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 I want to send out a sincere and heartfelt thanks from the bottom of my never-ending, always constantly beating huge heart.
Boo 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 uh Neil Bortz made it happen.
Neil Bortz is responsible for it.
And all of you across the country who uh who love uh Neil Bortz, your love is is well placed.
And there's nobody better warming up an audience than Bortz.
And uh 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, L Rushball at EIVNet.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 riffs.
This well, yeah, which one?
It didn't, it this time the Packers didn't get screwed out of it.
But but I was I was 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 rifts, and they didn't.
They did then they got close a couple times.
Uh but uh but but they didn't.
Anyway, it's uh great to be with you here, folks.
Some shocking news.
Uh uh in the drive-by media day election is over.
Uh Mitt Romney has lost.
Uh it's it's it's it's it's all over out there.
And it the 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, you know, even Romney, or even Obama himself is saying, hey, Imit's a much better debater than I am.
I mean, they're they're really out there lowering expectations for Obama in the debate on Wednesday night.
And it it's it's he's got a he's got a tough task.
I mean, guy can do nothing but lie, which is what he does.
Umway, but it's gonna be fascinating to me to see how Romney deals with that.
Yeah, AP says that that uh Obama has 271 electoral votes today, so uh I don't know why they're gonna do the debate.
First, second, or third, why they gonna mess with it?
I mean, the the election is over.
Uh David Pluff tells us the election is over.
Uh F. Chuck Todd's the election's over, uh David Gregory says the election's over.
I don't even know why even do the election.
But if you dig deep, you find uh things aren't necessarily so.
For example, Rasmussen yesterday.
43% of voters are certain they will vote for Romney.
Forty-two percent 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 uh I don't want to make too big a deal out of this, because I don't really know, but uh you 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.
Uh they were they were questions that that bore into his failures, that his unkept promises and so forth.
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 I well we put that montage together and and and watching that show, watching Obama on it, I don't think he realized.
I I think Obama's ego is uh 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.
It didn't start 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 saying what's in my gut.
Something is going on with this univision, and that is a huge audience.
Univision has it's telemundo, it's a it's a huge Hispanic audience.
And this this report they did on Fast and Furious was anything but flattering for Obama.
It was last night.
I can tell Snurdley and the guys on the other side of the glass looking at me with looks of utter ignorance on their face.
Well, 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 uh 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.
Uh and uh don't 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 uh conventional wisdom has it.
Then you see the Rasmussen number, this is another little hidden thing.
You know, the drive-by's discount Rasmussen because he's on Fox a lot, and they they they think Rasmussen is a conservative poll, and therefore he's not qualified.
He's not legitimate the way we look at at uh 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 this thing that it 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 the story, actually, that's quite conflicting.
Uh and they've had to change their headline about this story.
And it's about uh two to one people think Obama's gonna win, but in their poll, it's very close.
Two to one Obama's gonna win the election.
Two to one Obama's gonna 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 uh along the lines of how the the media are oversampling Democrats.
And have you noticed, by the way, that the the now predictable, well, that that means that they've lost.
If Limbaugh and these people are now 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.
Uh when you complain about polls and the and the samples, that's 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 Cadell 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 uh American media has become an enemy of the people of this country.
That it is derelict in its duty and its constitutional duty, and it sound bites, it's coming up.
But speaking of the polls and the 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 of 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 and 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 nine or plus ten?
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 and 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 18, that's a 38 percentage point or 36% shift here.
And 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, 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.
And 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.
And here's this from the House Committee on Small Business.
Oh, by the way.
By the way, we were wrong.
It's not twelve million Americans who have Obama phones.
It's six it's sixteen million.
Yeah.
Sixteen million of these kinds of people.
Obama.
You got Obama phone?
Yes, everybody in Cleveland, no minority got Obama phone.
Keep Obama in president, you know?
He gave us a phone.
How'd he give you a phone?
You sign up here.
You are full stamps, you own social security.
You got low income, you disability.
Okay, what's wrong with Romney again?
Romney!
He sucks!
16 and a half 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, look, just 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 six years, 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 Mexican government.
And by the way, this is not the only thing that partnership includes, that partnership also 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.
I've this this I shouldn't be surprised.
It's just it's 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.
So, you know, why don't you 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 Rush Ball, talent on loan from God.
You have to say God.
Talent on loan from God just doesn't cut it.
You're gonna literally pound it.
8282-2882 for when 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 30, the authors here are Gerardo Reyes and Santiago Wills.
On January 30th, 2010, a commando of at least 20 hit men parked themselves outside a birthday party of Haskrul and college students in Ciudad Juarez near midnight.
The assassins, later identified as hired guns for the Mexican Cartel La Linia, 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.
Fourteen young men and women were killed and twelve more were wounded before the hitmen finally fled.
Fourteen 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 that'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.
Fifty-seven 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 where 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 Snerdly, who is ostensibly as close to being as informed as I am.
And that's almost in not humanly possible for anybody to be as informed as I am.
But if anybody's close snurgling 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, you know, if Obama, just 5% of black vote would leave Obama, or if 5% of the Jewish vote would leave Obama, boy would be in real trouble.
The same thing with the Hispanic vote.
The Hispanic vote is considered to be feta completely.
This is not in any way, shape, manner, or harm firm uh form going to hurt Romney in 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 uh last week, all the way back in June, I've asked this repeatedly.
Think about 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 Mexico.
If I were Hispanic or Mexico, that would tick me off.
And if I were Hispanic or Mexico, 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 are, they have the 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 is the 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 all, 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 a 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 Cylindra.
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.
That 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 uh 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 info.
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 as the 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 and 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.
That's 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.
And it doesn't matter to the nation's gatekeepers in any way, shape, manner, or form.
Brief timeout, my friend, 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 uh five major English language networks.
They're off with a 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's gonna be re elected.
It also says that Obama is gonna 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.
Okay.
And among 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 4945.
Now keep that number in mind.
Just outside the margin of error.
However, he's not popular in the state.
Forty-eight percent 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.
But the majority of undecided always end up going with the uh with the challenger.
The Democrat over sample in the PPP poll is 5%.
He's a head 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 didn't get back.
That was Quinnipia or Marister.
Yeah, with CBS, because it was it was Jan Crawford of CBS basically.
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 polls are 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.
Uh and and the polls are gonna 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 gonna 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