All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 1, 2011 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:36
November 1, 2011, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Now, even though I'm on the radio, folks, it's now obvious I have to be very, very careful with my gestures because there's a camera in here and that camera broadcasts this program all over the world.
And any gestures deemed inappropriate by a bunch of feminazis, who knows where it could lead.
You know what sexual harassment is?
You know what it really is?
It's a political tool.
It is a political tool invented by the left.
And for the express, just like political correctness is a political tool of the left to shut people down.
Sexual harassment is a political tool of the left to get rid of people or to score money gains, whatever is most desired.
How are you, folks?
No, I'm not saying sexual harassment doesn't happen.
I'm just saying that it doesn't happen.
A whole lot of times people admit to it happening.
They'll make a settlement out of court rather than go to court to litigate it just to get rid of it.
It's become an accredited way for malcontent women to score some money.
There's no question about it.
Now, you're not going to have big corporate human resource people admitting any of this because they don't have the guts to.
But that's what it's become.
Like everything else, there are genuine, legitimate cases of sexual harassment, and there are phony, fraudulent, fake ones.
And the phony, fraudulent, fake ones are not about sexual harassment.
They're about politics.
Pure and simple.
It's undeniable.
Don't even try to argue it with me.
I'm not in the mood.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program.
Don't tell me how to do the program.
You don't like it?
Don't listen.
Email address lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
So I'm worried about the gestures.
I make gestures here all the time.
Remember when I was astounded at the Michael J. Fox ad in that Missouri Senate race that he did for Claire McCaskill?
And, you know, I'm an impersonator.
And I was trying to describe for people what I saw Michael Fox.
I was not making fun of it.
Of course, that didn't matter.
That became a political tool as well.
So now these, you know, can I tell you how tall Catherine is?
Can I show you?
I'm still trying to figure that out.
Herman Kane is talking to a woman.
Somebody has to explain this to me.
He's talking to a woman.
He says, you know, you're about my wife's height.
She comes up to about here on me.
You put your flat hand on your chin.
And a woman goes, you, you, you kid.
You get away from me.
What kind of woman do you think I am?
I don't understand it.
This was the gesture.
That's what he says the gesture was.
He just said to her, you know, you're about my wife's height.
And he put his flat hand on his chin.
This is how he described it.
This is last night he was on Greta Van Susteren's show on Fox.
This is the one incident that I recall as the day has gone on.
She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying, oh, and I was standing close to her, and I made a gesture.
You are the same height as my wife, and brought my hand, didn't touch you, up to my chin and said, you're the same height as my wife because my wife comes up to my chin, my wife for 43 years.
And that was put in there as something that made her uncomfortable as part of the sexual harassment charge.
All right, now, if that's indeed the way this went down, men in the workplace had better start wearing straitjackets.
Because I don't understand.
I've been trying to think about this.
What I'm doing it right now.
And if anybody political is watching, I know I'm running a real risk here, but okay, you know, my wife comes up to about here.
Actually, my wife in heels comes up to about here.
What does that do to you?
What does this make you think?
Oh, it's different here.
It's different at the chin and above the really now.
We have a resident sex and women expert on our staff.
That would bow snerdly.
What is the difference in the two gestures?
One here at the chin and one over the head.
What does this mean?
Yeah.
Okay.
Okay.
Here's the thinking on this from our resident female expert.
So you're saying that this could be interpreted by a woman.
Sexual harassment gesture.
Okay, Snerdley says, this is the official Obama criticizer, by the way, that says that you make a gesture.
If you fortunate have the Ditto Cam, your subscriber to Rush 24-7, you watch me do this.
The telecast going all over the world.
Snerdley says that putting your hand right here by your chin like this to designate somebody's height.
What did you say?
That it's close to the mouth.
Okay, it's close to the mouth.
So a woman might think that, you know what, you're about the same height as my wife.
Here, my wife comes up to about here on me and you put your hand on your chin.
You're saying that there are women who could interpret that to be a request for a Lewinsky.
I don't see it.
I don't, I don't see, I just don't see it.
You know, isn't it true, folks?
When I turn the teaching on this program over to others, isn't it amazing what you learn?
So depending on the kind of woman that Herman Kane was talking to, he could have been in her mind asking for a Lewinsky.
Really?
That's worth five figures.
I'll tell you what this is: a stretch.
At any rate, folks, it's great to be with you.
We have broadcast excellence here for the next three hours and looking forward to talking to you as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears.
Some of it, I don't think a lot of people do, but some underestimate the news media's power.
And if you do underestimate their power, you do so at your own peril.
Because you watch the Herman Kane witch hunt, the two things that have happened.
The media today is mad that he's still in there and that he's still smiling.
The media is also mad that the women haven't come forward.
They have been desperate to get these women.
Politico has a story out there, which basically is a clarion call in the last paragraph of the story.
Please, please come forward.
It's the next thing we needed begging the women to come forward.
The women don't want to come forward from what I have been able to glean.
They're mad that Herman Kane is still out there smiling.
They're mad that he has not been disqualified.
They're mad that he's still a viable candidate.
This was supposed to be over by the end of the day yesterday.
Particularly, they are stunned that, in their view, Herman can go change his story throughout the day, i.e., be inconsistent, and still survive this.
And they are really ticked at me and others who are defending Herman Cain.
They have assumed that we must really want Herman Cain to be the Republican nominee, otherwise, we wouldn't be defending him.
And they have no clue why he's being defended.
It's not about securing him the nomination for any of you in the drive-bys who care.
It's simply this.
We are not going to stand by idly and watch you try to take out another one of our own.
You never turn this kind of reporting on people like Barack Obama.
You never turn this kind of reporting around on Bill Clinton.
You never engage in this kind of news coverage, reporting, character assassination of people in the Democrat Party.
We have no choice.
We have our intelligence guided by experience in these matters.
But there are some, even on our side, I've done the usual perusal of conservative media, and there are plenty on our side who think Kane's a boob and he ought to quit.
That this is bringing disfavor on the whole field and on the whole party.
And there's got to be something there.
A politico wouldn't run with us.
Those are the outlets not geared up for the fight.
Those are the outlets, our own conservative media outlets, who don't think there's a fight.
This is just the political game going on.
And once one of our people's tainted, day's finished, Pitt, because they think the drive-bys determine who lives and dies in a political sense.
And as I watch this witch hunt of Herman Kane, I'm reminded once again that whether they can do it or not, the media clearly believe that they can make or destroy any political candidate they choose.
They do believe that.
They do believe they can make or destroy anybody they choose.
Now, they can in one circumstance, and that is if they have been responsible for making that person, then they can destroy that person.
If the media has had no role in someone's success, then the odds of the media taking somebody out without any evidence and with a bunch of baseless charges is practically nil.
But if you are the kind of person in entertainment politics, the field of celebrity, what have you, if your fame, if your presumed and assumed success owes exclusively to what the media has said about you, then you're vulnerable.
They can take you out.
Like Anthony Weiner.
If you are somebody because the media says you're somebody, not because you really are.
If you're Kim Kardashian, if they wanted to, they could take her out yesterday, be done with her forever.
Same with Paris Hilton.
They don't want to because it's too entertaining, too much fun.
Where's your heartbroken?
72 days.
Gave it their all.
Chris, what's her name?
Kim?
Kim Kardashian and the substitute basketball player.
Once the other basketball player, no, the football player, Reggie Bush, once he said no more than she found the basketball guy, 72 days, gone.
But it was a valued effort.
They gave it everything they had, even tried moving.
I saw this guy carrying boxes in and out.
So, well, pictures of it.
I wasn't there.
Where does she come up to on Humphreys?
Well, now that, if you want to demonstrate that, that could, that's much lower on the gesture trajectory than the chin.
Where Kim Kardashian came up to on Chris Humphreys, a basketball player.
Yeah.
You might have something there, but that's not what Herman Kane did.
He went to the chin.
So the media, if they make you, they can break you.
If they don't make you, it's not going to stop them from trying to break you.
But it's going to be more difficult for them to do so.
Now, before the alternative media, there wasn't a question.
If they wanted to destroy somebody, it was over.
And in fact, that's how you made a name for yourself in journalism.
Pick out some local level, state level, pick out somebody and destroy them.
That was a resume enhancement, especially if they were powerful.
They couldn't be Democrat powerful.
You note the treatment John Corzine's getting.
John Corzine, Enron times 10.
John Corzine, former senator, former Goldman Sachs CEO, former governor of New Jersey, had his own private financial firm that basically took money from the firm and put it in his own pocket.
It's now feasin' on a near record level.
You know what the Democrats are saying today is the media saying, gee, how could a guy so smart make such a big mistake?
Now you change his name to Ken Lay, and Enron, they're going to drive him to commit suicide.
With Corzine, an accredited favored Democrat, gosh, how could such a smart guy make such a mistake?
It wasn't a mistake.
It was a purposeful, willful attempt at breaking a law.
What do you expect?
A guy that left New Jersey $8 billion in debt, some whatever budget deficit.
What do you expect here?
At any rate, the media, in addition to believing it could take somebody out, they also believe that they can make anybody, no matter how unqualified, into a viable candidate.
And we know they can because we see Obama.
They took somebody who was not qualified.
He not just unqualified.
He was the least qualified.
He's still, after three years, he's still the least qualified guy in any room he walks into.
But they made him into a viable candidate, even a Messiah.
You can't doubt that they can do that.
At the same token, if they wanted to, they made Obama, I'm just telling they wanted to take Obama out, they could.
They could do it because he is the pure product of the media.
Let me take a break.
We got lots to do on the program today, including talking to you.
And the Democrats are running an ad, folks, in Virginia.
The Democrat Party of Virginia.
Jim Garrity sent me that.
I would have known it.
Jim Garrid at National Review Online.
They've got a web ad that says they want total control over Virginia.
It's a picture of four people.
Rick Perry, Ken Kuzzinelli, me, and Sarah Palin.
That's right.
The latest mailer from the Democrat Party of Virginia says that if you don't vote, if you're a Democrat, if you don't vote, Virginia may suddenly be under total control of Rick Perry, Ken Kuccinelli, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin.
To which we say, if only.
So here's the combination, as Garrity points out, you've got a governor of another state running for president, would be Perry, the current state attorney general, Kuzzinelli, the world's premier radio talk show host Limbaugh, and a former governor of another state who announced that she's not running for president.
Only one of those people even lives in Virginia, and he's already in a powerful state office.
So it's not quite clear why he would be joining the Perry-Limbaugh-Palin insurrection against Bob McDonnell, a governor who agrees with, that we agree with much of the time.
So they ought total control of Virginia.
And I'm in the group of four that wants total control of Virginia.
And I do.
If I could do it, I would.
Rush Limbaugh and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the stuff that dreams are made of.
Our telephone number again is 800-282-2882.
Let's go to the audio soundbites just to, uh, what are you carrying?
What is that?
Oh, good.
Stuff just came in boxes like Christmas day.
Good, good, good.
The Apple stuff?
Cool.
All right.
Let's go to the audio soundbites just to show you the media obsessed with me and defending Herman Kane.
And, you know, the media theme of me and other conservatives defending Herman Cain is that we're racists.
We're doing it because we are racists.
I kid you not.
I don't even understand it.
Just like I don't understand that apparently to liberals, the chin is a sexual organ.
I would love to have that explained or demoed to me.
There's not even our resident female and sex expert most thirdly understands how the chin is a sexual organ.
But it is apparently.
So from last night and this morning, a montage of the media on Herman Kane and me.
Rush Limbaugh calls the politico story a quote hit job.
Rush Limbaugh and others out there saying this is an attack on our guy.
Conservatives are coming out in support of him like Rush Limbaugh.
Rush was in his very high-tenor whiny mode.
Rush Limbaugh is attacking the mainstream media for being racist.
Rush Limbaugh talking about we see who the real racists are.
That was Touré, the one-named social commentator that appears on NBC now.
And then here's F. Chuck Todd talking with Jamal Simmons on MSNBC this morning.
I just can't let it pass by that Rush Limbaugh and some of these conservatives are now trying to use race to defend Herman Kane, who is somebody who so avowedly demeaned the notion of even having race play a part in politics or having anything to do with his kids.
It is interesting.
It's sort of like every, you know, these commentary, it's on the left to right.
Can we just agree not to play the race card at all?
Like, you know, and when you see it played, it is frustrating.
Oh, F. Chuck wants to end playing the race card now.
Really?
Did I hear that right?
F. Chuck's, ah, you know, with the commentary, it's too easy.
We got to stop playing the race card.
That must mean it ain't working for him here.
Or else it means whatever we're doing is effective and they don't like it.
And by the way, just to prove something that I said that's true, Herman Kane has announced this morning yesterday was his biggest fundraising day ever.
You know why?
Why do you think that is?
Outrage is exactly right.
People are fed up with this.
It's a one-way street.
If the media were actually watchdog, if the media were actually going after everybody this way, if this was standard operating procedure, if they went after anybody who has power or wants power, this way it'd be a different story.
Already having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have Rush Limbaugh and the EIB network.
So Herman Kane announces this morning yesterday was his biggest fundraising day ever.
He said this on the headline news network, which used to be CNN's headline news, but it's now just headline news.
Even headline news doesn't want to be known as being associated with CNN.
He also said that he's not changed his story at all, that he just got the wording right.
Now, the media claims that we on the right only like Kaine to prove that we aren't racists.
That's the theme.
You and I, anybody else, coming to Herman Kaine's defense because we see, C, C, we're coming to the defense of the black guy, and that means we're not racist like you people always say we are.
That's not what this is about.
Because we know we're not racists, and we're not on a life mission to prove it to anybody.
The real racism in this country exists in the Democrat Party anyway, and it surfaces in an ugly way constantly, frequently, often, as it did during the 2008 presidential campaign.
No, this is due strictly to outrage and what is perceived accurately as totally being unfair.
Even if Herman Cain did this, as they say, they still build Bill Clinton up as a hero in the Democrat Party.
And I don't care whatever the worst that's been alleged about Herman Cain is, it doesn't even compare to what we know factually happened with Bill Clinton and a number of women.
And so the very holier than now reporters on the left who are acting shocked and outraged, how could this happen in this modern era, this kind of blatant sexual harassment, trying to destroy Herman Cain?
And we know that's what they're trying to do.
The very same people put on a hero pedestal William Jefferson Clinton.
The lack of fairness is quite obvious.
It's nothing more complicated than that.
It's actually very simple.
And then that leads to outrage.
And people are willing to defend Herman Cain against the assault on principle because they recognize it for what it is.
It's yet another attempt by the state-controlled media to determine who our nominee is, to take out our people.
Pure and simple.
We had the soundbite yesterday from October 28th.
The Democrat strategist Karen Finney, who I think at one time was big in the Clinton administration, she said Republicans are supporting Herman Cain because of his race.
She said, one of the things about Herman Cain is I think that he makes the white Republican base of the party feel okay, like they're not racist because they can like this guy.
I think he's giving that base a free pass.
And I think they like him because they think he's a black man who knows his place.
I know that's harsh, but that's how it sure seems to me.
She's a member of the Democrat National Committee.
And in fact, that kind of symbolic demonstration, that kind of show is what the Democrats do.
So we have another case of projection here.
Back to the audio soundbites.
This morning on Scarborough Show on MSNBC, Mark Halperin from Time Magazine is a guest, and they discuss all this.
Scarborough said, do you think Herman Cain's numbers will slightly go up?
Why will the numbers go slightly up?
What do you think is going to happen here?
What's fueling Herman Cain, what has fueled his rise is an anti-Washington, anti-liberal establishment rallying around someone who has the right profile for that sentiment in the party.
And there's a lot of conservative voices, Rush Limbaugh and others out there saying this is an attack on our guy because he's rising so much.
Well, it's partially because he's rising so much.
You know, I'm getting more and more emails.
It's not even because he's rising so much.
I'll tell you what it is.
It's like I said yesterday.
And please don't doubt me on this.
The reason this looks just like Clarence Thomas is because it is.
And the reason this looks just like Marco Rubio is because it is.
And the reason this looks just like Alberto Gonzalez is because it is.
Blacks and Hispanics who rise and achieve to the top of their professions as Republicans will not be permitted.
They must be taken out.
That could only happen in the Democrat Party.
Only in the Democrat Party will a black or a minority be allowed, be permitted without fight to appear on the Supreme Court, sit on the Supreme Court, the Attorney General, run for the presidency or what have you.
An achieved independent minority, like a Herman Kaine or a Clarence Thomas or a Marco Rubio.
It was just last week the Washington Post tried to destroy Rubio with a multi-part hit piece.
And they're still at it.
Alberto Gonzalez, and there's one other Hispanic guy, a brilliant, I'm having a middle block on who it is, who's also nominated by Bush for a prominent position.
Well, I'm just, I'm having a middle block on his name, but took him out, destroyed him.
That's what this Herman Kaine getting too uppity.
The danger is if a black or an Hispanic rises to the top and demonstrates it can happen with conservative principles as the juice, self-reliance, hard work, conservative values, all those things, if you can get there without the Democrat Party putting you there or helping you to get there, you represent the biggest threat the Democrat Party has.
That's why Clarence Thomas had to be taken out.
Because he got where he got without one bit of assistance of the Democrat Party and left.
And as such, nothing they could do.
They didn't own him when he got there.
They didn't control him when he got there.
And they're not going to permit Herman Cain.
Keep this up.
And I really don't want you to doubt me on this.
This may sound simplistic or maybe not even possible.
The Democrats don't think that way, Rush, really.
They do.
But a Democrat Party and liberalism built on a series of lies.
And anything that exposes the lies, particularly anything that exposes them brightly, it's got to be dealt with.
So Herman Kane has become the enemy of the moment.
So here's Scarborough again.
This is Scarborough.
No, no, actually this is last night, Soundbite 5.
This is a full soundbite from the Time magazine contributor, and I guess he works at MSNBC Tour, about the Republican primary and Herman Cain.
And Lawrence O'Donnell, the host of the show, said, Touré, there's just this blender of Republican racial politics has gotten mixed up together.
I can't make any sense of it.
Guide us through this.
Well, one thing I see, saw Rush Limbaugh talking about, we see who the real racists are, and Clarence Thomas is using that same sort of bazooka to fire back, is that when we point out moments of racism or moments of minstrelsy in Herman Cain's example, they just fire back and they just use the word racism.
That's racist.
You're racist.
So it becomes this sort of negating tool that we'll just say racism wherever we see any racial politics taking place.
We'll say the race card is being played anytime somebody points out a moment of racism.
And that just sort of muddles the conversation to where a lot of people are like, I don't want to be part of this at all.
Okay, now, that's Touré on MSNBC where the motto is resist we much.
And he's a standalone commentator.
He's a guy, Lawrence Donaldson said, please break this down for us and explain it to us.
Did any of you understand what Touré was saying?
What is he saying?
What was he saying?
Because I know what he was trying to say.
What he was trying to say is they are staling our technique.
They're stealing our technique and they're muddying the waters by using our technique.
We're the ones who have exclusive right to the race card.
We are the ones who get to decide who's racist and who isn't.
And when guys like Limbaugh come along and call us racists, why that just muddies the water and makes everybody want to forget all this and leave.
We own it.
We own who's a racist and who isn't.
Limbaugh can't do that.
Limbaugh and these others come along and say we're being racist.
We own that ploy.
Why what?
Why what now?
Oh, because they haven't taken him out.
The reason they're reacting and the reason they're getting upset, they really thought that last night that was the end of it.
Herman Kane was going to be finished by last night.
They also, Snurd, look, you ask me these questions, and I have to answer them since you ask them.
I'm very uncomfortable answering this, but they're still ticked off that I'm a fed.
What they're really mad at here is that somebody or a group of people on our side in the media could maybe save whoever it is they go out to destroy.
So they seek, in this case, Herman Kane.
Okay, we're going to take Herman Kane out.
We get our dander up and we put a stop to it or slow them down.
That's going to make them mad too.
Pure and simple.
And then if we, in their perverted eyes, steal one of their techniques, i.e. playing the race card or accusing the race card of being played, then they really get ticked off.
And that's what Ture was saying here.
Well, they just fire back and they just use the word racism.
That's racist.
You're racist.
That's right, Touré.
For 23 years, I've been hearing it.
Maybe not from you, but people all over your side of the upper 23 years.
I'm a racist.
And I'm not.
Never have been.
You guys are.
We say it.
You don't like it.
Yeah, exactly.
They used it on one of their own, and we caught it and pointed it out.
Well, that 2008 presidential campaign was rife with racism on the Democrat side.
Anyway, brief time out here, folks.
We're just getting warmed up here on the EIB network.
It was Miguel Estrada that I was thinking of, another Hispanic conservative Republican who was destroyed at the very mention of his name, being nominated to a high judicial post.
Alberto Gonzalez, you name it.
Folks, it's undeniable.
It is what it is.
Now, I got a note from a friend of mine paying attention to all of this and all of this reporting, particularly about sexual harassment and what it is and how it's evolved into a political tool of the left.
Said this whole thing is complete fabricated BS, Rush.
Let's look at it.
Politico is a leftist site.
Sexual harassment is a leftist BS piece of social engineering that attempts to regulate against the grain of human nature.
Exactly like feminism.
Feminism attempts to regulate against the grain of human nature, and by extension, so does sexual harassment.
They are inextricably tied together.
Sexual harassment and feminism, and they are both attempts to change the direction of basic human nature.
Sexual harassment, most people cannot even explain the parameters of it.
Legal settlements, when it comes to sexual harassment, often had little to do with guilt.
They come with confidentiality provisions that make it impossible for somebody to defend himself without risk of breaching the agreement and reopening the whole prohibitively expensive episode.
So, the disgrace here is that our people paid any attention to this at all.
Now, my friend sending me the notes is I'm not a huge Kane fan, Rush.
The only story here should be how the media treated this nonsense versus the real transgressions, perhaps even crimes, of Bill Clinton and John Edwards.
And that is exactly right.
It's a point that we made yesterday.
Clinton and Edwards.
How could they be so silly?
How could they be so stupid?
And while we go to every length we can to defend them.
And here you've got nothing in comparison.
Here's Maude Behar on her show, The View.
Rush Limbaugh, he says this is an unconscionable racially stereotyped attack, okay?
Remember when he called President Obama Barack the Magic Negro?
This man is the biggest hypocrite.
Who listens to this guy?
Everybody, Maud, everybody listens to this program.
I did not come up with the name.
So, Maude Behar says that I called President Obama the Magic Negro.
In fact, ladies and gentlemen, Magic Negro has its own Wikipedia entry.
And what they say is that African-American filmmaker Spike Lee popularized the term in 2001.
And then they say usage of the title Obama the Magic Negro by David Ehrenstein, a Los Angeles Times column, inspired this.
So Wikipedia gets it right.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have been reading some of the signs written by people at Occupy Wall Street, some of their grievances, some of their notebook entries.
And it has it has created, well, I've seen what I think now I can properly, adequately explain as the diabolical liberal educational tactic here that demands, has people demanding socialism.
▲
Export Selection