![](\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/newt-romney-rush.jpg\"\/)
RUSH: Yeah, well, I guess it\u2019s gonna be up to me again today to put all this in perspective. Man, it\u2019s going nuts out there, and it\u2019s understandable. All these attacks on Romney, Bain Capital. Romney brought it on himself, and it\u2019s gonna be interesting to see how and if Romney can defend himself. I gotta tell you, folks, you think this is bad, wait \u2019til Obama gets hold of all this stuff. It\u2019s gonna be twice as bad as what you\u2019re seeing now. I know it\u2019s irritating to a lot of people. Here we have capitalism being attacked by Republicans, capitalism under assault by Republicans. I know a lot of people are commenting on it and a lot of people are upset about it, scratching their heads.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: Now, I got home yesterday and took a little break as I always do, and then started delving into the equivalent of show prep for today\u2019s program and I came across a number of pieces. Jay Nordlinger Impromptus at National Review and a number of other people, and they were good pieces. I just cannot believe that we have Santorum and Newt and Perry out attacking capitalism, out attacking Romney. What is this? Everybody is asking, “What is going on?” Republican presidential candidates attacking business? It\u2019s senseless. It doesn\u2019t make any sense — and it does in one way.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: In starting this discussion, they\u2019re trying to explain this, dissect what\u2019s going on on the Republican side with the attacks on Romney and capitalism and so forth, with language, by the way, that\u2019s used by the left. I want to read to you some excerpts of a piece by Jay Nordlinger, who writes a column at National Review called Impromptus. He says, “I was watching a clip of Romney tangling with an Occupy protester last week. Romney was defending corporate profits. I was astounded. I don\u00c2\u2019t think I had ever seen a candidate do this. When the subject comes up, you\u00c2\u2019re supposed to denounce corporate profits or say, ‘Hey, nice weather we\u00c2\u2019re having, huh?'”<\/p>\n
That gave me great pause. I had to stop and think. He\u2019s right, frustratingly so. He\u2019s right. No matter who it is, when the subject of profits comes up on our side, they usually duck it and run for the hills, which is maddening. Where are our people taking the occasion to educate people who have been mal-informed, ill-informed, or lied to about capitalism from the first day they stepped into public school? Profits are evil, they are so evil that even people on our side duck the discussion. Jay Nordlinger is reminding himself here that he saw a clip of Romney arguing with an Occupy protester defending corporate profits. How unusual is this? He then goes on to point out that Phil Gramm, the former Senator from Texas, conservative and an economist by trade, “once explained to Bill Buckley why he never talked about free trade on the stump.”<\/p>\n
![](\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/RushGenericStool.jpg\"\/)
Now, that was a huge benefit to consumers. Domestic oil, price of oil plummeting, gasoline prices were plummeting, fuel prices in general plummeting, great for the consumers, but look what happened to domestic business? They had to shut down. So every economic event, while good for a lot of people is going to be bad for some, and “verse vice-a.” You have an economic event such as the subprime mortgage crisis. That was a disaster for most people, but some people made huge amounts money on it by going short and understanding what the future was. <\/p>\n
So in any economy and in any economic activity you\u2019re going to have people that do well and people that get hurt. And Phil Gramm\u2019s point about free trade, the reason he never talked about it on the stump was that the people who benefited from it didn\u2019t know it. The people who were hurt by it knew it, and they were clearly able to articulate their opposition to free trade based on how it was hurting them, but the people who benefited from it, the average John Q. Citizen, wasn\u2019t able to explain it because he didn\u2019t know how it was helping him. So Phil Gramm said, I\u2019m never gonna have an army that\u2019s gonna be able to support me, so when it comes to free trade I\u2019m gonna have to do the right thing as a member of the Senate, but I can\u2019t talk about it on the stump or I might lose the election. Because most people who benefit from it don\u2019t know that they\u2019re benefiting from it and can easily be talked into the fact that they\u2019re hurting as a result of it. <\/p>\n
The point that Nordlinger is making here is that “over and over, Romney defends and explains capitalism.” Now, Nordlinger, I\u2019m gathering — I don\u2019t know this, but I\u2019m just assuming from the way he\u2019s written the piece here — that he\u2019s for Romney. He says, “Over and over, Romney defends and explains capitalism. And he\u00c2\u2019s supposed to be the RINO and squish in the race?” The one guy out there defending capitalism, the one guy out there trying to explain corporate profits to the Occupy crowd, he\u2019s the squish, he\u2019s the moderate, he\u2019s the guy that we have the problem with? “That\u00c2\u2019s what I read in the conservative blogosphere, every day. What do you have to do to be a ‘real conservative\u2019? Speak bad English and belch?<\/p>\n
“In the Saturday debate, Santorum knocked Romney for being just a ‘manager,\u2019 just a ‘CEO,\u2019 not fit to be president and commander-in-chief. This was odd for a couple of reasons: First, Romney did have a term as governor of Massachusetts (meaning he has executive political experience, unlike Santorum). And second: Since when do conservative Republicans denigrate private-sector experience?” And a lot of people are asking, “What is going on, why is Newt denigrating private sector experience?” And then saying what Romney does, put people out of work, is a takeover artist and he slashes jobs? That\u2019s what Obama\u2019s gonna say. Now, about that, we can sit here and wring our hands and lament that this is happening, “Oh, no!” But it is happening, so we have to deal with that, and so what it does is present Romney with an opportunity to defend himself. We\u2019ll see how he does. He\u2019s gonna have to. He\u2019s being assaulted. It\u2019s gonna be very eye opening for a lot of people. <\/p>\n
I live in Realville. I\u2019m telling you, what happens is what is. That\u2019s literal, that\u2019s real. It may be totally stupid, it may be totally unfair, it may be outrageous, it may be self-defeating for these Republicans to start ripping into big business or ripping into capitalism, but it\u2019s happening.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: So Romney is out there saying that he likes being able to fire people. Folks, don\u2019t we want somebody in the White House who\u2019s gonna fire people? How are we going to reduce the size of government? Don\u2019t we want somebody who loves firing people in the White House? Isn\u2019t that what we\u2019re all talking about here? We don\u2019t want \u2019em to quit; we don\u2019t want buyout packages; we don\u2019t want severance; we want to fire people. Do we not? If we are consistent, we are limited government, we\u2019ve gotta roll back the size. What the heck are we talking about here? <\/p>\n
So here we got a guy, defends profits; we jump on him. We conservatives, Republicans, jump on him. We got a guy who talks about how much he likes firing people; we jump on him. I mean, there\u2019s all kinds of reasons to jump on Romney, but not for this. Now, the idea that Romney is some big capitalist, I have to take issue with that. Did not Romney support TARP? What was TARP? By the way, if you think what Newt\u2019s doing to Romney is bad or Santorum or any of the others, wait \u2019til Obama has his run. Obama wants to run against Romney, for all of these reasons that you\u2019re seeing here. That\u2019s why I say it might actually be fortunate here for Romney to develop a chance, have a chance to defend himself, \u2019cause this is what\u2019s coming. I don\u2019t care who our nominee is, this is what\u2019s coming from Obama: mean-spirited, extremist, racist, wants to fire people, capitalist, wants profits, wants big, rich people to get richer. This is what\u2019s coming. <\/p>\n
Occupy Wall Street was created by Obama specifically to campaign against Romney. I don\u2019t want to hear anybody argue with me about this because you\u2019re gonna beat your head against the wall because you know I\u2019m right about this. And more and more members of the media are starting to let the cat out of the bag that the White House wants Romney. Okay, so he\u2019s got a chance. But TARP, folks, TARP, what was TARP? TARP, there was not one thing capitalistic about TARP. TARP was the biggest failed bailout using taxpayer money of defunct businesses in history. And Romney was in there supporting it. Romney supported TARP. Bush supported, they all supported it. Santorum didn\u2019t support TARP. I\u2019m just telling you, we gotta be real careful on how we start defining capitalism and how we plug people in. We have got to stand up. The Democrats want the economic collapse of 2008 to be laid at the feet of capitalism, and capitalism was not being practiced prior to 2008. That\u2019s not why we had the economic collapse.<\/p>\n
BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n
RUSH: Now, see, the thing that we know now is that TARP was not a bailout. It was a slush fund. TARP was a slush fund, and a year or two after it there was still two or three hundred billion of it unspent. There was no crisis to save the world economy that TARP was going to fix. We were lied to big time about it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
RUSH: Yeah, well, I guess it\u2019s gonna be up to me again today to put all this in perspective. Man, it\u2019s going nuts out there, and it\u2019s understandable. All these attacks on Romney, Bain Capital. Romney brought it on himself, and it\u2019s gonna be interesting to see how and if Romney can defend himself. I […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n