Wednesday - August 17, 2016
RUSH: Have you heard the latest Democrat scam? Have you heard about the agriculture department's financial grants to lesbian farmers? (interruption) You think I'm making this up? See, this is how they do it. All right. I hadn't intended to get into this right off the bat. Let me find it here in the Stack because it's something that's happening. It's actually real, and there is a strategic reason for it. Here it is. Are you ready for this? It's two pages. Let me pull 'em out here. It is from the Washington Free Beacon. That's the website.
Headline: "Feds Holding Summits for Lesbian Farmers -- USDA wants to change image of farmers from 'white, rich male.' The US Department of Agriculture is holding summits to promote the role of lesbian farmers as a part of its 'Rural Pride' campaign. The agency is working with singer and LGBT activist Cyndi Lauper for a 'day of conversation' about the struggles of gay and transgender individuals in rural America. [USDA] says its wants to change the perception of what it means to be a farmer in America away from the 'white, rich male.'"
Now, I understand farmers are not "rich." This is part of the disinformation campaign. "Rich, white male" is how the left describes pretty much any constituency group that they're opposed to. What the point of this is, folks... It's not about lesbian farmers. What they're trying to do is convince lesbians to become farmers. (interruption)
You sit in there and laugh. Okay, go ahead and laugh at it, but I'm telling you what they're doing. They are trying to bust up one of the last geographically conservative regions in the country; that's rural America.
Rural America happens to be largely conservative. Rural America is made up of self-reliant, rugged individualist types. They happen to be big believers in the Second Amendment. So here comes the Obama Regime with a bunch of federal money and they're waving it around, and all you gotta do to get it is be a lesbian and want to be a farmer and they'll set you up. I'm like you; I never before in my life knew that lesbians wanted to be farmers.
I never knew that lesbians wanted to get behind the horse and the plow and start burrowing. I never knew it. But apparently enough money it make it happen, and the objective here is to attack rural states. They're already attacking suburbs, and that has been made perfectly clear by what happened in Milwaukee. They're going after every geographic region that is known to be largely conservative. They never stop, folks. They are constantly on the march.
Now, I guarantee you that most people reading the news would come across a story with the Washington Free Beacon headline "Feds Holding Summits for Lesbian Farmers," and they would probably ignore it or laugh at it but ultimately cast it aside. But I, El Rushbo, am able to read the stitches on the fastball and clearly see what this is about. I only need to read three paragraphs of this story to understand what this is about.
And the college loan system, the student loan system? You know, I've been harping on that recently as a great illustration of how the people that we have trusted to run our affairs -- to manage things because we think they're competent -- are the people who've taken the promise of a student loan and a college education and turned it into an albatross around people's necks. I know people who are in their fifties who are just now paying off their student loans, and they're facing the cycle all over again as their kids are now starting college.
What has this done? In addition to destroying the college education as a building block on the road to prosperity -- I mean, you graduate with really an albatross around your neck, all that debt that you have to pay off before you begin to acquire personal wealth. Tuition never comes down! All they do is make adjustments in the student loan program to make it a little bit more attractive to people. What does it also do? Well, it makes colleges rich, but it turns these students into lifelong dependents.
It turns students into perpetual leftists. It creates students that have no hope but that to live at home. They have no way of earning enough money or getting a job to acquire any wealth because they've got the specter of the student loan and whatever else they have accrued as expenses. The latest numbers: One-in-five young adults, 20%, now live with their parents or their grandparents. Again, this is the Democrat Party or the left creating another voting bloc just as they have with the African-American voter.
They convinced the African-American voter that the Democrat Party's their only hope, that government is their only hope, that Democrats running government is their only hope. And they're in the process here of doing the same thing now with Millennial college graduates. And of course when it comes time to blame somebody for the student loan program, who do you think's gonna get blamed? Well, probably somebody they already hate, like George W. Bush, or some other Republican, or the Wall Street banks.
Yeah, that'll work.
Anybody that they've already convinced people to hate, blame them. Set yourself up, "the government," as the protector. "We got you the loan; we're helping you pay it back. We're making sure you got educated. We're the ones looking out for you," and this is how it goes. We look at recent surveys of Millennials asked whether they're liberal or conservative, and the number of Millennials who identify as liberal is double the number of conservatives, like 42%-21%. And some of them, of course, don't know, don't say, don't identify, what have you.
Just got a note here from the Official Program Observer. Yeah. I get into that. Question about how can farmers be perceived to be rich and white after being giving the Pigford money. That was the case where a bunch of black farmers supposedly got screwed and the federal government paid 'em off and many of 'em that got paid off have never been farmers. Right. I have other questions about this lesbian farmer thing that the USDA is doing. I'm thinking about... Maybe I don't need to share with you what I'm thinking about here.
Well, I just... But I'm not kidding, folks.
Again, in previous days gone by, hoo! This would have been... We would have looked at that... And we could still have our yuks about it, make no mistake. But it has a specific political objective, and the quick explanation is this is the left expanding their sphere of dominant influence. (interruption) I know. There's... Nobody's ever heard of a clamoring among lesbians to be farmers. I mean, lesbians are claiming that they're discriminated against in a lot of ways, but you've never heard 'em say that farming is unfair to them. You've never even heard 'em say they want to be farmers! But here come the Feds waving all kinds of money at 'em, and you know what's gonna happen then.
RUSH: You want to hear some more odd news? All right, here's some more odd news. Try this. From TheHill.com: "Transgender Rules for Homeless Shelters Spark Firestorm." Really? That's right, my friends. "Homeless shelters have become the latest battleground in the national debate over transgender rights. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is expected in September to finalize regulations that would allow people to stay in homeless shelters based on the gender they identify with."
Nobody's gonna be free from this. Nobody. You live in a shopping cart, and a transgender can claim it. You live in a homeless shelter, it doesn't matter. "The proposal has set off a firestorm, pitting LGBT groups against religious organizations that operate many homeless shelters." And there, by the way, is the real reason this is happening, because a lot of churches run homeless shelters. Not just Catholic churches. A lot of churches run homeless shelters.
So here comes the Regime, once again, with a full-fledged assault on religion. Just as Obamacare contains many assaults on religion, so now the new rules for homeless shelters that would allow people to stay in homeless shelters based on the gender they identify with.
"'Transgender women are women regardless of whether they were born male,' said David Stacy, government affairs director at the Human Rights Campaign," which is a gay rights organization, proving my point that the overlap here exists, and the transgender gang has been aided and abetted here by the gay and lesbian groups because the gays and lesbians pretty much got what they want now and there's no reason to rabble-rouse as much.
They want to keep rabble-rousing and agitating so they've adopted the bisexual and transgender group. They've imported them into the gay and lesbian group. They get to rabble-rouse and agitate all over again; get to act like they're still discriminated against; get to act like no accomplishments have happened; get to act like none of their demands have been met and so now it's the LGBT group, particularly transgenders, being allowed to not only choose the bathrooms they use, but now to choose the homeless shelters they want to use.
Notice there's not any discussion here of maybe trying to deal with homelessness. Notice that when we talk about homelessness, it's another one of these new norms. Yep, it's just there. It's just part of the fabric of America now. It is something that we must acknowledge and admit that is part and parcel of America. Homelessness illustrates the great divide. I'm speaking as a leftist now, as a progressive. Homelessness illustrates the unfairness, the equality, the bias and the bigotry of America.
How could a great country like America permit this is the question. The never-ending refrain, oh, you think America is exceptional, huh? You think America is great? Well, how do you explain all the homeless people? How do you explain this rampant lack of compassion that's features so many homeless people?
And Republicans are being blamed for this for having no compassion and no heart. And the left gets to applaud themselves, beat their chests as champions of the downtrodden, champions of the discriminated-against, champions of the forgotten, champions of the lost, champions of the hungry, the homeless, the thirsty, whatever.
And since churches run a lot of the homeless shelters, here comes the almighty federal government saying, hey, you can't discriminate. Transgenders get to choose their bathrooms, they get to choose their locker rooms, and now they get to choose their homeless shelters.
And again, quoting this guy, David Stacy, government affairs director, Human Rights Campaign, "Transgender women are women regardless of whether they were born male." And there you have it. See that guy over there? He was born male. But no, he's a woman in his mind, and therefore he's a woman. And you can't say otherwise.
He continued by saying, "If you're a transgender woman and you walk into a homeless shelter and they treat you like a man, it's traumatizing. These people are already vulnerable, they're homeless, they don't have a job. To face discrimination the entire time they're there is a real problem."
So now homeless shelters are being attacked by the left because many of them are run by churches. How many homeless transgenders would you say there are in America? I mean, whatever the number is, it's not even one half of 1%. And look at the massive upheaval in policy and federal dictate and everything else to accommodate them.
It's even worse than that, because the transgenders are now being accorded the label of normalcy, and anybody who isn't on board, you're the problem, you're the danger, you're the person whose mind is out of whack and who we've gotta get made right. It's what I mean, every day we wake up, every day, and we find another assault. Today there's two. Lesbian farmers and transgenders being allowed to use whatever homeless shelter they want.
And then there's this, folks. This is from the Poughkeepsie Journal. Poughkeepsie, New York. "Fire Chairman Seeks 'Compromise' After American Flag Controversy." What do you think that flag controversy is?
"The chairman of the Arlington Board of Fire Commissioners said he's reached out to Chief Tory Gallante to discuss the possibility of a compromise about the use of American flags on fire trucks," because somebody has demanded that the American flag not be anywhere on the fire trucks in Poughkeepsie.
"American flags were removed from three Arlington Fire District trucks Tuesday, sparking heated discussion on social media and disappointment from union members. Gallante was directed by the board to remove the flags from the backs of the trucks during Monday's meeting. He declined to comment on specifics of why the decision was made but said he is 'very disappointed with their direction.'
"Arlington Fire Commissioner Chairman Jim Beretta said the board majority feel the flags are a 'liability during normal operations for our people and other motorists,' and that the board had not been consulted before the flags were mounted."
How is the American flag on the back of a fire truck a liability during normal operations? "The flags, which were only recently mounted on the trucks at the request of the union, were removed during a ceremony at Arlington headquarters in the Town of Poughkeepsie Tuesday."
But why would the American flag be a liability in Poughkeepsie, New York, during normal operations? Do you want to take a wild guess? It's not stated here. I haven't completed reading the story. Just now got it. Could it be something similar to people I know in Connecticut who don't have the courage to put a Never Hillary bumper sticker on their car because they're afraid the car might be vandalized or attacked? Well, look, I'm just guessing here. Remember the word here.
"The board majority feel the flags are a liability during normal operations for our people and other motorists." How is it a liability unless it's provocative? And if the flag is provocative, who would the flag provoke? Well, these questions answer themselves. We don't know if this is the reason, but man, oh, man. You gotta take the flag off a fire truck 'cause it may provoke somebody, like people that don't like America?
RUSH: So the news keeps pouring in in ways I was not expecting. Transgender rules for homosexual shelters spark firestorm. USDA granting money to lesbians who want to become farmers. And so now there's this interesting support document here. This is BusinessInsider.com: "Same sex couples are more likely to have college degrees than opposite sex couples."
See how that works? Gay couples are smarter. Gay couples are more sophisticated. Gay couples are more reasonable. Gay couples are more hip. Gay couples are where it's at. Gay couples are more likely to have college degrees than opposite-sex couples. Now, the sentence actually says same sex versus opposite. Not homosexual versus heterosexual. That's part of the new terminology as well.
"Same sex couples are more likely to have college degrees than opposite sex couples. Interestingly, while married opposite sex couples are more likely than unmarried couples to have bachelor's degrees, the opposite is the case for gay couples. Gay couples also have higher incomes than straight couples." Did you know that? See what you straight people been missing out on?
"Married gay couples, with an average household income of about $115,000, make slightly more money than unmarried gay couples, whose average is $111,223. For straight couples, the gap between married and unmarried couples is much higher. Married straight couples make $101,487 per year on average."
So that means that married gay couples make $14,000 a year more, on average, now, than married straight couples. It seems like gay couples are doing pretty well out there. It doesn't seem like they're the victim of much discrimination out there. Maybe it's the single gay and lesbian people who are being discriminated against.
And, by the way, when it comes to lesbians they do pretty well, too. "In a survey of 29 studies published in January 2015 ... the University of Washington found an average earnings premium of 9% for lesbians over heterosexual women." This is incredible news! Same sex couples are more likely to be more educated than opposite sex couples. Same sex couples earn much more money, and lesbians also earn more than straight women. All this under the headline: "Here Are Some of the Demographic and Economic Characteristics of America's Gay Couples."
Folks, I'm telling you, the full-court press is on. No matter where you turn, you can't escape this fact: If you are conservative, Republican, straight and white, you are yesterday. You are so yesterday. You are so irrelevant. You are so unnecessary. That seems to be the tone of much of the hip reporting as it's taking place today.