All Episodes
Previous Next
April 30, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:45
April 30, 2012, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, I saw it.
Of course I saw it.
I'm a powerful, influential member of the media.
I got a pre-release screener of it.
I saw it.
They're asking me if I've seen the movie Bully.
I saw it.
I had mixed emotions about it.
And ultimately, I would recommend it.
Anyway, greetings and welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, the email address, lrushbow at EIBNet.com.
I need to clarify something here.
Romney was talking about bin Laden insofar as Obama was claiming that Iraq was a distraction and that all we really needed to do was kill bin Laden, the war on terror would be over.
The Democrats are running around saying that.
When Bush did not get bin Laden, the Democrats were defining that as the sole means of win or lose the war on terror.
So they would love, we're losing the war on terror because Bush hasn't got bin Laden.
If we just kill bin Laden, the war on terror would be over.
Romney was saying, sure, that'd be great, but that's not the end-all and be-all just to kill bin Laden, that we would still have to fight the war on terror.
Now, what the Obama people have done is turn that around into saying that Romney would not have cared about getting bin Laden.
And that's not what Romney was saying at all.
But that's not all, because I have here, I hold it, my formerly nicotine-stained finger.
Right here, it's a story from theHill.com and the headline, one year later, Obama team looks for lasting bin Laden bounce.
And the reporters here at The Hill, you read the story, and they're just dismayed at the injustice of all this, that Obama hasn't gotten a big bounce from killing Osama.
And now they're trying to, they didn't have a bounce, they didn't have a lasting bounce, they don't have a bounce now, so trying to actually create the first bounce by celebrating the anniversary.
That's why I asked if today or tomorrow would be a national holiday last week that nobody had told me about.
Because I'm not going to bother reading the whole story to you, but it's funny.
It's typical of a state-controlled media outlet whose puzzle they have not dismayed.
They have not been able to create the bounce for Obama.
Here we are just a year after the killing of Osama bin Laden, which The Hill here describes, quote, undoubtedly a crowning achievement in President Obama's tenure at the White House.
Man, if that's all I got to crow about, then I'm telling you, they've got nothing.
And that's all they've got to crow about.
And they're trying to dredge that up.
And they're dismayed here because Obama's not getting any bounce in the polls because the American public doesn't realize what a brave and courageous thing it was that Obama did.
And the American people are too darn fickle.
And they just don't have the level of appreciation that the Hill.com thinks they should have.
But I find it a bit ironic, ladies and gentlemen, for this to be Barack Obama's primary accomplishment as president, since he ran as an anti-war candidate.
He's going to get us out of club Gitmo.
He's going to get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq.
And now the big claim is, it's right, after seven years of bashing the war on terror and calling all of it a waste of money, What's the only thing that Obama can hang his hat on, and that's getting Osama.
And that was already Bush's policy.
I don't care what Gibbs said.
That soundbite's still hilarious.
Obama told the Intel people to go find Osama.
Yeah, it's a very courageous thing he did.
Here, what did I put in the back of the stack?
What is it?
Yeah, grab number, what do we play?
Number four?
We did.
Play, I don't want to play the whole thing.
Just the first couple, three sentences.
You've got to hear this again.
Certainly it's not over the line.
Barack Obama is our commander-in-chief, asked our intelligence community to find him.
He was brought actionable intelligence, directed the brave men and women in our military to go in and kill Osama bin Laden, which is exactly.
It had never been policy.
Bush hadn't done that.
See, it was Obama who told the Intel people, I want you.
I want you to go find Osama.
In fact, if I have this right, I know I have this right.
They had Osama ready to go for like two and a half or three weeks.
They couldn't convince Obama to go.
And somebody had to tell him they were going to lose their window if they didn't move now.
It was Obama who was reluctant to go.
They had to push him to this.
They knew what block he was in in Obatabad.
Abatabad, not Obadabad, it was Abbottabad.
Or Abbott Bad, however you want to.
Abbot Abad.
Any number of ways you can say it, but it's not Abbottabad.
It's Abbottabad or Abbott Abad or Abbott Ababat Abad or one of those.
But look it, folks, I'm telling you, they had to drag him to this.
They had this operator to go for two or three weeks and maybe a couple of months.
So they're terribly upset.
Terribly.
Since we're on the war on terror, let's go now to full-fledged soundbites of our buddy Jose Rodriguez.
Being interviewed by Leslie Stahl, 60 minutes.
Jose Rodriguez, CIA interrogator, who was head of the clandestine services for George W. Bush.
They don't get any better at what they do than Jose Rodriguez.
And he sat for an interview with Leslie Stahl for 60 minutes.
And here's the first bite.
She said, so Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding, specifically 183 pourings of water in about half a dozen separate sessions.
Jose Rodriguez said the average pour lasted 10 seconds.
Can I say something about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?
He's the one that was responsible for the death of Danny Pearl, the Wall Street reporter.
He slit his throat in front of the camera.
I don't know what type of man it takes to cut the throat of someone in front of you like that, but I can tell you that this is an individual who probably didn't give a rat's ass about having water poured on his face.
He never believed for one second you were going to kill him.
No.
And let me just tell you, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would use his fingers to count the number of seconds because he knew that in all likelihood we would stop at 10.
So this doesn't sound like a person who is afraid of dying.
He wanted to be executed at first until he heard that Holder wanted to put him on trial in New York City.
And then he said, wait, I'll go for that.
You give me two years on CBS and ABC in an American courtroom in New York.
Okay, I'll delay my martyrdom and the 73 Virgins until I finish with that.
He wanted to be executed.
Now, this next one, this is one of my all-time favorite soundbites.
This is Leslie Stahl of CBS News.
You will hear what to me is an amazingly hilarious distance from reality.
I do not know what world news people live in.
She says, So, what happens?
Did the chic break down?
Does he cry?
Does he fall apart after your waterboarding?
No, he gets a good night's sleep.
He gets his insure.
By the way, he was very heavy when he came to us and he lost 50 pounds.
What, his insure?
You mean like people in the hospital who drink that stuff?
Yes, dietary manipulation was part of these techniques.
So, sleep deprivation, dietary manipulation.
I mean, this is Orwellian stuff.
The United States doesn't do that.
Well, we do.
I just love that soundbite.
That is one of my all-time friends.
This guy knows exactly who he's talking to.
She can't believe that we would torture somebody with bottles of Insure.
I myself have been tortured with Insure.
Many Americans are given Insure in hospitals.
It's packed with vitamins and nutrients and calories.
Cancer patients and others who cannot eat solid food.
It's a way to keep them alive.
It's not torture.
It's granted, it's a liquid diet that maybe torture us to some people, but Leslie Stahl thinks that's just the stuff they give people a hug.
What did you recycle?
And our buddy here, Jose Rodriguez.
Yes, yes, dietary manipulation was part of those diet techniques.
And he's just, he's just toying with her.
Yes, yes, dietary manipulation was part of these dire techniques.
Dire techniques.
Torture.
Insure.
And then she says, Why sleep deprivation, dietary manipulation?
I mean, this is Orwellian stuff.
The United States doesn't do that.
Well, we do.
See, look, as the mayor of Realville, I love running into other fellow citizens of the place.
And Jose Rodriguez obviously lives in Realville.
Yes, we do.
Well, we do.
We give people insure.
We engage in dietary techniques.
Dietary manipulation.
You know what else did?
They played that Barney song.
I love you, you love me.
What's the rest of the song?
We're as happy as can be, or whatever it is.
But what kind of thinking is it that leads you to believe that drinking insure is Orwellian?
That making people drink insure is Orwellian.
Obama is Orwellian.
If you Google dietary manipulation, that's what Muchel Obama does.
Much el Obama is totally devoted to dietary manipulation.
And they don't call that torture.
Much el Obama is trying to tell us what we can and can't eat.
So we have one more sound bite here.
Leslie Stahl says, you retired from the CIA in January 2008, spent the last year writing this book, published by the CBS company Simon Schuster.
And in the book, you say that by canceling the interrogation program, President Obama has tied the government's hands in the war on terror.
We don't capture anybody anymore, Leslie.
You know, their default option of this administration has been to kill all prisoners.
Take no prisoners.
The drones, the drones.
How can it be more ethical to kill people rather than capture them?
I've never understood that one.
President Obama has said that what we did was torture.
Well, President Obama is entitled to his opinion.
When President Obama condemns the covert action activities of a previous government, he is breaking the covenant that exists between intelligence officers who are at the pointy end of the spear hanging way out there and the government that authorized them and directed them to go there.
Hear, here.
That is exactly right.
These guys were given orders to produce information.
They did it.
And now Obama and Eric Holder want to bring them up on charges.
He is exactly right.
This is obviously a great man here, Jose Rodriguez.
Now, if you were Leslie Stahl, question, what would you want to be blown up by a drone or have to drink and sure?
I asked the question.
Because she said, well, Obama said what you did was torture.
Of course, that makes it torture.
If Obama said it was torture.
But I ask you, not just Leslie Stahl, would you rather be blown up by a drone or have to drink and sure?
And listen to Barney.
I love you, you love me.
We're a happy family.
The great big hug, a kiss from me to you.
Won't you say you love me too?
And they play that over and over and over and drove them nuts.
They played that song over and over, drove those guys absent.
Verse two.
I love you, you love me.
We're best friends like friends should be.
With a great big hug and a kiss from me to you, won't you say you love me too?
And just loop it.
And during refrains, bring in a bottle of Insure.
And they were driven nuts.
Okay, brief timeout.
Old Rushbo and the EIB network back after this.
Okay, we got to go back to the phones.
People have been patiently waiting.
I just need to say, if it weren't for waterboarding, Obama could not claim victory in the war on terror by his definition of getting Osama.
It was waterboarding which led to the intel.
So much intel, by the way, including where Osama bin Alan was hiding out.
Who's now Michael in Washington, D.C. Michael?
Thanks so much for waiting.
Nice to have you on the program.
Rush, it is an honor.
Appreciate that.
Thank you.
As I told your screener, I'm a professional in the energy business, and I was at a professional conference last week, and they had a very well-known professor of economics giving a keynote speech about global warming.
Wait, a professor of economics giving a speech on global warming.
Yes, he's supposed to be one of the top people in the world on the subject.
An economics professor.
Right.
Yeah, okay.
And his first slide had to do with critics, and it depicted an illustration of the flat earth, suggesting that anybody who had any question about the validity of the theories of global warming and his suggested fixes was a flat earther.
And it was widely accepted among the audience.
I'm not surprised.
It's Washington.
Right.
Big money involved here.
But it goes to show you an economics professor doing a science lecture on man-made global warming with supposedly irrefutable evidence.
You mind mentioning his name or would you rather not?
I'd probably rather not.
I would identify a little bit too much about who it was and where it was and those involved.
Well, was it a private meeting?
It was an association of professionals in the energy business.
Well, you know, the regime, Obama, they rolled out a full court press over the weekend about global warming.
All the administration flax are out in force.
When was your meeting?
Last week, last Thursday.
Last Thursday.
In town.
Yes.
Wow, fascinating.
Well, there's an on-site report.
So here you have an economist, a lead lecture on global warming offered by an economist, and his first slide has to do with characterizing people who disagree with him as flat earthers.
Yeah, well, I appreciate that report.
Clarence in Philadelphia, you're next on the EIB network.
How about?
Yeah, Rush, you say that global warming is a fraud, huh?
The concept of man-made global warming is a fraud.
It's a hoax.
And what are your credentials to prove that?
Well, my ability to read faked emails from the University of East Anglia, emails written by participants in the Hulks who described how to cover up the Hulks and how they lied about various measurements and how they were covering it up and trying not to get caught.
That's your proof against global warming.
Well, yeah, plus it's getting cooler out there.
It hasn't warmed in 10 years, but virtually every claim these people...
Wait a minute.
Wait a minute now.
Here in Philadelphia, we had no winter at all.
Yeah, that means it's global warming.
They had more snowfall in Anchorage, Alaska than ever before in history.
What's talking about in Philadelphia?
Well, okay, then there's global warming in Philadelphia, and you better move.
We didn't have a winter here.
Well, then move if you want winter.
No, that's not the point.
The point is, that's as much proof as you've given out against.
No, no, no, no, no.
I'm not using daily weather.
You brought that up.
There is a consensus.
No, no, wait a minute.
There is a consensus opinion that weather is not climate.
That's what the global warming people say.
You can't, therefore, say, because it was not winter in Philadelphia that there's global warming.
Climate is an entirely different thing, according to their models, which have been faked.
Am I speaking to you?
Yeah.
Oh.
Well, every time it's cold somewhere, you talk about, oh, see, global warming.
You're talking about the weather, aren't you?
Well, I love anecdotes.
Huh?
Aren't you talking about the weather?
I like anecdotes.
I love, yeah, but there is no man-made global warming.
That's why they've had to change it to climate change, the terminology.
Do you think it's possible if you send up all this stuff?
I think it's entirely possible that the Earth might be warming.
The earth might, in fact, be warming, but number one, I don't see there might be anything wrong with that.
And number two, we aren't causing it because we can't.
Okay, so our last caller, they didn't have any winter in Philadelphia, and he said it's global warming.
And he thinks, you know, I'm basing my assessment there's no global warming on the same type of examples, which I'm not.
And it would take me the whole remaining half hour to recite for you to even synthesize 23 years' worth of focus on the issue.
But my belief in the non-existence of man-made global warming is that we don't have that power.
God does.
This guy in Philadelphia, he didn't have winter this year.
What does he think he did, along with other people in Philadelphia, to make that happen?
I don't know what he believes.
I didn't keep him on the phone, but there's nothing that he did.
There's nothing that any resident in Philadelphia did or in the United Kingdom did to cause the jet stream to stay in Canada all winter.
And that's why there wasn't a winter.
The jet stream stayed north.
It's a large part of it.
It's not that there wasn't cold weather.
It just didn't make it down to Philadelphia.
But that's not because we're driving SUVs or whatever it is they claim are the, we don't have that power.
We can't stop the warming, contrary to what people like Algo.
What's their solution to stopping the warming?
Okay, we drive electric cars, put up windmills.
This is absurd.
We pay higher taxes.
It's absurd.
We blame ourselves.
It's liberalism.
All it is is liberalism.
If we don't have the power to make it colder, we can't stop a hurricane from hitting New Orleans or anywhere else.
We can't stop lightning strikes or thunderstorms.
We don't have the power.
And if we can't stop this stuff, then we certainly can't cause it.
It's not complex.
It's simple.
Too many people spend too much time in complexity and thinking that the explanation for everything is complex when it isn't.
The simple answer usually is the answer.
Philadelphia had record cold in 2011.
They canceled a football game for crying out loud.
Before bad weather even arrived, it was forecast to be so bad.
They had a Sunday night game scheduled in Philadelphia, NBC game, and the mayor canceled it.
Well, the forecast came in of like eight to ten inches of snow and wind.
He said, I don't want our helpless citizens driving around on the interstate trying to get home after they're all drunk after the game.
So they cancel a game.
Now, there's not one thing anybody in Philadelphia could have done to stop that snowstorm, nor did they do anything to cause it.
It's simple stuff.
All this is rooted in everybody wanting their life to have meaning.
And most people, I hate to say it.
It's a sad reality.
Most people think that their lives don't have any real meaning because they've lost the ability to find meaning.
Meaning in someone's life usually now means do you get on television?
Does what you do end up being televised?
Is who you are popularized in People magazine or on the e-entertainment network or what have you?
Having a meaningful life is a very localized, immediate thing with the people that you love.
That's where your meaning comes from.
People search.
I watched a movie over the weekend about people who have no meaning in their lives, searching for it.
What's the purpose?
Why are we all here?
Some Tribeca Film Fest movie scheduled to be released in October or something.
It's called A Giant Mechanical Man.
And it's all about two people who do not fit into any norm.
Everybody thinks they're weird.
And they're trying to find meaning in their life.
And they find each other.
And they find comfort in the fact that they're both odd, at least according to societal norms.
And it all works on Hunky Dory, and they have sex, and the movie ends, and everything is cool.
But everybody wants more than that, it seems.
Got to have some sort of fame or notoriety, or your life's worthless.
And you have to have everybody know who you are and what you do, or your life is meaningless.
That's what most people.
And so, most people will never have fame.
Most people are never going to get on e-entertainment TV.
And you don't know how lucky you are, by the way.
And most people are never going to end up in People Magazine.
Most people are not going to be Kim Kardashian.
You don't know how lucky you are.
So something comes along, the liberals peddle like global warming.
Guess what?
You can save the planet.
Oh, wow, really?
My life has meaning all of a sudden.
I can save the planet.
I can say, yeah, and you can save it from ExxonMobil because they're destroying it.
And you can save it from Walmart.
And you can save it from Glaxo, Smith, Klein, the big drug people.
Yeah, you can.
You can save the planet.
Really?
How?
How do I do it?
Well, you have to pay higher taxes because you've caused this.
You've been irresponsible in the cars that you've driven, all those SUVs.
You've emitted all of this carbon dioxide, these greenhouse gases.
You've done all of this.
But you can atone for it by driving what Obama wants you to drive or what Al Gore wants you to drive.
And you can reduce your carbon footprint while they expand theirs, by the way.
And so the appeal is to people, it's the same, almost the same thing as you run around with a colored ribbon on your shirt.
It tells people you care.
The AIDS ribbon was popular one time.
And if you had that red ribbon on it, it means you care more than other people.
That's what that ribbon said.
Didn't say anything about what you've done for the disease, if anything.
But you put the ribbon on, you care.
And you were able to tell yourself you care.
And that ribbon told everybody else you care.
And then maybe you put a yellow one on for whatever that cause is.
And then produce, you can have 15 different ribbons on to show how much you really care.
It's a very, very seductive thing the left has done here by convincing people that their lives can have meaning if they will simply sacrifice.
We do with less and then join the club to make everybody else do with less.
And doing with less and stopping or retarding progress, that's how we will save our planet.
And then you become evangelists for this.
Then it's not enough for you to live your life the right way.
Then you've got to tell everybody else how they should live theirs too.
And that makes you an expert.
And then you really care.
And you really have meaning.
And all of this is brilliantly conceived and well-executed plan by the left To get people involved as soldiers, useful idiots for their cause.
I mentioned the movie Bully.
I was emailed by one of the management firms of the movie and said, We'd like to send you a screener of this.
I said, Okay.
And I immediately, I must admit, felt, okay, this is a liberal movie.
It's got a liberal agenda behind it.
I don't know what it is, but I'll watch it and find out.
And when I watched it, I had a lot of questions.
It's real people involving real, horrible things that happened.
Real people.
But my question, see, I live in Rielville.
And so I had some questions.
If these are real people and not actors, who wrote their lines?
And if they wrote their lines, then is it real?
And I know as well as anybody right now at the corner of 57 and 6th in New York, there's nothing going on, but you put a camera there that everybody can see and you will forever alter what would otherwise be normal behavior.
Once people see the camera, it's over.
People see a camera and they behave differently.
Human nature.
Some will ignore it.
Others will play to it.
Others will think, oh my God, somebody's watching me.
I'm going to stop looking like a tourist or whatever.
So I'm thinking, okay, here, real people put a camera in their house, in their school.
How real is this?
That was my problem with it.
But I watched it.
And then the next question I had: virtually everybody in this movie is Southern.
And it's Hollywood.
And I know what Hollywood thinks of people in the South.
What, Snerdley?
What are you doing?
No, wait.
No, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
I'm telling you, this is all the baggage, if you want, that I took into it.
Okay, I know that there are bullies everywhere.
Why do they focus on bullies in the South?
Why?
Because I know Hollywood thinks just like Washington establishment, Hayseed Hicks, pro-lifers, and they're just dumb idiots that live in the South.
The way they talk all this, I know that.
So I watched, and I had all these questions answered.
The reason why, there's an excellent reason why the families focused on it.
One family actually, their son committed suicide because of being bullied.
And when you watch the movie, what you learn is, and the real point of the movie is that the schools and the school buses where the bullying takes place are in denial.
Parents will go complain about it.
Schools don't do anything about it.
They don't admit that it's taking place, or they think they can have one meeting with the bully and stop it.
And it doesn't work.
And the reason they focused on small southern locales is that the people who live there can't move.
If you are in New York or Boston or Philadelphia or a large city and your kid is psychologically damaged, physically damaged because of bullies, you can more easily change schools, which is true than you can in some of the they used communities in Oklahoma, forget Georgia, maybe, three or four.
And the movie does really well make the point that we all know there are bullies everywhere, but it makes the point that many victims of bullies try to get along with them by being the punching bag.
By thinking that that's what it's going to take for them to be accepted, to be laughed at, made fun of because of the way they look or whatever.
But the real point of it is that the schools don't do anything about it.
And the parents in these little towns have no recourse.
They can't just pack up and move.
Their whole lives are there.
There's sometimes maybe only one school in the town.
You can't even change schools in the same city, same little berg.
And I thought when I watched this that the blame would have a political component to it, but it doesn't.
The blame in the movie is effectively pointed out as the complacent and the inattentive educators and school administrators who they're under constraints themselves.
They're all dependent on money coming in.
They don't want to rock any boat anywhere.
So they just want to almost in a state of denial.
I know South Park, the TV show, did a parody of it and so forth.
A lot of people are laughing at it and making fun of it.
But the people that made the movie did it to bring awareness to the real problem and the damage, their kids committing suicide because of it.
And that it would be easily stopped, well, more easily dealt with if authority figures in the schools where it's happening would admit to it and deal with it.
They're afraid of dealing with the parents of the bullies.
The bullies themselves deny it.
Sometimes there's no evidence he said, she said, other than the obvious damage that's being done to the kid that's being bullied.
Anyway, I had a whole different take after I watched it than I did going in.
And it's real people that I was told that they shot so much footage, so that everybody forgot the cameras were there after a while, which I do know can also happen.
When I did the Haney Project, after a while, I forgot the cameras, or I was so focused on how badly I was doing or how much I was improving or what you forget.
The cameras are there after a while, and they shot so much footage.
So I told the people that produced it that I would share my thoughts since they went to the trouble of closed captioning a screener for me, which most people don't go to that trouble.
Yeah, somebody says, send the movie to Obama.
Let me take a break.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Don't go.
Come on, come on.
A California man is suing BMW for a persistent 20-month erection caused by his motorcycle seat.
▲
Export Selection