All Episodes
Previous Next
May 17, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:56
May 17, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 247 Podcast.
And they uh they try to tell us that Maria Schriver was a journalist.
For ten years.
For ten years, Arnold kept that love child thing a secret from his wife as a journalist.
For NBC.
You know, Arnold's big mistake.
Aside from what you think is the obvious mistake.
Big mistake was thinking that he's a real Kennedy.
And in the end, he was just a Schwarzenegger.
Great to have you, folks.
Rushlinbaugh here, 800 282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, the email.
Email address Lrushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
Look at this.
Staffers at the White House budget office.
Staffers at the White House budget office filed a petition yesterday to join a labor union, seeking to gain more input over their working conditions.
Obama's budget office is a sweatshop.
They got rebels in there who want to unionize.
And what do you bet Obama will not let them?
What do you bet?
Everybody, what do you bet the NLRB will never see this petition?
About half of the career workforce of the Office of Management and Budget signed the petition, said Peter Winch, the deputy director of field services and education for the American Federation of Government Workers.
Winch said the move is not a signal that workers are unhappy.
It's rather a sign that they would like more of a voice in how the orifice is organized and more appreciation for the work that they do.
Winch said, Yeah, a lot of people expect you to come in on weekends and work late.
They don't mind that culture because they feel they're engaged in very important work.
But they would like more recognition for the fact that they do make those sacrifices.
OMB spokesman Kenneth Bear says that the regime strongly supports the rights of workers to unionize is up to the people working at any bargaining unit to decide.
Well, let's see if they have an open ballot or not in there.
Let's see if they do card check and all or keep a sharp eye on this.
Obama's sweatshop at the Office of Management and Budget.
These guys will unionize.
Ladies and gentlemen, it what is a first, I think it's a first.
Let's go audio sound bites 18 and 19.
Uh, Mike.
In what may be a first, we have formal complaints or a formal complaint lodged against the official Obama criticizer.
Bo Snerdly.
Bo Snardley recently uh utilized on this program last week as the official Obama criticizer, and it was as though it had happened for the first time.
We've been featuring the official Obama criticizer for close to a year, if not more on this program.
It's something about last week's version of the official Obama criticizer has rubbed them wrong out there, particularly your translation for Brothers and Sisters in the Hood.
The complaint is that there aren't any of those listening to the program.
And uh plus that, of course, the left and the media is on this this kick now that there's racism everywhere, and it really racism and race baiting has its home on the left.
But there's a there's a show out there called Reading News Service.
Now, when I first saw this, I said, wow, they've come a long way.
Reading is a little town in Northern California.
And I figured why would anything at the reading, I mean the population might be five.
So what is anything coming out of there making national news for?
So I did a little uh due diligence and looked into this, and I found a reading news review has nothing to do with uh Reading, California.
It's some guy named Rob Redding.
And last his program is syndicated.
Well, whose isn't uh the Rob Redding interviewed the former chairman of Republican National Committee, Michael Steele.
And Reading says, okay, Rush Linbaugh wildly thought to be a racist.
No, accused.
Baselessly so by members of the left when they can't come up with anything better to criticize me for.
But nevertheless.
Rush Limbaugh widely thought to be a racist.
You've gotten into snerdly would say his grill several times.
He's talking to Michael Steele here.
You were repudiated for it within the Republican Party.
Is Rush Limbaugh a racist?
Is he wrong for doing this satire?
Yes or yes or no?
I can't get in into the heart of somebody and how they really feel about stuff.
I'm not going to sit here and say the man is a racist no more than I would say any number of other people who've said and done things over the last couple of years or so that uh one could argue make the same point.
Rush Limbaugh, you know, provides a form of entertainment that is provocative, that is controversial, but that is based in politics and and um and the political context, and I think that this satire falls into that box.
So here's Michael Steele talking to um who.
Now here's the the thing is uh I know Michael Steele.
He knows me.
He was chairman of Republican National Committee.
I went to Washington once to a rush to excellence tour for our affiliate there, WMAL.
Not long after Michael had run for the Senate in Maryland, a campaign, by the way, in which I heartily endorsed and defended candidate Steele.
Remember, he had those Michael J. Fox ads run against him.
That uh Claire McCaskill used against Jim Talent in Missouri.
And at that WMAL Rush to Excellence tour, they bring uh uh people before the show starts, bring them backstage, and there's a reception line, shake hands with a couple pictures, and he was there, and I was really flattered.
Michael Steele of all people in line to say hello.
So it's not as though he doesn't know who I am, it's not as though he doesn't know what we do here.
Uh and he's he's been a beneficiary of what we do here.
We've big supporters of Michael Steele.
Yeah, he can't.
This is the second time the CNN uh you know brought him with a DJ Hughley or whatever it was, and he he took the uh took the easy road there.
Now this guy Michael Redding is that they're all upset here about you, sturdely, the official Obama criticizer.
But of course, it's my fault because I give you the forum.
But Mr. Redding was not satisfied with his answer.
He said, well, come on, Michael, is it appropriate or not?
This criticizer bit.
I thought it was highly inappropriate.
I mean, you don't need to do that.
Now are we going to translate this conversation for all the white folks out there?
I mean, this is stupid.
I mean, it's it it it it it it's not it's not something that you know furthers the conversation.
You don't want to be in the business of turning people off to your ideas, you want to turn them on to them.
Well, he clearly has no idea what happened.
He has literally no clue what we were doing with the official Obama criticizer bit last week.
None whatsoever.
So falls into the easy stereotypical response to all of this.
Uh so Snurdly, uh, welcome to the club.
You two are racist now.
And it's uh I don't know, it just it it's it's exemplary here.
It's an it it's an illustration of uh the problem that people on our side have of hanging into being tough.
There's nothing here that has to be defended, only explained to people who are trying to mischaracterize it in the first place because it's effective.
That is why they don't like it.
It's effective.
Back in March of 2009, Steele said uh Rush Limbaugh's an entertainer.
His whole thing's entertainment, yeah, it's a scendiary, yeah, it's ugly.
And we called him on that.
He does the he does the back off and calls here and apologizes and so forth.
The French, ladies and gentlemen, are shocked.
They're literally shocked.
Frankly, I am too.
I I have never seen a member of the socialist elite treated the way this perp is being treated.
Mr. Strauss Khan, one night, he's in a $3,000 a night suite at the St. Regis.
The next night, he's on Rikers Island.
Rikers Island, folks.
That is New York's collection point of human debris.
There are 14,000 of them in there.
And he's in there and they ran him off of an airplane.
They're not letting him go there's no bail whatsoever.
You've got Michael Jackson's attorney out there, one of many, Benjamin Brunfman, or Braffman, trying to.
And the French, they just can't believe this.
They can't, well, they think that, you know, we're so Puritan and Victorian and so forth.
They can't believe everybody's so uptight about this.
And now they're starting to ask this, well, maybe we've been too tolerant.
As as they as they watch all this, but Fred, I, ladies and gentlemen, uh nobody seems to notice here in all of this that a hardcore socialist has been running the International Monetary Fund, and we wonder why the world is in the economic situation that it is in.
It's a mess.
And here we've got somebody who considers himself a libertine and somebody who considers himself grandly sophisticated.
You know, in Europe, to be a socialist is to be an aristocrat.
And I guarantee this guy cannot possibly fathom this.
He cannot fathom being held accountable for something like this.
This is just part of the day where he lives.
And so now they're screaming setup.
Maybe Sarkozy's behind this, because this guy was going to run against Sarkozy.
Though horrified by his alleged crimes, the French press, the political elite on Monday, seem perhaps more scandalized still by the images of Mr. Strauss Khan's brusque treatment by the New York cops and his exposure in the American media.
You keep calling it a perp walk.
It was more like a frog march.
I found that image to be incredibly brutal, violent, and cruel, said the former justice minister, Elizabeth Guiou, to the French info radio on Monday, referring to widely published photographs of a beleaguered looking Mr. Strauss Khan, handcuffed and led by several New York police officers.
I'm happy we don't have the same judicial system here in France.
You know, I'm...
I'm just amazed these people can harness the courage to eat snails.
Back after this, don't go away.
Something happened in Pakistan that I think we should take note of.
A NATO jet and helicopters, that's us.
NATO jet and helicopters entered Pakistani airspace today, starting an exchange of gunfire between coalition Pakistani for in other words, Pakistan fired on us.
Now let's check the timeline here.
Yesterday, we sent the haughty John Carey, who served in Vietnam over to Pakistan to smooth their ruffled feathers.
I don't care what anybody says, they are still burning over our raid to get bin Laden.
They are burnt and this proves it.
They are they are really mad about Obama killing Osama.
Maybe it was a gutsy call after all, because the Pakistani are really peeved.
And it goes to show that that not even the haughty John Carey is very good at smoothing ruffled feathers or much of anything else.
They started shooting at us today.
Now, I might be just a coincidence.
Maybe he got them riled up talking about how our troops are like Jingjus Khan, as he's prone to say.
Who knows?
But NATO jet and helicopters entered Pakistani airspace and they fired on us.
Two coalition helicopters operating on behalf of the U.S. forward operating base Tillman in Afghanistan were fired upon from the Pakistani side of the border between the two countries.
This, according to a Western military official who asked not to be named, all this according to CNN, by the way, asked if the choppers were on the Afghan side of the border.
The military officials said believe so, but we're not sure.
So they fired on us while our guys are over Afghanistan.
They're doing a slow burn.
Of the 204 new Obamacare waivers that Obama's administration approved in April, 38 of them are for fancy restaurants and nightclubs and hotels in Nancy Pelosi's Northern California district.
That's in addition to the 27 new waivers for health care or drug companies and the 31 new union waivers that the Department of Health and Human Services approve.
You know, we're up now to over 1,300 waivers that Obama has granted.
And a number of the latest ones are in high-rent districts like Pelosi's.
20% of the new Obamacare waivers are gourmet restaurants, nightclubs, and fancy hotels.
There's a restaurant, Bobo Kubari.
Thank you.
In Pelosi's district in San Francisco, got a waiver from Obamacare.
Bobo Kavare's advertises $59 porterhouse steaks, $39 fillet mignon, and $35 crab dinners.
Now who is it that's always hammered being the party of the rich?
Who is it that's always hammered as being sympathetic and in bed with the rich?
Here it's us, it's the Republican side.
Here's Pelosi and Obama getting together.
I mean, all these places are named.
There's a place in Union Square Cafe Masson.
The four harsh four-star hotel Campton Place got a waiver as in the Hotel Nico in San Francisco.
The spa owner, all these places get waivers from Obamacare in Pelosi's district.
From the Cybercast News Service.com.
Next year on Earth Day, the Obama and Yeah, I'm going to get to Newt.
I've got a theory on Newton.
I want to get some of this little smaller stuff out of the way that somewhat amuses me.
It doesn't require a long dissertation monologue-wise.
Yeah, because I've I think I have evolved a theory on what Newt's up to.
And it my theory is based in my belief that Newt knows he's going to lose this.
So this is about positioning after he loses it.
Now, I should tell you that, and I might have mentioned this before, I don't remember six weeks ago, eight weeks ago, I had breakfast with Newt.
Long before he officially announced his presidential run.
He told me he was going to run.
He went through his agenda, bullet point by bullet point.
And at that lunch, he practically said, now I think I've already got the nomination wrapped up.
I'm not worried about that.
I'm looking beyond that vice presidential running mates policies and so forth and so on.
very, very confident that he'd already had it wrapped up.
This is in the midst of Trump.
I asked him about Mitch Daniels.
Yeah, Mitch's not going to run.
Conventional wisdom, Mitch isn't going to run.
His wife is are like politics.
Mitch wasn't going to run.
Romney can't survive Romneycare.
He went through all of this as to why he was almost the de facto default winner of the nomination.
But my theorem actually evolves from a belief that I have that he thinks Look at Romney is obviously the front runner now with all the money.
They're saying Romney's going to be able to raise a billion dollars too.
Romney raised something like 10 million in eight hours.
So you got Trump who was never in out of it.
You've got all the others, you know, Santorum, I think's uh a dark horse thing.
Bachman, she's probably getting in.
I think Bachman could stir things up too.
In a fascinatingly interesting way.
And what's going to happen?
It's already happened.
There's a website that loves Sarah Palin.
And that website is already trashing Michelle Bachman.
We've always thought that Bachman and Palin are buds.
They've shown up together at different places, introduced each other.
But now this Palin friends website is launching broadsides at Bachman, using that daily caller piece that I shared with you yesterday as ammo.
This is what happens in primaries.
But we'll get to the new theory in just a second.
Next year on Earth Day, the Obama administration plans to announce which American schools have been selected as green ribbon schools, a designation that will honor schools for creating healthy and sustainable learning environments for teaching environmental literacy.
I kid you not, they're not going to reward or honor schools for math scores, science scores.
is Or grammar.
No, no, no, no.
Preparing our children to be good environmental citizens is some of the most important work any of us can do, said the U.S. education secretary.
Preparing means indoctrinating.
The Green Ribbon Schools program was announced in late April.
Details on how scruels will be picked or what the honor entails have not been released.
Joanne Webb, spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Education told the Cybercast News Service that the program's still under development.
Yeah, we haven't uh we haven't developed the criteria yet.
The plan is for the U.S. Department of Education, the EPA, and the Council for Environmental Quality to develop the criteria this spring and summer and to issue the call for applications early in the fall.
All based on a hoax, all based on a fraud, all based on global warming.
Which, by the way, is a religion.
Its proponents cannot prove it.
Belief in global warming requires faith.
Because there is no evidence.
There's no evidence of man-made destructive climate change, global warming, what have you.
The evidence that we have suggests that the whole thing's been a hoax and a fraud.
And yet, the left marches on, not educating, but indoctrinating.
And so now schools will be indoctrinating children to be good environmental citizens, which means wards of the state.
Which means following dictates from the state as to how to live and how to get where you're going.
Where to live.
Honoring people who basically give their lives over to state initiatives, honoring teachers who are able to successfully indoctrinate young skulls full of mush into happily turning over their futures to the state.
Preparing children to be good environmental citizens.
Some of the most important work any of us can do.
To hell with what they learn elsewhere.
In fact, better to have them domed down.
And ignorant.
Two leading makers of lighting products are showcasing LED bulbs that are bright enough to replace energy guzzling 100 watt light bulbs which are set to disappear from the stores in January.
It's only six months left, folks, to uh start hoarding your supply of incandescent light bulbs.
Now, these LEDs, these are not the compact fluorescence.
That's all different things.
The LEDs are 100 watt light bulbs.
The problem with the with the with the incandescent bulb is that it produces more heat than light.
This is the standard complaint.
That the purpose of the bulb to provide light as overridden by the heat that it produces, a waste of energy.
So we've got to get rid of it.
It's a hundred-year-old technology.
So here come the compact fluorescence, but they're dangerous.
Need the hazmat people every time you drop one and break one.
Could really poison it.
There's mercury in there.
The LEDs are not the compact fluorescence.
However, a 100 watt LED bulb is going to cost $50.
$50 per bulb.
In other words, like every other product launch, it is going to require the filthy rich to start buying these things in quantity in order to get the price down.
The first Betamax, which recorded television programs for one hour from Sony, was 1200.
Well, who could afford 1200 bucks to record one hour?
Only the filthy rich did.
And they bought them in enough droves that eventually Panasonic gets in with a VHS format, and finally you get another VCR for 199 bucks that records for six or eight hours.
So these LED bulbs, $50 apiece.
The reason that they are priced at $50.
The new bulbs will be expensive, so the development may not prevent consumers from hoarding the traditional bulbs.
People are still going to be hoarding the incandescence because they can't afford $50.
Even if they could, who wants to pay $50 for a light bulb?
Now, the LED will last longer.
But $50 for a light bulb, imagine the average number of light bulbs that heading into a black market with incandescent bulbs.
Absolutely right.
People are hoarding them now.
That ban is in six months.
In January, you will, it will be illegal to have one in your house.
Well, it'll be illegal to buy one.
It's always going to be illegal to have one in there in your house, subject to fine and so forth.
Now, this ought to be one of the first things a Republican should have done is repeal this ban.
All right, now on to Newt.
I mentioned yesterday that that uh talked about the phenomenon known as niche marketing, niche programming in terms of radio programs.
There's a lot of that going on.
I think it goes on in politics.
I think people seek unexploited areas.
Try to fill a void that exists.
For example, if the Republican field is already viewed as chocked full of middle of the road mainstream conservatives.
Does it make sense to enter the field as one of those, or maybe find a niche where you are in your mind a mainstream conservative, but you differ in two or three areas enough so that you are not called in a derogatory way a typical right winger.
Now this really, as far as a theory involving Newt, uh, I I evolved, I got a note from a friend of mine who who uh mentioned parts of this to me, got me thinking, energized the little gray cells.
You know, it really isn't new what Newt has done here with the throwing of Paul Ryan under the bus, uh, suggesting the mandate, uh, individual mandate is something that has to be considered here in healthcare.
Uh it's not, it's not unprecedented behavior for Newt.
Not the first time.
We had the Newt and Hillary show.
We've had the Newt and Pelosi show.
And don't forget we had the Newt and uh and Didi Skazefava show.
If you've forgotten Newt was right down the line with the party apparatus in New York 23, Didi Skazefava.
I mean, As rhino liberal Republican as you can get.
And there was Newt right in there supporting her over the conservative alternative in that in that field.
Now, of all the things we know about Newt Gengrich, we know that he's not stupid.
What do you think as he looks at the Republican presidential field and the whole prospect here of the presidential election?
What do you think he really thinks about his prospects?
The rule of thumb is the conventional wisdom is that people that do this, people that actually subject themselves to the media anal exam, people that subject themselves to the lifestyle change, the uh never-ending energy required to not only run a campaign, but then if you win it, life changes forever for at least four years, and you hope eight.
People that do this don't generally do it, hoping to lose.
Now, some of them do it knowing they're not serious, they're using it for other reasons to make themselves known, to have on the resume former presidential candidates, so they get invited as never-ending revolving guests on cable shows.
And so the graphic will be former presidential candidate.
But people who enter the race who are serious about winning it, are a different breed.
They believe that the country cannot do without them.
Their egos are massive.
It has to be that way.
The people who are serious about it.
People who are serious about it are genuinely disciplined people as well.
They understand that you can blow the whole thing wide open in a matter of seconds with one ill-timed, ill-fated comment.
I understand this.
Now my theory is based on the belief that Newt knows his chances of winning the nomination are tiny.
If I'm wrong about this, then the rest of the theory falls apart.
And I have to remind you, I've spoken to him about this.
And when I spoke to him about it six weeks, eight weeks ago, I mean, he was of the mind that it was already done.
Winning a nomination was a formality.
The field was weak.
He was head and shoulders above anybody in the field in his mind, so had to go through the nomination process, but in his mind, that was a fait accompli.
He was already planning his campaign and life as the nominee at this breakfast.
And he went down a list of things issue-wise for me that detailed his stance on various issues and ideas.
But what if he isn't serious about winning it?
That's that's where my theory evolves, and I'll share it with you after this brief but obscene profit timeout here on the EIB network.
Okay, so what's the niche?
What is the niche right now in the Republican presidential field that Newt might see needs to be filled, or that he wants to fill?
What's the niche?
What's missing in the Republican field right now?
Announced.
The McCain wing, the moderate.
Don't smirk at me.
Polenti does not, Polenti is trying to move away from that.
You might you might want to say Palency's rhino.
Daniel's not officially in it.
You might want to say Pollen's rhino, but he's moving away from it.
He's apologizing for cap and trade.
He's apologizing for a number of things he had to do as the governor of a liberal state.
Politti is clearly aiming at aligning himself with the Tea Party, with conservatives.
Romney, uh no, Romney's Romney's Romney's not out trying to be McCain.
There's nobody in the field right now trying to be McKinney.
Okay, stick with me On this now.
Because again, this is all predicated on my belief that Newton doesn't expect to win.
If if I'm wrong about that, then all of this is, of course, worthless.
So I do have that caveat.
If he's really in this to win, then this that I have evolved or developed here is not so much accurate, but he is running a campaign.
I mean, that that stuff he said about the budget and the mandate and Ryan and right wing social engineering and stuff, that is not intended to resonate with Republican primary voters.
And he knows now that it doesn't.
He got taken to the cleaners by somebody.
Where was he yesterday?
I've got the bite here somewhere.
It was in uh Iowa, and he got taken to the cleaners by an average voter.
Here, let me put audio sound by three.
This in Dubuque, Iowa yesterday, on the campaign trail, unidentified guy and Newt had this exchange about Newt's criticism of Paul Ryan's budget.
Paul Ryan is unforgivable.
I didn't do anything to Paul Ryan.
Yes, you did.
You undercut him and his allies in the house.
No, I see.
You're an embarrassment to our party.
I'm sorry, you feel that way.
Why don't you get out before you make a bigger fool of yourself?
Okay, so that's that's what he ran into in Iowa yesterday.
So he he has to know now after that his belief on not being a part of uh right-wing social engineering, which is a slap at Ryan, he has to know that that's not going to resonate with Republican primary voters.
He knew it before he made the statement.
But who does it resonate with?
Who who has the potential to like that?
The power elite in 2012 and beyond, the establishment, the DC, the ruling class, they'll eat a statement like that up.
You know, somebody criticizing left-wing extremism, uh right, right-wing extremism extremism, social engineering.
If Newt can provoke attack from the conservative Republican contenders, and even from the rank and file of voters by trotting on their sacred cows, which is what he did.
There's no denying he trod on some sacred cows as defined by this campaign.
If so be it, if he does that, it gives him visibility.
Who's talking about him?
In some people's eye, it makes him reasonable.
With this crowd that I'm talking about, it's a resume enhancement to be criticized by me.
And he rises above the field with this kind of stuff.
Now, not going to win the nomination with this strategy.
We all agree that, right?
Not going to win the nomination with it.
So what's he doing?
This gives him a slim chance at something else.
And in his mind, it could have him perfectly hedged.
When he loses, he could end up being like McCain used to be, the darling of the establishment, media corporate academic.
McCain was until he ran and then abandoned the, you know, he's out there proudly saying the media is his base.
Until it came time to run.
When it came time to run, McCain abandoned all that and tried to become one of us.
Newt's doing the exact opposite.
When it comes time to run, Newt is heading to that place that McCain used to be.
He could end up, for example, on the Aspen Institute board.
He might get a professorship at the Kennedy School.
He might be added to the board of directors IBM or what have you.
Remember, McCain got spanked big time in 2000, made every effort he could to be more of a conservative Republican in 2008, and that's when the media turned on him.
Now, this deficit government spending issue has become The battleground and Newt just broke ranks and moved himself right into this open niche where nobody is.
Being attacked by the right is a feature when you are thinking beyond the party nomination to your post primary job prospects.
Just everybody's asking me, what do you think is going on here?
So this is a as good an explanation as I can come up with if again he's not serious about winning.
An email rush, what are you doing?
Newt is using a brilliant strategy.
Take Obama down, needs to carry the whole Republican ticket.
He's in the process of uniting Tea Party and Country Club Republicans for a massive takeover.
Stop shooting him down unless you're part of the misdirection campaign.
▲
Export Selection