RUSH: For the explanation of why do this, and from an Obama standpoint, why do this? And, by the way, did you see when Obama went out to announce this he had Biden standing there? If I’m Hillary Clinton, I don’t like that. Why bring Biden out there? And Biden was looking defiant. Biden was looking defiant and proud, and then I remembered all the way back when Biden was put in charge of making sure nobody scammed the stimulus, Obama said, “Nobody gets anything past Joe.”
So obviously Biden’s there to make sure the Iranians know that they better not cheat, ’cause, if they do, they’re gonna have to deal with old Joe here. ‘Cause old Joe, he was right over Obama’s right shoulder, left shoulder if you’re looking at the TV screen, and just looking defiant and tough and proud. And unstated in that picture you’re still wondering, is Biden gonna run? If Biden runs, that throws one of the biggest wrenches in the Clinton plans that you can possibly imagine. But more on that later.
Yesterday I explained, and I know it’s hard, why would anybody — I know you don’t want to believe this. I don’t want to believe it. You don’t want to believe that we’ve actually conceded this way. You don’t want to believe that the Iranians have emerged — the Iranians, for God’s sakes, are responsible for the deaths of how many Americans alone, not to mention others. There’s still four Americans being held prisoner, a journalist included, in Iran. This deal doesn’t even get them released. Do you believe that? This deal doesn’t even get them released. Things like that weren’t even discussed.
If you want to know why we’re doing this, you have to understand what it’s about. And it is not about Iran and nuclear weapons. It’s about Obama. Are you at the same time asking yourself, or have you heard others ask — maybe you’ve even seen this addressed in the Washington Post today. People have been noticing and mentioning for a while, but the Post has finally got on board now, Obama hasn’t called the Steinle family out in San Francisco. He hasn’t lifted a finger. He hasn’t called them. He hasn’t had an emissary call.
This is the woman who was killed by the illegal alien immigrant in San Francisco who was there because San Francisco’s a sanctuary city. Hell, Obama called Sandra Fluke, for crying out loud. Obama called Trayvon Martin’s mom, Obama called anybody he could in Baltimore. Obama is calling them all over the place in Ferguson, Missouri. He’s not called the family of Katie Steinle. You know why? Because there’s no way he can turn that event into being something about him.
It’s hard for people, particularly Millennials, who have the exact opposite picture of who Obama really is. Obama is one of the biggest egoists and egotists and superiorists that we’ve ever heard serve in the White House. It is literally all about him. All of these things are about him. He doesn’t call that family in San Francisco ’cause there’s no way he can turn this event into something positive about him. This is a negative for him and his policies, that whole event. So he’s not gonna go anywhere near it.
Now, you might be a member of the New Castrati listening today and shouting, “Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Limbaugh, does that mean that you’re saying that Obama doesn’t really care about these families when he does call them?” That’s pretty much what I’m saying, Mr. New Castrati. “Do you realize how absurd that that is? He’s the most compassionate Democrat president we have ever had.” Mr. New Castrati, you’ve got it all wrong. Obama calculates everything and how it can benefit him or will it benefit him. And if it won’t, he’s not gonna touch it; he’s not gonna go there.
So if you want to know why we have a deal with Iran that is the way it is, the answer to the question is: It doesn’t matter what the deal is; what matters is that there is one. Here, listen to me explain it from yesterday. The explanation hasn’t changed from day to day, and this is what I said yesterday attempting to explain to people why we have this deal.
RUSH ARCHIVE: Obama, folks, can you say the word “legacy”? That’s all this is. Look, when Obama finishes he wants to be able to say he’s the first president to do national health care. In 200-some-odd years, every president theoretically has wanted to do this, but who got it done? Barack Hussein O. And in the midst of terrorism and an uneasy world that is teetering on the edge of terrorism daily, who is it that got a nuclear arms deal with Iran? To hell that it allows them to have them, they won’t get mentioned. Who got a deal with Iran? Not Clinton. Not Bush. Not Reagan. Obama got the deal. That’s what he wants.
He wants the legacy. And remember the old saying, the victors get to write history? Well, in this case the victors are the ones that get to pervert it. So Obama and his merry band in the Drive-By Media are gonna be able to write this great, great presidential legacy of great, great Barack Obama achievements. And right up there at the top is gonna be a nuclear deal with Iran that nobody ever thought possible.
ALISYN CAMEROTA: This is just another notch in the president’s legacy that has grown measurably.
KRISTEN WELKER: This is a legacy issue for the president.
ED HENRY: As a major legacy item for him.
ALAN FISHER: It’s a significant development for him particularly when it comes to painting his legacy and, of course he won the Nobel Peace Prize.
JIM PETHOKOUKIS: A major piece to his legacy.
FAWAZ GERGES: This would be Barack Obama’s foreign policy legacy, the highest foreign policy legacy.
JOHN KING: He thinks this is the biggest foreign policy achievement of his presidency. He made clear, he views this as history.
RUSH: There you have it. I mean, I called it yesterday, the media goes out, that’s a montage of media people from CNN and NBC, from just this morning. Now, the guy that couldn’t pronounce “legacy” was Fawaz Gerges. That’s how it’s spelled. I’m sure it’s not pronounced that way, but he was the guy saying (imitating Gerges), “This would be Obama’s foreign policy legacy, legacy, the highest, highest foreign policy legacy.”
Anyway, legacy is what it’s all about. It’s all about Obama. Health care, you name it. Do you hear any of these people discussing the details of this deal? Do you hear any Drive-By people talking about it up, down, good or bad, significant, insignificant? Nah. That’s for later. The current immediate goal for low-information consumption is that Obama is the one who demanded this. He’s special. You know it must have meant something when he was making those speeches in front of those Greek columns.
I guess Obama was the one we were waiting for. I guess Obama really is the real deal. Oh, that’s what this is about. And to sit here and to go through all the details evidencing our failure, not gonna make a difference to the people who are going to be dazzled and wowed by the fact that Obama did it. I even took note this morning, I was watching CNN and they had some apologist on there for Obama. I mean, there are people that know this is a disaster, I mean, even on the Democrat side.
The Democrats are kind of caught in the middle here on this because just as the Democrats opposed Obama on that pan-Pacific partnership, that transpacific, that trade deal that nobody was allowed to see, read, or talk about, the one the Democrats abandoned him on, the one that Republicans saved for him. Yeah, that’s another legacy deal, by the way.
The Democrats are in a similar position here. The Democrats, by and large (want everybody to believe, anyway, by and large), that they are pro-Israel. This is not pro-Israel. And they are really caught. They are under intense pressure to not do anything that would deny Obama his legacy. But there are people who think this deal is bad, that it stinks, that it’s rotten, and the Democrats who think that can’t and don’t dare say so. So I watched one of these apologists, who is clearly troubled by this.
It was the most… I say, “outrageous.” It wasn’t that. It was just… It was kind of insulting and hilarious at the same time. This guy was ranting and raving and comparing Obama to Reagan dealing with the Soviets. His point was, “You remember when Reagan and everybody was talking the Soviet Union and nuclear disarmament and so forth and Gorbachev and so forth, and everybody said Reagan didn’t know what he was doing and the Soviets were just running rings around Reagan and Reagan was silly?
“It turns out that Reagan was just running the rings around the Soviets, and it was the Soviet Union that imploded, and that’s what Obama’s doing here. Obama has seen to it that Iran’s gonna implode! It won’t be very long before Iran’s gonna be giving up.” It was incredible. I’m struck by, whenever these Democrats get in trouble trying to analyze and actually put Obama somewhere up on this legacy of greatness, they always trot out Ronald Reagan as the comparative.
Even though they despised Reagan, hated Reagan. Whenever they want any Democrat president to be thought of as great, they always bring Reagan up as an example of greatness to which in this case Obama should be compared. But there is no similarity between what Obama did here with the Iranians and what Reagan did with Gorbachev, say, at Reykjavik, or any of the other summits that he had with them.
Reagan did clean the Soviets’ clock, and the Soviet Union, as it existed then, is gone. That’s what Reagan’s legacy was in terms of foreign policy. He actually abolished and got rid of the Soviet Union. Obama’s not gotten rid of Iran! Obama has strengthened Iran. Obama has empowered Iran. This silly idea, this comparison to Reagan, just added insult to injury.
Related Links