Rush Limbaugh on Glenn Beck



Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5pm and 2am ET on FOX News Channel

GLENN BECK, HOST: Now, we go to the former head of the Republican Party — he did step down yesterday. Mr. Rush Limbaugh is with us.

Rush, how are you, sir?

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST (via telephone): I'm fine. Hey, Glenn, how are you? Are you feeling better today, Glenn?

BECK: I am feeling a little bit better today. Thank you.

LIMBAUGH: Nyquil? How are you staying awake taking it?

BECK: I have no idea. It's the first time I've tried it. It's not a good thing.

Rush, I wanted to ask you. What is the most disturbing thing that you see coming out of Washington and of California with the grab of the rights? What do you most concerned about?

LIMBAUGH: Well, I think it's hard to single out one thing. I think it's a cumulative thing. But, Glenn, the thing that worries me the most about is, I think, Obama's who he is — liberal Democrat politicians and other politicians who are oriented toward acquiring power are who they are. They've always been who they are.

The question that we're all asking is: At what point the American people decide they wanted this kind of power grab by government into the private sector or have they decided that? Did they vote for a cult-like figure based on emotion when they voted for Obama? If so, what's it going to take for them to wake up?

I mean, the politics of this is, that with the numbers in Washington, even if the Republican Party was a unified conservative opposition in stark contrast to Obama, even if they were all unified, they don't have the numbers to stop anything that he is doing. It's going to be — it's going to require the American people stopping this and you have to wonder at this stage at — where are they?

Do they want the government owning their house? Do they want the government owning the mortgage company that they deal with and the bank that they deal with? Do they want the government owning the car company that they're going to buy their little putt-putt from?

Until we know the answer to that, we're not going to know just how serious this is going to get before we can make it better.

BECK: You know, I saw Barack Obama today. I think he is a — I think he's an extraordinarily talented man — very, very shrewd, very good politician. He was giving a speech today at the National Archives. He was standing right in front of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

I think this man sees the disenfranchisement in this country and he is going to wrap himself not in the flag, he's going to wrap himself in those documents to make himself somehow or another look like the grand protector of the Constitution — when I think we've shredded much of it under him just recently.

LIMBAUGH: Yes, a good point. I — the speeches today — his speech and Vice President Cheney's, I had somebody e-mail me during my radio program this afternoon, who watched both speeches, that it looked like President Obama was doing the Democrat response to a presidential address by Dick Cheney, just in reverse order. Obama was very defensive. He made sure he had a hole where he had a God-like echo in front of those documents.

But I thought — it was eerie to me, Glenn. Here's a man who starts out just talking about national security, starts out with his own personal story with his father, mother, immigrating to the country and all this kind of stuff — the man's a pure, full-fledged man-child narcissist who has to make everything about him.

And while he is talking about protecting and defending us and so forth, the Federal Reserve yesterday came out and said the economic forecast for the rest of the year is even worse, unemployment is going to go even higher, GDP is going to drop even lower.

Nothing is getting better. Nothing that the man has done while telling everybody this is going to fix it is fixing anything.

And back to my first point, that we can pound this and we can remind people of this, but they're going to have to experience it. I have a friend who's got a couple of kids in college, and they bought everything that Al Gore said about global warming. And their father said, "No, no," these facts and figures were demonstrated as overblown... (INAUDIBLE).

It wasn't until this winter when they were still shoveling snow in April in Kansas that they began to think, maybe this isn't true. So, until people are personally impacted by this in a way that they tie Obama to it, it's — he's going to get away with the behavior that you just described.

BECK: You know, Rush, I'm concerned because this guy is — he is so effective at playing right into — I mean, he — what he says and what he does rarely matches up. He's also very, very good at focus groups, finding key words and using them, but not in a way that — not enacting the things that people would want with those words.

And now today, for the first time, apparently the White House has their own news division now to where they didn't allow the press in to cover an event that President Obama was doing. And the White House put together a news package with the lower third and absolutely everything. The press said, "We wanted to cover it," and they said, "Don't worry about it, we got the package for you," and they put the package out. Now, they're becoming a news service as well.

LIMBAUGH: Well, what you are describing is somebody who's entirely phony. You are describing someone who cannot rely on who he genuinely is. And I think that's going to eventually lead to the plummet in his popularity ratings, because, you know, the life — the reality of life at some point is going to have to intersect with the words.

Right now, you're right: It's not what Obama says. It is how he says it that has the magical effect on people. And until the reality of the not improving situation — we were talking today on the radio about — somebody called in and said, "When are we are going to revive the misery index?" I said, "Well, we can't have a misery index until somebody reports the fact that there is misery."

And you watch the news networks all day long, and you found it fascinating that, in fact, during the Bush years, we have reports every day through six years on how we're heading into a recession and the economy is in a tank and people believed it even though their own lives were just fine, they thought other people were hurting.

There is no news detailing how people are suffering. We've got all these foreclosures, we have all this unemployment. We don't see the hard luck stories about what people are doing to overcome this. And so, the public at large, even amidst to this bad news, doesn't think that many people are being harmed by it, because the country is going on, we're launching shuttles, we are — the banks are operating and you go and use your credit card and so forth.

So, I don't know — we're looking at this as an opposition party very early on in this man's term as he barely passed 100 days now. And patience is something that we're going to have to muster and understand who we're dealing with here.

I do disagree with you on one thing: I know he's got a very eloquent speaking ability, very talented and so forth, but I think with the right political candidate, Glenn, in 2008, he could have been — he could have been defeated.

BECK: Oh, I think — yes...

LIMBAUGH: I don't think there's any reason to be afraid here. There is no reason to be intimidated. He's just a man who puts his pants on one leg at a time like Hillary does. There's no reason to get all intimated and think all is lost.

BECK: Yes, I don't — I don't — I don't disagree with you on that, Rush. I think the problem with the last election was — America had to choose between two progressives. I mean, any man who says Teddy Roosevelt is his — is his idol and answers questions that way John McCain does — John McCain is a progressive.

The problem with the Republican Party is not that it is — it's too conservative; the problem with the Republican Party is it doesn't even know what it is — except progressive light. It's got to be for small government — small government. And right now, I haven't seen that. Have you seen a turning point with the Republicans at all that they understand that?

LIMBAUGH: No. And, you know, you were talking to California and the vote at the top of the program. This is why I officially resigned yesterday as titular head of the Republican Party. I didn't seek the job and it was anointed to me — I was given the job by the Obama White House and the media.

The Republican Party, conservative intellectuals — Republican Party intellectuals and blue-blood, country club Rockefeller types — for the last year and a half, two years, have been trying to reorganize the party under the premise that the era of Reagan is over when it comes to tax cuts: "No, no, no, we're not old. The tax cuts don't relate to what's happening in 2009. And plus, we got to get rid of these social conservatives. We got to get rid of the social issues. We're never going to win elections."

The truth is that the country club, blue-blood Rockefeller types never won anything. It was the Reagan coalition — all these people the Republican Party is trying to kick out that finally was able to win landslide elections. The blue print is there, the Republican Party is rejecting it.

This vote in California yesterday, it was — you described it accurately — even the low turnout, it was still a nuclear blast, political nuclear blast, and it sends a message to politicians. OK. Here's a way to contrast yourself with Obama. He's spending. We're in debt $11 trillion. Here is a way — people are fed up. They know what the future holds for their children or grandchildren.

But Glenn, if there isn't a Republican Party that is willing to pick up the action and what happened in California yesterday and run with it, then it may as well not have happened.

BECK: You're exactly right. There's — right now, I — you know what? Rush, when people say, "You know, what can I do?"

I can't tell you of a person that I could look in the eye — well, maybe a couple of people that I think are Republicans that are serving — that I know would say, "We're going to do what Reagan wanted to do. We're going to cut all of these — all of these departments of education — we're just cutting them. They're too big. It's too bloated. That's not what this government was supposed to be."

And I'll tell you, they keep making the argument that if you vote for a conservative — oh, well, we're going to round up, you know, all of the unwed mothers and throw them in furnaces or whatever it is. That's not what this movement is about, at all. You're right on the social aspect. What this movement is about is they are destroying our children's future.

Look, I don't care what you do in your own bedroom. You — we won't have a bedroom left anymore. We're all going to be living in Hooverville or Obamaville if we don't stop the spending.

(LAUGHTER)

LIMBAUGH: Yes. It really — I say that the way to go about this, I think, the one thing that's never going to go out of style in this country, the one thing that distinguishes the human beings who live in this country versus the human beings in all time — throughout human history of the rest of the world — is freedom.

The reason we're the greatest country in the history of humanity in less than 300 years is simply freedom — the freedom and ability of human beings to maximize potential, desire — was granted by virtue of our founding documents to people born in this country.

What's happening with this expansion of government and the incursion in the private sector by the federal government is loss of liberty.

So, the way back here is to remind people of what made this country great. What is their birthright? What is the natural yearning of their spirit?

The human spirit is freedom, not to be confined, not to be treated like sheep, not to go along with a tug of popular culture, but being independent, being self-reliant and promote your own self-interests which helps everybody in your family and your neighborhood. Freedom is the key here. But I think, you know, I don't mean to trash conservatives in Washington when I talk about Republicans. I'm talking about...

BECK: Republicans.

LIMBAUGH: ...the rest of the Republicans to talk about — somebody is going to surface at some point.

BECK: Yes.

LIMBAUGH: I mean, it will. It just — it hasn't happened now. And the thing California just represents is a great opportunity for somebody to seize it...

BECK: You know, Rush...

LIMBAUGH: ...who is a Republican in electoral politics and run with this. And this — that thing in California, people are tired of losing their freedoms, paying higher taxes to fund a bloated, inefficient, wasteful government that's not getting anything done by people who are elected for it. The only responsibility that the people of California have for this mess is that they keep electing the people that make it.

BECK: Rush, will you — help me out on this, because you always get thrown under the bus, that — well, you know, where were you when George Bush was spending, et cetera, et cetera.

Address — because I — I have to tell you, the Republican Party doesn't get it. You just said, echoed again what I was saying about the progressive Republicans. George Bush, this compassionate conservative movement has got to die a violent death.

LIMBAUGH: Yes, Glenn, let me tell you something. I don't — personally, I don't mind people asking me that question, "Where were you with all the spending?"

I remember — I don't want to mention any names — I was getting phone calls from people in the White House angry because I was opposed to every attempt they made to amnesty. I was opposed to the Medicare expansion.

BECK: Yes.

LIMBAUGH: And they have found a way and called me mad as he can be. "What do you mean this is good — good in the private sector?" I said, "No, it's an entitlement and Republicans don't do that."

I was — you know, I wasn't alone in complaining about some of the spending, but the elected Republicans — here's the problem with it — when you're a Republican and your president is a Republican, you have to go along with it. If you break from him, then you got party disunity and so forth.

The Republicans in the House, I think they are in a no-win situation with some of the spending that the Bush administration was doing in opposing it, because they're charged with carrying his agenda forward... (inaudible).

I don't mean to be critical of him, but I don't think that's such a big an obstacle to overcome.

Even with all the Bush spending, Obama has obliterated whatever Bush spending was.

BECK: Yes.

LIMBAUGH: To say that we didn't oppose Bush even though we did on spending disqualifies us from opposing this outrage is nonsense. Too many Republicans are allowing themselves to be intimidated into silence by a dominant media cultural and a Washington political class that wants to achieve just that.

BECK: Rush, I can't thank you enough for being on the program. I appreciate it, sir. You are a legend. It was an honor to write your most influential piece in Time magazine. Thank you. We'll talk again.

Rapper Kendrick Lamar brings white fan onstage to sing with him, but here’s the catch

Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for American Express

Rapper Kendrick Lamar asked a fan to come onstage and sing with him, only to condemn her when she failed to censor all of the song's frequent mentions of the “n-word" while singing along.

RELATED: You'll Never Guess Who Wrote the Racist Message Targeting Black Air Force Cadets

“I am so sorry," she apologized when Lamar pointed out that she needed to “bleep" that word. “I'm used to singing it like you wrote it." She was booed at by the crowd of people, many screaming “f*** you" after her mistake.

On Tuesday's show, Pat and Jeffy watched the clip and talked about some of the Twitter reactions.

“This is ridiculous," Pat said. “The situation with this word has become so ludicrous."

What happened?

MSNBC's Katy Tur didn't bother to hide her pro-gun control bias in an interview with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in the wake of the Santa Fe High School killings.

RELATED: Media Are Pushing Inflated '18 School Shootings' Statistic. Here Are the Facts.

What did she ask?

As Pat pointed out while sitting in for Glenn on today's show, Tur tried to “badger" Paxton into vowing that he would push for a magical fix that will make schools “100 percent safe." She found it “just wild" that the Texas attorney general couldn't promise that schools will ever be completely, totally safe.

“Can you promise kids in Texas today that they're safe to go to school?" Tur pressured Paxton.

“I don't think there's any way to say that we're ever 100 percent safe," the attorney general responded.

What solutions did the AG offer?

“We've got a long way to go," Paxton said. He listed potential solutions to improve school safety, including installing security officers and training administrators and teachers to carry a gun.

Pat's take:

“Unbelievable," Pat said on today's show. “Nobody can promise [100 percent safety]."

Every president from George Washington to Donald Trump has issued at least one executive order (with the exception of William Harrison who died just 31 days into his presidency) and yet the U.S. Constitution doesn't even mention executive orders. So how did the use of this legislative loophole become such an accepted part of the job? Well, we can thank Franklin Roosevelt for that.

Back at the chalkboard, Glenn Beck broke down the progression of the executive order over the years and discussed which US Presidents have been the “worst offenders."

RELATED: POWER GRAB: Here's how US presidents use 'moments of crisis' to override Constitutional law

“It's hard to judge our worst presidential overreachers on sheer numbers alone," said Glenn. “However, it's not a shock that FDR issued by far the most of any president."

Our first 15 presidents issued a combined total of 143. By comparison, Franklin D. Roosevelt issued 3721, more than twice the next runner up, Woodrow Wilson, at 1803.

“Next to FDR, no other president in our history attempted to reshape so much of American life by decree, until we get to this guy: President Obama," Glenn explained. “He didn't issue 3000, or even 1800; he did 276 executive orders, but it was the power of those orders. He instituted 560 major regulations classified by the Congressional Budget Office as having 'significant economic or social impacts.' That's 50 percent more regulations than George W. Bush's presidency — and remember, everybody thought he was a fascist."

President Obama blamed an obstructionist Congress for forcing him to bypass the legislative process. By executive order, President Obama decreed the U.S. join the Paris Climate Accord, DACA, the Clean Power Plan and transgender restrooms. He also authorized spying in US citizens through section 702 of FISA, used the IRS to target political opponents and ordered military action in Libya without Congressional permission.

All of these changes were accepted by the very people who now condemn President Trump for his use of executive orders — many of which were issued to annul President Obama's executive orders, just as President Obama annulled President Bush's executive orders when he took office … and therein lies the rub with executive orders.

“That's not the way it's supposed to work, nor would we ever want it to be," said Glenn. “We have to have the Constitution and laws need to originate in Congress."

Watch the video above to find out more.

Six months ago, I alerted readers to the very attractive benefits that the TreasuryDirect program offers to investors who are defensively sitting on cash right now.

Since then, those benefits have continued to improve. Substantially.

Back in November, by holding extremely conservative short-term (i.e., 6-months or less) Treasury bills, TreasuryDirect participants were receiving over 16x more in interest payments vs keeping their cash in a standard bank savings account.

Today, they're now receiving over 30 times more. Without having to worry about the risk of a bank "bail-in" or failure.

So if you're holding cash right now and NOT participating in the TreasuryDirect program, do yourself a favor and read on. If you're going to pass on this opportunity, at least make it an 'eyes-wide-open' decision.

Holding Cash (In Treasurys) Now Beats The Market

There are many prudent reasons to hold cash in today's dangerously overvalued financial markets, as we've frequently touted here at PeakProsperity.com.

Well, there's now one more good reason to add to the list: holding cash in short-term Treasurys is now meeting/beating the dividend returns offered by the stock market:

"Cash Is King" Again - 3-Month Bills Yield More Than Stocks (Zero Hedge)
'Reaching for yield' just got a lot easier...
For the first time since February 2008, three-month Treasury bills now have a yield advantage over the S&P; 500 dividend yield (and dramatically lower risk).
Investors can earn a guaranteed 1.90% by holding the 3-month bills or a risky 1.89% holding the S&P; 500...

The longest period of financial repression in history is coming to an end...

And it would appear TINA is dead as there is now an alternative.

And when you look at the total return (dividends + appreciation) of the market since the start of 2018, stocks have returned only marginally better than 3-month Treasurys. Plus, those scant few extra S&P; points have come with a LOT more risk.

Why take it under such dangerously overvalued conditions?

If You Can't Beat 'Em, Join 'Em

In my June report Less Than Zero: How The Fed Killed Saving, I explained how the Federal Reserve's policy of holding interest rates at record lows has decimated savers. Those who simply want to park money somewhere "safe" can't do so without losing money in real terms.

To drive this point home: back in November, the average interest rate being offered in a US bank savings account was an insutling 0.06%. Six months later, nothing has changed:

(Source

That's virtually the same as getting paid 0%. But it's actually worse than that, because once you take inflation into account, the real return on your savings is markedly negative.

And to really get your blood boiling, note that the Federal Reserve has rasied the federal funds rate it pays banks from 1.16% in November to 1.69% in April. Banks are now making nearly 50% more money on the excess reserves they park at the Fed -- but are they passing any of that free profit along to their depositors? No....

This is why knowing about the TreasuryDirect program is so important. It's a way for individual investors savvy enough to understand the game being played to bend some of its rules to their favor and limit the damage they suffer.

Below is an updated version (using today's rates) of my recap of TreasuryDirect, which enables you to get over 30x more interest on your cash savings than your bank will pay you, with lower risk.

TreasuryDirect

For those not already familiar with it, TreasuryDirect is a service offered by the United States Department of the Treasury that allows individual investors to purchase Treasury securities such as T-Bills, notes and bonds directly from the U.S. government.

You purchase these Treasury securities by linking a TreasuryDirect account to your personal bank account. Once linked, you use your cash savings to purchase T-bills, etc from the US Treasury. When the Treasury securities you've purchased mature or are sold, the proceeds are deposited back into your bank account.

So why buy Treasuries rather than keep your cash savings in a bank? Two main reasons:

  • Much higher return: T-Bills are currently offering an annualized return rate between 1.66-2.04%. Notes and bonds, depending on their duration, are currently offering between 2.6% - 3.1%
  • Extremely low risk: Your bank can change the interest rate on your savings account at any time -- with Treasury bills, your rate of return is locked in at purchase. Funds in a bank are subject to risks such as a bank bail-in or the insolvency of the FDIC depositor protection program -- while at TreasuryDirect, your funds are being held with the US Treasury, the institution with the lowest default risk in the country for reasons I'll explain more in a moment.

Let's look at a quick example. If you parked $100,000 in the average bank savings account for a full year, you would earn $60 in interest. Let's compare this to the current lowest-yielding TreasuryDirect option: continuously rolling that same $100,000 into 4-week T-Bills for a year:

  1. Day 1: Funds are transferred from your bank account to TreasuryDirect to purchase $100,000 face value of 4-week T-Bills at auction yielding 1.68%
  2. Day 28: the T-Bills mature and the Treasury holds the full $100,000 proceeds in your TreasuryDirect account. Since you've set up the auto-reinvestment option, TreasuryDirect then purchases another $100,000 face value of 4-week T-Bills at the next auction.
  3. Days 29-364: the process repeats every 4 weeks
  4. Day 365: assuming the average yield for T-Bills remained at 1.68%, you will have received $1,680 in interest in total throughout the year from the US Treasury.

$1,680 vs $60. That's a 27x difference in return.

And the comparison only improves if you decide to purchase longer duration (13-week or 26-week) bills instead of the 4-week ones:

Repeating the above example for a year using 13-week bills would yield $1,925. Using 26-week bills would yield $2,085. A lot better (34x better!) than $60.

Opportunity Cost & Default Risk

So what are the downsides to using TreasuryDirect? There aren't many.

The biggest one is opportunity cost. While your money is being held in a T-Bill, it's tied up at the US Treasury. If you suddenly need access to those funds, you have to wait until the bill matures.

But T-Bill durations are short. 4 weeks is not a lot of time to have to wait. (If you think the probability is high you may to need to pull money out of savings sooner than that, you shouldn't be considering the TreasuryDirect program.)

Other than that, TreasuryDirect offers an appealing reduction in risk.

If your bank suddenly closes due to a failure, any funds invested in TreasuryDirect are not in your bank account, so are not subject to being confiscated in a bail-in.

Instead, your money is held as a T-Bill, note or bond, which is essentially an obligation of the US Treasury to pay you in full for the face amount. The US Treasury is the single last entity in the country (and quite possibly, the world) that will ever default on its obligations. Why? Because Treasurys are the mechanism by which money is created in the US. Chapter 8 from The Crash Course explains:

As a result, to preserve its ability to print the money it needs to function, the US government will bring its full force and backing to bear in order to ensure confidence in the market for Treasurys.

Meaning: the US government won't squelch on paying you back the money you lent it. If required, it will just print the money it needs to repay you.

So, How To Get Started?

Usage of TreasuryDirect is quite low among investors today. Many are unaware of the program. Others simply haven't tried it out.

And let's be real: it's crazy that we live in a world where a 1.68-2.09% return now qualifies as an exceptionally high yield on savings. A lot of folks just can't get motivated to take action by rates that low. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't -- money left on the table is money forfeited.

So, if you're interested in learning more about the TreasuryDirect program, start by visiting their website. Like everything operated by the government, it's pretty 'no frills'; but their FAQ page addresses investors' most common questions.

Before you decide whether or not to fund an account there, be sure to discuss the decision with your professional financial advisor to make sure it fits well with your personal financial situation and goals. (If you're having difficulty finding a good one, consider scheduling a free discussion with PeakProsperity.com's endorsed financial advisor -- who has considerable experience managing TreasuryDirect purchases for many of its clients).

In Part 2: A Primer On How To Use TreasuryDirect, we lay out the step-by-step process for opening, funding and transacting within a TreasuryDirect account. We've created it to be a helpful resource for those self-directed individuals potentially interested in increasing their return on their cash savings in this manner.

Yes, we savers are getting completely abused by our government's policies. So there's some poetic justice in using the government's own financing instruments to slightly lessen the sting of the whip.

Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

NOTE: PeakProsperity.com does not have any business relationship with the TreasuryDirect program. Nor is anything in the article above to be taken as an offer of personal financial advice. As mentioned, discuss any decision to participate in TreasuryDirect with your professional financial advisor before taking action.