All Episodes
Previous Next
March 19, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:26
March 19, 2012, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hiya folks, I'm Rush Limbaugh America's real anchor man.
Real anchor man doing the job the mainstream media used to do and is supposed to do.
And not only am I America's real anchor man, I am America's truth detector and the doctor of democracy.
All combined into one harmless, lovable little fuzzball type package, meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
A thrill and a delight to have you here with us.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program is 800-282-2882.
If you want to send an email, that address is L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Now, uh ladies and gentlemen, this tweet that I just mentioned, we will have it ready to go after the show.
That's when we're going to tweet it, and that's when you go there and read it and retweet it.
And what it is is basically uh a website among these people who are astroturfing advertisers trying to convince the advertisers that they're hearing from angry consumers when they're not.
The advertisers are hearing from coordinated Democrat operatives under the guise of Media Matters, Think Progress, and some others.
And we will put the proof of this up so you can see how uh how this this whole secondary boycott is artificial.
It's phony, it's fake, it's been drummed up.
And the key to it is they try to make these these uh advertisers all over the country think that the angry consumers are emailing them and calling them when they're not, they're Democrat operatives.
We'll have that up ready to go after the program at Limbaugh or at Rush Limbaugh.
No space between Rush Limbaugh, that's where you follow on Twitter.
We're we're having to um uh white out some information on the piece that we have.
And we're even doing more than just tweeting it out to you so you can see it, but it's uh it's it's it's an AstroTurf secondary boygott boycott, totally fake, totally manufactured.
In fact, it's it's a program that's been sitting idle in a drawer since 2009, uh, just waiting to be hatched.
And in fact, something that we tweeted over the weekend, there's a there's a radio trade website uh by a radio journalist by the name of Al Peterson, and it just so happens that a couple of radio consultants tweeted or did a survey about this whole circumstance, and they characterized me as the canary in the coal mine for all of radio.
And a guy was out doing a market research survey at the time decided to go ahead and find out if indeed this whole episode was damaging talk radio.
It's not.
In fact, this survey illustrates that none of you in this audience believed any of this and didn't think it was that big a deal to begin with, and thought the reaction to it was way over the top.
So we tweeted that.
That's up as well on our on our uh Twitter page at Limbaugh at Rush Limbaugh.
Now, an interesting idea here as to why this piece in the Washington Post.
I have been scratching my head all day.
Now let's review Washington Post front page yesterday.
Very long piece on Obama and the debt ceiling negotiations last June.
And in this piece, it makes it clear that Obama is not very competent as a negotiator.
That he's arrogant but insecure at the same time.
It paints Pelosi and Reed as bystanders, basically Obama puppets, not the problems, although not to excuse them, they are problems each and every day, but in the debt deal, they were puppets.
I remember Biden or uh Boehner telling me some months before last summer.
I just I asked him, we were just having a general conversation.
I asked him how he got along with Harry Reid.
He said, You know what?
Harry gets it.
And I cringed when he said that.
But he said, Harry gets it.
If if Harry and I, we could we can sit down, we can put together a deal today.
Well, this piece pretty much says that.
This pie it doesn't say it in so many words, but the piece uh indicates that Obama was the problem, not Reed or Pelosi in this particular instance.
And then the piece makes clear that Obama went before the nation in a primetime address and lied.
John Boehner and Eric Cantor had given Obama everything he asked for.
Tax increases to raise the debt limit, and Obama just got what he didn't want.
I mean, that's he wanted to run against a do nothing Congress.
He can't have the Republicans compromise with it.
He can't have it known that the Republicans are willing to work with him.
Because his whole campaign for re-election is based on a do-nothing Congress.
So he basically left the negotiating table, goes to the microphone and cameras and lies to the American people.
So why is this being reported?
That's what I've been trying to figure out.
Try this as an idea.
We look at it from our perception of Obama.
But let's try to look at this through the eyes of your average lunatic fringe Democrat base voter.
How do they see Obama?
What do they want out of Obama?
I have seen it referenced many times that his own base that he's a wuss.
And I even have had stories, I've shared them with you, where we've scratched our heads together how they're unhappy.
Yeah, they got health care, but it took too long.
And where's card check?
And how come Gitmo's still open?
And why are we expanding wars in Afghanistan?
His base.
His base thinks he's a wuss.
His base thinks he's dragging his feet.
His his base think that he's not accomplishing that much.
His base is angry at him that he's not out there ripping the Republicans to shreds verbally every day.
So this story, I can imagine a fringe lunatic member of the Obama Democrat base reading this and maybe applauding it.
Can you see that, Don?
Obama went, what he snookered Boehner.
He snookered Keiner Cantor, they come up and they give him everything he wants, and he threw it right back in their face.
He goes out and lies and gets away with it.
That's the kind of thing they like.
So it could well be that if we look at this through the prism that an Obama base voter would look at it, this is a this is a win-win for him.
He slapped Boehner around.
He slapped Eric Cantor around.
He made fools of him.
He brought them up, he let them think they were getting somewhere, and at the last minute he pulls a rug out from under him, he moves the goalposts, and then he goes out and tells everybody what a bunch of losers they are, which is what Obama's base wants him to do.
He ended up getting the debt ceiling increased.
And from his standpoint, from Axelrod's standpoint, this story in the Washington Post could end up portraying Obama as Mr. Man of Steel, Mr. Tough Guy.
He stood up to Boehner.
He stood up to Cantor.
He just mopped up the floor with them.
We don't see it that way.
We see a guy goes out, gets everything he wants, lies about it.
But they see it perhaps.
I'm just guessing here.
Because I'm see, I I can't get my arms around the fact the Washington Post wants to harm Obama.
And looked at from our perspective, it does.
This piece is not flattering given how we see Obama even before we read the story.
But the way his base sees him, they could very well see this as this tough guy took it to him.
They would love the fact that he lied and misled Boehner and then goes out and skunks him by lying to the people in a nationwide address.
There wasn't any big pushback from labor or any other group over this.
In fact, the story's been dormant until it shows up now.
So that's just another possibility to explain why the story is um is running.
So it could be seen by these guys as Obama being more crafty and more partisan than anybody had been thinking.
He's so tough he wouldn't even take yes for an answer.
That's our guy.
Wouldn't even take yes, smoked these guys, made them look like fools, which is what the base thrives on.
Quick time out here, folks.
More of your phone calls when we get back.
Don't go away.
Okay, we're back.
Rush Limbaugh on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
I I'm not going to put the tweet up.
I can't get the tweet done until I'm finished with the program, folks.
We've got some.
We've got to wipe out some names and phone numbers on this thing that are not necessary, but I can't do that till the program is over.
Well, I'll take this tweet will be up within 30 minutes of the uh of the program ending today.
And I'll tell you something else.
Well, just one more comment.
I hope I'm not boring you with this, this this Washington Post piece and Obama and the debt deal, because it's instructive.
That there's more of this to come.
We're likely going to have to go through this again.
And we now have learned that the Republicans offered tax increases.
They gave Obama everything if they compromised.
And what happened?
He slapped them around, slapped him upside the wall and down the other.
And then went out and lied to the American people about it to shore up his base.
Who want blood?
And I'm I'm telling you what this does.
This makes a joke out of all this BS that exists on our side about the need to compromise.
You know, it it we continue to hear it from uh from people like Senator McCain and and others in the Republican establishment that that uh that's right, Limboy, American people they want to should work together.
People that can cross the aisle and get things done, you know, shake hands and and and compromise.
No.
They don't want compromise.
They got everything they wanted.
Boehner, Cantor, Court is offered them tax increases, and Obama turned tail and ran because the last thing he wanted was a deal where the Republicans compromised.
He needed to run against a do-nothing Congress.
But this should put to rest this whole notion that compromise has any relevance here in dealing with these people on the left.
Okay, back to the phones as promised.
Susan, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Hello.
Great to have you here.
Hello, Rush Megadetto from a really deep blue state.
Um I was calling because I think there's one other reason that the Washington Post, New York Times might have gone ahead with this story about one week after their catastrophic polls for Obama.
I think they may have been seeing this trend roll up for quite a while, and now they're a little worried that Obama might not be able to win.
And if so, what can they do to save the senior leadership of the House and the Senate?
Maybe make them blameless, the ones who would have worked and compromised, but no Obama was in the way.
Well, I guess it's possible.
Just so I understand, you're thinking this story results from the two devastating polls a week ago today.
Yep.
I think they've probably seen these numbers starting to creep for a long time, and by last week, I mean they just had to publish them.
Well, it could be.
I I just think with with as many there's a book, there's another story in the New York Times coming on this.
This has been in the works for a while.
And the more I think about it, I think I've answered my own question here.
Obama is the culprit in the Washington Post piece.
Obama thinks this piece makes him look good with his base.
See, we're looking at it through our eyes.
We gotta look at it through the eyes of his supporters.
The Senate and the House end up being damaged by Obama's attacks on a do-nothing Congress.
And that's a centerpiece of his campaign.
Pelosi wants to take back the House.
Reed wants to hold on to his majority in the Senate.
Obama just said a couple of weeks ago.
Obama just told Reed and Pelosi that I'm I'm not going to campaign for you, and I'm not going to give you any campaign money from my stash.
He promised to do one appearance each for the House and Senate re-elect committees.
And that's it.
Normally presidents collect so much money they can divvy some out and give some away to the House and Senate for their re-elect efforts.
Obama told them he's got nothing for them.
So the congressional Democrats are on their own.
Congressional Democrats on their own.
And this story makes clear that Reed and Pelosi were puppets in this whole debt expansion deal.
So it's Obama who is the incompetent and arrogant one.
Congressional Democrats not responsible for his leadership.
It could well be here, folks, that that the Libs have a plan B to hold the Senate and take back the House in case Obama loses.
Now, it's important to look at this from their side, too.
We look at this such as George Will, who has now amended his previous column on this.
But a week or so ago, ten days ago, Will Wright's piece that everybody interprets to mean, hey, we can't beat Obama, but let's hold the House and focus on winning the Senate.
Now, George Will has since said that's not what he meant.
He thinks we can still win and we should try, but the House and Senate are going to be necessary regardless if we're going to stop Obama and or roll back some of what Obama has done.
But look at from the Democrat side.
These polls last Monday, folks, I'm telling you, 41% approval.
Obama's not raising money.
He's raising less than expected.
He's told the House and Senate Democrats he's not giving them any, and he's not going to campaign for them.
And privately some of them are glad.
There are negatives galore attached to Obama, but perhaps some of you don't see them, such as your frustration with the status of the Republican primary or your anger with the Republican establishment or what have you.
But again, maybe the House and Senate Democrats, I guarantee you, this Washington Post Peace makes it clear that Reed and Pelosi are Obama useful idiots.
He used them.
So if you are a member of the House or Senate, you're a Democrat.
Maybe what you're you're doing to reverse, George Will.
Maybe you've got your own plan independent of Obama.
And that is you want to take back the House and hold the Senate in case Obama loses.
Because his polls are not good.
And there's not a lot of love between Obama and the Democrats in the House and Senate, and there really never has been.
Obama has made it clear he's out for himself.
You look at all these Democrat candidates he went out and endorsed that lost governors in Washington in New Jersey and Virginia.
And I think there are a couple of other elections.
It's not total unity on the Democrats.
He's not unified them.
I mean, they're unified against us, but they will not sacrifice their own seats to help him.
There was a time, maybe in the first year they would have done that.
So if you looked at it that way, here's Obama, who's the culprit in this Washington Post piece?
The Senate and House Democrats are damaged by his attacks on it.
Because they're in the Congress too.
So if Obama's running against a do-nothing Congress, guess who's also in there?
Democrats, and they run the Senate.
And Obama's running against them, not just Republicans.
The Republicans run this uh the House, but Harry Reid and the boys run the Senate, and there are Democrats both places, and Obama's out trying to blame everything on them at large.
He's not saying it's a do-nothing Republican Congress.
So I wouldn't, I wouldn't be surprised if if if the source for this Washington Post piece is a bunch of Democrats, elected Democrats who are making a move here towards self-preservation.
Now some of you may be poo-pooing this.
Come on, Rush, this guy's got the media, he's got all the money.
You're fall-I'm not falling for anything.
I'm giving you possibilities.
I also have the confidence to know that it is panic time.
At the Obama re-elect committee.
They live and die with polls.
Polls are used to shape public opinion, not reflect it.
Polls are used to find out what Obama should say about something.
And these polls, and again, the Hill.com has a poll today that's just as devastating as the two Washington Post, New York Times last Monday.
There could be infighting going on behind the scenes on the Democrat side.
That's what this could be about.
One other thing, and I'm gonna move on.
Another reason to suspect that Democrats leaked this, not Obama.
Obama's the culprit in this piece.
Obama, in this Washington Post piece, Obama is the problem.
He's the one that screwed up, lied, what have you.
But what do we now know for sure?
We know that Bahner and Cantor offered tax increases.
We know it now.
After steadfastly saying that they would not, after steadfastly maintaining that they wanted to do cuts, they had before they would agree.
I mean, they they they agreed to moderate tax increases, but there had to be spending cuts first in the debt limit deals.
The Democrats have now got it out there that Boehner and Cantor are willing to raise taxes, and that will not help.
The theory on the Democrat side is it's not going to help those guys with the Republican base.
So the more I think about it, and again, I'm I apologize for for basically thinking out loud about this during the whole program.
I could not fathom before the program started, why now?
So I thank you for indulging me as I think aloud on the air about it, trying to figure it out.
Now we know that the Democrats had to be responsible for this.
Democrats in the House had to be behind this, somebody.
Because it benefits them, however, you analyze this in in their minds anyway.
From the Washington Post yesterday, President Obama struggling to draw in big dollar donations, half as many people writing large checks this campaign as four years ago.
Half as many.
Well, now we know why he had all those big dollar bundlers in as guests at the state dinner for the British prime minister.
There were 34 fundraisers at a state dinner.
Unprecedented.
Obama is outpacing his Republican rivals in fundraising overall.
His advisors have concentrated on amassing small dollar backers.
Now you notice, I can keep reading here, but you notice how far they have to go into the weeds to find somewhere in which Obama is trouncing the Republicans in fundraising.
They have to go really deep.
This this story, Obama's high dollar donations lagging.
Well, again, he goes, he had five or six fundraisers last Friday.
They guessed 5.6 million, that's what they expected.
They got 4.6 or 4.7 million.
They got less than they expected.
This is not four years ago.
By any stretch.
It's a different day.
Looky here.
A Massachusetts screw principal is renaming St. Patrick's Day to O'Green Day in an effort to be inclusive and diverse.
Some parents are blasting the decision as stupid and illogical.
The principal is named Lisa Curtin.
The principal, Lisa Curtin, she of the Sol Road School in uh Wilbram, Massachusetts, decided to change the name from St. Patrick's Day to O'Green Day to ease discomfort that some students might have.
Celebrating St. Patrick's Day or Valentine's Day, which last month was renamed to Caring and Kindness Day.
Well, because it's Catholic.
Dawn, that's why this uh female principal thinks that it's offensive to her school kids.
Because St. Patrick is a Catholic saint.
St. Valentine, a Catholic that's that makes some people uncomfortable.
So she really did.
She changed St. Patrick's Day to O'Green Day.
Who's next?
David, in um what is that?
How do you pr I never heard of it?
How do you pronounce where you live, sir?
Wingina.
When oh I. Yeah, Wingina.
Win Wingina, Virginia.
Yeah, right.
Okay, cool.
Make it do this to you, Russ.
Thanks for all that you do for our country, and God bless you.
Appreciate that, sir.
Thanks very much.
I've got an idea.
I think I know why this may be uh this this Washington Post article is coming out when it is.
If you think ahead to the November election, they're gonna need credibility in the press.
The press is gonna have to have credibility with with a skeptical audience already.
Viewership is already declining with the ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, uh state media.
And if they put out an article like this later on, they can say, see, we criticize him too.
Well, I would I would be inclined to think you have a point here, uh, but for one thing.
I know what you're saying, that they're gonna have to do random acts of journalism now and then just have credibility.
Right.
This I I would like for you to do something.
Okay.
If you have time, I want you to go read this story.
Because I it took me a long time to translate this.
I have really taken something very complex here and synthesized it down to what I think its essence is the way I have portrayed this to you.
You have to dig deep in this story to find it.
My point is that if they want to do a story that's critical of Obama in order to advance their credibility, this may not be it because it's too complicated.
It's forget that later on.
People can't remember what polit politicians said last month.
Yeah, but I'm saying that people reading it yesterday might not have figured it out until they heard me translate it for them.
That's true, and there may be more than one reason why they're doing this, but I think that's part of the reason there.
They need credibility later on.
They're gonna have to say, see, we criticize them too, we're objective.
Well, I know what you're saying.
But you get down to election time and they're just gonna be in the tank for Obama.
And and uh they're gonna be able to point to things, hey, remember that piece we did back in March, we really ripped Obama to shred.
Yeah.
It's gonna come up.
Well, maybe.
I don't know that they care about that anymore.
I I used to be of the same mindset that you're on regarding it.
I don't think they care anymore.
Be frank frank with you.
I don't think these drive-by journalists care what we think of them.
I I really don't.
Some of them individually might in private Moments.
But as an industry, they don't care.
They are part of the agenda.
They are part of the Obama re-elect arm.
This is why this does stand out.
I can see why you think on this about this the way you're thinking.
I've got a story here somewhere, by the way.
That you may have seen it, folks.
It's about the newspaper industry and the deep trouble that it's in.
It is in the kind of trouble that leads to potential end of the business.
It's that bad.
The newspaper, but not television news, not radio news, but but news papers are in a world of hurt, big time, losing money, losing readers, losing circulation, and practically all of them.
It is uh it's it's perhaps at death knell status, according to this story.
Anyway, David from Wingina, Virginia, I appreciate the call.
We'll take a brief time out here at Obscene Profit Timeout, the EIB network.
Back right after this.
I just got a note from Catherine.
She told me she went to school in Wilbram, Massachusetts when she was uh when she was young.
Glad she got out of there in the nick of time.
I mean, is this place changing St. Patrick's Day to O'Green Day because it's uncomfortable for the students.
Rob Portman, Republican Senator Rob Portman, former budget director in the uh in the Bush administration.
He's a former director of the office and management budget.
Uh and a great guy, by the way.
He's one of us, folks.
Rob Portman is predicting the debt ceiling will be hit in mid-October unless Obama reigns in spending, or the Treasury Department uses some uh uh restraint, and of course, we had a record deficit in February.
We're not reigning in any spending.
So if if we run up against the debt limit in October, right in the midst of the campaign.
Now that's gonna get very interesting.
The more I think about this, folks, the more I think about this Washington Post piece, I think some Democrats in Congress are sending a little warning shot across Obama's bow.
He told them no money from me, you're on your own, I'm not gonna campaign for you.
They're running against a do-nothing Congress, which they are in, and they got his health care bill passed for him.
I think there's a you know a little warning shot fired to Obama.
Hey, you better go easy here.
We might hold your fate in our hands.
Uh, some audio sound bites.
John McCain, meet the press, was asked by David Gregory.
You're worried about tone of the campaign.
You've been in some nasty fights yourself politically.
Do you think this is having a toll, this Republican primary?
It's the nastiest I have ever seen.
It's a result of the worst decision the United States Supreme Court has made in many years, the Citizens United decision, where out of naivete and sheer ignorance, uh the uh majority of Supreme Court uh just uh unloosened all money uh released all money now.
That's absurd.
With with all due res Oh, folks, by the way, you got to remind me tomorrow.
I we watched what was it, Saturday night.
We watched Game Change, this movie.
This movie is a joke.
I can't but I've read the reviews of this movie by Republican conservative media people.
They should have excoriated this movie.
This movie is an outright embarrassment.
It is so over the top.
Uh it's a it's a cartoon that pretends to reflect reality.
It is, it is, it was it was it was horrible.
I Catherine got she walked out of it after an hour.
It's a two-hour movie.
She got up and left the room.
This McCain soundbite made me think of it, Because uh it's about him and Palin and their in their campaign.
This Citizens United.
Supreme Court decision.
That's not problem here.
Money is not the problem in politics.
Anyway, Scarborough respond or Santorum responded to this.
He was on CBS this morning today.
And Charlie Rose said Senator McCain said that this is the dirtiest campaign he's ever seen.
Yeah, you should tell the guy that's uh that he's supporting to stop spending tens and tens of millions of dollars running negative ads.
It's not Rick Santorum who's been running all the negative ads, or even Newt Gingrich.
It's Mitt Romney who's systematically just gone out there and run a negative campaign, has had no positive vision for this country, and spends billionaire dollars uh to tear down every single opponent that's in his path.
That happened in 08, too, and that's why there was uh the animosity for Romney back then.
So that's Santorum's answer to McHey.
It's not the money, it's the guy spending it.
Is Santorum's point.
It's not the money.
It's not the gun.
It's the guy pulling the trigger.
It's the same thing.
Bud McCain yes, say this.
McCain's fine gold, campaign finance reform, all of that.
But it's just it's an absurd premise that the money is the problem.
Then this morning on Scarborough Show on MSNBC, Santorum again, the guest in Scarborough said, Rick, just so you know, I've been critical of the focus on this issue of contraception.
I brought it up to you today because we've talked about it a lot, and certainly now that we have you here, we want you to respond to it.
Let's move beyond the issue of contraception.
Rick, what are you doing?
Hold on one second.
Go and come to any of my uh now almost thousand town hall meetings, and let me assure you, I don't think the word contraception has ever come up.
Let's just deal with reality instead of what the media tries to do, which is to pigeonhole you and tell a narrative.
We are losing our freedom.
We have a government that is getting bigger and bigger.
We have a group of elites who think they can run our lives better than we can run it ourselves, and unfortunately, we have another candidate in the Republican Party who believes that the same things as Barack Obama when it comes to the big issues of the day of government control of your life, and in specific the biggest overreach of government, and that is in the area of health care.
And on that score, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are the same, and that's what we can't have in this election.
Scarborough was not pleased with that answer.
Well, I have certainly talked about your focus on this in the past.
You've known me for a long time.
Do you think I'm trying to pigeonhole you and stereotype you?
Well, and the fact that you continue to bring it up, yeah, sure.
I think my record on this in in Congress is the same as yours.
All I'm saying is it is a legitimate issue.
Joe, the only reason I would talk about this issue, as I said, is with respect to government mandates of people of faith.
That's why this issue continued to be talked about and should continue to be talked about in the context of government forcing people of faith to do things that are against the religious beliefs, something the federal government has never done and should never do when it comes to whether it's the Catholic Church or any other legitimate religion.
Right on.
Exactly right.
This is an issue because of Barack Obama violating the Constitution, acting without the authority to mandate that people who conscientiously object to these things must provide them.
That's why it's in the it's in the news because Obama wants it in the news, because Obama wants to be able to construct this phony Republican war on women.
Nobody was talking about contraception until one of Obama's operatives, George Stephanopoulos at ABC News, brought it up in a question to Romney in a Republican primary debate on January 7th in Manchester, New Hampshire.
It was not being discussed until it came.
Stephanopoulos' question came literally out of the blue.
And Romney, I don't know what you're talking about, George.
This is silly.
Nobody wants to ban contraception.
Well, it turns out Obama wanted to mandate that the Catholic Church buy it for everybody.
You want your own contraception, go down to Walmart and get it.
It's five bucks or nine bucks.
Go get it.
Why does everybody else have to pay for it?
Where does Obama get the authority to tell the Catholic Church or any other church or religious school to buy it for Somebody.
That's what this is about.
And Santorum is dead on right about it.
It's official.
Peyton Manning has chosen the Denver Broncos.
Contract negotiations are underway.
I'm not through either with my thoughts on this Washington Post story, and we're gonna add that big tweet up in a half hour to explain the Democrat operatives in a secondary boycott astroturfing, and all.
See you tomorrow, folks.
▲
Export Selection