "What is this?  You didn't correct The Politico and tell 'em that I'm the most important undecided..." "Donald, I didn't write the headline. I didn't know it was gonna be the story."  Just joking about that.

So then Jonathan Martin said, "Well, are you gonna tell people how you voted after you vote?"  I said, "I don't vote 'til after the show."  "Oh.  Oh."  I don't think Trump votes in Florida, actually. I think Trump votes in New York.  He's a New York resident. (interruption) Channel 5, the local NBC affiliate, is wondering how their local -- (interruption) Oh, I'm just now hearing that the local NBC affiliate here, Channel 5, this morning on their morning news wanted to know how their local Republican celebrity, as though there's only one here, there's only one Republican celebrity here, how that Republican -- i.e., me -- is going to vote.

Well, that's what I'm saying: I think Trump probably votes in New York. He's a New York resident, comes down here... I think Trump probably votes there, so Trump is not voting in Florida. They said "most famous Republican celebrity," most famous Republican celebrity. Six of one, half dozen "or" another. But then it says here: "One Limbaugh has come out for Santorum, though. Limbaugh noted last week on show that his brother, conservative author David Limbaugh, is backing Santorum," and I'm quoted here as saying, "My brother goes rogue!" David did tell me he's gonna vote for Santorum. So I'm The Big Vote on the Right. The Big Voice on the Right and the Big Vote on the Right.

What do the polls now show? Is Gingrich down by 15 in Florida? Twenty in one poll, 15...? See, this is the thing. You know how much respect I have for you in this audience, for your intelligence and your independence and for your ability to follow and understand what we do on the program here. I've never, ever considered all of you mind-numbed robots. Contrary to what many of you might believe, I do not have an out-sized ego. I don't have really much of an ego at all. I frankly wish I had a bigger ego than I do. I don't think that my endorsement is gonna change a whole lot of opinions.

You listen to the people calling here that are passionate about these candidates. That guy who called yesterday about why he thinks I'm screwing Romney? Do you think if I came out and said I'm voting Santorum that it'd change his mind? No, no. My point here is that... This is the thing about this primary: The attachments these people have to these candidates are really solid, and they are passionate. And a lot of it is driven by hatred for the other guy. I think the Romney people, a lot of them just can't stand Newt, and vice-versa. A lot of Newt people just can't stand Romney.

In fact, I have to tell you: The vitriol, the dislike, the enmity that people who are not voting for Romney have for him is powerful stuff. And, by the way, if I came out today and said, "I'm voting Romney and I think you should, too," I wouldn't win a bunch of converts. Those people would be livid with me! They are attached either to the negative aspect of somebody or the positive. The support aspect of it. But the people that are not supporting Romney largely it's they just can't stand him. They don't think he's conservative, and in their minds I would be dumb and idiotic and I'm not seeing things as plain as day. They wouldn't be swayed. This is my point.

I think it's a little insulting to conservatives to think that a series of endorsements from people will have a significant impact. I know some people -- I'm not denying that -- would be influenced by it. They would like to hear an endorsement. Most of you are not mind-numbed robots. Most of you have made up your mind. And this next comment is by no means critical. This next comment is by no means critical. I want you to understand that. Sarah Palin, God bless her, has been out for the past week doing everything she can. In fact, I think she's now crossed over and said, "Vote Newt!" For the past week she's been doing this. Now, it's not showing up in the polls. We'll see. I mentioned yesterday that this enmity toward Romney is so strong that the polls may not be picking it up. And Gingrich may finish a lot closer than minus-15 tonight. That's how strong the anti-Mitt feelings are among those who harbor them. It's vicious. And a lot of them are angry at Mitt because of the way he's conducting the campaign and all of what they think are the lies that are being told about Gingrich. Even though there's nothing illegal about it, they're fed up with it. They're blatant lies; they don't like it. It just seems, to a lot of people, unnecessary. A lot of people think it's dirty pool. A lot of people say it says a lot about Romney's character, whatever. They just don't like it. So we'll see. (interruption) What, are you telling me that if I came out and said, "I'm voting for X," that everybody would then think X could win? (interruption)

A lot of people would? So... (interruption) But... (interruption) Wait a second, wait a second. (interruption) Snerdley, wait a minute. See, this is... I've often said, "People that work for me have a far loftier impression of me than I have of myself." I don't think of myself at all like this. In fact, I'm not looking at this from the standpoint of "electability." Whoever I choose, it's not gonna be 'cause I think they can win. Whoever I vote for it's not because I think they can win. It's 'cause I like 'em; I like their policies. There's a whole lot of reasons to vote. I also don't mind this process going on further. Anyway, let me take a brief time-out here, folks. That sets the table out there. Nate Silver -- supposed genius blogger at Yahoo, New York Times, wherever he is -- has Romney up by 15. Rasmussen has Romney up by 15. The best way, folks, for you to read my tea leaves is to go to TwoIfByTea.com and buy some.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: And we're back, Rush Limbaugh, the cutting edge of societal evolution.

For example, in the monologue I just told you how some people that are voting for Newt are. They're just ticked as hell about the lies that Romney's telling. I got an e-mail: (angrily) "So what 'lies' is Mitt telling?" You know, I have never been through anything like this in my life. I'm gonna lose friendships over this, and I haven't taken a position! I'm the one that has not taken a position. I'm gonna lose friendships over this; I'm gonna fire people over this. And that's why I'm not gonna tell anybody for whom I voted. It would destroy my objectivity as a journalist. Somebody has to be a journalist in this situation! I just want to see... It's the Florida primary. I want to see if anybody votes for Pat Buchanan today. That's what I want to see. I want to see if there are any votes for Buchanan. I know the chads are gone, but I still want to see if somebody ends up voting for Buchanan.