All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 25, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:47
September 25, 2012, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, my friends.
Great to have you here as broadcast excellence rolls on as it does nowhere else, right here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Thrill and delight to have you with us.
Telephone number you want to be on the program 800-282-2882 and the email address, L Rushball at EIB net.com.
Yes, my friends, EIB, eye candy for your brain.
So I've got these audio sound bites.
I've got Romney, I've got uh Obama at the UN, I've got uh Obama over at the view.
He's much better on the view than he was to you.
I think those are the ones I'm gonna use.
I've I've talked enough about the Obama UN speech of platitudes and the road, the road is hard.
The path is clear.
Madonna, Madonna uh.
You know, if you're just joining us, you do have to hear this.
Grab the Madonna endorsement soundbits.
Last night, the Verizon Center in uh in Washington.
I don't know what she's doing.
I mean, she's endorsing Obama.
But folks, we've had to bleep out a bunch of F bombs and uh uh excrements and uh and and uh G damits and so just laced all this but she says in this thing, and she gets she's wildly cheered, that Obama's a black Muslim.
So here it is.
I just told you much of what's in this thing.
It's it's hard to hear it, but it's a little easier if you know what's coming as you do.
You better call him the f***ing Obama, okay?
You better call him the worse.
All right?
We have a black musical in the White House.
It means there is hope in this country that Obama is fighting for gay rights.
Woo!
I'm not going to f*** you!
Yeah!
The only thing she didn't talk about is the birth certificate.
You imagine if she'd have thrown something in about that.
So for all of you people out there in the drive-by's, I didn't say it.
Madonna did.
We're just replaying her endorsement of Obama's black Muslim business.
And oh, for i i if if you, for example, welfare recipient, you're just getting up and and just joining the program.
You probably watched the football game last night.
Looks great on your plasma, I know.
On your flat screen, you know the controversy.
Really the oh, what did I do with folks?
The NFL has issued a statement.
NFL supports decision to not overturn Seahawks touchdown.
The NFL's totally fine with this.
On the surface, uh I am sure that Roger Goodell and everybody in the league office is being hammered today with phone calls from the clubs.
I don't know if coaches get on the phone or owners, but I guarantee you know these people are totally PR conscious, and this is not good.
Yeah, I I I come down a whole bunch of different ways in this.
You know I'm a huge football fan, but it's just football.
It's not gonna raise our taxes or send anybody off to war or uh it could corrupt the culture, but that's about it.
I love it, as as you know.
But I do have it over here.
It's it's avocational for me.
So when stuff like this happens, I get a bigger kick out of watching the sports media go bonkers over everything they stand for.
The sports media stands for this kind of incompetence elsewhere in society because they're media.
The sports media is all for rigged and stacked decks.
They're all liberals.
They don't see anything wrong with the regular media being a stacked deck, cheating against Romney, showing favoritism to Obama or any Democrat, doing anything it can to destroy any Republican.
That's fine with them.
That's fine with it.
But you let their little corner of the world, the National Football League, show up with the same kind of corruption or incompetence that they promote daily by virtue of being liberals, and it's just funny to me.
I love listening to these people complain.
I find it funny.
And last night, John Gruden, coach, I feel bad.
I got a bad feeling about, oh, I feel not going to be able to sleep.
I got a bad feeling about it.
Come on, that's football.
It's the NFL got a bad feeling about it.
I got a bad feeling over where the country's headed.
I got a bad feeling in my stomach.
I'm not sleeping because what Obama's doing to the country, where you guys sit around worried about some incompetent referee on a touchdown pass.
Now, meanwhile, we've got the the the legacy media in this country doing everything it can to support people who are trying to tear down the institutions and traditions that made this country great, and nobody says a word.
And when those of us who are the targets of this, and we as a conservative, we had to put up with this for 50 years.
Every day we have to put up with what you guys in the NFL are ticked off here about for three weeks.
Imagine every day of your life being like this.
You're you're livid, you're mad, you think the game's going to hell, you think the game's losing its integrity?
Well, substitute the country for the game and substitute us for you.
And you know what every day's like for us?
Trying to deal with incompetence, unfairness, rigged stacked deck in the mainstream media reporting on things that are truly important, not a football game.
Now what are we told?
Get with it.
That's life.
It's what it is.
There's no bias.
Okay, then I'll say, you know what?
You guys are wrong.
Those refs are fine.
They're no different than the regular refs.
In fact, Bill Levy, I've got I've got it in the stack here somewhere.
One of the striking or locked out NFL referees, a guy named Bill Levy, and he refereed the Seahawks Steelers Super Bowl earlier this decade that the Seahawks think was given away to the Steelers by bad calls with a refs.
Bill Levy actually apologized to Seahawks fans, said he kicked it on three separate calls and ended up affecting the outcome of it.
You people think this doesn't happen with the regular referees.
It does every week.
Doesn't Ahmed Hockey Lee ring a bell?
And the San Diego Chargers Denver Broncos, uh, what was it, a couple years ago?
It happens every week.
And when that when it happens to the regular reps, what do you say?
Oh, can't let the referees bother us.
We have to have to fix our game.
We have to keep plugging away.
Referees are not the reason we lost this game.
Now all of a sudden the referees are the reason we lose.
Well, I got a lot of friends of mine who think the referees, i.e., the media, is a lot of reason why we lose elections.
And what are we told?
Grow up.
Media's not biased.
The media's not unfair.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Well, I'm just telling you the way you sports media people feel, the way all you football fans feel about your precious game, somehow being affected its integrity under assault, its believability, all that.
That's what life as a conservative is like every day.
And it has been my whole life.
From Walter Cronkite, Eric Severai, you name it, doesn't matter who the media people are.
And now it's worse than it's ever been.
With the media picking sides and cheating and ignoring embarrassing or stupid, dumb things Obama says and lying about things Romney doesn't say.
And if Obama comes out and accuses Romney of being a felon, what media says, yep, guess he's a felon today, and they go report it.
Go talk to Romney.
Why are you a felon?
Why do you have money parked offshore?
Well, Obama says you do, and that's good enough for us.
Then they run an ad, yeah, you know, Romney's responsible for a steel worker's wife's death.
Is there any questioning of this in the media?
They think there's anything wrong with this?
No.
They go ahead and report it, and they run to the Romney campaign and say how do you feel about being responsible for that guy's wife dying.
And we sit here, we watch this, and we ask, have you people no shame?
Are you not aware of the damage you're doing to your own business, your own industry?
You're corrupting journalism.
It isn't even journalism anymore.
It's just Democrats with bylines.
Well, I maintain that's exactly what's happening in the NFL.
This little microcosm of it.
But now it's the Libs ox being gored.
And I'm telling you, it's pure entertainment to me.
I love it.
I just love it.
Yes, of course I worry about the integrity game, but it's not the biggest thing to me.
Integrity, the country's first foremost always, and it's still entertaining.
I guarantee you, if the regular refs stay locked out, if this bunch of refs stays in, I'm gonna tell you the games are gonna have higher ratings than ever because fans who've never watched football, and there's still some of those people out there are gonna tune in just to see what the next outrage is.
Or what the next blown call is.
It's gonna be like wanting to see a car wreck at a car race.
It is it is entirely unpredictable.
And as I say, the cherry on the top for me is to sit back and watch the sports media just pull its hair out.
Get all exercise.
Because everything going on in the NFL is things they support throughout our culture.
Tolerance for the incompetent, advancement of the incompetent, relaxing standards for firemen and police so that people who really aren't qualified can still do it.
Uh we need to have courts and elections and legislative bodies that look like America.
I mean, the last thing you know this, folks, do not do not argue with me.
The last thing the left, in fact, the left opposes meritocracy.
Meritocracy is discriminatory.
And you know why?
Because there are some people who are better than others, and that's not fair.
Everybody should have the same outcome.
That's what's fair.
Nobody should have any advantages over anybody else, nobody should have any greater opportunity anybody else, and if there's somebody does, we gotta penalize them.
We got to raise their taxes if they have more money.
If they're smarter than other kids in a class, we gotta slow them down so that they don't humiliate the dumber kids in a class rather than try to speed up the education of the slower kids.
No, no, bring everybody down to the mediocre level.
That's what liberalism is.
Shrink everything to mediocrity.
That's the best and fastest way you get to equal.
Because greatness is rare.
Excellence is rare.
Being really good at something is rare.
Being among the best is even rarer.
And that's not good.
That's because it's unfair.
It's not fair that some people should have bigger houses and others.
It's not fair that some people should have nicer cars.
It's not fair.
Liberalism seeks to equalize all this.
Well, take it here to the NFL.
Everything, everything that they promote in everyday American life.
They can't stand it when it affects what they do.
They just can't stand it.
We are supposed to sit there and put up with unqualified teachers.
We're supposed to tolerate teachers that can't do the job and don't want any accountability.
We're supposed to put up with all kinds of incompetence everywhere else.
Because we're not to be judgmental of people.
All of these, you know, I could get countless examples.
I can fill the rest of this program with them.
And now it's all sort of coming home to roost in this one little microcosm of three weeks of the NFL.
We've got referees who look like America.
That should be good enough.
We got a woman referee, we got Hispanic referees, we've got black referees, we've got white referees, we got brown green, we've got fat, we got one-eyed, we got blind, we've got everything in there.
The way liberals judge things, it's it's all good.
We got referees who look like America.
We have some that are good at it and some aren't, but everybody's getting a fair shot.
Nobody's being denied opportunity.
Because of where they came from.
What they don't have.
I love it.
I just I think it's cool.
See, what it what it illustrates in a small way is that liberals no more want to live under the guidelines, rules, and philosophies they set forth for everybody else than we do.
They will exempt themselves from their own rules.
Their kids will not go to rundown schools.
Their kids will not put up with teachers that can't teach.
No, they'll get them out of there, they'll move them somewhere else.
Your kids though have to stay.
So that the teachers' union can be mollified and kept happy.
As I say, let it happen to them.
And you you you see how false and phony.
Liberalism really is.
Now the NFL's come out here.
The following is a statement issued by the NFL regarding Golden Tate's game-winning touchdown catch at a conclusion of Monday night's game.
In a game between the Packers and the Seahawks, Seattle faced a fourth and ten.
They've given the game situation.
And they go on to justify what happened.
While the ball is in the air, Tate can be seen shoving Green Bay cornerback Sam Shields to the ground.
This should have been a penalty for offensive pass interference, which would have ended the game.
It wasn't called and is not reviewable.
So it should have been, but guess what?
The refs didn't call it, so it didn't happen.
Isn't that real life?
It's never always fair, is it?
So here's the NFL standing up for their product.
Hey, that game shouldn't have ended up the way it did, but it did, and it's over, and that's it.
And there's nothing we can do about it.
This is going to infuriate sports media even more.
And to the phones we go.
We're gonna get a truck driver near um Hebron, Kentucky.
Jerry, I'm glad you waited, sir.
Great to have you on the program.
Well, thanks so much, Maha Russia.
Uh mega truck driver diddle to the Professor Maharashi.
I appreciate you taking my phone call.
Thank you, sir, very much.
Um point that I have not had heard uh expressed about this uh referee issue.
Wait a minute, Jerry.
Wait, wait a minute.
There isn't anything else left to be said about that.
I just this is the problem.
What when I this is a different angle.
Just a different angle.
Okay, go for it.
Okay, my angle is the media.
They're all about the 99% uh occupy Wall Street, right?
What are they against?
Corporate America, football owners, they're the billionaires, they're the corporate owners, they're the they're the evil people.
What are the referees represent?
Unions.
Unions are just these poor people just trying to make a living.
We have to stick together.
We've got to hand it to corporate America.
That is a big issue.
I think that is why they are.
That is interesting.
And the the the in your analogy, the referees are the 99%, and everybody's dumping on them.
Yes.
And and and got exactly handed to corporate America, corporate America.
What that's what these owners are.
They're the billionaires.
What are the billionaires?
They're the evil people.
They're the ones that are honoring the money.
And the sports media is lined up with the corporate billionaires and against the 99%.
No, the sports community's lining up with the 99%.
That's what the media is.
No, they're not.
The sports media wants to kill these refs.
The sports, but 99% the refs, the incompetent refs, they think are killing the game.
They're siding.
No, I'm there.
I'm talking about the the unionized that are locked out.
That's who they're signing for.
Oh, there's corporate America.
Siding with the unionized refs against corporate America, the owners.
Yes.
Exactly.
It's it's all we got it.
Well, I see why I didn't think of that.
It's not that good.
Um just Jerry, I'm just kidding.
I'm just I'm I'm just in a in a kind of a jocular mood here for the first time in a long time, and I'm enjoying it.
You know, I'm actually enjoying being a good mood here.
So I I d don't take it personally.
I would just it was just a you know a Madonna moment.
I'm not taking it personally.
I love you.
You're you're a wonderful So I listen to you, I'm glad I'm in the school of the United States.
Well, I thank you.
Thank you very much.
Okay, so the point is the unionized refs locked out, the media is supporting them, right?
And they're anti the corporate guys, the owners so forth.
That's why they're really lining up here because they're standing with the unionized.
That that sounds good, but I don't think I know that's out.
I don't think that's the motivation.
I don't think I think these sports media guys really want this game to be great.
want the best playing it.
But not anywhere else in society can we have this.
Ha.
How are you?
El Rush Ball.
Executing assigned host duties flawlessly.
Zero mistakes.
You know, there was a referee last night who got the game right.
Got the call right.
Black referee who uh d gave the signal for that's it, time out, game over.
That meant interception.
He was overruled by the old white referee.
The old white referee came up and ruled touchdown.
Once somebody rules touchdown, that's it.
And the old white referee goes over rules touchdown, and I saw what I thought was a little hesitation.
I think he might have gotten confused over which team was which.
I because you look at the replay, this guy's standing right there, there's no way that the Seahawks receiver caught that pass.
Forget the pass interference.
There's no way it did.
The Packers intercepted that pass.
It's as clear as a bell.
That's another thing I love about it.
It's it just it's perfect for my analogy.
And that is the NFL is the country and the substitute refs are the drive-by media.
And the country's integrity shot to hell because the only difference is that the refs here are just incompetent.
They're not purposely cheating.
The drive-by's purposely cheat.
The American media has chosen sides.
They're nothing incompetent about what they do.
These guys, obviously, they're not qualified to be doing what they're doing.
But it's interesting.
So you you have racism on top of this because the black referee got it right, but he's overruled by the old white guy.
What would have happened if a female referee had had signaled touchdown?
Whoa.
And what I shudder to think you start throwing other liberal factors into this, the way they judge people.
And who deserves a break and who deserves an advantage, who doesn't?
You know, who who deserves to be discriminated against because of the color of their skin or because of their sexual orientation or whatever it's not the way they do things.
What what if we learn that the black referee was gay and is Muslim and he still got the call right, but he got discriminated.
Oh my God, folks, and it it could be it could be bad.
The way the way Libs look at things.
But see, now they're confronted.
Now they're forced to look at things only on merit, which they refuse to permit throughout the rest of culture and society.
I just I just love they're they're they're being gored by their own ox.
Okay, who's next here?
Edgar in Atlanta.
Great to have you on the uh EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Russia.
Is it okay if I talk about something other than the NFL?
By all means.
Um since last week when this issue about 47% of us not paying income taxes and and the uh 1998 video of Obama talking about building a majority coalition of welfare recipients came up.
Got me to thinking about the arc of America's history.
You know, we started at a point where we had taxation without representation, and the founders found that so intolerable.
They went to war against an empire over it.
And now that ARK is arriving at a place not the opposite of taxation without represent uh uh Representation.
But it's the other side of the same coin.
We have representation without taxation.
And to me the two are equally tyrannical and oppressive, but instead of being outraged about it, Americans just look at it now and shrug and say, Yeah, that's fairness.
And uh and I have to wonder how how did we get here, Rush?
How did the character of America as a nation fall this far?
Where we're self-reliance isn't considered a virtue anymore.
We don't know that it has yet.
See, I this the question that we ask ourselves every day.
So I was I d let me put it to you this way.
I ask you a question.
Do you realize the level of either or a combination of ignorance or apathy that would have to exist for Obama to be re-elected?
It's profound.
Do you the people don't care about what's going on in the Middle East, don't care ambassadors are getting shot, don't care our foreign policy is falling apart, don't care housing price plumbing, don't care about rising unemployment, don't care about assaults on achievers, don't care about all of I I just I find it if you go back to the 2010 elections and look at the turnout, which is a landslide, I just find it hard to believe it in two years all this apathy has overcome.
I just don't believe it's there.
I think everybody's in for a shock on election day.
But then I have to guard against uh having my hopefulness uh become a substitute for reality.
Because I'm like you, there are days it's an emotional roller coaster, days that we've lost the country.
Uh uh you look at these all-out assaults on raising taxes on the achievers, Hillary Clinton running around saying that the rich don't contribute anything, and there's no outrageous reaction to it.
And you think, my God, how do we get here?
Well, we know how we got here.
We there's been an all-out assault on values, culture, morality, all of these things by the left for decades.
They had they've gotten control of the education system, and that's a large reason for uh our central explanation answer to your question.
Um, but your point is really good.
I think the founders would have been appalled that people have so much say in the government with no skin in the game.
You your point about representation without taxation.
Right.
So many people with no skin in the game are running the show.
They're able to go out and determine policy that that ends up with money being taken away from people who are truly producing it.
So I that's why I say that in in um a couple occasions I've said we can if it were just us, we can handle four years of Obama.
We're resilient enough.
But can we deal with four years or an eternity of the kind of people who would elect him?
Am I still with you, Rush?
Yep.
Uh well, the point I wanted to make is uh the character of America, uh I have to believe the founders wanted us as citizens to be self-reliant, and they codified it in the last four words of the Tenth Amendment.
So if the federal government doesn't do it, either the states do it or the people do it.
It says to me that there must be some things they expected us to do for ourselves, not because they wanted us to be selfish, because they wanted the citizenry to be self-reliant, because how can we be an independent nation comprised of dependent people?
And they had to have known that.
They did.
You're you're absolutely right.
Your analogy is a hundred percent correct.
But there are reasons why all this has happened.
The quest for never-ending power on the part of leftists, statists, I mean the way you do that is turn people into total dependent serfs.
That's how you do it.
And they've there's been an effort that's as old as I am and older actually to uh bring this about.
The question's gonna be answered in November.
How much apathy over all this stuff is there really going On out there.
And I, in my um lucid moments, I tell myself the level of apathy and acquiescence to the wholesale destruction of greatness that was this country.
It just can't be that many people.
Just can't be.
That's what my hope is.
We'll see.
I'm glad you called.
Great points.
Be back after this, folks.
Stay with us.
How many years ago was it that Mahmoud Ahmedini Zad came to the United Nations and was invited to speak at Columbia?
Was that 2007, 2008?
It was the Bush.
Well, I know it was present because it was the same year that Hugo Chavez came and claimed he could smell the sulfur in the United Nations General Assembly, meaning Bush, Bush had just spoken earlier that day, and Chavez, I can still smell the sulfur, and the devil was there for there, and the place erupted in applause.
It was the same year that Mahmood Ahmedizad was invited to speak at Columbia.
And he went over there, and there was such outrage that he had been invited that I don't know if it was the university president or some high-ranking official in introducing Ahmedini Zad raked him over the calls.
And you got, after hearing it, you say, well, why'd you invite this guy that if he's such a reprobate?
2006, six years ago.
It seems like it was yesterday.
2006, October, well, September of 2006.
So Ahmedini Zad's introduced with this guy, or 2007, whatever it was.
He was he was uh accurately described as uh as a tyrant and a reprobate, ne'er do well, human debris and all that.
And it was clear that the university president did this to try to salvage some of his reputation because everybody, even the left, was dumping a and Ahmedini Zad was echoing everything Democrats were saying about Bush.
They hated Bush, Ahmedini Zad hated Bush, and uh the the you you there was no difference between what Ahmedini Zad was saying about Bush, what the Democrats think about Bush.
Okay, so as Hugo Chavez in 2006 and Ahmedini Zad in 2007.
So Ahmedini Zad comes out and he makes some remarks and goes to questions.
And somehow the question of homosexuality came up.
Remember, and Ahmadini Zad said, we don't have that in Iran.
And the students started laughing.
When Ahmedini Zad said, oh, we don't we don't have homosexuality in Iran.
Students start laughing, and Ahmadini Zad, do you know one?
Do you do you know where he lives?
Tell us, tell us where he is.
I'm not kidding.
Ahmed, gay people, you know one, you tell me right now where he is, and we're gonna snuff the guy out.
Okay, now let's move forward to last night over at CNN.
These people wonder why they can't find viewers.
I look, there's a story, maybe it's the New York Post today, about the potential new presidents, people they might hire to run CNN when Jim Walton retires the end of the year.
And the names are everyday names that have already done this, and not and that's Jeff Zucker, NBC, Howard Stringer, CBS, all these same guys that have presided over news division plummets.
I'm never you know, failure is the biggest resume enhancement you can have as a liberal.
Every fail you get, you launch to the top in liberalism.
They circled the wagons around their failures because they will not allow liberalism to take any hits.
That's why Dan Rather and that that hoax of the uh uh Bush National Guard store.
What they circled the wagon gave him all kinds of awards.
They would not let journalism take a hit.
They wouldn't let liberalism take a hit.
So here's CNN bottoming out, and what do they do?
They're they're they're they're gonna go hire people that have already demonstrated they know how to fail.
Because the last thing that will happen, they will not let failures be acknowledged as such.
Failures get promoted in order to save the ideology.
So Piers Morgan is interviewing Ahmedini Zad on CNN last night.
And this has to be heard to be believed.
Piers Morgan is speaking with with the anchor Brooke Baldwin, CNN's newsroom.
And she says, is he saying that education could make someone not gay?
That's exactly what he's saying, and I think he believes it.
And uh, you know, that's where you have an example of really quite extreme bigotry, but it's not something necessarily new.
Some of the language you use was new, and it was pretty shocking.
Uh but he's contradictory in this sense.
When I asked him questions soon afterwards, again about his children, I said, How would you feel, given your relentless anti-Israeli statements?
How would he feel if he was to find out that one of his children was dating a Jew?
And to my astonishment, he said he would be perfectly okay with that.
Yeah, for how long?
But here's the thing.
What happened before this was Ahmadini Zad said that he could convert gays to straight.
And the anchor is beside herself and is saying to Piers, is he saying, is he saying education could make someone not gay?
And Piers Morgan says it's exactly what he's saying.
Okay?
Now, who is this guy?
He's the terrorist leader of Iran.
Next soundbite.
Piers Morgan has to tell people exactly who Ahmedini Zad is.
He's a surprising character.
He's unpredictable.
I don't think he's mad in the way that many in the West, I perhaps prefer to see him.
He's certainly a caricature figure when he comes to America.
I didn't get a sense of a crazy madman.
He is at times charming and sinister and contradictory and unpredictable, and occasionally he says stuff where you find yourself nodding in agreement.
What is it about media people that they kind of go uh groupy around dictators?
What is it?
It's got to be the respect and the awe of the power the dictator has.
This Achmed Eliezzani's reprehensible.
Here's a guy who just got through saying, I can turn a gay guy straight.
He's charming.
You'll let me say that and see what they say about me.
But Ahmedini Zad, charming, uh not crazy, not at all.
Bit of a caricature in America, but a nice guy, actually.
These guys go all groupy around dictators, but Nora O'Donnell.
Nora O'Donnell, CBS was offended at Ahmadini Zad would not call her by her name.
He referred to her as the lady, and that offended her.
So CBS this morning, after playing a portion of the interview that she did with Charlie Rose and then uh Ahmedini Zod, Nora O'Donnell and Gail King talked about it.
You can see the rest of our interview with Iran's president tomorrow on CBS this morning, including what he called me during the interview.
Ms. O'Donnell.
So he did not.
He would not call me by my name, he just called me the lady, the lady.
Repeatedly throughout the interview.
Well my God.
How dare he?
How insulting.
He called her a lady.
What does she want to be called?
The tramp.
Oh, this is great.
Piers Morgan is a charming, wonderful guy.
After hearing Ahmadini Zad Thinks he can make gay people straight.
Charming, wonderful.
A bit of a sinister guy at times, but admirable.
He wouldn't even count my name.
I don't care.
They would never call me charming.
That's all I know.
I know how Ahmadini Zad turns gay people straight.
He takes him down a dungeon, he points a gun at him.
He says, Okay, look, you either stay the way you are, and I shoot you, and you go meet the 73 virgins, which not gonna do you any good, or you go straight.
Which is it?
And what do you think?
They choose.
That's probably how he does it.
Point of a gun.
And we'll be back.
Much more straight ahead.
▲
Export Selection