Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Well, Wyclef Jean is going to have a press conference here pretty soon. It seems that some people are targeting him and him alone. Wyclef Jean is running charitable operations for relief efforts in Haiti. And some people (‘experts,’ we are told by NBC News) say that Wyclef Jean’s administrative expenses may be going into his pocket, that he may be personally profiting by virtue of his charitable operations for earthquake victims in Haiti. Now, why single out this guy? There are all kinds of charitable organizations that are working around the clock every day in Haiti, even before the earthquake happened. Why single out this guy? This is the first White House in history which has asked for these kinds of donations to go to a website run by the president of the United States. And, folks, I have to tell you something.

If you think a dollar of welfare ends up as a dollar of welfare when it gets distributed you’re wrong. Ten years ago the administrative cost of a dollar of welfare was 28 cents. I’m sure it’s higher now which means that only 72 cents of every dollar taxed or printed for welfare spending got spent. Only 72 cents of every dollar. The government — you don’t want to say ‘profited,’ but you have to pay people that administer these things. There are a lot of charities where the administrative costs are high. There are a lot of charities where the administrative costs are low. Some charities do a 100% pass-through. But why focus on this guy? Why focus on this guy? Could it be that they want all of this money to go through the White House website? I mean, it’s a natural question to ask in discussing this.

You know during Hurricane Katrina — and let’s be honest about something here. The media is not comparing Obama’s efforts in Haiti to the impossible, and that’s the difference in what’s being reported in Haiti and how what happened in Katrina-New Orleans was reported. During Katrina, it was reported that Bush didn’t do enough. Bush was portrayed as a Superman who with the push after button could make everything happen. Here we had ‘Shemp’ Smith of Fox News in tears in New Orleans. (crying) ‘How can this be happening? Geraldo was down there and it was the same thing. He was in tears, ‘How can all this be happening? Where is the government?’ and that was after two days. It was portrayed as though Bush could do anything and he didn’t want to, and then people like Jeremiah Wright and the Reverend Jackson and some other prominent Democrats said, ‘Well, you know, these people are black and Bush really doesn’t care.’ That was stated.

That was stated. Kanye West said it about black people. Kanye West said, ‘Bush doesn’t care about black people.’ Ah, my memory is long in this stuff. I don’t forget it. With a push of a button Bush coulda done anything but he chose not to. Now, we’re not seeing that with Haiti. With Haiti, what are we hearing? We’re hearing about all the physical limitations, the problems, the bottlenecks, the impossibility of it all. ‘Good old Obama, he’s trying as hard as he can but there are just insurmountable odds. There are just insurmountable obstacles. Oh, poor Obama, he’s doing everything! (We’re going to nail that Wyclef Jean, by the way!) Obama is doing everything he can. But, man, there’s just so much in the way. He’s got Bill Clinton helping out, he’s got George W. Bush helping out, and Hillary landed down there. He’s doing everything he possibly can, but — oh! — it’s just impossible.’

Well, are there things that Obama (and, more specifically, the military) could be doing in Haiti if they really wanted to? Are there? I mean, I’m just asking. Could the Navy go in there and build a new seaport, for instance? (interruption) Yeah, but could they get started on it? They may not be able to redo it quickly but could they repair this one, for instance? But somehow we got a closed port and we got a clogged airport. My point is the media is not demanding these things be dealt with. The media is not demanding that Obama fix this. The media is not portraying Obama with a magic button, a magic wand that could get all this fixed overnight. They did that with Bush. The media is making excuses for Obama. The media is making excuses for Clinton. Did you hear what Clinton said? He’s campaigning for Martha ‘Coaxley,’ Martha Coakley.

Excuse me. I’ve had so many people mispronouncing her name I’m trying to honor them and I’m goofing it up myself. Bill Clinton went up there and he did an appearance for her on Friday. He said going up and making a campaign appearance for Martha Coakley and Haiti aid are two sides of the same coin. (interruption) Oh, yes, he did. I have it right here in my stack. I did. Let me find it. Let me find it. I’ve got it right here. Don’t doubt me on this. Da-da-da-da. It’s in the stack here. I went past it because a bunch of stuff I wanted to get to first. Well, let me find it during the break. But he did. He said they’re two sides of the same coin. Coakley, that’s purely political. Purely political. Now, the president of the United States… Let me just ask you a question, because they’re raking me over the coals here for being flat-out honest.

I never said, ‘Don’t donate.’ I simply said there are a lot of better places to donate than WhiteHouse.gov. People have been on the ground. There are missionary services there. You’ve got the Red Cross. You’ve got the United Way. There were all kinds of people that are in Haiti before this happened. So let me just ask you a question: Is it politicizing Haiti to direct Americans to WhiteHouse.gov to contribute? I think it is. It is politicizing it when you send Americans to WhiteHouse.gov. You see, the president of the United States politicized Haiti when instead of referring to nonpolitical entities for contributions to Haiti relief efforts he gave them his own highly politicized website: WhiteHouse.gov. It’s been a political tool from day one, from Stay Connected, to the blogs, to the touting of purely partisan initiatives that a majority of Americans have flatly rejected.

That site, WhiteHouse.gov, is used for partisan purposes, to mine e-mails addresses, to cultivate political volunteers and voters, and to mobilize them. And there are companion websites, Organize Now or whatever it is. Now, the president could have referred Americans to the Red Cross for charitable giving, any number of apolitical organizations, but he didn’t do that, although there is a link at WhiteHouse.gov to go to the Red Cross. But he didn’t refer people to it. You gotta go to WhiteHouse.gov to see it. Now, the White House has proudly declared — Rahm Emanuel did this, folks. Look, I didn’t say this. They did. The White House has proudly declared that ‘a crisis is a terrible thing to waste,’ that a crisis has to be held to a higher, non-benefit of the doubt standard. Look, do you think the Democrats are still politicizing Hurricane Katrina and the aftermath?

Do you think the media still is? There’s no doubt they are. They’re still politicizing that. The White House still blames its predecessors instead of accepting responsibility for its own votes and policies. Obama voted for every spending measure he now blames Bush for. The buck has never stopped at this White House and it never will as long as the State-Controlled, propaganda-reporting media remains retired from journalism and full-fledged into propaganda. This White House, folks, politicized 9/11. ‘What do you mean, Rush? What do you mean?’ Let me remind you. The White House politicized 9/11 when it made it ‘a day of service.’ Remember that? They said 9/11 should be a day of service, which is a left-wing political belief. It politicized art and artists. The White House in a conference call with selected artists who were rounded up by the National Endowment for the Arts to participate in paid political art to help support administration policies.

This has been exposed by Andrew Breitbart at BigGovernment.com. There are endless and countless examples of subtle and not-so-subtle efforts by this White House to recruit and organize Americans for the political benefit of one Barack Obama. You know it and I know it. The White House website was used to recruit union members to disrupt the tea parties and town halls last August. It has been obnoxious, inappropriate, unethical, and (some experts that I’ve talked to say) illegal. To push back twice as hard on the relentless, never ending political games by this White House has become an unpleasant responsibility, but I shoulder it. I happily do so. To ignore the manipulative organizing practices of this administration is to give them a free pass to brazenly consolidate power under the guise of good intentions and public service.

And that’s exactly what they have to do. Folks, I’m going to tell you, it sickens me to have to be the one to point out sleaze dressed up as honorable public service. If the media were halfway doing its job, I wouldn’t have to point out that a pervert has been named not just a czar, but the ‘safe school czar.’ If the media did its job, it would demand transparency. If the media did its job, it would investigate the epic corruption of Nancy Pelosi, of Harry Reid, of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. I mean, this is low-hanging fruit just waiting to be picked. If the media did its job it would demand to see Barack Obama’s college and law school transcripts, and that just scratches the surface. You see, to demand a higher standard of this president may be an uncomfortable burden at times but I wear it as a badge of honor.

We used to demand this higher standard from every president. I don’t think Barack Obama could handle one week of the treatment George W. Bush got for five years. I don’t think he or anybody in this administration could put up with it. The president works for us, he reports to us — and when he tries to manipulate and politicize people and situations that cross the boundaries of responsible public service, I will call him out. I don’t do it for any other reason than it is the proper role of a responsible citizen. The day it becomes irresponsible to hold public servants accountable, then I could say this country’s great experiment at self-governance is over. I’m not ready to stand by while our heritage, our inheritance of the freest country ever created is slowly given away by somebody who has apologized time and again for our proud history.

It still infuriates me: A man who means it when he says he will ‘remake’ America if given the chance. Just so you know, I don’t intend to passively sit by while he executes this plan of his — and everything that’s happened to this country over the last year is part of a plan. Only a fool or an accomplice would conclude otherwise. I just… I find it next to impossible, very difficult to sit by and quietly watch this travesty happen and say, ‘I couldn’t do anything about it due to political correctness.’ You’re just not supposed to criticize people in the midst of charitable efforts. Why not, if the charitable effort is being used for their purposes? Are they not going after Wyclef Jean? Why are they singling him out? I, frankly, don’t know anything about his charity, but there are a lot of people that are doing charity work. Why single him out? See, political correctness is killing this country — and like Obama’s recession is destroying the economy, I’m simply choosing not to participate. It would be irresponsible.


RUSH: Here it is. It’s in the DC Examiner: ‘Clinton: Haiti Relief, Dem Politicking Are ‘Two Sides of the Same Coin’ — ‘Somebody asked me today,” Clinton said, ”Well, why are you going to this political rally?’ he began. ‘And I said to them, this is just two sides of the same coin. You have to bear with me. I have friends killed there. I’ve worked with this country for 35 years. Hillary and I had a good cry on the phone because the cathedral that we sat in the pews 35 years ago was totally destroyed.’ Clinton said that they used frequent flier miles in 1975 to go to Hawaii. There’s only one problem with that. The frequent flier mileage program didn’t go into effect until 1981, until after airline deregulation in 1978. There was no such thing as frequent flier miles in 1975. You can look it up. It doesn’t matter. Two sides of the same coin and they get mad at me for accusing these guys of politicizing things. They had a good cry. He and Hillary had a good cry because the cathedral where they prayed in 35 years ago went down, is what he said. He and Hillary had a good cry on the phone. Now, you can process that however you wish.

One more thing here about this WhiteHouse.gov, from The Politico, this is about a year ago, January 20th of 2009: ‘The new White House website unveiled by President Barack Obama’s team Tuesday includes a shot at former President Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina. Under the ‘agenda’ portion of the site regarding Katrina, it reads: ‘President Obama will keep the broken promises made by President Bush to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. He and Vice President Biden will take steps to ensure that the federal government will never again allow such catastrophic failures in emergency planning and response to occur.” And it goes on. So don’t tell me, you people in the press, don’t tell me, and don’t tell anybody else, that I’m off track when I say this man politicizes everything, including the Haiti relief effort, by asking people to go to WhiteHouse.gov.

And don’t ever tell ’em I’m telling people not to donate to Haiti because I’ve not said that. I have said, ‘You’ve already donated to the government in the form of your taxes.’ You already have. And what did they do, authorize a hundred million dollars from the government? That’s been done. You want to donate, go someplace else. Remember, Obama wants to remove the charitable deduction. He wants all charitable contributions or all charitable outlays to come from government in the future.


RUSH: Let me ask you another question here, folks. Would a man who politicizes a man-caused disaster, 9/11, politicize a natural disaster? Let me point this out, Barack Obama has given a terrorist, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, constitutional rights and a show trial in New York City. He did this for political purposes. Don’t tell me this is the best legal way to resolve this. Obama wants the media to help him smear President Bush and Vice President Cheney based upon the rantings of a Muslim extremist. Obama is willing to bankrupt New York City, ignore the Constitution, destroy the CIA, and launch a banana republic style attack on his predecessor to advance his political agenda. It’s one of the most brazen and destructive political ploys in American history, but it’s there for everybody to see who cares to deal with reality. And I am grounded in reality. I am Mr. Literal. So would a man who politicizes 9/11, would a man who politicizes Hurricane Katrina, politicize an earthquake? I think so.

The White House released a timeline trying to establish — and I mentioned this earlier — a four-day minute-by-minute timeline trying to establish Obama’s concern and leadership in Haiti. This comes after his total lack of concern regarding Fort Hood, the terror attack there, the attempted terror attack on Christmas Day. This comes with the president’s approval ratings in free fall. It’s uncomfortable to connect the dots, but it’s far more uncomfortable for me not to connect them. Now, let’s not forget here, folks, this is the same person who wants to exempt his union political contributors from attacks on health care policies. Obama is trying to get you and me to pick up the tab for unions, workers who earn an average wage and benefits of $175,000 a year, just like he wants 49 states to pick up the tab for Nebraska and Louisiana. This is a man who thinks that it’s appropriate to fine and jail Americans for not buying health insurance. So would a man who politicizes man-caused disasters, 9/11, politicize a natural disaster? The dots are there for everybody to connect, or they can try to distract from the obvious by attacking me.

Now, Michael D. Tanner, this is an article that originally appeared in the Christian Science Monitor on September 20th of 2005, and it’s from the Cato Institute, which is a Libertarian think tank: ‘Katrina: Government Failure, Private Success.’ It’s a long article, let me give you some excerpts from it: ‘As we hear calls for a ‘compassionate’ response to the victims of this tragedy, it is important to remember that you can’t be compassionate with other people’s money.’ He’s writing this about Katrina. ‘This difference is as simple as the difference between my reaching into my pocket for money to help someone in need and my reaching into your pocket for the same purpose. The former is charity — the latter is not.

‘Moreover, private charity has long been recognized as more effective and efficient than government welfare programs. Local churches and community groups are the best positioned to understand the needs in their respective areas, and can direct money or services to where they are most useful. Private charities are generally far more flexible than government agencies, which are frequently bogged down in red tape and regulations. Just ask yourself, who has done a better job at timely and effective response, FEMA or the American Red Cross? This is not to say that government has no role in dealing with a disaster like Katrina. From policing to search and rescue to infrastructure repair, the government has and will continue to be active. But there is a danger in turning to the government too quickly or too often. If people come to believe that government will provide the funding, they may decide that there is less need for their own contributions. This will result in a loss not only of money, but of the human quality of charity.’ And this is all that I was saying.

That was all that I was saying when I said, ‘Don’t go to this WhiteHouse.gov business. That’s a politicized entity. There are countless private charities to donate to. Find them, Red Cross and so forth and do it that way.’ Nobody here, including me, ever said don’t donate, which is what they’re trying to distract you with. More importantly, they’re trying to distract me. They were hoping I would lead off my show with this today and ignore what’s going on in Massachusetts and what’s going on with health care, but I’m not going to let them distract me.


RUSH: This is Mark Halperin who is one half of the authorship of the book Game Change and he was on Meet the Press yesterday during the roundtable. He’s now at TIME Magazine. He said this.

HALPERIN: We see Rush Limbaugh say something outrageous and not a lot of repudiation from Republicans in Congress or others to say, ‘This is acceptable.’ It’s a time when the American people are showing our best to help. I’m talking about other Republicans in this country who shouldn’t be silent at such an outrageous remark, at a time when we should be coming together.

RUSH: So I don’t know what he thinks, I said. All I said was don’t go to WhiteHouse.gov. If you’re going to donate, do something more efficient than a politicized website run by the president of the United States. But Mr. Halperin, I could just as easily say that nobody in the media has chided you for not denouncing you, for withholding all this information in your book during the campaign, for your own personal profit. If I wanted to I could sit here and say, ‘Where’s the rest of the media not denouncing Mark Halperin?’ He had all this data on John and Elizabeth Edwards; he had all this data on the Clintons; he had all of this information on what was going on, information that would have impacted the campaign, and he withheld it for profit, for a book. And I thought journalists were about the news. I didn’t think they were about profit. I thought they didn’t believe in profit.

I don’t see any journalist denouncing Mark Halperin or his coauthor for withholding important, vitally important campaign information during that news cycle. And even Howard Kurtz: ”Game-change’ in Journalism?’ Howard Kurtz on background sourcing issues, and he’s a little distressed here. ‘These passages from the new book are at odds with the smoothly functioning Obama machine depicted by much of the media.’ Howard Kurtz is wringing his hands, why, we didn’t know what was going on in this campaign. We thought the Obama machine was smooth and oiled and just heading on down the tracks and we didn’t know. Come on, Howard, just say it. The media lied to us for a year for profit. Why don’t you denounce Mark Halperin for this instead of wringing your hands about, oh, my God, why, things were not like we thought. And you’re journalists?


RUSH: You know, Harry Reid has a following in Haiti. I had a story here from State-Controlled Associated Press. ‘Some voodoo followers –‘ I’m just reading verbatim from AP — ‘Some voodoo followers see God’s judgment on corruption among Haiti’s mostly light-skinned elite.’ That’s why the earthquake happened in Haiti, according to voodoo followers, according to the AP. So Harry Reid’s got some buddies in the voodoo movement down in Haiti.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This