Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

Listen to it Button

RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, my contention that there is only one mandate the Republican Party has after the election, that being to stop Obama, has been debated all over cable news. And I frankly — and I’m not trying to be funny here — I don’t understand what the debate is. What is there to debate about this? If you want to say that the election, “Well, Mr. Limbaugh may be partially right, but there’s also the idea…” I heard this on TV this morning. “It may be that he’s right, but, I mean, that would mean, uh, nothing gets done.”

I said, “Yeah, that’s precisely the point. Stopping Obama is making sure that nothing gets done, nothing of his agenda gets done.” That’s huge! That has to happen before anything else. If you look at this country as a giant boat or ship on the water, you have to stop it before you can change direction. Stopping Obama, stopping the implementation of the Obama agenda is the mandate. And of course it means nothing of Obama’s gets done. But stopping the mandate is a huge getting something done. Stopping Obama’s agenda from being implemented is a huge getting something done.

I really — well, I say I don’t understand. I do. I know it’s the competitive nature of commentary and the competitive nature of analysis and the overriding — I’m telling you, it’s big out there with a lot of people, this notion that we’ve got to work together. And the reason that notion is big is because professional political people misunderstand the electorate on this. They’ve got it in their heads, primarily the Republicans have it in their heads, that the electorate wants both parties to work together and compromise and get along and smile and enjoy each other’s company. That’s not what this election meant.

How many Republicans lost in the House? Let me just give you a pop quiz. How many elections, how many Republicans lost seats in the House? (interruption) Nope, that’s it. Two. How can you say that this is an anti-incumbent election, if only two House seats were lost by the Republicans? Sorry, folks, no way this is anti-incumbent, either. It’s anti-Obama. It is anti-Democrat.


RUSH: So it’s a little guarded. It’s a little guarded ’til we find out what they’re gonna do. We’re gonna get a pretty good indication here when we listen to some of the audio sound bites, ’cause my analysis that the only possible way to analyze this election is a mandate for Republicans to stop Obama, that’s been all over cable news, and every analyst you can think of is being asked to comment on it.

And I was surprised. Practically everybody that was asked agreed with it, but they all had a ” BUT.”

“Yeah, Rush is right, BUT I think the voters still want us to work together. Yeah, Rush was right, BUT there’s more to it. Yeah, Rush was right. Of course Rush was right. BUT…” And then people throw their own ideas in here.


RUSH: Lot of great calls on hold, and if you are one of them, please be patient and hang on, as we are going to get to you. In fact, one of them has a great point to make. If the voters — and don’t hang up out there. This is John in Mount Clemens, Michigan. But I don’t want to take the call right now because I gotta get started. His point is, “If the voters wanted Congress to work with Obama, they would have elected Democrats.”

Amen! That deserves an iPad or an iPhone. That is brilliant. He’s exactly right. That may be the most down-to-earth, simplest way to explain this. If voters wanted Congress to work with Obama to get things done, they would have elected Democrats. Anyway, let’s start with the reaction to my version of the election, the mandate analysis. Dana Perino was on Fox with Megyn Kelly last night.

PERINO: He certainly has a point, but I don’t think it’s the only point. I would describe it as “Stop, Drop, and Roll.” They want to “stop” President Obama from doing more things like Obamacare. They want to “stop” executive action on immigration, and I also think there’s a significant part of the population who wants to “stop” him from doing a deal with Iran. The “drop” part, Obamacare certainly still played a major part. And the third thing is, get the economy on a “roll.” And so that’s why I think President… Uh, Bush… (giggles) “Bush.” Rush… President… Rush Limbaugh, uh, is not being fulsome enough in the answer because I think that people do want to see a change in the economy, and these senators, members of the Congress that won —

RUSH: All right, that’s enough. First of all, see the faux pas there? President Rush Limbaugh? (chuckles) It’s all on their minds. It just is. See, she agrees partially. What she doesn’t know is she agreed fully. How do you get the economy back rolling? The first thing is you’ve got to stop what Obama’s doing to it. Obamacare is destroying the private enterprise economy!

Obama’s tax increases that are part of Obamacare, any number of things that he’s doing, all of the spending that he’s done and wants to continue doing, the continuation resolutions and the way we’re doing budgeting in this? All of this is contributing to the slow down of the economy. He’s gotta be stopped. His policies have to be stopped.

The Republicans alone are not going to be able to get the economy rolling because they have to go through Obama to do that, and he’s not going to willingly work with them on different ideas. Therefore, his ideas have to be stopped, and that’s a major achievement. Again, I’ve heard so many people on Fox this morning that were saying, “Well, I agree with Rush partially, but — but — but then nothing would get done.” Au contraire.

The whole point of stopping the Obama agenda is a major “getting something done.” It’s huge. It’s the only thing. This idea that Republicans and Democrats have to work together to produce legislation that leads to X, Y, and Z? No, that’s not what has to happen right now because that would mean compromise with the Democrats, and the voters don’t want any more of that.

So many people are caught in this prison of belief that “We have to work together and get something done.” Yeah, normally. Yeah. Normally, when everybody’s on the same page. Normally when everybody arguably wants the same thing. It used to be that both parties wanted economic growth. It used to be that both parties wanted great career opportunities for a lot of people. It’s not that way anymore.

The Democrat Party wants as much dependence on government as they can concoct. That’s why they’re gonna do amnesty. The Democrat Party is not the Democrat Party of JFK. “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.” Those are curse words today to the Democrat Party. The Democrat Party today wants as many un-self-reliant people as they can concoct and create.

Why work with that? The Democrat Party wants as many victims as they can create. They want as many people thinking of themselves as victims of this unfair, unjust, immoral, racist, bigoted country as they can create. They don’t want people self-reliant and productive. They want to be that for people. In the old days, you could work together when at least the objectives had some things in common.

That doesn’t happen right now. So the old idea of, “Well, if we stop Obama, nothing is gonna get done.” Precisely. We’ve had six years of something getting done, and we can’t afford any more of it. Here’s Joe Trippi, Democrat strategerist, cohort of Karl Rove on election night coverage, and he ran Howard Dean’s campaign.

TRIPPI: Some of the people did mean what Rush said — stop, don’t compromise, don’t work with the Democrats, don’t give in to the president — and I do think there are a lot of people who do want things to get done and want compromise. And that actually exists within the Republican Party, too.

RUSH: Who? If that were the case, like our upcoming caller is gonna say, why not elect Democrats? If you want to get something done, if you want people to work together, keep voting for the Democrats. By the way, with the Democrats running the Senate and the president having White House (Democrats have the White House) why isn’t any more getting done than is getting done? Why is it such a mess anyway?

Democrats are in charge. The Republicans are trying to work with ’em. Listen carefully. The Republicans have come up with something like, what did I hear, 300 pieces of legislation the past two years, and they’re all dead. Harry Reid shut down the Senate to protect Obama. There wasn’t any debate. There were no deliberations. There were no amendments. Nothing was taking place in the Senate. No legislation was being advanced.

Who did that? Dingy Harry, Democrats. Why? To protect Obama. The legislation coming from the Republicans was designed to work with them and help fix what’s wrong, and that wasn’t desired. This is an old cliche that people are falling back on. “Well, I do think people want things to get done and they want compromise.” Things are getting done. Just the wrong things!

Obamacare is getting done, and the worst parts of it haven’t even hit yet. Those were delayed purposely until after the election this week. Amnesty is gonna get done, incrementally. Illegal immigration is getting done. People want it to stop. The idea that nothing’s getting done in this country’s absurd. What the Democrats want is the Republicans to have some fingerprints on this mess, and that’s what they had better not let happen.


RUSH: You know something else about this idea that we gotta get something done? That is, I believe, the root of our problems. What is great about congressional recesses? Nothing gets done. We have too many laws. Since when has this country been defined by the greatness of its legislation. That’s not how things got great. Legislation didn’t make the country great. “What about the GI Bill, Rush?” Ah, spare me. The GI Bill enabled people to work hard. Hard work makes things happen, innovation, creativity, entrepreneurism.

This idea that we got to be doing something to get things done, Congress has gotta be doing something. Obama and the Democrats had total control of the White House and the House of Representatives and the Senate the first two years. What’d they get done? A lot of bad crap is what they got done. Just because something gets done doesn’t mean good is happening. There’s way too much that’s been done. There’s been way too much of doing something going on out there.

We just need to stop it. It’s the first order of business, and that’s what this election’s message was, to stop this. Put the brakes on it. But yet it survives out there. “That would mean we wouldn’t be getting things done.” Yes, it would. It would be a major thing to get done to stop Obama’s Regime, to stop this agenda. It would be huge. Look, I don’t mean to be beating a dead horse here. I guess I am. But I’m trying to get through.

This, to me, seems inarguably perfectly clear. And I’m not trying to stir things up. I never try to stir things. That just happens. I’m not trying to do that. I mean every bit of what I’m saying. Just like in 2009 when I said, “I hope he fails,” I meant that for exactly what it said. And ditto here.

Greetings. Welcome back. Rush Limbaugh, EIB Network. 800-282-2882, and the e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.

“But, Rush, they want us to work together, and they want us to get things done.” No, no, no. If that were the case they would have sent a bunch more Democrats back. This isn’t that hard to figure out. They don’t want compromise. They want this stuff stopped. They’ve had six years now. They know they made a mistake in 2008. They didn’t vote for more of it. How can anybody take any other message?

If people wanted more of what is happening in the country, they would have returned Democrats to the majority. Republicans would have lost all those Senate seats. The Democrats would have picked up seats in the House. If people wanted more of this, then they would have guaranteed that Obama had what he needed to get it done, and what’d they do? They sent people to stop it.

Mr. Snerdley, you have a vacant look on your face. Is this hard to understand? (interruption) You’re confusing me, looking like you don’t understand what I’m saying in here and this is simple as hell. How can I make it any simpler? (interruption) Surgeons love to cut people open, too, but sometimes you don’t need surgery. Surgeons like to do surgery. That’s what they do.

I like to talk but sometimes it’s better when I don’t. Well, not for you. But for me. Sometimes I get tired of talking. Sometimes I get tired of the expectations and the pressure. Sometimes I like to shut up. Most of my life I shut up, by the way. Most of my life I don’t talk, I listen. But that’s another story.

Just because surgery… (interruption) Wait a minute. Just because surgery is getting something done, does that mean you should have some when you don’t need it? (interruption) Well, okay, then. But we do. We have this silly idea, it’s settled in and it’s been there for decades that the only time things are getting done is when they’re passing legislation. And that’s a crock. That is absolute, total BS.

We have enough laws. What is legislation but new law? You don’t think we have enough limits on our behavior already? We don’t need anymore limits on our behavior. We don’t need any more people being regulated out of profit, regulated out of prosperity, taxed out of profit. We don’t need anymore! We need to cut it back. We don’t need reduce some of this stuff, in fact. That’s the kind of doing stuff that we need done.

Great artists will always tell you that the final step in any great work of art is what you take out of it, not what you add to it at the last moment. And if you doubt me, Google it, however you can produce search results, Google it, and you’ll find every great artiste, and not just painter, any artist in anything. When they go in to edit a movie, what do they do? Take stuff out of it that’s confusing, not relevant. They might add some things now and then. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but you take out. The idea that we need more laws and we need more legislation and Congress working together. No, no, no, no. We need to halt it, and that’s what the vote meant.


RUSH: back to the audio sound bites. I’m taking this slow because, you know, I don’t like to make this show all about me. But I could have if I wanted to today. Because virtually everybody in the Drive-Bys has been asked to comment on my take on the meaning of the election results. Here is Kirsten Powers last night on The Kelly File.

She asked the question, Megyn Kelly did, “Let’s take immigration. This has been a divisive issue within the Republican Party. Is there any way Republicans get together on that issue and manage to strike a deal with somebody who sees it through a very different ideological lens like President Obama?”

POWERS: For anything to get done now, someone’s gonna have to compromise. I mean, both sides are gonna have to compromise, because the problem with what Rush Limbaugh said, in my mind is: How are they gonna get anything done if they don’t compromise with President Obama —

KELLY: Mmm-hmm.

POWERS: — ’cause he’s gonna veto it.

RUSH: I don’t… Again, you see how people are caught up in this age-old trap or belief that the only time anything gets done is when the two parties sit down and somehow agree on something, and that constitutes “getting something done”? But that’s not what the people who voted in this election want to happen. They want the stuff that is getting done to stop!

It’s no more complicated than that, and it’s not accurate to say, “For anything to get done, somebody’s gonna have to compromise.” That’s not accurate at all. Both sides are not gonna have to compromise to get something done. There’s only one way that can happen, and that’s if you define something getting done as more of the Obama agenda passing, because that’s the only thing that can happen right now with something getting done.

The Republicans right now cannot advance their agenda. And, by the way, who knows what it is, if I may be so bold. Can somebody tell what the Republican agenda is? And I’m not being critical. Can somebody tell me what the Republican agenda is? They did not run on one. You can’t say the Republicans were elected to implement X, Y, and Z. They did not run on such an agenda.

So the Republicans don’t have an agenda today, and they can’t get one done anyway. Everybody knows Obama is gonna veto whatever they want to do if they send bills up; that’s the point! You send those bills up to make him veto them. That is getting something done. That is rebuilding the Republican Party brand. That is telling the country what you stand for as a Republican, or as Republicans.

That informs the American people who really is obstructing things. This, to me — and again, I’m not trying to sound insulting. Please don’t take it that way. It just seems common-sensical to me — or sensible. I don’t understand what’s so hard to grasp here. Let’s just take it in logical order. We had a campaign, and in the campaign the Republicans did not advance an agenda, by design and on purpose.

The Democrats were committing suicide, and the Republican strategy was to shut up and don’t distract anybody from what the Democrats were doing and let the Democrats commit political suicide. In the individual campaigns, Republican candidates were indeed campaigning on specific things. At the top of their list was Obamacare and repealing it.

But the national Republican Party doesn’t have an agenda. They didn’t announce one. So how in the world can anybody say they were elected to do something? How can anybody say that the Republicans were elected to advance their agenda when nobody knows what it is? They were sent there to do one thing: To stop what’s happening now.

They were not sent there to compromise with Obama so he only gets 10% of what he’s doing, or 20% of what he wants. They weren’t sent there to compromise with Obama. If they wanted to get things done, they would have kept Democrats in power and let the Democrats advance their agenda. That’s not what the voters did. They elected people who did not have an agenda, other than the individual candidates.

But in terms of party identity, you can’t tell me what the Republicans stood for in this election. It’s not a criticism. I’m just look at this as logically as I can. So if you elect a bunch of people… By the way, everybody will admit there’s no way, even if the Republicans had announced an agenda, they can get it done. You’ve got obstructionist number one in the Oval Office who everybody admits is gonna veto whatever comes his way if he doesn’t like it.

So then what’s to be done?

How do you stop this?

Well, the first thing is you don’t agree with any of it. You don’t compromise with anything that Obama wants to do. Zilch, zero, nada. Unless Obama surprises everybody and agrees with you. That’s the only time you compromise is when he comes off what he wants. That’s it. That’s what the people voted for. You don’t compromise by giving him only 10%. You don’t give up anything.

You’re the winner. You just won big. You just had a landslide. You don’t give up anything! Obama does. He lost. His party lost. They’re the ones that have to move. If they don’t move, the American people should be told. The way you do that is, you send these bills up there just exactly as I said: You attach polling data to ’em to show how much the American people support it.

But what you do is, you very publicly pass pieces of legislation to repeal Obamacare or whatever your agenda is, as Republicans. You send it up, and you let him veto it, and that’s how you tell people who you are as Republicans, and that’s how you portray him as the obstructionist. “But, Rush! But, Rush! The media is not gonna tell the truth about them!” Don’t care. You can. The Republicans can.

The Republicans can tell the truth, just as was just proven. Boehner called a press conference and they all showed up, right? And it was all on TV. People that watched it don’t need to have it characterized for ’em. They saw it. Republicans can get on TV. They’re more hated than ever now ’cause they won. They can get on TV any time they want; they can say whatever they want.

There’s no excuse now for not calling press conferences, going on TV, announcing the agenda, and coming up with legislation. It’s very simple: You make Obama veto what the American people want done. The American people want things to happen, to roll back Obamacare. They don’t want amnesty. You send the legislation up there and you make Obama govern against the will of the people.

You demonstrate that he’s been doing that. You make the Democrats the focus in your effort to explain to the American people why things aren’t getting done, and you tell them that you heard them and you’re gonna do whatever you can to make sure no more of this gets done. You know you were sent up there to stop it, so you do. See, me — in the eternal-optimist mode in which I live — see this as a golden opportunity.

I see it as a great opportunity, and it’s not even that hard. You don’t have to debate anybody. You don’t have to. There’s no racism or sexism or bigotry or homophobia. There’s no War on Women. You just announce an agenda via legislation that you know the American people support, you send it up and make him veto it — and then he’s why nothing is getting done. Now, I know it’s not gonna happen in a vacuum.

Obama, at the same time, is gonna be saying (Obama impression), “I’m working with these guys. I’m doing everything I can but, you know what, I can’t work with them. They’re a bunch of extremist racist pigs and so I gotta do everything by executive order.” Fine. If the American people like that, the Democrats would have won. If Obama keeps doing stuff like that he’s only gonna be further damaging the Democrat Party and Hillary and whoever else in 2016. There are too many golden opportunities here. And we haven’t even gotten to what would guarantee decades of Republican dominance, and that’s conservatism as their agenda. Well, we’ll get there. But for today, the agenda is to stop what’s happening.

Back to Fox today. Martha MacCallum had a new panel to talk about this. She spoke with Lars Larson, the radio host, syndicated radio host and Leslie Marshall, another syndicated radio host. There are a lot of those, aren’t there, Mr. Snerdley? (laughing) Yes, there are. And Martha MacCallum is one who also thinks thta nothing would get done if we do this. She said here to Lars, “Is Rush right? Because this is a debate that will take place largely on the Republican side of the fence. If you just stop doing things, how does anything get done?” And here’s what Lars Larson had to say.

LARSON: I think Rush is right from the standpoint that voters are unhappy with the president. They’re also unhappy with the Congress because they see gridlock there, but the gridlock is not coming from the Republicans. Rush is right when he says that it is to stop the policies of the president, because that’s what’s made him unpopular. It’s what made him so toxic that he couldn’t really show up to support Democrats who are running for reelection or for election on Tuesday night, because his policies are so unpopular.

RUSH: Okay, so next it’s time to turn to syndicated radio host Leslie Marshall. The question that Martha MacCallum asked, “If Republicans do block and stop everything they can, are the voters going to look at this and be turned back on them in the 2016 elections being the party of ‘no’ and just not get anything done?”

MARSHALL: You read my mind, because that’s what I was thinking. The party of “no” has an opportunity for two years to be the party of “yes.” They’re not happy with the president, clearly. But I don’t think this is the referendum entirely on the president, and, quite frankly, that makes it easier on voters that didn’t come out, on Democrats that didn’t run very good campaigns. You had both sides not running on issues, so I don’t think this is really about issues.

RUSH: See, so she’s really concerned about people that didn’t vote. That’s the future of the Democrat Party, people that didn’t vote. So her theory is the party of “no” has an opportunity for two years to be the party of “yes.” How does the Republican Party become the party of “yes”? What do they have to do to achieve that great accomplishment?

Seriously, what does the Republican Party have to do? They were elected to be the party of “no.” If they want to become the party of “yes,” what they do is go up and do their own version of political suicide and let Obama have what he wants. That’s being the party of “yes,” and then you can wave good-bye to ’em in the rearview mirror.


RUSH: Question: Is the Republican Party known as the party of “no”? They are. The Democrats have been calling them that for years, and they won, didn’t they? They won as the party of “no.” There’s no other way to spin this than my way. I’m just sorry. No, I’m not. It’s the way it is.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This