RUSH: You know what I did? I went and checked the unemployment rate in Nazi Germany during World War II. You know what I found? I found that the Nazis had plenty of jobs. It wasn’t because of unemployment that the Nazis became Nazis. The Nazis didn’t become Nazis ’cause they couldn’t find jobs. There were jobs all over the place. But yet Obama tells us and Marie Harf tells us that the terrorists have become terrorists because there are no jobs. We have destroyed their economy. They have destroyed their economy. They have not built up an economy. We have not helped them build an economy. We’ve not done this; we’ve not done that.

As we go through these sound bites I want you to listen for a word. You’ll hear Obama use it frequently: “grievance.” And it was I, El Rushbo, last week or the week before, I spent a lot of time in one of my famous monologues explaining liberalism to people. I had a caller ask a specific question and my answer involved the fact that liberals think that everybody in this country, other than conservative Republicans, has a grievance, a legitimate grievance. Hispanics have a grievance, African-Americans have a grievance, there’s a whole grievance industry. And I sought to explain it, and you will hear Obama use that word in these sound bites.

So I checked the unemployment during Nazi Germany, and it was a heavy industrialized country. It wasn’t the explanation for why so many people became Nazis. By the same token, trying to remember here, during the Cold War, ladies and gentlemen, when we were fighting Soviet communism, did anybody say that we weren’t really fighting communism, we were just fighting people who had perverted the concept of communism? You might think this is a facetious question.

Now, the answer is, yeah, there were people on the left in this country who stood up for the concept of communism, and they still do. And the way they do is basically to say, when you accuse communism of having failed every time it’s been tried, their retort is, “Well, not yet. We still haven’t tried it with the right people.” Obama was to be the right people, and it wasn’t communism; it was socialism. But regardless, it’s never worked. Anywhere in the world, it has never worked. It has never fulfilled its promise. It may work for the leadership. Socialism, communism is great for the Politburo. It’s great for people in the leadership of the state. But in terms of average, ordinary citizens in the state, it’s an abject failure. It’s never worked.

A point that I made yesterday I want to reiterate. We basically have been in this country on the march toward socialism in a concentrated fashion since the early sixties, LBJ, Great Society, and the War on Poverty. Now, I know you could predate it. You go back to FDR if you wanted to, but I chose 1964 because it’s a year that’s recent enough that most everybody, whether they were alive then or not, can relate to it, at least. It’s close enough. It’s not ancient history to a lot of people.

And my point is, we’ve had maybe 12 years, maybe definitely only eight, arguably 12 years, where we put the brakes on this march towards socialism. The two terms of Reagan we put the brakes on. We’ve never really had the chance to fully stop the march towards socialism and then take the country in the other way. We got as close as we’ve ever come in our lifetimes to the two terms of Reagan, and in some sense, with tax rates and so, we did make an annual positive move toward conservatism.

But my point with all this is, since 1964, let’s just say eight years, all but eight years we have been on this march towards socialism, and the last six years we’ve been on steroids. And my question is, where’s all the happiness? Where’s all the satisfaction? Not only is there not happiness, there isn’t a general content, even. You don’t even find a contentment. Everybody’s miserable, especially people on the left. They’re miserable, they’re angry, they’re unhappy, and yet we’ve been heading in the direction they want to go since 1964, all but for eight years. And they were angry during those eight years, too.

My point is, socialism promises this utopia, it promises equality and fairness and justice and all of these other things. And yet all of the beneficiaries of socialism, they’re the angriest. They’re the most unhappy. The people government is paying special attention to, the victims of this unfair, unjust, and immoral country, the people on federal largesse, 92 and a half million Americans not working. Throughout this entire period, the group in our country, the segment of the population that arguably is the happiest — and it’s a relative scale — are the people working, the people trying to stop this march to socialism ironically are having the most enjoyable lives, and it goes to the fact they’re working, they’re being productive. Many of them have careers.

The people who have thrown all that overboard, thrown that aside and are waiting for the government to come along and fix whatever injustices happened in the past, and maybe not even to them, the people waiting for government to make it fair, the people waiting for government to institute all this justice, to make amends for all these transgressions that took place, they’re miserable. They’re miserable, they’re unhappy, they’re angry, and it’s getting worse. They’re getting angrier. They are getting more unhappy, and they are getting more miserable, and they want everybody to be miserable with them.

They are just not content to be miserable within their own little universe. They want to spread the misery around. And yet they are getting what they want. Now, arguably, they can see that what they want doesn’t work. That would depress me, too. But they don’t give up on that. I don’t think they make that conclusion. They are still waiting for the right people to make it work.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is Alyssa in Raleigh, North Carolina. Great to have you on the program. Welcome.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. I’m so excited to get a chance to talk to you today.

RUSH: Thank you.

CALLER: I’m actually a Rush Baby, so I’m a lifelong student of the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. But the main reason I’m calling today is I believe I have the real reason that liberals, like Marie Harf, want to spread jobs and capitalism to ISIS. Back when I was in college a couple years ago I had a professor, it was my sociology professor —

RUSH: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa whoa.

CALLER: Okay.

RUSH: Capitalism?

CALLER: Yes, capitalism.

RUSH: Marie Harf wants to spread capitalism? In a liberal mind you can spread jobs without capitalism.

CALLER: True.

RUSH: Do you think she wants to spread capitalism to ISIS?

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: Okay.

CALLER: The reason I think this is because my sociology professor, who actually was a communist, she told us that the real reason that communism has never been a successful form of government in the world is because it first must grow out of a capitalist society, and that’s the whole reason that it actually hasn’t worked. So by spreading capitalism or jobs to ISIS, people like Marie Harf would be creating a fertile ground for what they would see as a chance for a true socialist society to rise up in the future.

RUSH: Okay. I’m going to retrace this.

CALLER: Sure.

RUSH: Step by step. You had an admitted communist professorette. What was it, was it sociology did you say?

CALLER: Yes, sir. It was Sociology 101.

RUSH: And she said that the reason that communism hasn’t worked is because it must spring from capitalism?

CALLER: Yes. Basically we have to overthrow a capitalist society in order for true communism to actually work and that’s the reason —

RUSH: Did she mean that you can’t start from ground zero and build a communist society, you have to first build a capitalist society where there’s wealth and where there’s income and where there is prosperity, and then the communists take it over and equalize it and make it fair?

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: Okay.

CALLER: Of course no one else in the class agreed with her point, but —

RUSH: Well, how many other communists were there in the class?

CALLER: No one took her side, so I’m —

RUSH: Well, that doesn’t necessarily mean — you got plenty of communists who eschew capitalism at any cost. I can imagine you had some communist students in there. What university, what school?

CALLER: It was a technical college. I had actually gone back for the second time to get my veterinary technician degree, so —

RUSH: Oh. Technical college. You had an admitted communist in a technical veterinary college? See, they’re everywhere, folks, you can’t stop ’em. But my point is, I can imagine you have students, by definition are gonna be young people, and I imagine many of them, “Capitalism? To hell with that. We’re gonna go communism right out of the gate. We’re not gonna mess with capitalism.” And they might have thought she was all wet because of that. But her point was, it’s interesting if this is what she means, she must have been admitting that communism by itself cannot create anything worth taking over. It cannot create wealth, it cannot create a burgeoning and growing economy, it cannot create jobs. Somebody else has to do that, then the communists go in and take it over on the basis that the end result of capitalism is inequity, unfairness, inequality, racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, and the communists go in and promise to equalize all of that and get rid of all the injustice, and that was her point, right?

CALLER: Yeah, that was her point.

RUSH: Well, then that would explain the ongoing effort to communize the United States. I mean, we are the essence of capitalism in the world. And they have done it in Hong Kong. The ChiComs, I don’t know to whatever extent — I mean, your professor may be on to something more than people might realize —

CALLER: That was her whole basis.

RUSH: Well, she was telling you the reason it hasn’t worked yet is precisely because of that.

CALLER: Right. Right. And that was, you know, Saul Alinsky’s argument, too. He was trying to create a communist society out of the United States.

RUSH: Right.

CALLER: So what better platform to do it, unfortunately.

RUSH: Well, and the way they go about it, I mean, capitalism, and it creates differences, by definition. Some people are gonna do better than others ’cause some people care more, some people are smarter, some people have more talent doing things, some people are more ambitious. And of course communists don’t like that, outcomes the same. So the inequality and the unfairness. And of course the requisite racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia would mean communists could come over and appeal to the youth of the capitalist society on the basis of how unjust all this unfairness and inequality is and promise to fix it and create the utopia, and in the process you destroy capitalism, proving, therefore, that communism is superior. That’s probably her thought process. But it didn’t rope you in. You now think that’s what Marie Harf is thinking, that before they can socialize or communize ISIS, they have to make ’em a capitalist economy?

CALLER: Right, in order for them to actually be able to grow anything out of it.

RUSH: Right. What would you say, if you look ISIS now, or Al-Qaeda, or any terrorist organization, and if you had to attach an ideological label or an ideology to them, what would you call them?

CALLER: Radical Islam, definitely. I actually studied the Koran in college for my undergrad.

RUSH: You studied the Holy Koran in college?

CALLER: I did. That was quite a few years back for my undergrad, in English, but, yeah, I had to take a whole course on it. And it was actually a pretty good course. It was fairly unbiased. But, yeah, unfortunately we learned in that class that Mohammed was actually a bit of a warmonger — might get in trouble for saying some of this — but he would actually change portions of the Koran in order to incite war on a different country. That’s actually what we learned.

RUSH: Well, look, I’ve not read the Holy Koran, as Calypso Louie says, but I know some people who have. I know some people who’ve read it cover to cover a couple of times, highly intelligent people, and they all tell me that what we see is in the Koran, that this is not unusual, that it is not — what’s the term? — an indiscriminate offshoot or offset, that this is all in there. I haven’t read it. People I know who have say this. That’s why there’s such a dichotomy, or dilemma, actually, for me on this. But I appreciate the call, Alyssa, very much. Thank you.