Williams calls projected cost of health care reform a “lie”

By Greg Lewis

Closing out the week, it was Walter E. Williams' turn to be Rush's substitute for the day. He began the show with a pressing question that he wondered if Limbaugh's audience cared about: Is it permissible under the U.S. Constitution for the federal government to be involved in health care? Williams scoffed at the general welfare language in the spending clause of the Constitution, and quoted Madison and Jefferson to support his position that the clause shouldn't apply.

His next argument concerned the predicted cost of health care reform. He noted the projections coming out of Washington at $50 or $60 billion a year, but said declared it a “lie,” adding that almost any cost estimate coming out of D.C. is a lie. Williams explained how the original estimate for the cost of Medicare was off by a factor of nine, and went through several “lies” that can be found when Medicare and Social Security were originally passed. Williams concluded the segment saying the president needs to be asked to cite the constitutional authority for fooling around with the health care system.

After the break, Williams was back on health care reform, arguing that the British and Canadian models are not as “wonderful” as people hold them up to be, citing cancer statistics in Britain and waiting times in Canada. The first caller of the day said the Constitution is designed to protect our rights, and has nothing to do with controlling “products” like health care, Social Security, and welfare. Williams told the caller he was missing the point -- the government can only do what is enumerated. Williams went on to summarize the arguments on this in Federalist Papers No. 45.

Williams likens taxation to “legalized theft”

The next caller responded to Williams' mention of the general welfare clause, to which Williams constructed this biblical analogy to explain how taxation is like theft:

WILLIAMS: When you reach into somebody else's pockets to help your fellow man in need, that is despicable and worthy of condemnation. And for those of you who are Christians out there, I'm very sure that when God gave Moses the commandment “thou shalt not steal,” he did not mean that thou shalt not steal unless you got a majority vote in Congress. Moreover, if you were to say to God, “Well, I know you say thou shalt not steal, but is it OK to be a recipient of stolen property?” He would probably consider that a sin as well.

After another break, Williams responded to Joe Biden saying that the stimulus was the right thing to do morally and economically. Williams disagreed with this notion, and asserted that the actions of Herbert Hoover, FDR, and the Federal Reserve took what might have been a two- or three-year “sharp downturn” into a depression that didn't end until 1946.

Done for now with rewriting history, Williams again argued that taxation is the equivalent to legal theft. The next caller was concerned over Obama's czars, and she and Williams went on to bemoan the non-conservative policies of George W. Bush. The next caller described the “theft” by the government of his social security money. Williams said the Social Security system needed to be changed for future generations to prevent what had happened to the caller.

Coming back from another break, Williams continued to rant about the problems in Britain's health care system -- a system that is, we might add, nothing like what is being proposed by Democrats. Then Williams returned to his “tax is theft” theme of the hour. He said if he saw an elderly lady lying helpless on the street in a cold winter night, and he robbed somebody at gunpoint and used the stolen money to assist the lady, he would be guilty of theft. But he explained that is what the government does, and it is legal.

The next caller on the program also commented on the general welfare cause, prompting Williams to say the clause means the government should be doing things that benefit all Americans. He argued that he “doesn't benefit” if somebody breaks their leg and the government pays for it. He continued with his “legalized theft” motif:

WILLIAMS: As a matter of fact, so far as this legalized theft is concerned, I think I would be more happy with a thief taking my money rather than a congressman. You see, a thief will take your money and be on his way. A congressman will take your money, and then stand in front of you and bore you with the reasons why you should be happy about his taking your money. That's the difference between a thief and a congressman.

Williams promotes secessionist group, laments that last time secession was tried, “it didn't work”

Closing out the first hour, Williams found himself inspired by a caller asking about unfunded liabilities to promote the secessionist group FreeStateProject.org. Williams explained how the group would try to get Congress to obey the Constitution, or else issue a unilateral declaration of independence. Williams wasn't sure if it would work -- last time secession was tried, he said, “it didn't work.”

Williams wonders why liberals have “sympathy and admiration” for the world's greatest barbarians

The second hour began with Williams promoting a book by R.J. Rummel, Death By Government. The book, as Williams explained, was about all the death caused by communist regimes under leaders like Mao and Stalin. Williams wondered why “people on the left” praise these monster of history, and why people on the left have “sympathy and admiration” for the world's greatest barbarians.

Then conservative columnist Thomas Sowell joined the program to discuss a variety of topics, the first being Sowell's most recent book, The Housing Boom and Bust. In it, Sowell essentially re-wrote the history of the housing bubble crash to shift all blame away from the financial services industry and cast it upon government programs.

Then Williams brought up the subject he was just musing about, asking Sowell why liberal intellectuals are supporters and hero worshippers of Mao and Stalin. Sowell talked about how intellectuals loved Hitler's peace speeches in the 1930s, and the two of them pondered how much more dangerous Ahmadinejad would be than Hitler if he developed nuclear weapons.

After the break, Sowell and Williams discussed Islamic extremists in Western Europe trying to impose Sharia law. After another break, Sowell and Williams took a handful of callers. The first caller to get the double-dose treatment asked why the government hasn't put together a program to help people who are losing their homes. Sowell was “baffled” as to why the government would be saying who should be living in what house, and explained how market forces should win out.

The next caller suspected Obama would become a totalitarian leader and would try to get rid of term limits. Another caller bemoaned liberal idealism and arrogance, with Sowell and Williams naturally agreeing.

Guest Sowell on health care reform: “A lot of old people are gonna be sacrificed”

Sowell began the next segment ranting about health care reform, and how “a lot of old people are gonna be sacrificed” under it, calling Democrats in power “closet totalitarians.” Williams added to what Sowell said:

WILLIAMS: This might be where -- why Mao Zedong might be a hero to some of these people. They -- or they might not like or they might not support all of the murder, but they surely support the level of government control over peoples' lives.

And Sowell responded with a floodgate analogy:

SOWELL: Yeah. But once you agree to give the government this huge amount of power, it's like opening the floodgates. When you open the floodgates, you can't tell the water where to go. And so if you give the government enough power to, quote, “create social justice,” you've given them enough power to make life miserable for millions of people.

Guest Sowell compares Obama back-to-school speech to Hitler Youth

The hour closed out with Williams asking Sowell what he though about Obama's nefarious scheme to indoctrinate our schoolchildren. Sowell compared it to the Hitler Youth:

WILLIAMS: Here's a question I have to ask you before you leave, Tom. What do you think of the president calling the schools and talking to the children?

SOWELL: Oh, my. It is classic. I mean, the first thing that occurred to my mind was the Hitler Youth from the 1930s. All the dictators want to get their hands on the kids. They get them early on -- Stalin, Hitler, Castro, you name them. They want to get the kids because the kids first of all, they don't have any experience. All they -- they live in a world of words in the schools, and these guys are great with words. The rest of us have lived, you know, a few decades, and we realize that words really don't cut it.

WILLIAMS: But don't you think --

SOWELL: -- insidious.

Williams: Liberals condemn Hitler, but not Stalin, Mao, or Castro

The third hour was Sowell-free, but we still had another 60 minutes to spend with Dr. Williams. Guest host Williams started things going by picking up on the Mao/Stalin theme from the previous hour. He observed that you see a lot of liberals condemning Hitler, but you don't see that kind of condemnation for Stalin, Mao, or Fidel Castro.

From there, Williams unleashed his economics professor alter ego to explain inflation. (We often joke that Limbaugh is a professor in the field of X, so we'd like to point out for the record that Williams actually is an economics professor.) Williams explained that inflation isn't here yet, but he believes it's coming, and wanted the audience to be informed about it so that politicians wouldn't be able to deceive them.

Williams went on to explain how inflation occurs, and described the massive inflation that took place in Hungary and Zimbabwe. Williams also talked about how the Founding Fathers feared a paper currency because it allowed government to steal from citizens. He then explained the federal budget deficit, and how in an “economic sense,” the budget is actually always balanced. Williams concluded by telling his audience not to let politicians deceive them into thinking the deficit would be a burden on future generations.

After the break, Williams said he had just watched a report on Fox News about people selling their kidneys in Iraq to earn extra money. Williams thought this was wonderful, and thought that people should have the right to sell their organs. After all, it's your own body, and selling organs would help increase supply and help a lot of people. We think Williams is doing a disservice to his audience by leaving out the ethical dilemmas that would result from legalizing the sale of body parts.

Then Williams' daughter called into the program, and asked what her father thought about the so-called elastic clause in the Constitution. After a quick commercial break, Williams took another caller who was baffled as to why the stock market would be going up after the latest unemployment numbers were announced. Williams didn't sound too bothered about unemployment, explaining how it is a relocation process that will end with people getting other jobs.

Coming back from the next break, Williams took a caller who disagreed with the host's take on inflation. Williams reasserted his position, using an analogy to the game of Monopoly to make his point that government is the cause of inflation. He added that if you ever find yourself on trial for counterfeiting, just tell the judge you're engaging in monetary policy. Williams closed out the program with a couple more callers asking about various clauses in the Constitution.

Zachary Aronow and Zachary Pleat contributed to this edition of the Limbaugh Wire.

Highlights

Outrageous comments

WILLIAMS: And I agree with you 100 percent that helping your fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable, but under only one circumstance -- that is, when you reach into your own pocket to help your fellow man in need, that is praiseworthy and laudable. When you reach into somebody else's pockets to help your fellow man in need, that is despicable and worthy of condemnation. And for those of you who are Christians out there, I'm very sure that when God gave Moses the commandment “thou shalt not steal,” he did not mean that thou shalt not steal unless you got a majority vote in Congress. Moreover, if you were to say to God, “Well, I know you say thou shalt not steal, but is it OK to be a recipient of stolen property?” He would probably consider that a sin as well.

[...]

WILLIAMS: As a matter of fact, so far as this legalized theft is concerned, I think I would be more happy with a thief taking my money rather than a congressman. You see, a thief will take your money and be on his way. A congressman will take your money, and then stand in front of you and bore you with the reasons why you should be happy about his taking your money. That's the difference between a thief and a congressman.

[...]

WILLIAMS: And this might go to something that we were saying towards the beginning of the hour. This might be where -- why Mao Zedong might be a hero to some of these people. They -- or they might not like or they might not support all of the murder, but they surely support the level of government control over peoples' lives.

SOWELL: Yeah. But once you agree to give the government this huge amount of power, it's like opening the floodgates. When you open the floodgates, you can't tell the water where to go. And so if you give the government enough power to, quote, “create social justice,” you've given them enough power to make life miserable for millions of people.

WILLIAMS: That's right.

[...]

WILLIAMS: Here's a question I have to ask you before you leave, Tom. What do you think of the president calling the schools and talking to the children?

SOWELL: Oh, my. It is classic. I mean, the first thing that occurred to my mind was the Hitler Youth from the 1930s. All the dictators want to get their hands on the kids. They get them early on -- Stalin, Hitler, Castro, you name them. They want to get the kids because the kids first of all, they don't have any experience. All they -- they live in a world of words in the schools, and these guys are great with words. The rest of us have lived, you know, a few decades, and we realize that words really don't cut it.

WILLIAMS: But don't you think --

SOWELL: -- insidious.