All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 1, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:45
October 1, 2012, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Before we get started today, ladies and gentlemen, I want to send out a sincere and heartfelt thanks from the bottom of my never-ending, always constantly beating huge heart.
Boom-boom, boo-boom.
And that is to Neil Bortz.
Neil Bortz has warmed up the audience for me in Atlanta as we kick off today on WSB, one of the largest radio stations in America.
And now, in addition to owning everything else, we own Atlanta, and Neil Bortz made it happen.
Neil Bortz is responsible for it.
And all of you across the country who love Neil Bortz, your love is well placed.
And there's nobody better at warming up an audience than Bortz.
And happy to be with you all in Atlanta here on WSB, Rush Limbaugh, and the EIB Network at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-2882.
And the email address, El Rushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
So I'm watching the Saints and Packers.
And the regular reps make a call just as bad, just as bad as the replacement reps.
Well, yeah, which one?
It didn't.
This time, the Packers didn't get screwed out of it.
But I was watching, listening.
Every bad call yesterday.
I was waiting for the announcers to dump on the reps like they did on the replacement riffs, and they didn't.
They got close a couple times.
But they didn't.
Anyway, it's great to be with you here, folks.
Some shocking news.
In the drive-by-me today, the election is over.
Mitt Romney has lost.
It's all over out there.
Actually, that's not the case.
The polls today are starting to tighten up exactly as predicted here.
Now we're into October.
The debate is Wednesday night.
Have you noticed what's going on with this?
The DNC and Howard Dean and a number of others.
Even Romney, or even Obama himself is saying, Mitt's a much better debater than I am.
I mean, they're really out there lowering expectations for Obama in the debate on Wednesday night.
And he's got a tough task.
I mean, Guy can do nothing but lie, which is what he does.
Anyway, but it's going to be fascinating to me to see how Romney deals with that.
Yeah, AP says that Obama has 271 electoral votes today.
So I don't know why they're going to do the debate.
First, second, or third.
Why are they going to mess with it?
I mean, the election is over.
David Pluff tells us the election is over.
F. Chuck Todd says the election's over.
David Gregory says the election's over.
I don't even know why he even do the election.
But if you dig deep, you find things aren't necessarily so.
For example, Rasmussen yesterday, 43% of voters are certain they will vote for Romney.
42% are certain that they will vote for Obama.
The remaining 15% are either uncommitted or open to changing their mind.
So according to Rasmussen, 43% are solid Romney, 42% solid Obama, 15% yet to be persuaded.
There's something else happening out there, and I don't want to make too big a deal out of this because I don't really know.
But go back to the Univision appearance that Obama did.
And we put together that montage of questions from the Univision hosts.
And they were the first real questions Obama has faced as president.
They were tough.
They were questions that bore into his failures, his unkept promises and so forth.
And one of the big ones was amnesty, illegal immigration.
These people bore in, but you promised.
And Obama did his usual song and dance and tried to blame it on other people and said you can't change Washington from the inside.
He knows that.
And I got the impression when we put that montage together and watching that show, watching Obama on it, I don't think he realized.
I think Obama's ego is narcissism is such that he really believes that there is no problem after he shows up someplace.
There might be a problem when he shows up, but he magically, just because of his presence, takes care of any problem anybody might have with him just by showing up.
And I don't think he got it.
Now, I don't know about his staff, but I don't think he, most people were not happy with him.
And then yesterday, Univision did a thorough expose of Fast and Furious.
They went further than any American network has gone, and they laid the blame.
Remember during that Obama appearance with Univision, one of the hosts asked him if Eric Holder should be fired or made the statement that Eric Holder should be fired.
And Obama lied about it.
He said, no, it started under the Bush administration.
It didn't start it under the Bush administration.
Fast and Furious is an Obama holder operation.
They conceived it and they put it into place.
And this Univision show last night was equally hard-hitting on Obama and Holder and Fast and Furious.
And they made the point that it was Mexicans who died with American guns made possible by Barack Obama.
Now, folks, we are never going to be told anything but Obama owns the Hispanic vote, just like he owns the black vote.
And they tell us just like he owns the female vote.
He owns the Hispanic vote.
And I'm not trying to be dramatic about anything here, and I'm not engaging in wishful thinking.
I'm just telling you what's in my gut.
Something is going on with this Univision, and that is a huge audience.
Univision has, Telemundo, it's a huge Hispanic audience.
And this report they did on Fast and Furious was anything but flattering for Obama.
It was last night.
I can tell Snurdly and the guys on the other side of the glass looking at me with looks of utter ignorance on their face.
I don't know what I'm talking about.
No, you've, this is the first you've heard about this?
That's my point.
But the Hispanics who watched it watched it, and they watched it in droves.
And they saw a treatment of Fast and Furious that they've not seen anywhere else other than on Univision in the Obama interview, the Telemundo, wherever it was.
I'm just telling you, it may be nothing.
My instinct tells me that something's happening here.
I'm not trying to be melodramatic about it.
I'm just saying that the Hispanic vote may not end up being as automatic for Obama as the conventional wisdom has it.
Then you see the Rasmussen number, this is another little hidden thing.
You know, the drive-bys discount Rasmussen because he's on Fox a lot.
And they think Rasmussen is a conservative poll, and therefore he's not qualified.
He's not legitimate the way we look at their polling.
Except Rasmussen happens to be always in a top five and often at the very top in accuracy, predicting presidential results.
And this thing that dribbled out yesterday morning, 43% certain to vote for Romney, 42% certain to vote for Obama, 15% uncommitted.
The drive-bys have told us that it is so bad for Romney in Ohio that the only chance he's got there is to change committed Obama voters' minds.
ABC has a poll out today that's a story, actually, that's quite conflicting.
And they've had to change their headline about this story.
And it's about two to one people think Obama's going to win, but in their poll, it's very close.
Two to one, Obama's going to win the election.
Two to one, Obama's going to win the debate.
But in the poll, it is tightening.
And then there's USA Today.
And this is the enthusiasm gap.
And this is along the lines of how the media are oversampling Democrats.
And have you noticed, by the way, the now predictable, well, that means that they've lost.
If Limbo and these people are not complaining about the polling, you only do that when you lose.
When you know you're losing, that's when you complain about media bias.
When you complain about polls and the SAM, that's how they tell us that they know they're losing.
That's what's being said about us.
They can't get it through their heads that I don't think we're losing, and I don't think we're going to lose.
This is simply where we are documenting what is unprecedented in this country.
Hell, Pat Caddell went to an accuracy in media conference over the weekend and basically said that the U.
And this is the Carter, Jimmy Carter pollster, basically said that the American media has become an enemy of the people of this country.
That it is derelict in its duty and its constitutional duty.
I had sound bites.
It's coming up.
But speaking of the polls and how the media are oversampling Democrats, a USA Today Gallup poll released over the weekend, and it had this headline: rich and poor, male and female, what groups would thrive under Obama or Romney?
But buried 13 paragraphs into the 16-paragraph USA Today story was this detail.
Quote, Republicans have opened a big enthusiasm gap.
64% say that they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting compared to 48% of Democrats.
Now, folks, I did the numbers.
I ran the numbers on that.
I got out a calculator and I subtracted 48 from 64.
You know what I got?
I got an enthusiasm gap of 16%, pro-Republican.
And that's in paragraph 13 of a 16-paragraph story in USA Today.
64% Republicans say they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting, which makes perfect sense, compared to 48% of Democrats.
That's a huge story, but USA Today and Gallup don't think it's that newsworthy, and they don't seem to think they should sample Republicans accordingly.
If there's a 16% enthusiasm gap that your own poll turns up, what are you doing sampling Democrats plus 9 or plus 10?
Anywhere, Ohio, Florida, what have you.
Now, let's go back now.
2008.
Back in 2008, Gallup had no problem whatsoever reporting to the world the huge enthusiasm gap that the Democrats enjoyed back then.
From Gallup, October 13, 2008, four years ago, Democrats' election enthusiasm far outweighs Republicans.
Only 51% of Republicans say that they are more enthusiastic about voting than in previous years compared to 71% of Democrats, marking a shift from October 2004.
So there was a 70% or a 20% enthusiasm gap in 08 in the Gallup poll for Democrats.
That's now become a 16% gap for the Republicans, and it's in paragraph 13 of USA Today's story.
Back in 2008, it was the lead.
This is a massive, I mean, add the numbers.
20 and 8, it's a 38 percentage point or 36 percent shift here in enthusiasm.
You notice that the Republicans won in 2004 when enthusiasm was about the same for both partisan groups.
So what would you expect the outcome to be when the enthusiasm for Republicans is up by 16?
No, no, that's not in USA Today.
I'm just extrapolating now.
I know what happened back in 2004.
So Obama wins with a 20% enthusiasm edge, and yet we're supposed to believe that Romney is sure to lose with a 16% enthusiasm edge when the Republicans won in 2004 when it was equal.
Nope, nope.
Once again, no false optimism here, no artificially being positive or any of that.
I'm just telling you what is.
And here's this from the House Committee on Small Business.
Oh, by the way, by the way, we were wrong.
It's not 12 million Americans who have Obama phones.
It's 16 million.
Yeah, 16 million of these kinds of people.
Obama.
You got Obama phones?
Yes, everybody in Cleveland, no minority got Obama phones.
Keep Obama in president, you know?
He gave us a phone.
He gave you a phone.
How did he give you a phone?
You sign up if you're a full stamp.
You on Social Security.
You got low income.
You disability.
Okay, what's wrong with Romney again?
Romney, he sucks.
16.5 million of those people with Obama phones.
We thought last week it was 12 million, and the number is growing.
And not just that, Department of Agriculture personnel in the regime have met with Mexican government officials dozens of times since Obama took office to promote nutrition assistance programs, i.e.,
food stamps, among Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals, and migrant communities in America, writing in response to a request for information from Jeff Sessions, a senator from Alabama, about the USDA's little-known partnership with the Mexican government to educate citizen and non-citizen immigrants from Mexico about the availability of food stamps and other nutrition assistance programs.
Tom Vilsack, the education secretary, defended the partnership as a way to curb hunger in America and the continuation of a program formed under the Bush administration in 2004.
I thought we had an obesity epidemic.
What is this curb hunger in America business?
You know what you do to curb hunger?
You work.
It's called a job.
Now, we got a problem with jobs in this country.
Would you like to hear this statistic?
Well, no, stop.
Yes, stop and think of this, though.
What are we doing?
We have a partnership with the Mexican government to do what?
Expand welfare roles.
A partnership with the Mexican government to tell them how to tell their citizens to come here and access food stamps, not come here and find a job.
Because that's apparently not on the menu.
From the House Committee on Small Business, this is a startling statistic.
From 1948 to 2008, a span of 60 years, the United States had 39 months of unemployment above 8%.
From 1948, 60 years, 2008, we had 39 months in there in those 60 years of unemployment above 8%.
Under President Obama, we have had 43 consecutive months of unemployment over 8% in just three and a half, four years, three and three-quarters years.
And you could do the same thing with debt, the amount of debt that was racked up in previous administrations versus this one.
I mean, it is just, it's a disaster, and it's happening right in front of our faces.
And we're giving away cell phones, we're buying votes with Obama phones, and now we're working in a partnership with the Megan government.
And by the way, this is not the only thing that partnership includes.
That partnership also no doubt explains to people how to get here.
And then after they're here, how to access health care via the emergency room.
And then food stamps.
Because this is the new wave of permanent underclass voters that the Democrats need.
The Democrat Party cannot get by without a permanent underclass in need, incapable of taking care of itself.
And the last thing this regime is interested in is self-reliance and rugged individualism.
They don't think people are capable of it.
This I shouldn't be surprised.
It's just, it's to see it here in black and white in print that we're working with the Mexican government to help them tell their citizens who are coming here, A, how to get here, and B, once they're here, how to access food stamps under the guise of avoiding hunger.
And the way you used to do that is get a job.
But see, it's insensitive to say the easy for you to say.
I mean, back in the homeless days, when that was a big cost to live, say, you know, why don't you pay people ever thought about giving a job?
Oh, easy for you to say, Mr. Limboy.
You've got well, what if we all just decided to get a shopping cart and check out?
Where would we be?
You got to take a break.
Don't go away.
Hi, how are you?
El Rushball, talent on loan from God.
You have to say, God.
Talent on loan from God just doesn't cut it.
You're going to literally pound it.
800-282-2882 for when and if we get to your phone calls.
ABC News, Univision, Fast and Furious Scandal.
New details emerge on how the U.S. government armed Mexican drug cartels.
Now, none of this is going to be new to you, but it is new to the audience of Univision.
And what impact, if any, it's going to have, who knows?
On January 3rd, the authors here are Gerardo Reyes and Santiago Wills.
On January 30th, 2010, a commando of at least 20 hitmen parked themselves outside a birthday party of haskruel and college students in Ciudad Juarez.
Near midnight, the assassins, later identified as hired guns for the Mexican cartel La Linea, broke into a one-story house and opened fire on a gathering of nearly 60 teenagers.
Folks, you know all this.
This was on Univision last night.
This is a piece written by these two guys that accompanies the TV show last night.
Outside, lookouts gunned down a screaming neighbor and several students who had managed to escape.
14 young men and women were killed and 12 more were wounded before the hitmen finally fled.
14 people killed just in this incident with American guns illegally walked across the border to Mexico from Arizona as part of an Obama administration program.
Indirectly, the United States government played a role in the massacre by supplying some of the firearms used by the cartel murderers.
Three of the high-caliber weapons fired that night were linked to a gun tracing operation run by the ATF, according to a Mexican Army document obtained exclusively by Univision News.
I think it's pretty direct involvement.
What they mean by indirect is that an American didn't pull a trigger.
That's all they mean by this.
But this program is now being exposed for the first time in October before the election to a large Hispanic audience.
Univision News identified a total of 57 more previously unreported firearms that were bought by straw purchasers monitored by ATF during Operation Fast and Furious and then recovered in Mexico in sites related to murders, kidnappings, and at least one other massacre.
And here are the details of how they did that, again, via ABC News and Univision.
57 previously undiscovered fast and furious guns used in Mexican crimes.
They were recovered in sites associated with murders, kidnappings, and at least two gruesome massacres.
Univision News obtained the list of fast and furious weapons and a list containing almost 60,000 recovered firearms compiled by Mexico's defense agency.
A cross-reference of the serial numbers resulted in 96 full matches.
The 96 firearms linked to Operation Fast and Furious all turned up at crime scenes in Mexico from 2009 to 2010.
Now, you and I again know this, but why?
In fact, the timing here is not that bad.
You can say, why are we only hearing about the involvement of Fast and Furious weapons at this late date and only from Univision?
But that could be the point.
The Obama administration and the DOJ did not help Univision at all with their investigation.
Univision was not given any cooperation.
No, no, again, I'm not engaging in any wishful thinking here whatsoever.
It's just that, look, I got on the other side of the glass here, I got the official Obama criticizer, Bo Snerdley, who is ostensibly as close to being as informed as I am.
It's almost not humanly possible for anybody to be as informed as I am.
But if anybody's close, snurdy is, he didn't know about this.
And I don't know how many of you did either, but the Univision audience is not insignificant.
And this is a program, and it comes after a very tough interview for an hour of Obama.
And the only point here is that you hear all the time, if Obama, just 5% of black vote would leave Obama, or if 5% of the Jewish vote would leave Obama, boy, be in real trouble.
Same thing with the Hispanic vote.
The Hispanic vote is considered to be fait a compli in the tank for Obama.
Now, I guarantee you, Univision is not doing this report to help Obama.
This is not in any way, shape, manner, or firm form going to hurt Romney in any way.
But it's just another portion of the electorate being told something that they haven't learned from the United States media.
Now, I asked the question, it was last week, all the way back in June, I've asked this repeatedly.
Think about it.
If you were Hispanic, you learned that the president of the United States had allowed assault weapons to be walked across the border to drug cartels and used to kill hundreds of Mexicans.
That would tick me off if I were Hispanic or Mexico, that would tick me off.
And if I were Hispanic or Mexican, I'd be asking myself, why did they do this?
What was the point?
Why give these people in Mexico are scared to literal death of these drug cartels and these gangs.
They are more powerful than the federales in many places.
They put the fear of death in everybody, and here the Obama administration is arming them.
If I'm Hispanic, I have to be asking myself, why?
Of course, you and I know what the reason for this is, even though it sounds cynical.
This was an attempt by the regime to drum up anti-gun sentiment in this country.
They were hoping that there would be rampant stories of crime committed with these American guns that somehow so easily ended up across the border.
Nobody was supposed to know that the regime had a program to make it happen.
Nobody was supposed to find out.
But then something did happen.
A federal agent was killed.
And then all kinds of light was shined on this.
Congressional investigations ensued and lying took place from the administration to Darrell Issa from the DOJ, fudged emails.
I mean, we've got, and I was thinking over the weekend.
And I bet you, ladies and gentlemen, many of you have had these same sentiments in recent days.
You look at what you know has happened in this country, the economic destruction, the absolute collapse of American foreign policy, the incompetence in Washington everywhere you look in this administration.
And then you turn on the news every day and you think, my God, there's no way that Romney has a chance of winning this, no chance whatsoever.
You probably say, boy, if only Romney could have run against a president who was tied to some shocking scandals, like a president who ran guns across the border and ended up hundreds of Mexicans dying.
Gee, if Romney only had a president who had done that.
Oh, wait, he does.
But it doesn't matter.
Yeah, oh, what would we too bad?
Romney can't run against a president who didn't take any care whatsoever to rig up any additional security on 9-11 in Cairo or Libya.
Oh, wait!
He is running against the president who botched that.
A damaging scandal is where you follow the money and you find a few people close to the president on the take, like Solyndra.
Oh, but we do have that.
We do have a president with all kinds of crony capitalism scandals.
Maybe something where several donors got billions of tax dollars to run phony companies orchestrated by the Energy Secretary into bankruptcy.
Oh, wait, Romney does have that to run against.
It doesn't matter.
Now, in this election cycle, Republicans are stuck with having to harp about scandals where Americans and Mexicans have been murdered.
A president has admitted skipping half of his daily intelligence briefings.
His ambassador, who lived in fear of his life, as told by his diary found by CNN at an unsecured crime scene strewn with highly classified national security infrastructure.
Romney's running against all that, but it doesn't matter.
Ambassador was raped and murdered due to the president's gross incompetence in security preparation.
It's too bad Romney can't be running against a president who wants to blame all this on a video.
Oh, wait, he is.
Well, the Republicans just can't catch a break.
Then a massive cover-up takes place in full view.
And the president blames an obscure American who nobody ever heard of and blames free speech.
Yep, free speech in a video.
That's what caused that stuff to happen in Libya and in Cairo.
And all this is going on while the president jets off to David Letterman and Jay-Z and a bunch of fundraisers in Las Vegas where nobody else is supposed to go.
Why couldn't Romney have a Democrat incumbent with all these scandals to run?
Oh, he does.
But it doesn't seem to matter.
Now Obama's trying to blame an intelligence flack for bad intelligence.
It's amazing.
This is not to mention the economic incompetence, the economic policies, which have led to over three and a half years of unemployment over 8% every month.
Boy, if there was only something out there that Romney could sink his teeth into that this president had done, there is.
There's all of this, and it doesn't matter to the nation's gatekeepers in any way, shape, manner, or form.
Brief time out, my friends.
Sit tight.
We'll be right back.
Don't go away.
By the way, folks, just so you know, Fast and Furious as a subject matter on Univision, Univision is the largest audience of Spanish language television viewers, according to the Nielsen ratings.
In recent years, Univision has reached parity with the five major English language networks.
They're off of the strong fifth.
They have a lot of viewers.
And they heard about Fast and Furious last night for the first time in detail that you and I know well and intimately.
Now, we mentioned also there's a Washington Post-ABC poll that's out today.
That's the poll that claims by a two-to-one margin.
People think Obama is going to be re-elected.
It also says that Obama is going to mop the floor with Romney in the debates.
But here's their latest question.
Who would you rather see as a contestant on Dancing with the Stars, Obama or Romney?
That's the kind of stuff that they put in their poll.
Who would you rather see on Dancing with the Stars?
And they'll extrapolate that.
Now, we've told you before about this outfit public policy polling.
They're from North Carolina, a big, big liberal bunch.
And they say that Ohio isn't over, that it's still neck and neck in Ohio.
PPP's newest poll of the presidential race in Ohio finds Obama leading Romney 49 to 45 down from 50 to 45 in their last poll.
Now, it's October, and this is where this is the point in time where the polls do start to tighten up, because now is when the pollsters start really being concerned about how they finish in terms of predictions and accuracy and all that.
But public policy polling says right here in their own release, it is a mistake to think, based on recent polling in Ohio, that the race there is over.
Obama is not popular in the state.
48% of voters approve of him.
49% disapprove of Obama in Ohio.
And among voters who remain undecided, there are just 13% who think that he's doing a good job to 65% who give him poor marks.
Now, can I run that by you again and emphasize to you that public policy polling has Obama up over Romney 49-45.
Now, keep that number in mind, just outside the margin of error.
49-45 Obama over Romney.
However, he's not popular in the state.
48% of voters approve of Obama.
49% disapprove.
Yet, PPP says he beats Romney by four.
Among voters who remain undecided, and there are a lot of them, just 13% think that Obama's doing a good job to 65% who give him poor marks.
I'll tell you something else.
Dirty little secret about polling.
Undecided voters, the majority of them always go for the challenger.
That's why they're undecided.
If they're undecided, there's something wrong with the incumbent.
That's just human nature and common sense.
Now, the pollsters don't want you to know that, but the majority of undecideds always end up going with the challenger.
The Democrat oversample in the PPP poll is 5%.
He's ahead by four in a Democrat poll in Ohio.
This is the same state where last week, I think it was ABC or NBC, I forget, had him up 10, or was it 11 in Ohio?
And they said it was over.
That was CBS New York Times.
They get back.
That was Quinnipiak or Marist or whatever.
Yeah, it was CBS because it was Jan Crawford of CBS.
Well, this is over.
There's nothing Romney can do.
Last week, they had Romney finished, cooked.
Don't even bother voting in Ohio.
So this is the week.
This is the week, folks, that are bipolar pollsters.
They're saying the race is getting tighter.
Public policy polling, they don't like it when I say this, but they're practically a Democrat front organization.
And they're saying that this is trending toward Romney in Ohio.
So we'll see.
Still a lot of time left to go and a lot of things left to happen.
And the polls are going to be a roller coaster, as is the news, each and every day.
Brief time out.
We'll be back and continue after this.
Look, before we have to skate out of here for this hour, I want you to listen to just a little excerpt from the host of the Univision show last night talking about people who had just learned about Fast and Furious and all the details.
They are waiting for an answer.
They want to know what happened and why they didn't stop these guns from leaving the United States and ending up in these crimes.
They feel helpless.
They don't know what to do.
And we interview one of them and they say, who's going to pay for this?
That's the Univision audience that's scared, that's helpless, and is asking how in hell these guns ended up in Mexico from the United States.
And this program provided the answers for them.
We'll be back, folks.
▲
Export Selection