All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 24, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
32:26
October 24, 2012, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this show, now documented to be almost always right 99.7% of the time, El Rushbo, the all-knowing, all-caring, all-sensing, all-feeling.
All-concerned Maha Rushi here at the distinguished and prestigious Limbo Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Happy to have you here.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882 and the email address El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
Everybody trying to understand this.
It defies understanding.
It defies explanation.
So let's throw something else into the mix here that is possible.
It's going to sound just as implausible.
You can't imagine it being the case.
What if during all of this hellfire in Benghazi, State Department, the CIA station chief sending emails, real-time video to the situation room in the White House within two hours of the attack?
The White House knows it's going on, can watch video in the situation room, knows that a terror group is claiming credit for it, knows that it's not a protest, knows that it has nothing to do with the video.
They know exactly what's going on and who's claiming to be responsible.
They know that 30 Americans are under attack.
They note that the attack went on for seven hours and nothing was done about it.
And then a giant lie was constructed to say that it was a video in June, an anti-Muhammad video that had everybody riled up in the Middle East.
And Obama told that lie and his surrogates told a lie and you know the drill.
What if during all of this, Obama just wasn't engaged?
What do you mean by that, Mr. Limbaugh, the president of the United States, not engaged?
I know, folks.
I know it's tough.
Not engaged.
Just have the do not disturb sign on the door.
Just don't bug me.
He's the president of the United States.
Folks, understand he's the president of the United States.
Everybody works for him.
If he doesn't want to be bothered, they're not going to bother him.
Somebody might try, but what, I mean, also, well, 3 a.m. phone call, maybe nobody made the call.
Maybe it wasn't a question of getting and waking up and dealing with it.
Maybe nobody made the call.
Maybe Obama was voting present.
I'm trying to be charitable here.
And maybe by not being engaged, maybe he just his mind wasn't there.
He's totally focused on something else.
Don't bother me with this.
Let somebody else handle it.
After all, he did get on the plane and fly to Las Vegas the next day.
And he did get engaged with Letterman, and he got engaged with Jay-Z.
We know he was fully engaged in his reelection effort.
What if he just wasn't engaged?
And what if the reason for the leak of this is because somebody's really worried in the White House that the guy wasn't engaged?
It could be any number of explanations, but the fact that we're trying to come up with one that's plausible, we don't have one that satisfies.
There's not one that excuses what happened.
There isn't one that justifies the lie.
There is no explanation that does that.
And let's just review.
Here's our montage.
These emails prove the White House knew as it happened it was a terror attack, unrelated to a video, and yet the regime and everybody in it lied for weeks about it.
I don't care how offensive this video was, and it was terribly offensive.
And we should shut it.
Video is disgusting and reprehensible.
It appears to have a deeply cynical purpose to denigrate a great religion and to provoke rage.
Let's be clear.
These protests were in reaction to a video that had spread to the region.
You had a video that was released by somebody who lives here, sort of a shadowy character, who is an extremely offensive video.
The unrest we've seen has been in reaction to a video.
It was a crude and disgusting video.
Sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.
It was a spontaneous, not a premeditated, response, a direct result of a heinous and offensive video.
I know there are some who ask, why don't we just ban such a video?
And the answer is enshrined in our laws.
Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.
By the way, that has always bothered me.
This is just an ancillary point.
But to go to the United Nations and try to knowing full well he's got an audience of dictators who are saying, well, if it's a guy with a video, why is he still alive?
In their world, this guy would be in some dungeon someplace or had already been taken care of with a firing squad.
And Obama talking to fellow world leaders is, why can't we do what you would do?
Why can't we do what y'all do because of our laws?
That just rubs me raw every time it's almost like he's making a freaking excuse for not being able to deal with the guy.
Don't blame me.
I got a constitution here.
It's in our law.
That just bugs me.
And a whole thing bugs me out there telling lies about this video.
And don't forget this ad Obama and Hillary produced that ran in Pakistan.
Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.
We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.
But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.
None.
Let me state very clearly, and I hope it is obvious, that the United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video.
We absolutely reject its content and message.
America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.
Jack and Jill went up the hill.
Jill was a feminist.
Jack went back castrated.
What is she talking to a bunch of three-years-olds in Pakistan?
What can't we do with this guy what you would do?
Because I am bound.
I'm shackled by the Constitution.
It's enshrined in our laws.
I can't kill this guy like you would.
No, I'm joking.
Anyway, the point, the possibility here is that Obama's not engaged.
It just wasn't attached to this.
Didn't want to deal with it.
Back to Bolton's ideological explanation.
This can't be happening.
We wiped out terrorism.
I know people can't believe this.
This is why people, I've always said, gosh, if you could just learn liberalism, just understand who they are, so much of your world would open up.
And so much that seems perplexing would make sense.
Well, Lyndon Johnson was a social liberal and so forth.
These guys are radical leftists.
They come from, you know, liberal is actually not the right word.
We go for progressive, socialist, Marxist.
These guys are statist, authoritarian Type people, really more so than liberals.
But it's still, the ideology is still a leftist idio.
Can you come up?
I'm just trying to help people understand here.
I'm coming up with possible explanations based on what we now know the facts to be.
You got some better explanation.
I've got three things here.
Here we have.
You got three possible explanations.
President wasn't engaged.
President and his administration are entirely over their head, so incompetent that it's corrupt.
Or three, they're big liars, just everything lying through their teeth.
Everybody, or Obama's making them lie.
Somebody doesn't want to lie, though.
Somebody leaked all this.
Somebody, not at the State Department, not State Department or Intelligence Agency did not leak this.
Reuters says that whoever gave him this does not come from the State Department or intelligence groups, so it has to be somebody else.
So those are the three possibilities.
Lying through their teeth on purpose, incompetent, and then have to tell a lie to cover up the incompetence.
Or, well, let's throw fourth in Bolton.
The ideological explanation is, no, this can't, there's no terrorism.
There's no, we killed Al-Qaeda with bin Laden.
That's got to be America's fault somehow, some way.
It had to be the video.
You believe it.
You really pathologically, psychologically, sickly, believe it.
Or the fourth thing is he just wasn't engaged.
You can yell at me all you want, snurdy.
I'm just trying to come up with explanations here because I don't care what you come up with.
None of it's satisfying and none of it is legitimate.
There isn't really anything that excuses this.
Anyway, folks, I found an interesting sports column by a well-known sports columnist at Fox Sports.
His name is Jason Whitlock.
And I became familiar with his work when he worked at the Kansas City Star.
He's now with Fox Sports.
He's been at ESPN and a number of other places.
And he's got a column out called Your NFL Truths for Week 8.
And the headline here is, Bubble doesn't help black quarterbacks.
The information bubble is the number one obstacle hindrance for black NFL quarterbacks.
This bubble creates delusion.
It erodes self-awareness and unwittingly undermines a black quarterback's chances of sustaining success.
Cam Newton is a victim of the information bubble.
Robert Griffin III is the bubble's next target.
Let me explain.
We're in our political season.
Democrats and Republicans both have their respective information bubbles, MSNBC and Fox News, respectively.
They can lock their televisions on a single channel, avoid hearing their perspectives challenged in a credible way, hear their critics lamb basted.
It's comforting.
It's polarizing.
It's unhealthy for intellectual growth in our democracy for people not to expose themselves to alternative point of view.
If I may pause for a second, speaking only for ourselves here, ladies and women, you and I, well, that's about you as the audience of this program.
I explain liberalism every day in the process of refuting it.
I present liberalism every day in the process of shooting it down.
I read and watch and I tell you what the liberals are saying and doing and I play liberal soundbites each and every day.
You are not in a safe cocoon here.
You are being exposed to liberalism each and every day as I attempt to help you understand it so that you are motivated as I am to defeat them in elections.
There's no bubble or cocoon here.
And there isn't at Fox.
They've got all kinds of liberal commentators at Fox.
There is a bubble, it's at MSNBC.
Well, you will not find an alternate point of view.
Anyway, that's just a brief aside.
Black sports fans and black pop culture media, but not sports media, have created a loosely formed but influential social media and talk radio information bubble about black quarterbacks.
This network of groupthink roars on sports talk radio, black-owned radio stations, Facebook and Twitter, pumping out the message that Cam Newton and Robert Griffin III and others can do no wrong.
And any criticism of them is rooted in racism.
What?
What?
There's a bubble of media types that protect black quarterbacks.
Jason Whitlock, he's African-American.
He's saying that there's a bubble of media types that protect black quarterbacks by saying any criticism of them is racist.
Hmm.
Who knew?
Fear of backlash from this network of well-intentioned enablers causes many mainstream sports analysts to avoid being totally honest about black quarterbacks.
Yes, so Mr. Whitlock is saying here that there is a protective shell around black quarterbacks in the NFL and that the enablers here, the people that create this protective bubble, cause many sports analysts to avoid legitimate criticism of black quarterbacks because they will be called racist.
And so they don't engage in legitimate criticism and in fact end up coddling these quarterbacks.
And that results in them not being adequately prepared to deal with adversity.
Hmm.
That's how a career-killing information bubble is formed.
White quarterbacks don't have to deal with this.
In Kansas City, a group of fans paid for a banner to be flown over Airhead Stadium that called for the owner to bench Matt Castle.
Kansas City's backup quarterback is Brady Quinn, the Cleveland Browns bust.
He's not a solution, but he was named the starter on Monday.
Now, imagine, writes Mr. Whitlock, the uproar if fans in Philadelphia took similar action against turnover machine Michael Vick and flew a banner over Lincoln Financial Stadium demanding that Vick be benched.
There would be riots in the streets.
Philadelphia fans would be labeled racist.
Mr. Whitlock says here that Cam Newton, a quarterback for the Carolina Panthers, is being ruined.
In the aftermath of Sunday's loss to the Cowboys, Newton once again handled a post-game news conference horribly.
He not so subtly criticized his coaching staff.
He flippantly quipped that he wanted to bring a suggestion box into the news conference.
He condescendingly called a female reporter sweetheart.
Sounded like a crybaby and loser.
The black information bubble leaped to his defense, claiming that Cam's critique of the offense strategy was accurate, and any criticism of him was racist.
And therefore, there isn't adequate, proper criticism.
Therefore, Cam Newton's never going to learn to deal with adversity.
Therefore, the bubble protecting him is actually harming, not helping.
But the bottom line here is that Mr. Whitlock says that, well, what is he saying?
He's saying here that there's a group of people in the media that don't want criticism/slash truth said about Black Quarter because it's racist and it's unfair,
and so there's a protective bubble around them that might result in them being overrated and certainly not being able to learn to deal with adversity.
Because when helpful critique doesn't happen because the person fears being called a racist and therefore shuts up, then there's no progress.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Rush Limbaugh, one of the great synthesizers ever to grace modern American media.
You would be stunned and amazed what I get thrown at me each and every day and how I put it together here.
It's unsometimes I dazzle even myself.
And I do finish this program frazzled each and every day.
Here's Daniel in Las Vegas.
I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Well, mega Las Vegas cigar smoking ditto, sir.
Hey, you're right up my alley.
Right up my alley.
In fact, I got a stogie going even now.
Well, bless your heart.
Bless your heart.
You know what?
It's indoors, it's indoors, and it's around other people who cannot make me stop.
It's the way America used to be.
Yes, sir.
I agree.
Total freedom, not hurting anybody here, and enjoying life.
Yes.
And that's what bugs the left.
I know.
I agree.
I agree.
I was going to tell you this little story, but I want to get to my question.
I got a three-part question for you.
But I want to thank you for being the professor and helping me understand this coming election.
Well, it's what I do.
I know.
Look, I got to have you hold on here.
I didn't realize I had such little time before the break.
So don't go away, Daniel.
We'll come back and we'll get to your three-parter right after this.
James O'Keefe at Project Veritas is out with another video.
I have not had a chance to look at it yet.
And it's video, and we can't play video for you on the radio, but it's out there.
And what he has done is caught the son of Congressman Jim Moran, Democrat Virginia, discussing how to commit voter fraud and get away with it.
Patrick Moran, the son of Congressman James Moran, in the video, discusses how to forge utility bills, how to impersonate pollsters, all for the goal of circumventing voter ID laws in Virginia and to end up casting ballots for unsuspecting, inactive voters within the state for Barack Obama.
Patrick Moran holds the salaried title of field director for his father's congressional campaign and assures James O'Keefe's reporter doing the video project Veritas, our reporter at Committee Lawyers will defend his fraud if the forged documents look good enough.
So just like the way they exposed Acorn, they have exposed how the Democrats are conducting voter fraud, how they forge documents to get around voter ID laws straight from the son of a Democrat congressman, Patrick Moran.
The video is out there.
Wanted to alert you to it.
It's going to be all over the place.
It'll be viral before it's on YouTube right now.
Here's Daniel.
We go back to Daniel Las Vegas, who had a three-parter for me.
I'm glad you waited during the break.
Thanks very much for that.
You're welcome, sir.
And thank you again for not dumbing down talking to us the way the Obama administration is with their video excuse for this terrorism.
Anyway, my three-parter starts with the undecided voters and who are they and why are they undecided?
I was decided when Sarah Palin ran in 08, and when she spoke at that acceptance speech with John McCain and the hairs on my neck raised up, she was hitting to the core what we needed.
And my mind was made up then that this president would not see a second term.
And I want to know who's undecided.
I mean, you have to be blind, deaf, or not have a radio, TV, be, what do you call it, homeless?
Let me tell you who the undecideds are, my theory this time, because I understand what you're saying.
There's so much media.
There's so much opinion out there.
There's so much that you can access and learn.
How could anybody be undecided?
Right.
Well, and I've been thinking of doing this, by the way.
I think that there is, I don't know how large a percentage of the population, but I think there are some people.
How to put this, because I don't want to sound like an Oprah viewer saying this.
I think there are some people who, in effect, need permission to vote against Obama.
They voted for him the first time, and they bought into all the reasons why.
Now they know that's all fluff, but he's still the first black president.
He's trying so hard.
He's got so many people against him now.
And it's not enough for these people to be told by somebody like me or somebody else who is confidently decided like you.
I think they might need to hear from others just like them who are going to vote against Obama this time so that they know it's okay.
In other words, I don't think they're so much undecided as afraid that there's a little guilt they might feel.
There was a lot of guilt in voting for Obama in 2008.
Daniel, you'll have to admit this, a lot of people voted for Obama thinking that it would say great things about them.
They could go out and say, I voted Obama.
I voted a black guy.
I'm not racist.
When you think somebody's right, I'm not.
Look at me.
I'm not.
But isn't that the actual reverse discrimination or reverse racism?
Because if you ask a black person, would you vote for a white person, they would say no.
Yeah, but they're allowed.
See, they're the minority.
And in the popular culture, it's impossible for blacks to be racist because theoretically they don't have the power to do anything with their racism.
And besides, they've been perpetual victims for so long.
You know, they're the victims of the nation's original sin that they have a lot of latitudes.
It's two sets of rules.
Double standard, doesn't apply.
Now, let's talk about the others.
The genuine real undecideds, and are they really?
Like when Luntz puts together his focus group of undecideds, not this last debate, but two debates.
The second debate, there was a focus group put together, and there's a guy in that focus group who has now been a routine guest on cable networks.
I saw that.
His name is Ladke.
I think it's L-A-D-K-E.
I'm not sure.
It's close to that.
And this guy, every time I listen to him speak, sounds like he's made up his mind, but he continues to profess being undecided.
He's waiting a little bit more for more economic data.
He's just a little concerned about what Obama, but on the other side, Romney, something about Romney doesn't like.
But he's getting a lot of FaceTime as an Undecided.
And remember, look at the value we attach to Undecideds.
Why?
They're the kingmakers.
You can get a lot of attention if you luck out being an undecided on TV in a focus group.
And how do you lose that?
By making up your mind.
I know.
They just make you think that they were raised without a father.
Well, no, no.
No.
The psychological component to the Undecided is that they are a little bit more open-minded.
They're a little bit more tolerant.
They're not as partisan, not as close-minded.
They're, you know, they vote the issues.
They don't vote the party.
I mean, there's a lot of perceived exceptional value in being an independent or a moderate because we've just allowed the perception to be that you're more open-minded if you haven't made up your mind.
So most Democrats vote Democratic because they think that it rhymes with the word democracy.
Is that right?
Well, I'm sure that there are some, because there's an explanation for everybody.
Not everybody is monolithic.
Some people vote Democrat because they've always been.
They just grew up that way.
Their parents, grandparents, unions, what have you.
Same thing with the Republicans.
And some people have no concept of ideology.
Conservative, liberal doesn't mean anything to them.
It's all just party.
There are a lot of people out there clueless.
Yes, I know.
But it makes you wonder how can they be clueless in this modern day and age, you know?
That's really your question, isn't it?
How can with all the media out there and with all the, but there are still people who do not use computers, don't know what the internet is.
They're people that just read newspapers and listen to the nightly news, and that's it.
You know, I early voted the other day, and there was a sign in the parking lot where I voted, and it said, vote for the American.
Yeah?
Yeah, I just wonder, is that what Donald Trump's going to drop?
No, no, no, no, that's no.
Vote for the American.
How did you interpret that?
Who's the American in this race?
Romney.
Okay.
So, I mean, everybody's talking about it.
Do you think any undecideds are among the early voters?
No, because they're still not decided.
Right.
It can't be, right?
It can't be.
But your real question is, how undecided are they, really?
You just don't believe there are that many undecided, right?
Yes, and why do they have to say after the debates that they're polling countries around the world and who they would vote for?
They have nothing to do with this election.
So why are they worried about other countries?
No, let me tell you something else here, Daniel.
This is a fact of life, too, that you can't ignore.
And that that you just mentioned, people worried about what others around the world think?
I'm sure you know people who are obsessed with what people think of them.
Yes, that's true.
Well, that's a large part of the undecided.
That's why the vote for Obama, they wanted to be thought of as not racist.
They wanted to be thought of as not bigots.
They wanted people to think of them in a positive way.
They weren't voting issues.
They weren't voting intelligently.
They were voting selfishly.
It's just the fact.
There's so many different reasons to explain this.
So many people, so obsessed with what people think of them.
So many people go through life.
Number one objective is to be liked.
I gave that up at two months.
I knew it wasn't possible for me.
Here's Peggy in Powell, Tennessee.
Hey, Peggy, I'm glad you waited.
Thanks for the call.
Oh, thank you so much, Rush.
You bet.
Two quick things.
Thanks to Snerdley for taking my call.
He's a neat guy to talk to.
He's so sweet.
Thank you so much for saying that.
Oh, he's great.
And the second thing, back to the beginning of the show about PMS, I believe it's true, but I think intelligent women know the difference between hormonal imbalance and logic.
Here's what it is.
New research.
It's out of Atlanta, by the way.
New research suggests that the phenomenon of premenstrual syndrome, known more commonly as PMS, may not occur the way many have thought over the years.
Oh, well, I just know.
Don't ask me to do anything between the 13th and the 16th of the month, and I'm okay.
Yeah, well, I decided to read this and then forget it and never bring it up.
Well, what I wanted to ask your opinion on is that, you know, the first debate really wasn't a debate because we all know Barack wasn't there.
The second debate, I didn't personally like them up, you know, walking around and shaking hands and talking and stuff.
But to me, I really enjoyed this third debate the best because that's me.
I'm not a really highly emotional person.
And I like someone to tell me the facts like Jefferson, you know, tell me the worst so, you know, I know what to expect.
And I really liked what Romney was presenting, how he was calm.
He said, this is the way it is.
This is what I'll do.
You know, attacking me is not an agenda.
I like the way he phrased things.
Let me ask you this.
Did you also like it when he said to Obama, we can't kill our way out of this problem?
Well, I did like that.
There were a couple of things that he said that I didn't think they were real snide, but they were to the point.
But, you know, you talk to so many people, and with people calling in and then people that you talk to in your social and private events.
Not really that many.
I don't really like people that much.
Well, sometimes I have that feeling, too.
But do you think that, see, I want to have the impression that Romney, if he's elected, is an intelligent enough man to know his limitations and he will put people in key political positions that can make changes.
See, because Romney was not my big choice.
I mean, I stick with the Republicans because I think that the Democratic Party has been overrun by socialists.
Well, did Romney make you think that he would accommodate for his own lack of intelligence experience some area by putting somebody qualified in it?
Did he make you think he's not?
I want to think that by his behind the scenes of how he acts.
You know, you were just alluding to that a few minutes ago about people not wanting credit for what they do.
There are millions of Americans in America today that do all kinds of things for their community, their family, their friends that go without appreciation or not that you need it.
You know, I mean, they were talking about Romney helping some guy dig up a stump.
And, you know, he didn't ask the press to come out there and watch him do that.
And I think that as Americans, that's kind of what our character is known about.
We do things because it's our duty to other man.
Basically, you liked what Romney did then in that debate.
I do.
And I hope that because of his personal life, the way he grew up with his values, that I want to believe that he's going to put people like.
We'll find out.
I have to take a break here because I'm really up to it against the time clock.
But I'm glad you called Peggy.
Thanks very much.
We'll be right back.
New York Times has a story saying Bill Clinton is hurting Barack Obama by ill-advising him.
Is it not a good thing to call Romney a conservative?
That's not working, the New York Times says.
▲
Export Selection