All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:52
October 3, 2011, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Now, here's what, here's, here's, we don't, we don't have the audio of what Herman Cain said to Christiana Manpur.
I just want to tell you what he said, because I got some emails.
Why are you getting so exercised about this?
The reason I'm getting so exercised about it is not, folks, and I will admit I'm exercised about it, is not to criticize Herman Cain.
Our guys are going to have to learn at some point how to deal with these people.
We're going to have to stop going on their shows if we're not going to know how to deal with them.
When you are a Republican presidential candidate, I understand they call you from ABC, the Sunday show, you go.
You don't say no.
Okay, you better figure out what they're trying to do by having you on.
It's just like I told a Republican freshman back in 1994.
Koki Roberts is going to call you.
She's going to bat her eyes at you, but she's ticked off that you're there.
The media is not happy that you are going to be running Congress.
Their objective is going to be to get rid of you.
They're never going to treat you like the winners.
They're buddies.
They're friends of the Democrats.
If they invite you on these shows, every moment is a gotcha.
And our people are going to have to learn to figure this out.
If they're going to go on these shows, what Herman Cain said, the question about the rock at Perry's family hunting ground that they leased in the 1983, I think.
They started leasing it.
And then the name on the rock, identifying this hunting ground, the N-word.
And so the Perry family painted over the rock, and then they eventually turned the rock over.
It embarrassed them.
So the Washington Post has this story about the opposite.
No sources, no name sources, no evidence whatsoever.
The point of the Washington Post story is that Rick Perry is a racist because he chose a place that was named with the N-word in it to go hunting.
Now, how stupid and absurd is the allegation?
Here it is, 2011, and the media still think that they can convince readers that Republicans are institutional racists.
Imagine Rick Perry and his family went to a place to hunt in Texas, early 80s, had the N-word in it, and that's why they chose it.
Yeah, because they don't like N-words.
And they are racist.
It's laughable that they think this is 30 years ago and people are automatically going to believe this stuff.
So Herman Kane said, my reaction is that it's very insensitive.
There are some words that do not basically inspire the kind of negativity like that particular word.
And I know that you're refraining from saying that word.
So I'm going to say the word that was on the rock.
The name of the place was called, I'm not going to say it.
It was the N-word followed by the word head.
And Herman Kane says, very insensitive.
And since Governor Perry has been going there for years to hunt, I think it shows a lack of sensitivity for a long time of not taking that word off of that rock and renaming the place.
It's basically a case of insensitivity.
Well, Perry did.
They tried to paint over it.
They turned the rock upside down.
Perry had taken the name off of the rock, or his father had, back in 1983, if not earlier.
And Christiana Monpour knew that since it was in the Washington Post story.
Here was the question that she asked to Herman Kane that resulted in the answer I just read you.
And it's been painted over.
She said to her, it's been painted over, but the report raises questions about whether this rock, this stone with that word on it, was still on display even quite recently in the last several years.
What's your reaction to that?
Now, I understand Kane wants to beat Perry in the Republican presidential primary, and I understand how he might have interpreted the question as an opportunity to nail Perry.
But wasn't it just last week that somebody called Herman Kane some epithets?
Didn't they call him some I forget what it was?
He was called a name along the lines of an Uncle Tom because he's a Republican black.
But what was obvious was that Christian Amonpour was unable to figure out the Washington Post had no evidence whatsoever to make the claim that the name had been on display on that rock over the last several years because no one whatsoever, except for a bunch of anonymous sources who the Washington Post claims, by the way, were big Perry supporters who just worried about this hurting him, but nobody will go on record.
So the reason for harping on this is not that any other reason.
It's time now that every Republican running for the presidency know what they're dealing with when they go on ABC, CBS, or NBC.
And it's about time they understand one thing.
They are not being invited on these shows to be assisted.
They're not being invited on these shows because these shows are interested in them.
They're not being invited on these shows because anybody related to this show wants to see them succeed.
They're being invited on these shows so that perhaps the media can destroy any and all of the Republican nominees or candidates for the nomination.
And so I cringe when a Republican candidate falls prey to this.
Well, what have been the correct answer would have been to tell Christian Amanpour it's a non-story.
And can we talk about the loss of jobs in this country and the attack on the private sector?
This is a non-story.
The Washington Post has no evidence for it.
And it's time you people stopped in the media.
It's time you stopped with your little template here.
I'm trying to tag every one of us racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobes.
It's called offense.
But folks, I'm telling you, our side is still deathly afraid of making those people mad.
They're just deathly afraid of it.
Mr. Limbaugh, they're definitely afraid of making you mad too.
It's Fitzro right there in the authority of the press.
Well, yeah, but that's for good reason.
No reason to be afraid of these people.
These people in the media are one-third as smart.
They're not the wizards of smart.
They're not the grand poopas.
They can be easily outrun or outsmarted here.
It's these, who they are and how they operate and what their objectives are is crystal clear.
What?
Did Maxine Waters call Herman Kane in Oreo?
I didn't hear that.
Somebody says, I don't know.
Anyway, Herman, Rick Perry was a Democrat when he started hunting at this place.
He was a Democrat back in the 80s.
Fran Tarkinton, former quarterback of the Minnesota Vikings.
No, no, I'm excited.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
I know.
I hate to admit this.
This is like Christmas Eve.
I have been going nuts trying to figure out what Apple's going to announce tomorrow.
Can't.
I cannot.
What?
I do not know what they're going to do.
This is the most amazing.
There is no inside stuff.
Let me tell you this.
Apple has got an announcement tomorrow.
They're going to, but nobody knows what.
It just says, let's talk iPhone.
10 o'clock tomorrow morning, Pacific time.
Let's talk iPhone.
Two weeks ago, folks, this is stunning.
This is amazing.
Two weeks ago and three weeks ago and two months ago, six months ago, Apple, as of today, has not said a word about a new iPhone.
There has been no official nothing from Apple about a new iPhone.
What there are are a bunch of blogs and rumors.
Gore is a member of the Apple board of directors, and he did allude to the fact that a couple of iPhones are coming in October.
But Apple, Gore is not Apple.
He is on the board.
Apple hasn't said a word.
Two weeks ago, in a 30-minute stretch of time, there were a couple of rumors about a new iPhone and what it was going to do.
Apple stock went up.
Their total aggregate market cap went up $50 billion on rumors on internet blogs.
Apple had not said a word.
Apple still hasn't said a word.
Now, the latest beta of iTunes is out, and some of the wizards of Smart have gone through it and they have found references to an iPhone 4S.
Okay, well, what's that?
Nobody knows what the 4S is.
It's been 16 months since they've had an iPhone.
And tomorrow at 10 o'clock Pacific, they're going to announce it.
I'm like everybody else.
I'm caught up in this.
I can't wait.
I'm just trying to figure out.
I, myself, am spending time trying to figure out what it is, but there's no way of knowing.
I don't know.
No, I, my.
My gut is to tell me they got problems and it's not going to be anything super duper special.
But on the other side of that, there is some not evidence, but there are some compelling indications that they're going to revolutionize the whole smartphone industry tomorrow.
Basically, with voice-to-text, artificial intelligence.
But nobody knows.
This is the, nobody knows.
They have kept it.
Supposedly, they are manufacturing.
Snerdley, look at me.
Supposedly, they're manufacturing 150,000 iPhones a day.
And nobody throughout the vendor supply chain will actually admit anything.
I don't know how they get everybody to clam up.
Phone will talk back to you, is what I mean by artificial intelligence.
Yeah, it'll supposedly, supposedly, one of the things that it's going to have is voice-to-text dictation.
You can say, iPhone, send text to Snerdly.
I'll be a little late this morning.
And the phone just does it.
Just does it.
And then talks back to you and tells you that it did it.
As long as the name Snerdley is in your address book, if you say text, it'll fire up the SMS app and it'll send a text.
If you say iPhone, email Snerdly, whatever, it translates what you're saying to text in an email.
You hit send and it sends it.
You don't ever have to type anything.
You're never going to have to connect an iPhone or an iPad to your computer ever again for any reason.
Everything's going to be wireless.
Some of that's been announced.
Now that the software stuff, that's been announced.
Not the voice stuff, the artificial intelligence.
That's coming someday, but nobody knows if it's tomorrow.
But that's where everybody's on pins and needles.
Anyways, I'm just sitting here about that.
And I got Fran Tarkinton here, who has a piece, What If the NFL Played by Teacher's Rules.
Fran Tarkin, former quarterback, Minnesota Vikings.
And this is really a great piece.
And of course, allows me the opportunity to irritate you stick to the issues, people.
Because here in 10 minutes, I'm talking about the iPhone and football.
So I got to take a break.
Plus this school story about how you can end up in jail and a felon if you take your kid out of the school where you live and send him to a better school nearby.
All that coming up, plus your phone.
Well, don't tell me that the iPhone 4S is showing up in various, like at Verizon and Radio Shack in their inventory.
This is iPhone 5, but this is a placeholder.
There isn't an iPhone 5 that nobody knows.
So just because Radio Shack or Vodafone or, yeah, I'll tell you how bad it is.
Over the weekend, there was this tiny little service provider in Cincinnati that's not affiliated with AT ⁇ T or any of the other providers that Apple deals with that had for the briefest of moments until they pulled it off of their website on their website where you buy service or buy phones, the iPhone 5 with the bigger screen, 4G speeds, what the price is going to be.
Somebody saw it, took a screenshot of it, sent it to a couple Apple blogs.
That hit the whole Apple universe all over the world.
Then that place, Cincinnati, pulled it.
But nobody knows if it was faked.
It could have been a dummy Photoshop.
Totally think it's been faked.
So yeah, you can find in Verizon and other places in their inventory list, iPhone 4S 32 gig, but Apple hasn't said there's a 4S.
Well, maybe they have.
Because in the latest iTunes Beta, people who have stripped away the code have found reference to an iPhone 4S.
But that could be a placeholder.
Because it's a beta.
The point is, nobody knows this is, and yet Apple stock, their market cap just balloons up on rumors.
Never balloons down.
That's fascinating to me.
Anyway, you sit tight.
Be patient.
Be cool.
Hang in there.
Be tough.
We're coming right back.
On the cutting edge, Rush Limbaugh having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have talent on the loan from God.
So I think what's going on here, folks, the regime and the state-controlled media want Romney to be our nominee.
That's what they want.
They think Romney's beatable.
This Perry, you should read this Washington Post story.
We'll have it linked to at rushlimbaugh.com.
It's written as though Rick Perry painted the N-word on the rock himself.
And I will bet you that a Democrat put that word on this rock way back when.
I'll bet you that a Democrat named this hunting place that name.
So what you have in the Washington Post story is they're trying to shape the field.
They're trying to pick our nominee.
Michelle Buckman, disabling migraines.
Sarah Palin, stupid.
Paul Ryan pushed grandmother off a cliff in a wheelchair.
And take your pick of any other nominees that they're trying to mischaracterize and what have you.
And that's why I just, I think our people either need to be schooled how to behave when they go on these shows or punt.
And just don't go on these shows.
Here's Fran targeted.
What if the NFL played by teachers' rules?
Imagine.
The National Football League in an alternate reality.
Each player's salary is based on how long he's been in the league.
It's about tenure, not talent.
The same scale is used for every player, no matter whether he's an all-pro quarterback or the last man on the roster.
For every year a player has been in this NFL, he gets a bump in pay.
The only difference between Tom Brady and the worst player in the league is a few years of step increases.
And if a player makes it through his third season, he can never be cut from the roster until he chooses to retire, except in the most extreme cases of misconduct.
Let's face the truth about this alternate reality.
The on-field product under such circumstances would steadily decline.
Why bother playing harder or better and risk getting hurt?
No matter how much money was poured into the league, it wouldn't get better.
In fact, in many ways, the disincentive to play harder or to try to stand out would be even stronger with more money.
Of course, a few wild-eyed reformers might suggest the whole system was broken and needed revamping to reward better results, but the players union would refuse to budge and then demonize the reform advocates.
They hate football.
They hate the players.
They hate the fans.
The only thing that might get done would be building bigger, more expensive stadiums.
If you haven't figured it out yet, the NFL in this alternate reality is the real-life American public education system.
That's exactly how it works.
You get a job.
You hang in for three years.
It doesn't matter how well you do your job or not.
You still get your automatic pay increases.
After you've worked for three years, you get paid for the rest of your life, no matter when you quit, no matter what you do.
It doesn't matter how good you are.
It doesn't matter how well you do the job.
Doesn't matter whether the students are learning anything.
In the alternate universe NFL, same thing.
Get on the roster last three years.
It doesn't matter.
You be star quarterback or the equipment manager.
You get paid the same and you get paid for life.
Teachers' salaries have no relation to whether teachers are actually good at their job.
Excellence is not rewarded.
Neither is extra effort.
Pay is almost solely determined by how many years they've been teaching.
That's it.
After a teacher earns tenure, which is often essentially automatic, firing him or her becomes almost impossible no matter how bad their performance might be.
And if you criticize the system, you're demonized for hating teachers and not believing in our nation's children.
Inflation-adjusted spending per student in the U.S. has nearly tripled since 1970.
According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, we spend more per student than any nation except Switzerland with only middling results to show for it.
Inflation-adjusted spending is just all there is.
There's no incentive to work harder.
These same misguided beliefs are front and center in Obama's jobs plan, which includes billions for public school modernization.
Some reformers, including Bill Gates, finally catching on that our federally centralized union-created system provides no incentive for better performance.
If anything, it penalizes those who work hard because they spend time and energy and their own money to help students only to get the same check every month as the worst teacher in the district or even smaller one if that teacher's been there longer.
Is it any surprise then that so many good teachers burn out or become disenchanted?
This is the setup for the story that follows.
happens to students and parents in these schools okay let's review friend Tarkenton Op-ed, Wall Street Journal, imagines what the NFL would look like if run like America's public school system.
What if the NFL played by teachers rules?
It would go out of business, and the reason is that watching football is voluntary.
Nobody would sponsor nor pay to watch lazy mediocrity.
And by the way, this is not to cut teachers.
This is human nature.
I remember in the early days of this program, I accused the Bricklayers Union in Chicago of securing in a new contract the right to lay fewer bricks than they were laying in their current contract, longer breaks, all kinds of stuff.
They raised hell, but it went away because I was right.
It's just the nature of the beast.
In fact, over the years, people have called her and said, what do you got against unions?
Nothing.
You want to join a union, feel free.
It's a free country.
It's the United States.
There are unions here.
And if you want to join one, go ahead.
But understand something.
You cease to be an individual.
You get paid like everybody else.
Your own individual work doesn't stand out.
To earn more, you got to work overtime.
It's not the place to go to make a name for yourself.
That's what you want to do.
But if that's not important to you, joining a union and a job and all the benefits that come with it, that's what's fine, go for it.
But then don't call me three years later and complain about how much money you're not making because you knew that going in.
Especially teachers.
You know what you're going to make if you join a teachers union.
So you put the school system rules in charge of the National Football League and people are going to stop going.
They'll stop buying tickets.
They'll stop buying merchandise.
They'll stop watching.
Advertising sales would dry up because fewer people would be watching games on television.
ESPN would not pay the NFL $1.9 billion to broadcast the games.
And that was Fran Tarkinson's point.
There's no incentive.
It takes to the next piece, also in the Wall Street Journal by Michael Flaherty, president and co-founder of Walden Media, which co-produced the 2010 documentary, Waiting for Superman, about the American public education system.
If you haven't seen it, you should rent it.
It's good.
The latest crime wave is sending your child to a better school.
In case you needed further proof of the American education system's failings, especially in poor and minority communities, consider the latest crime to spread across the country.
It's called educational theft.
That's the charge that has landed several parents in jail this year, such as Ohio's Kelly Williams Bowler.
An African-American mother of two, Ms. Williams Bowler, last year used her father's address to enroll her two daughters in a better public school outside their neighborhood.
After spending nine days in jail charged with grand theft, the single mother was convicted of two felony counts.
Not only did this stain her spotless record, but it threatened her ability to earn the teacher's license that she had been working on.
Ms. Williams Bowler caught a break last month when Ohio Governor John Kasich granted her clemency, reducing her charges to misdemeanors from felonies.
His decision allows her to pursue her teacher's license, and it may provide hope to parents beyond the Buckeye State.
In the last year, parents in Connecticut, Kentucky, and Missouri have all been arrested and await sentencing for enrolling their children in better public schools outside their districts.
These arrests represent two major forms of exasperation.
First is that of parents whose children are zoned into failing public schools.
They can't afford private schools.
They can't access school vouchers and they haven't won or haven't been able to enter a lottery for a better charter school.
Then there's the exasperation of school officials finding it more and more difficult to deal with these boundary-hopping parents.
From California to Massachusetts, districts are hiring special investigators to follow children from school to their homes to determine their true residences and decide if they belong in high-achieving public schools.
No.
No.
Now, you are probably listening to this in one degree of incredulity or another.
You can't believe what you're hearing.
Parents are felons and are going to jail for sending their kids to better schools outside of the districts in which they live.
We don't forget the Fran Tarkinen piece about what has happened to public education.
If the NFL were run the same way the teachers union and the public schools are run, there's no incentive for the teachers to do any better.
And by the way, who is it that defends this system?
It's your Democrat Party.
It's your President Barack Obama who are loyal to teachers' unions first and foremost.
Who is it that's keeping these rundown schools open while running around bellyaching and whining and moaning about the need for shovel-ready jobs to build new schools and new infrastructure and all that?
So while our president is running around not doing anything and running around claiming that bridges are about to collapse while people drive over them, he also says the same thing about schools, but who is it that's keeping them open?
Who is it that is putting parents in jail in the United States of America for trying to send their kids to better public schools near where they live?
This is jaw-dropping, is it not?
This is how police states work.
And this is what happens when the Democrat Party cares more about pleasing and satisfying teachers' unions.
And why do they, you say?
Well, teachers, as members of unions, pay dues.
And the dues end up funding Democrat campaigns.
Once again, it's a giant money laundering operation.
Wherever you find 99 out of 100 times, wherever you find a union, you are going to find massive amounts of money that support by way of coercion, then donation, and contribution to Democrat candidates.
Liberal policies in public education are continuing to hurt the poor.
Who is it hurting the poor here?
It is the poor who are trying to escape.
Let us not forget in Washington, D.C., there was a voucher program when Obama assumed office.
There was a voucher program that permitted parents of poor children to send their kids to private schools.
The same type of school Obama sends his children to and the Clintons sent Chelsea to.
The same kind of school that Al Gore sent his kids to, the same kind of school that members of Congress sent their kids to.
However, Obama came in, shut down that program.
Poor kids whose parents desperately, just like any other parents, they want the best for their kids.
And like most Americans, they think education is the ticket.
Like most parents, regardless of income, they want the best for their kids and the best education.
So if a program comes along that allows them to get their kids in a greater school, they'll apply for it and do what they can to have access to it.
And here comes who?
A Democrat president shutting it down.
Who is it keeping these dilapidated, underperforming, crony union schools open in their dilapidated state?
The Democrat Party.
Liberalism, ladies and gentlemen.
Liberal policies in public education continue to hurt the poor.
Only in a world where irony is dead could people not marvel at concerned parents being prosecuted for stealing a free public education for their children.
Public education is already free, but they're being charged with educational theft.
That is the felonious charge that has been created, educational theft.
If you send your kid to a school outside your district.
In August, an internal PowerPoint presentation from the American Federation of Teachers surfaced online.
The document described how the American Federation of Teachers undermined minority parent groups' efforts in Connecticut to pass the parent trigger legislation that offers parents real governing authority to transform failing schools.
A key to the American Federation of Teachers' success in killing the effort was keeping parents groups away from the table.
The story goes on to talk about two different schools here, a good school and a poor school.
And it concludes that the defining differences between the two schools is parents.
It's actually a novel, 1943, written by Betty Smith called A Tree Grows in Brooklyn.
And that was adapted into an Academy Award-winning movie in the novel.
Frances Nolan is a bright young daughter of Irish immigrants living in Brooklyn's Williamsburg immigrant ghetto in the early 20th century.
An avid reader, Francie's crushed when she attends her local public school, discovers that opportunity is non-existent for girls of her ilk.
So she and her father, Johnny, claim the address of a house next to a good public school.
That's where they say they live.
Francie enrolls at the better school.
Her life is transformed.
A teacher nurtures her love for writing.
She goes on to thrive at the school.
She eventually becomes an accomplished writer who tells the story of her transformation through education.
It's a novel made into a movie in 43.
The defining difference between the two schools in the novel is parents.
At the good school, the parents were too American, too aware of the rights granted them by their Constitution to accept injustices meekly.
They could not be bulldozed and exploited, as could the immigrants and the second generation Americans.
And by the way, this is another reason why the children of illegals are sought for public schools.
They'll put up with it.
The children of illegals will put up with these dilapidated schools because for them, it is a huge step up.
And these schools become little indoctrination centers for the children of illegal immigrants as they are brainwashed and programmed to become Democrats as adults.
Yeah.
They hire investigators to follow kids leaving school to see where they actually go.
No one ever fools the TGB.
Okay, to the phones we go.
Who's next?
Susie!
Susie in Pittsburgh.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
I'm so excited.
You have no idea how long I've been listening to you, and I'm one of your biggest fans, and I'm just so excited to talk to you.
I wanted to talk about the incident at the debate where the soldier was supposedly booed, and I don't think that he was booed.
I think it was the question that was booed.
Being a Pennsylvanian and knowing what Senator Santorum has had to put up with when he was up for reelection for the Senate, I think that it might have been two frustrated Pennsylvania supporters of his in the audience who heard this question and just knew they're just trying to stick it to him once again and were upset about the question aimed at the senator.
And I mean, in Pennsylvania, he just was just constantly pilloried by the left on the street.
Sadly, it worked.
Oh, it did.
I mean, they were just brutal to him.
And it was, and he's honestly, he's one of the most honest, respectable men and truly a statesman.
And this brings me to a question I have for you, too, is that I've noticed that Senator Santorum and Newt Gingrich have been just so marginalized in this debate and in these debates.
And they're two the smartest people up there.
I mean, they have done so much already in the Congress and the Senate.
So what's the question?
Well, I'm just wondering why they're being so marginalized, even by the Fox people with questions and why they just aren't being hurt.
I mean, they're the.
I don't.
Look at, I don't pretend.
I don't pretend to understand how the host and the moderators go about deciding who's going to be asked what.
They don't consult me on that.
But I can explain, I think, why both those guys are having trouble getting traction.
You're not going to like it.
But you call me and you ask a question and I think I can answer it.
In the case of Rick Santorum, I don't know this.
I'm going to tell you what I think it is.
Two things.
The endorsement.
Remember, we're talking about Republican primary vote.
The endorsement of Senator Spector.
And the fact, and this, this, Susie, this is you, you may think this is fleeting, but it's not.
It's really important.
It's not just that Senator Santorum lost his reelection, but he lost it by 20 points.
That is, people, people remember that.
It's maybe unfair.
You're asking me for reasons why no traction.
And I need to tell you, everybody is, I love Rick Santorum.
He's a friend of mine.
And my comment here has nothing to do with whether or not he'd be a good president.
I think he'd be a great one, in fact.
You asked me why he's not getting traction.
I'll tell you what I think.
With Newt, it's the same thing.
You're dealing with 80% of the time a genius.
But in that other 20%, you get TV commercials on a couch with Nancy Pelosi on climate change.
And then you get a joint appearance with Hillary Clinton on Healthcare, which kind of dilutes the 80%.
His numbers are coming up.
Newts in double digits now, which means that his performances in these debates have been consistent enough and powerful enough that people are focusing on the 80% or 90% that's Newt genius.
Now, I'm fairly confident that my answers to you are correct, but I can't say it with onological certitude.
But as to why the Fox people structure the debate the way they do and who gets questions and how much time, no my yob.
No my yob.
And they have yet to consult me at Fox on this.
All I can tell you is they're not debates.
They are enlarged press conferences with time limits.
And so the skills required here.
That's why Romney's doing well.
How many he's done this for two or three cycles now?
You get good at it with practice.
I've told you, brevity is a solo wit.
These people are going to have to learn to say what they think with persuasion and convincibility in 30 seconds.
And if they can't, they're going to come off as looking incoherent.
The nature of the beast today.
It is the fastest three hours in media.
Two of them are already gone.
And would you believe I've still only barely scratched the surface of today's show prep?
▲
Export Selection