All Episodes
Previous Next
June 5, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:59
June 5, 2012, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Say, Dawn, did you, there's no wrong answer.
I'm not trying to embarrass you.
I actually need to learn.
So did you watch Sex in the City, the TV show?
You saw the move.
Okay, you never saw the series in HBO, but you saw the movie.
Well, darn it.
I need to talk to a woman who watched it.
Snerdly, find me a woman at what, because I have a question about it.
And I'm not going to ask the question until I get the woman on the phone.
So if you watched sex, if you were a fan, not if you, by fan, you could have disagreed with it like the way, but if you watched it a lot, I want to talk to you.
I got a single, very simple question about it.
Greetings, folks.
Great to have you back.
Rush Limbaugh and the EIB Network and the most listened to radio talk show in America where we combine elements here, serious discussion of issues along with irreverent, sarcastic, parodic, and even satirical comedy, all in one bundle with credibility everywhere.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882, the email address LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
There is a C, is this Gallup?
What is the poll?
The Pew Research Center, partisan differences now divide Americans more sharply than distinctions of race, religion, education, or sex in a 10-year wave that has pushed Democrats and Republicans to opposite corners on a wide range of formerly less partisan issues.
Do you realize how profound that is?
The partisan divide is sharper than the divisions that exist because of race, religion, education, or sex.
The partisan design divide left versus right, conservative versus liberal.
That divide is sharper than even race and religion.
Now, I'm not surprised.
This does not shock me, but I can imagine this is going to blow the lid off of a lot of people.
And I know it's true.
I don't need a poll to tell me this is true.
I saw this focus group last night that Luntz did on the Hannity show with supposedly a cross-section of people from Wisconsin on the eve of the recall election today.
Folks, it was breathtakingly sad, breathtakingly frustrating.
And what it ensured was that there is no hope for compromise here.
And all of this talk about compromise is drivel.
All of this talk of compromise is a sideshow.
It's a distraction.
And it is part of the arsenal of weaponry, ammo from the left to defeat us.
They have no desire to get along with us.
And that's any conservative or Republican, any political consultant from this day forward who advises a candidate that the way to get elected is to go out and sell him or herself as the guy who can cross the divide, bridge the gap, is going to be responsible for that person losing.
I am not kidding.
The people I saw that Frank Lunt put together in this focus group last night, there is no, it's not even a matter of changing their minds.
There's no reaching them.
They were as close-minded to truth and fact as anything I've ever seen.
And I've seen it all.
And I've talked to obstinate liberals.
I've talked to brain-dead people.
These people took the cake.
They were mostly union workers.
And they have this set of beliefs that are every bit as hysterical as every right-wing conspiracy kook that you've ever run into.
They are that devoid and that distanced from a reality, these people were.
And so this Pew Center report says on matters as disparate as environmental protection, support for the social safety net, and immigration,
former areas of bipartisan agreement have dissolved as Democrats have moved left and Republicans have shifted to the right, according to a major new study by the Pew Research Center, which tracked or has tracked American values for over the past 25 years.
Now, this survey found that young people today are less politically engaged, less religious, and yet more positive about government and what it can do than ever before.
And as polarization has important practical consequences, it basically indicates that there will be continued gridlock in national politics.
Well, I'm going to tell you something.
That's fine.
If the choice is more Obama-ism and more liberalism or gridlock, we take the gridlock because that stops them.
When you stop and think of this, you know how sharp the racial divisions in this country have been.
For the political divisions to be more extreme, to have more emotion attached to them, that's big.
And it is on issues like the environment.
It's on issues like abortion.
It's on issues like the social safety.
It's about the very future of the country.
That's why these divisions are so sharp because that's what this is about.
What kind of country are we going to be?
What kind of leaders are we going to have?
What will be the makeup of our population?
What will be the American purpose?
What will become the American ideal?
That's what's at stake here.
This sharp division results.
And this is going to be, I'm sure, a bone of contention with a lot of people.
I think, and I expect a lot of people are not going to understand this.
They're going to think this is a very simplistic analysis.
But I think we owe all of this or the vast majority of it to the left.
And the reason I say that is we conservatives do not try to force anything on anybody other than individual liberty and freedom.
If we like broccoli, it's enough that we like it.
We are not going to have a law or policy demanding that you eat it.
And if we don't like it, we're not going to try to stop you from eating it.
They do.
They want the most powerful forces in this country controlling all of us, the government.
We don't.
We have been rendered almost in an entirely defensive posture.
We are content to obey the tenets of the Declaration of Independence, pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
They are content to take those away.
Not content.
They are on a mission to deny those things.
It's no wonder that there is this massive partisan divide.
But as I listen to people on the left, as I read comments posted to blogs, and I don't care if it's news, sports, I don't care what it is, as I look at the comments posted by the left, there is no thinking going on there.
It's pure, mind-numbed robotics.
It is the walking braindead.
Now, I'm not saying this to be provocative or insulting.
I'm trying to accurately describe it and what we are up against.
And I think I know what some of the root causes are.
I think one of the major root causes, and it's been there forever, and it is an effervescing forever.
We just happen to be alive when it has boiled over.
And a lot of it is income inequality.
A lot of it is money.
And for everybody who says it's not the money, quadruple the impact that it is the money.
It's so much about that.
It's haves and have-nots, jealousy, envy.
That's the main thing the left has been able to exploit.
We've had a number of isms.
Communism exploited class differences.
Nazism exploited racial differences.
The point is, whatever ism it is, people on the left are constantly trying to exploit and divide.
And they pick what they think is the most direct route to somebody's heart and mind.
And they're mostly concerned with the heart.
It's easier than getting into somebody's head.
They control education.
They're able to shape young people who already, because of youth, are idealistic.
We are at a very, very crucial point in history for ourselves and the country.
And this partisanship divide is not something for which there's a bridge.
Yeah, there might be individual instances where a liberal has his mind changed.
There aren't too many.
You ever hear of conservatives who become liberal?
See, John O'Sullivan, a former editor, National Review, had a loosely knit theorem.
And I'm going to have to paraphrase it.
I don't have it right in front of me.
But essentially, any person or thing who was not conservative would, by definition, become liberal.
Conservatism is a constant daily intellectual application and pursuit.
Liberalism is the most gutless thing you can do.
It's easy.
And it's what everybody devolves to if they are not actively, thoughtfully conservative.
You don't hear of people being persuaded to liberalism.
They more or less just become it.
There are instances where liberals have been converted to conservatism, and it's probably more than the left would like them to believe in.
And this show has had a profound role in that.
And Tom Daschell, no less, has indicated that, former Senate majority leader in the Democrat Party.
But right now, all this talk of compromise and crossing the aisle and reaching out and the great independence here in the middle just want us all to get along, folks.
There isn't any of that.
And listen to Obama longing for John McCain to be his opponent.
Why?
Because McCain agreed with him about campaign finance reform and the environment.
McCain agreed with him.
What did that mean?
Mean McCain caved.
It meant that McCain presented no opposition.
Obama's not interesting in compromising with anybody.
Nobody on the left is interested in meeting halfway.
And we shouldn't be either when we're talking about core beliefs and principles.
And so this partisan divide has resulted from a reality that people in positions of power on both sides of the divide realize there is no getting along.
There's only defeat.
We have to defeat these people.
We have to keep them a permanent electoral minority.
Got to take a brief time out.
We'll do it.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Couple things here before we get to the phones.
This Pew survey that shows a sharp increase in partisanship, more so than even racial divides or religious divides.
The, how do I put this, the wizards of SMART in politics, the political consultants, the advisors, the quote-unquote experts who advise people how to win in the business of politics have been scratching their heads lately because there is this wonderful, great partisan divide in Congress.
And as you know, everybody's wringing their hands over it.
Why can't they work together?
Why can't we just get along?
Why isn't there any compromise?
Why can't we get some bills?
Why can't we get some legislation?
The analysts have been saying, what's going on here?
Is it that members of Congress are actually that entrenched in their ideology?
Or are they afraid of their voters who are the real extremists, quote unquote, and are simply reflecting their voters?
And they've been scratching their heads, all these experts trying to figure out the hot debate is whether the trench warfare so obvious in Congress involves conflicts among elected officials and political interest groups or reflects a deeper divide among voters.
And what the survey indicates is that members of Congress are no different than the population at large.
That the trench warfare in Congress is simply being repeated and replicating the trench warfare in the culture.
And we know that there is trench warfare in the culture and Wisconsin's the focal point of it right now, but it's everywhere.
Now back to John O'Sullivan.
Something, some person, some institution that is not by definition conservative will become liberal.
Let me read to you the charter of the very foundation that did this survey, the Pew Foundation.
This is the charter of the Pew Freedom Trust, 1957, spelled out that Pew intended to acquaint the American people with the evils of bureaucracy, the values of a free market, and the paralyzing effects of government controls on the lives and activities of people.
The Pew Foundation was intended to inform our people of the struggle, persecution, hardship, sacrifice, and death by which freedom of the individual was won.
The Pew Foundation, begun by the conservative oil magnate J. Howard Pew, and like all of these foundations, it's been turned upside down.
Here's a foundation that started much like the Ford Foundation did.
You know, you hear about all these foundations, and they're all solidly liberal now.
The left took them over.
Most of them were founded by died-in-the-wool conservatives.
But over the years, the people that were hired there were not active conservatives.
They moderated and became centrists or independents.
Finally, the Libs moved in and took over because if it isn't a conservative organization applied each and every day, it's going to become liberal.
And it's happened to Pew.
It's happened to the Ford Foundation.
It's happened to practically all of them.
When the founder is out of the way, that's when the mischief begins.
And the left exists to wait, bide their time, and take these places over.
And the only way they can do it is if the people that run the place start waffling or caving or simply stop being conservative.
It's the same thing.
We wonder what happens to all these conservatives who run for election, members of the House, they run and they campaign as ardent conservatives.
And all of a sudden they get there and it isn't long before they're just mashed potatoes.
Why?
This is one of the reasons if they do not actively pursue their conservatism every day.
And believe me, it's hard when the dominant culture is liberalism, social, to boot, is liberal and everybody wants to get along, everybody wants to have friends, everybody wants to be accepted, everybody wants to be in the click.
What do you do?
You start caving.
You start compromising.
You start sacrificing and you stop being conservative and then it's over.
And this is why the Tea Party exists, by the way, and it's why Died-in-the-Wool conservatives are so insistent that things be and remain conservative, because the great reality is that the moment the committed, locked-in to mission of conservatism weakens, liberalism is like a tsunami, just sweeps in.
It is safe to say that Mr. J. Howard Pugh would not recognize his foundation today.
He wouldn't have the slightest idea.
If he came back to life, he'd be scratching his head.
He's saying, what the hell happened?
Same thing with the Ford Foundation.
There's any number of others.
Just can't think of the names off the top of my head.
But it's what happens.
And that's why conservative voters reward conservatives who don't waver, who stick to it.
It's why they're so admired.
It's why they are celebrated, rewarded, and built up.
And it's why the people who cave are so resented and disliked because it's a betrayal.
Andrew Carnegie, Carnegie, Carnegie Foundation, totally run by the left.
Andrew Carnegie was a conservative.
Radical conservative by today's standards even.
His foundation has been taken over.
That's why there isn't a Limbaugh Foundation.
The last thing I'm going to have is that become a liberal bunch of, you know what?
Okay, we found a fan of sex in the city.
Her name is Megan, and we're going to get to her here.
Megan, it may be not long.
I got to get a couple people from Wisconsin in first, but we'll get to you.
But from wisconsinpolitics.com, are you ready?
With only about four hours, this is from just before noon Eastern time today.
With only about four hours into the election day voting, members of the Milwaukee Democrat Party are claiming that telephone calls are going out to voters telling them that if they signed the recall petition, they don't have to vote today.
Milwaukee County Democrat chair Sashin Cheda said that Walker supporters can't get through the day without cheating.
The latest low-life sleaze comes on the heels of countless reports from around the state of various Republican dirty tricks on behalf of Walker.
Let me tell you what I'll bet you is going on.
The Democrats know that they're down by five or six or maybe more points.
The public policy polling poll, which is a strictly far-left liberal, agenda-oriented polling outfit, had Walker up by three just outside the margin of error yesterday.
If they could, these people would have published a poll with Barrett ahead of Walker.
But they've got their credibility.
I'm telling you, this is not a three-point race going in.
And the Democrats, you got the DOJ in there monitoring the elections.
The Democrats already start talking about cheating.
I can't prove it.
Obviously, I'm not there.
But this is, dude, this is too made to order.
Republicans simply don't do this stuff.
What's happening is the Democrats are probably making these phone calls and then accusing the Republicans.
The phone calls have to be happening.
Even if it's just one or two, the phone calls have to be happening for the charge to be made.
Somebody's out there making crank calls so that the Democrats can level the charge and set up a protest or a recount or what have you.
No matter what the margin of victory.
Okay, Tammy in Madison, thank you for waiting.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
Oh, I'm so thrilled.
This is a great honor to talk to you.
Thank you very much.
I'm in the, not only in Madison, but I'm in the belly of the beast.
I go to grad school at UW and I teach at another local college.
And I am telling you, there is absolutely no compromise with these people.
I hear it in every classroom, in every semester, more and more extravagant claims.
If you try to debate the final point of view.
You can't.
It's not even a matter of compromise.
You can't.
If what I saw in that focus group last night is at all representative, it would have to be, or Luntz is not doing his job, but it would have to be a representative crossover.
You could hit these people between the eyes with the fact that two and two is four.
And if you were told Scott Walker said it, they wouldn't believe it.
There is no penetration by a fact that can get through to these people.
None.
You can't talk to people.
If you can't even put facts on the table without them being rejected on a partisan basis, what possible compromise is there?
There actually is none.
You can't carry on an intelligent debate with them.
In my classroom, as a teacher, as an instructor, I can force the issue, and luckily I'm able to do that.
But as a student, you just can't.
You cannot.
Are you well?
It's got to be frustrating.
As I watched this focus group last night, you know, Hannity took it over from Lunch.
He was saying, well, wait a minute now.
The unemployment rate in Wisconsin is just over 6%.
It's way below the 8% national average.
No, it's not.
That's just another Walker lie.
Well, nobody has been fired.
Scott Walker has not laid off anybody.
None of the union claims.
That's not true.
I know people.
They're losing their jobs left and right.
Scott Walker, the taxes, everything he said he was going to do.
He doesn't care about us.
Scott Walker doesn't care about us.
All of this is a bunch of lies.
It was, didn't matter what the fact was.
Did not matter.
It didn't exist.
It wasn't true.
It was all trichonology.
It was.
I've seen it before, folks.
This is not the first time I've seen this.
I know I sound incredulous.
I encounter it quite often.
But it was concentrated in this setting, and the presentation of fact was rat-tat-tat-tat-tap.
And all the facts were true.
I live in Realville.
I'm not interested in lies.
I'm not interested in things that are not right.
These people couldn't have cared less.
They have an entirely different motivation.
Being right, factual is irrelevant to them.
All that matters is the triumph of their ideology.
But here's a guy, Scott Walker, who's being recalled for one reason.
He's doing what he said he was going to do.
It's a policy recall.
He ran for office.
He got elected on a specific agenda and he has implemented it.
And now the Democrats are trying to recall him for it.
If this kind of stuff ever gets hold, elections are going to be meaningless.
Elections are just going to become another poll.
Tammy, I appreciate the call.
Is Scott also in Madison, Wisconsin?
Great to have you here.
Hi.
Hello, Rush.
Gun toting, meat-eating, truck-driving dittos, sir.
Thank you very much.
Hey, the people that Mr. Lunt had on last night were not a cross-section of Wisconsin.
They were a cross-section maybe of Madison.
But the fuzzy-headed, moon-bat, motherfucker coffee-drinking liberals that hang out on Willie Street and Monroe Street were not there.
Nobody started screaming.
Nobody started throwing anything.
Nobody started yelling liar.
Nobody changed their head to the well.
Wait a second.
I counted maybe two conservatives.
No, if they were conservative, they were probably sitting there with their hands in their lap.
Even the conservatives seemed afraid to say anything, and those that did, you're right.
But the cameras being present, I think, stopped any violence or anything being thrown or things like that.
Oh, that doesn't stop the liberals.
What it does is stop the conservatives from even putting up yard signs.
We just don't do it.
I mean, I figure for every Barrett sign there is, every empty yard, there's got to be at least one locker sign that's not up because we're afraid to.
But, you know, every bit of union thuggery and union hackery that could possibly be had is happening here.
You know, when someone comes up and says, oh, yeah, we're going to help the voting with Wisconsin.
I'm like, really?
Oh, yeah, we're from, you know, Monona.
Oh, you mean Monona?
You know, they're not even pronouncing things right, like O'Connor, Mekwan, Wauke Shaw, Ray Dean, you know, when they can't even pronounce Wisconsin or any of our cities, right?
You just know none of them are from here.
And they're all.
I know.
And that's been the case since this whole recall effort began.
But that's interesting.
If what we saw last night were the polite, calm, reserved, it's worse than even I thought.
Here's Megan.
She's the Sex in the City fan in New York City.
Hi, Megan.
I'm glad you called.
Hi, Rash.
I'm a huge fan.
Thanks for watching.
Appreciate it.
Megan, I just have one question.
Sure.
No, I've got, let me, I have one question, but a couple of setups.
Did you watch the show as often as you could?
Did you try not to miss it?
I did.
I would try every week.
Every week.
So you were a committed fan of the program.
When it was on HBO.
When it was on HBO, okay, good.
No, not these reruns now.
Now, I guess I want to ask why, but I don't want to leave it quite that open.
And did the show have a message to you?
Or was it just entertainment?
Well, no, it was just entertainment.
What was interesting about the show, if you saw all four women, they were each an extreme personality of all of us have a little bit of each one of those women in us.
But what was the objective?
What was the purpose?
Venting.
Venting about men, venting about venting about men.
I saw the show a number of times.
I didn't watch it religiously.
I saw the show a number of times.
I'll tell you what I came away with is what I want to ask you.
As I watched the show, all I remember about it is that that show basically told women they should be willing to do anything to get Mr. Big, to get a man, to get the guy.
Well, to get Mr. Big, I mean, how do you get better than him?
I'm just kidding.
Yeah, that is the message of the show.
You work really hard to get the man, but you have to also remember that when the show ended, the main character still didn't get married.
She didn't settle down with the man.
They were equal at the end.
Exactly.
So it wasn't trying to get married and make babies.
It was all trying to build a relationship.
It was these New York women who were fashion plates in one instance.
But they were the crime to the crim.
And yet, what was their focus?
The only thing that they had a problem with, it wasn't their careers.
It wasn't anything except for how do I get this guy to like.
Yeah, how do I get the guy?
Which amazed me because that was the thing that the feminism wanted no woman to be engaged in.
Don't make your life revolve around a man.
Don't make your happiness dependent on your relationship.
And yet here is a total show, four years or whatever it went, focused on just that.
And I'm sorry to say, but that does happen a lot.
I mean, I'm 28.
I'm looking around and all my friends are going through that extra.
I know it does.
They have great jobs.
They can be doing really well in their lives, but if they don't have a man, not happy.
It's feminism is a promise that's having a mental block on the word, but it's a promise that's betrayed is really what it is.
Because the whole notion of feminism was do not get a man.
Do not make a man the focal point of your life.
Certainly your relationship's not supposed to be the primary reason you're happy.
Don't prostitute yourself.
Don't go out there just to get, and that's all the show was about.
And these are supposedly feminist hip.
Supposedly, yeah.
Then these women had it all.
And the sad thing is that.
But they were not happy, were they?
They were not happy.
But I hate to say that I have related to some episode at one point.
All of my friends have related to an episode at some point.
So women have been there, but so have men.
That's that show entourage.
It's kind of the same thing.
They're all trying to get women.
They're just not trying to settle down with them.
I know.
And exactly.
This is the point.
I guess the circuitous way of getting there is that human nature is what it is.
Feminism has done everything it could to try to reorient and erase it, but they have failed.
And this show is a great illustration of how and why.
I mean, here's HBO, a feminist network, great liberal network, great advanced, not attached to any of these societal clichés.
And one of the most popular shows is all about men and women and how they behaved for hundreds of years.
Wearing sandals or monolo blonics, it doesn't matter.
The purpose is still the same.
That's a great way to put it.
Okay, so were you sad when it ended?
Oh, I was heartbroken when it ended.
It was good entertainment.
I did like it.
I didn't base my life around it.
You did?
You didn't want to be any of the four women?
No, and I felt there was a little piece of me in each of them.
Right.
No, there's the one that does want to get away.
Okay, well, then that's good writing.
There's the one that does want to get away.
I mean, it is entertainment at the end of the day.
Okay.
Just entertainment.
Just entertainment.
I'm going to go further than that and base my life around it.
Okay.
Well, thank you for taking time to call.
Yeah, no problem.
Hey, again, I'm a huge fan, so thanks for hearing me out.
Appreciate that.
I really do.
So I'm glad you made it through.
It's a tough thing to get through, and you did it.
So you're here.
Appreciate it.
You bet.
It's Megan in New York City.
And the reason I brought this up is Sarah Jessica Parker is hosting this big dinner for Obama.
Big liberal, big feminist contest.
You two could win dinner at Sarah Jessica Parker's house.
And big claim to fame is Sex in the City.
And it was basically, you know, Sex in the City was about fish trying to get a bicycle.
It was, well, that's why that's what feminism is women need men like a fish needs a bicycle.
That's one of their philosophies.
Women don't need men.
Women shouldn't want men.
Women shouldn't want the relationship with a man to be the focal point of their life.
Here's a show that that's all it was about, particularly the pursuit of Mr. Big.
It was a betrayal of everything feminism stood for.
There it was right there on HBO.
And that's who's co-hosting one of these dinners.
Or this dinner for two lucky Obama voters, whatever the heck.
Dr. LaVon's Columbia, South Carolina.
It's Lauren at Lauren, one of my all-time top 10 favorite female names.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
I know.
I'm so excited I got through, and it's just so exciting to talk to you.
And I know probably your top name now is Catherine, which I don't blame you.
She's absolutely beautiful.
You know, today is our two-year anniversary.
Well, happy anniversary.
Two years.
It just seems like two days.
It seems like it was just yesterday that Elton John was singing to us at this giant ballroom at the Breakers Hotel.
Well, I would have loved to have seen more pictures, but the few that you released were absolutely beautiful.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
And I've been married 32 years in last month.
You don't even sound 32.
Thank you.
You don't?
Thank you.
I have a couple of questions, a couple comments.
One, there's a dinner with Sarah Jessica Parker.
What are the guidelines for that?
I've not been able to research it.
I haven't really.
Well, I haven't either.
I just listened to the ad.
You have to go to an Obama website, and what they're not telling you is that it's a donation website.
And all you're doing is putting yourself on a mailing list for future fundraising.
What do you want to do?
So it's assumed that Republicans are not going to go there.
It's a donation place.
So they're assuming that the only people that could win are going to be sympathetic to Obama and his policies.
Well, I was asking Snerdly, I said, what do you think?
Do they have a minimum bid on that?
Do they have a minimum donation?
I mean, what do you give $10?
No, they can't.
They can't put a dollar amount on it.
It's a sweepstakes.
We do this at 2FIT, but ours are genuine and real.
They can't put a dollar amount on it.
The thing they're leading people to believe is it's going to be a random selection.
Sure, it is.
But you know, Obama's going to be, the Secret Service is going to have a say in who shows up at this place.
I mean, it's going to be tightly controlled.
It's just such a, it's so ridiculous.
And I, too, was a fan of Sex in the City.
I mean, I loved it for the entertainment, and it was so removed from my life that it was like, oh, my God, people actually think like this or write like this or live like this.
And it just makes me sick when these celebrities come out and support they're brain dead.
Look, look, the analysis of why celebrities are the way they are politically, we've been through that countless times, and you know them without having to be told.
The whole point of this that needs to be made is, is that Obama is really narrow casting here.
For a man running for president, this is something that hurts.
Most people are never going to win this thing.
Most people are never going to enter this thing.
This thing does not say a thing about jobs, the future of the country.
This pure solution.
This is Barack Kardashian.
This is not helpful to him.
Don't doubt me on this.
Got to take a brief time out here at top of the hour.
That last segment was a little short.
I apologize because we went long in a previous one, but you know how it works.
And we're coming right back.
▲
Export Selection