All Episodes
Previous Next
May 12, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:27
May 12, 2010, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You are listening to America's real anchor man and the doctor of democracy, Rush Limbaugh behind the golden EIB microphone and the most listened to radio talk show in America.
And we're going to get to your phone calls pretty quick in this half hour.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
Some guy from Ohio says a Rush comic book is really good.
I didn't know there was a Rush comic book.
I didn't know there was a Rush comic book.
I'll be learning about the Rush comic book from the caller when we get there.
Now, look, folks, immigration.
There's some fabulous, fabulous, just amazing news on this today.
70%, 70% of Massachusetts voters favor a proposal recently rejected by the state legislature that would stop illegal immigrants from receiving public benefits.
70% in Ted Kennedy's state out there.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that just 17% oppose the proposal to prevent illegal immigrants from gaining access to public housing, unemployment benefits, welfare, or workers' comp.
The proposal failed to pass in a Democrat-controlled state house last month by a 75 to 82 vote.
So once again, the Democrats are governing against the will of the voters, which is exactly what Obama is doing.
Obama doesn't care what the people want.
So he's not going to bend to any public opinion or public opposition.
And the Democrats throughout the country are not either.
And this is not going to stand them in good stead.
Once people figure out en masse, and it's happening, that the Democrats are a minority and are governing against the will of the people, that they are siding against the American people.
That's something that these people pay for down the road.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed a bill targeting a school district's ethnic studies program yesterday, hours after a report by a United Nations human rights expert condemned the measure.
The United Nations had to look at what's going on in Arizona, condemned it.
This is another thing that's going to cement support for Arizona.
State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the measure for years, said a Tucson Schrill District program promotes ethnic chauvinism and racial resentment toward whites while segregating students by race.
He says it's just like the old South.
It's long past time that we prohibited this.
The measure prohibits classes that advocate ethnic solidarity that are designed primarily for students of a particular race or that promote resentment toward a certain ethnic group.
It also prohibits classes that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government.
The Tucson Unified Schruel District program offers specialized courses in African-American, Mexican-American, and Native American studies that focus on history and literature and include information about the influence of a particular ethnic group.
A Republican running for Attorney General, Tom Horn, has been trying to restrict the program ever since he learned that the Hispanic civil rights activist Dolores Huerta in 2006 told students that Republicans hate Latinos.
That was being taught in Tucson.
Republicans hate Latinos.
So we have the new law.
Now we got the United Nations checking on the new law in Arizona.
Now, ethnic studies classes.
You know what ethnic studies classes really are?
Racial profiling, are they not?
Ethnic studies, if you're going to sit out there and say Republicans hate Latinos, are you not profiling?
You most certainly are.
So you can profile one way if you want.
Liberals can do all the profiling they want.
And they can say to anybody that anybody else is a racist, a sexist, a bigot, a homophobe, they can do that with impunity.
And they're not accused of profiling.
Like I said yesterday, I've been profiled my whole life simply because I'm a conservative.
All conservatives are profiled every day.
And nobody ever says a word about it.
There is a new poll out that is just stunning.
We are three weeks from the governor signing this immigration bill in Arizona.
The public, the American public broadly supports a new Arizona law aimed at dealing with illegal immigration and the law's provisions giving the cops increased powers to stop and detain people who are suspected of being in the country illegally.
73% of the American people, fully 73%, and this is a pew center for the people in the press poll.
73% say they approve of requiring people to produce documents verifying their legal status if the police ask for them.
Two-thirds, 67% approve of allowing police to detain anyone who cannot verify their status, while 62% approve of allowing police to question people they think may be in the country illegally.
Now, when you have 73% of the American people supporting the law, how are the Democrats going to then say that the entire nation is a bunch of bigots?
That the entire nation is a bunch of racists.
I mean, they will try, but this is their task.
They now have said anybody who opposes this is a Neanderthal, a racist, a bigot.
All of these things.
73%.
Do you realize, folks, just like in healthcare, the support, which the support for repeal is growing.
Nationwide support for Arizona's immigration law is growing because people understand, it's very simple.
All Arizona does is find a way to identify who's here illegally, not by targeting them on anything else.
They have to be stopped in the process of any other violation the cops would think might be a violation of law.
But everybody knows if we don't seal the border, this is going to continue to happen no matter if we grant amnesty or not.
And people are seeing this massive protest of what's happening in Arizona.
Don't understand it.
I thought everybody, Democrats, everybody's been talking about securing the border.
So here's a state finally taking it upon itself to do it because the federal government won't.
And the Democrat Party is having a cow.
And remember, never forget this.
70% of these voters, if they were identified as Republican voters, the Democrats would be hunting them.
The Democrats would have built a fence.
The Democrats would have snipers on the border and we'd be picking them off.
And the ones that got through the snipers, we put on an Acela train bound for Peru.
There wouldn't be any discussion about fairness and racism and they just want a better life.
There wouldn't be any of that.
If it was thought that these illegals were going to vote Republican broad approval for the this stunning, stunning stuff.
Brief time out here, my friends, we'll be back and continue.
Get to your phone calls when we get back.
All right, as promise, to the phones we go.
And it's mentor Ohio.
This is Scott.
It's great to have you with us there.
Hi hello, how are you?
Very well, thank you good I, we just got in the new Rush Limbaugh comic book and I didn't know if you were involved with.
No, i'm not involved in it.
I didn't know there was a Rush Limbaugh comic book.
Uh, somebody reminded me a moment ago.
They sent me news about it last week, but I, I don't remember it.
What what, what is it?
Well uh, there's a company out there called BLUE Water Comics and they uh, produce a variation of a comic called Political Power and this month uh, you're it, it's the Rush Limba.
The cover is really great.
It's got uh, really nice artwork on it.
But, of course, the interior story I wasn't sure if they discussed it with you or reviewed it with you.
Then how true is it?
It talks about you know, you being on the eye in the first couple pages, and it talks about your youth and how you came to be the uh individual on the radio that you are today.
Well uh, you and you're wanting to know if this is true.
Well obviously, you just answered that, if you didn't know there was a comic book they, they probably didn't have any conversations with you about the content.
No, i've never had any conversations with, uh anybody any comic book about.
Uh, I usually don't uh, when people write about me.
This is uh, it's very rare that I participate with people writing about me and I sure well, what?
Give me something.
This thing says that you are uh uh, curious about as to whether or not it's accurate.
Well, as I open it up, it talks about uh, you and a cat named Banjo.
Did you ever have a cat named banjo?
No, all right.
Well, it talks about you being on the air in the 1970s.
Uh, it's not you as a superhero, it's you as an individual, a biography.
Well, I am a superhero as an individual, it doesn't matter.
Well, we'll put you next to Iron Man on the shelf.
Well no, the Iron Man's a fictional character.
I exist, i'm real.
They have a cat named banjo.
Yeah well, references the cat named Banjo.
I think they probably take some uh uh uh yeah, creative liberties here.
I have a cat uh, cat's called Punkin, but I didn't have a cat.
I didn't have a cat in the 70s okay but uh, you know, that was my curiosity.
It's an interesting book.
Uh, wasn't sure.
Just, you know obviously, how true the content is.
You said it was a biography, you said it was good.
What's good about it?
Well, the artwork.
Oh, the artwork is good.
Yeah, the artwork is good.
Well, I guess that's why people buy comic books.
I guess that's why people buy Playboy.
I read the articles.
Oh, there you go, all right well, just making you aware that's available if you want us to send you a copy of it.
If you don't have it uh, take me off the air.
Well, but i'm not a big, i'm not a big comic book guy.
Okay uh i've i've, i've never read comic books.
In fact I, I just I never have.
You know, I was stunned.
Um, i've heard of Spider-man and all this, but I never read them.
But i'm i'm, i'm spiked.
I didn't know Iron Man was a comedy comic book.
They make these movies I didn't have.
No staff is worried here that i'm somehow doing harm to myself by admitting truthful aspects.
What, what is?
What is so uh horrible about not having i'm sorry, snerdly sorry, snerdly Snerdley's telling me that Marvel comic books are a way of life for uh American boys.
I See, that's not X-Men.
I never knew the X-Men was a comic book.
When I saw that, the first X-Men movies, I thought, wow, somebody's got a creative imagination.
I never knew X-Men was a comic book.
If there were a repository of every item I've ever had, you would not find one comic book.
There was what did I do?
I did play with baseball cards.
I played baseball.
I read a lot.
I started working when I was 13.
I hated being a kid.
Don't forget that, Snerdly.
I hated being a kid, and I didn't want to do anything that was identified with being a kid.
I wanted to be an adult the first time I hung around them.
They were having fun, plus they were bossing me around.
So I might have, wait a second, wait a second, wait a second, wait a second, wait a second, wait a second.
I do remember this.
I have heard.
I do remember one time my mother gave me a Swanson's frozen fried chicken TV dinner, and I read a couple pages of a Superman comic book while doing it.
And I watched Clutch Cargo on TV, which is a cartoon show.
One of the worst of all times.
But it was still, it was one of my, one of my, one of my favorite cartoons was the Wacky Racers.
Oh, yeah, the Wacky Racers and the Roadrunner and Coyote, but I didn't read comic books.
No, no, no.
Guys in Missouri didn't have to go out and do the harvest.
And I'm sure even people that had to go out and do the harvest read comic books.
No, I never read Sgt. Rock.
I never heard of Sgt. Rock.
Let me go back to the phones here because why is this so unbelievable?
No, it's not.
Comic books, comic books are like Rockwell Americana stuff.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Not me.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Dave, you're next on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hey, how are you, Rush?
Very well, thank you.
Glad to be on your show.
I can't appreciate, I can't tell you enough how much I appreciate what you're doing.
Thank you, sir.
You know, I do have one disagreement with you, though, and it's something you said earlier in the program a couple times, that the Obama administration was somehow an architect of what we're dealing with.
And while I recognize the escalation is totally within their, you know, they're completely responsible for the escalation of it.
I truly believe that we have to look at the liberal progressives that are in the Republican Party as well.
And I think not enough conservatives, talk show host people, whoever are really remembering this.
We have to send the right people to Washington in November.
And I think that means de-electing a lot of the party, you know, the Republicans who are lifers and who are vested in the system.
Give me some names.
Well, Lindsey Graham, you know, for one, you know, this Scott Brown, I don't know if you just heard on the news his comment that he made about the, you know, Kaggle or Kagan, excuse me, Atlanta Kagan.
You know, the sort of mealy-mouthed Namby-Pamby stuff that we hear, the people who aren't willing to fight in the Republican Party should not be there.
We need fighters.
Well, you know, I understand what you're saying.
I said this, in fact, this morning when I was discussing that Orrin Hatch, or this happened early the first hour, when Orin Hatch is in trouble in Utah, And you know, Orrin Hatch, back in the old days, he was rock-rib, strong, conservative as he could be.
But I know Washington overtakes a lot of people, and you become a creature of the beltway and so forth.
But, you know, I don't see the purpose here in trying to nitpick.
You know, you can look at Bush and say, I was a big spender, no question about it, and you'd be critical of it.
And I have, and I was.
And you can look at Bush on immigration, and it wasn't the right thing to do.
But I'm going to tell you something.
What this gets toward is that there's no difference in the two parties.
And that I cannot allow that to stand.
The two parties are entirely different.
There's not one Republican that voted for health care.
Not one.
And, you know, the idea here that you throw all of the bums out misses the point.
The problem is liberalism.
Yeah, there are some moderate Republicans, rhinos, and so forth.
Very few.
There aren't any Obama Republicans.
There aren't any Harry Reid Republicans.
This is, you know, this is a circumstance.
If we're not careful, you can look at what's happening here in Florida.
In a two-way race, Charlie Crist gets cream by Marco Rubio, who I'm sure is a Republican you're pretty much in favor of.
So Charlie Crist decides to go independent.
And somehow, in a three-way race, he's winning now.
Why?
Because he splits the opposition vote.
So the danger of this kind of thinking leads to a third party of purity and so forth.
We've got a lot of work to do here.
And I think the objective is to stop liberalism wherever it is.
Anyway, I appreciate the call.
Thanks much.
This is where are we going next, Snerdley?
Give me a nine-wheel Charles in Bozier City, Louisiana.
Great to have you here, sir.
Yeah, we should be able to pick up that Virginia seat, that incumbent that just got beat in West Virginia, Palin, and McCain did carry that district.
We get us a good conservative.
We should win that.
And can I make one other quick comment to you, real quick?
Sure.
One of your high school friends said to tell you hello.
Buford Moyer in Louisiana.
He went to high school with you in his freshman year before he moved off.
And he ever told me to tell you if I ever got a chance to tell you hello from him.
Buford Moyer.
Yeah, him and his wife own Sioux Country Kitchen in Bozier City, Louisiana.
They've had it for about 30 years.
Sounds like a restaurant.
Yeah, yeah, right.
They moved from Missouri.
Well, he did.
His family did.
But he said he went to school with you his freshman year, I believe it was, in high school.
He said you was a real nice guy.
Obviously, he didn't know me.
Well, anyway, Charles, thanks for the phone call.
Quick time out, folks.
Be right back.
They're pulling out all the stops at the White House here, folks, to oppose Arizona's immigration law.
I have a question.
I've got a story just cleared here, the Foxnews.com wire.
Administration threatens to veto health spending bill after price tag jumps.
The Obama administration threatened to veto parts of its own health care bill after budget scorekeepers at the CBO found that the package would add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending.
Obama's budget orifice charged Congress with finding $115 billion in spending cuts or tax increases to offset this new price increase.
The figure approached the amount of money the CBO previously estimated a law would save and push the total 10-year cost of the package past a trillion dollars.
The Office of Management and Budget stood by the administration's original claims that the law would reduce the deficit and tasked Congress with making sure that happens.
Ken Baer, budget office spokesman, said, Look, the Affordable Care Act will reduce the deficit by more than $100 billion in the first decade, and that'll not change unless Congress acts to change it.
If these authorizations are funded, this additional $115, they're going to have to be offset somewhere else in the discretionary budget.
The president has called for a non-security, discretionary spending freeze, and he will enforce that with his veto pin.
So it's going to close Gitmo, I know, but how do you veto something that you've already signed into law?
And what is this?
Administration threatens to veto health spending bill after price tag jumps.
This is not a new piece of legislation.
This is a new calculation that says the bill Obama's already signed will add $115 billion to it.
And now they're threatening to veto health spending.
I mean, this is just, this is an excuse to raise taxes somewhere $115 billion, but it's still the strangest story.
Administration threatens to veto health spending bill after price rates.
It's his bill.
But he's dumping on Congress, throwing them overboard here.
It's amazing.
Let's go to the audio sound dice because I told you earlier today that Obama was doing a 180 here on the way he was treating Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan.
Here, Obama welcomes Karzai after his regime has spent months trashing Karzai.
Mr. President, thank you and welcome to the United States.
More importantly, this visit's an opportunity for us to assess the progress of our shared strategy in Afghanistan and to advance the strong partnership between our two nations, one that's based on mutual interest and mutual respect.
Now, we would forgive Karzai if his mouth fell open and he fainted here after hearing this.
Because, I mean, they tried to defeat this guy.
Obama was working to get this guy defeated in an election in Afghanistan.
It got so bad that Karzai threatened to quit and join the Taliban.
He denied saying that, by the way.
But now all of a sudden, there's been this 180, and Hamid Karzai is one of the most beloved world figures to Obama.
CNN's White House correspondent Suzanne Malvo said, President Karzai, is there anything that you can do, your government, your people, to maintain this deadline, the end game of July 2011?
And have you found your meetings with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadine Izad to be helpful or hurtful in your relationship with the Obama administration?
Obama answers a question.
Let's be clear about what July 2011 represents.
What I have said is that having put in more troops over the last several months in order to break the momentum of the Taliban, that beginning in 2011, July, we will start bringing those troops down and turning over more and more responsibility to Afghan security forces that we are building up.
But we are not suddenly, as of July 2011, finished with Afghanistan.
But after July 2011, we are still going to have an interest in making sure that Afghanistan is secure, that economic development is taking place, that good governance is being promoted.
My God, folks, do you imagine what his kooks on the left-wing fringe are doing after they hear this?
Well, we're not leaving in 2011.
No, we're going to build schools and we're going to build roads and we're going to build them houses and we're going to have good governance promoted.
Yeah, and they were going to close Club Gitmo this past January as well.
So he said, we're breaking the momentum of the Taliban.
And yet the Taliban, sick, the Taliban, just happened to sneak a bomb into the country and almost blew up a portion of Times Square recently.
So Obama now gets fired up when talking about civilian casualties.
Now, remember, this was not his attitude when John Kerry and Jack Murthy were calling our troops racists.
And in fact, let's grab Soundbite 26 first.
Because this August 1st of 2007, New Hampshire campaign event, then Senator Barack Obama had this to say about Afghanistan.
We've got to get the job done there.
And that requires us to have enough troops that we're not just air raiding villages and killing civilians.
So he's demonizing the troops under Bush, air raiding villages and killing civilians.
And that's his take.
And it was right along the lines with Jack Murtha and John Kerry, the haughty John Kerry, served in Vietnam, by the way, who were calling our troops rapists and murderers and terrorists and so forth.
So now here is Obama talking about civilian casualties and defending them.
War is tough and difficult, and mistakes are going to be made.
And our troops put themselves at risk, oftentimes, in order to reduce civilian casualties.
Because of General McChrystal's direction, oftentimes they're holding fire, they're hesitating, they're being cautious about how they operate, even though it would be safer for them to go ahead and just take these locations out, because part of what the American military stands for is that we distinguish between civilians and combatants.
I want everybody to be clear, especially the Afghan people.
I take no pleasure in hearing a report that a civilian has been killed.
That's not why I ran for president.
It's not why I'm commander-in-chief.
What?
What?
Hey, by the way, you people of Afghanistan, I didn't run for president, so you get killed.
I didn't run for president.
Anyone ought to be commander-in-chief?
So you get killed.
What a thing to say.
By the way, to say to the people of Afghanistan, I don't take any pleasure in hearing that one of you has died.
As though there's some question about it?
As though Bush did?
As though Bush wanted you to die?
Is this what this is?
Damn right, it's what it is.
But now, okay, killing civilians, it's tough out there.
You know, war, tough.
Mistakes are made.
You know, what Obama can't, if you listen to these soundbites and you put them all together, he's going to build roads and he's going to build schools.
He's going to have good governance.
He's going to build houses.
Obama simply cannot comprehend the Taliban can't be bought off.
He's like anybody else on the left.
Just throw enough money at them and you own them and they'll run away and not be a problem.
These guys are true believers.
You know, Hamid Karzai has offered the Taliban government jobs.
Hamid Karzai has offered them payoffs, and they don't take it.
They are the epitome of the true believers.
Here's Obama.
He knows that Karzai doesn't have a whole lot to offer money-wise.
So he's upping the ante.
I'm going to build you the roads and I'm going to build you houses and schools.
And I'm going to get you good government.
And by the way, when one of the civilians dies, that's not me.
And this is our foreign policy.
This is our esteemed leader in a press conference televised around the world.
Obama's now, with this statement, he has put our troops at risk to prevent civilian casualties.
It's not the troops' idea to do that.
So it's everybody else's fault.
The troops' fault.
I didn't do it.
People of Afghanistan.
One of my soldiers kills one of you.
It's not me.
Don't blame me.
George Bush and the troops.
I didn't run for president to kill you.
It's unbelievable.
Now, one other thing that Obama did here in this soundbite, I'm not going to play the soundbite again.
But this is just here's this is a commander-in-chief passing the buck.
Obama said, war is tough, difficult.
Mistakes are going to be made.
Troops put themselves at risk oftentimes in order to reduce division casualty.
The troops are not putting themselves in these positions.
Obama is.
Obama's rules of engagement, not the troops.
And then he blames it on McChrystal.
He next says, Because of General McChrystal's direction, oftentimes they're holding fire, they're hesitating, they're being cautious about how they have to operate, even though it'll be safe for them to go ahead.
McChrystal, it is Obama who's ordered these rules of engagement.
And he's making it sound like the troops are handicapping themselves.
And it's McChrystal's rules.
They can't hear the rules.
U.S. troops in Afghanistan cannot fight in their houses.
They cannot fight at night.
What else?
There's all kinds of restrictions on them.
I mean, if they see a civilian anywhere near where there's a target, of course, we know how the Taliban dresses a civilian.
He can't fire.
So he's, war is tough, difficult, mistakes are being made.
Troops put themselves at risk oftentimes in order to reduce civilian casualties.
The troops are not making policy.
They follow orders.
And don't tell me that it's McChrystal's orders here.
There's no question.
This is Obama's order.
I'll tell you what Obama's doing here, folks.
Don't doubt me.
Obama is giving himself an out to get out of this without victory.
Pure and simple, there's no question in my mind that's what this is all about.
I have, you know, this, we have this is a man-child.
This is an immature, childish man-child.
Here he's got Hamid Karzai, who yesterday he despised and hated.
Well, maybe last week, treated him worse than he's treated Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel.
And now, all of a sudden, roll out the red carpet four days.
Hamid Karzai comes to Washington, D.C. Do a joint press conference that Obama unloads on the Crystal and the troops for the mistakes that are made.
Now, I'm sure in Obama's mind, he's praising the troops.
What do you mean, Limbo?
What are you going to do my case for?
I'm talking about how valid our troops are.
Yeah, ballion, dollar, whatever.
They're not taking every opportunity they can to kill an enemy because they know they might marry kill a kid.
That's what he that he wants.
He's trying to make the troops think that they are defining the rules of engagement.
And in his way, this is how he's crediting them.
When in fact, he's got them in straight jackets.
And then a dump on the crystal.
Now, I know this is not the first time a president is dumped on a general, but this, this, this little man cannot even stand up and defend his own policy to dump on the troops this way.
And McChrystal, what?
What a medal for restraint.
You, I've got to be kidding.
How did I miss that?
You mean Obama has proposed a new medal, a Valorous Valorous Medal for restraint?
Oh, it's Obama.
Don't tell me it's in this.
You mean at the Pentagon, they're going to, instead of like the purple heart, the green heart, the red heart, whatever, the yellow heart for restraint.
What are we going to call it?
Holy cow, how did I miss this?
Must have been reading a comic book or something.
What is it?
The Congressional The Military Medal for Courageous Restraint?
Send me that.
How the hell did my staff miss this?
Yeah, you just told me about it, but you didn't tell me about it when you found out about it.
You were reading comic books too.
All right, so the military medal for courageous restraint.
Well, see, it dovetails here.
Troops, yeah.
See, Limbaugh finally figured it out.
Didn't take long.
Troops put themselves at risk, oftentimes, in order to reduce civilian casualties.
The military medal for courageous restraint.
Now, this is it's just a proposal, right?
It hasn't been acted on.
Yeah, okay.
I'm looking at it now.
It has not.
It's not, it's just a proposal at this stage.
Okay, look at quick time out here, folks.
And we'll be back and continue right after this on the EIB network with your host, El Rushbook.
All right, here it is.
I'm holding it right here.
My formerly Nicotine Stained Fingers dateline today.
My version of it here is from the Navy Times and the headline, Hold Fire, Earn a Medal.
U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
This would be the Yellow Heart Medal.
U.S. troops in Afghanistan could soon be awarded a medal for not doing something.
A precedent-setting award that would be given for courageous restraint for holding fire to save civilian lives.
The proposal now circulating in the Kabul headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force, according to a command spokesman yesterday.
Soldiers are often recognized for non-combat achievement, decorations like their services commendation medal, but most of the highest U.S. military decorations are for valor in combat.
A medal to recognize a conscious effort to avoid combat action would be unique.
Well, okay.
I'm sorry I missed this, folks.
I'm up to speed on it now.
So we're going to have courageous military medal for showing restraint.
And if you really want to do it right, you make it posthumous.
▲
Export Selection