All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 14, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:13
December 14, 2012, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings, my friends, and how are you?
It's Friday here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
It's open live.
Oh, yeah, Open Line Friday.
And this is where I, El Rushbow, America's most prominent major big-time media guy, take the biggest risk known to exist in major big-time media.
And that is turning over the content portion of this program, the most highly valued, the most eagerly anticipated, the most often imitated, the most often copied program to rank amateurs.
You.
One day a week we do this.
Lovable rank amateurs.
Don't get the idea.
I'm not being insulting.
I'm just being realistic.
Monday through Thursday, if you get on a program, you have to talk about things I care about.
On Friday, you don't.
Whatever you want to talk about is fine.
It's a golden opportunity for callers to veer off, to branch out, as they say.
And if you're a naturally boring person, this is the day for you to be on the radio.
Telephone number 800-282-2882, the email address LRushbow at EIBnet.com.
You all realize how we're being played on this whole Susan Rice thing.
Susan Rice has not even been nominated to be Secretary of State, and she's already withdrawn.
She wasn't even nominated.
This is all such a smokescreen.
All this is, is an effort to get an old white guy in there, which has the babes at the White House little ticked off, by the way.
But they're still angrier at the Republicans.
They think, of course, everything is the fault of Republicans.
And the Republicans derailed Susan Rice because all they care about is getting to the bottom of what happened at four Americans being killed at Benghazi.
American people don't care about the four American people.
Obama doesn't care about it.
Susan Rice, Hillary don't care about it.
Only the Republicans do.
And so we're not going to get to the bottom of it.
You realize Mrs. Clinton's not going to testify either?
She ain't going to be around.
And by the time testimony is taken, she's not even going to be Secretary of State.
She's going to be long gone, setting up her 2016 coronation.
So Susan Rice withdrawing, not even nominated.
It's amazing.
This is a great example of the DC media bubble.
They create it.
Everybody gets in it, plays ball according to the people, set the template, and it's never been real.
I don't think it's ever been real.
Oh, there might have been some distant hope on the part of Susan Rice to be Secretary of State, but Obama's always wanted to put John Kerry in there.
And guess what?
Speaking of that, and that's who McCain wants, by the way.
If anybody did in Susan Rice, it's the old white guys' club in the Senate, Republican and Democrat.
And you got Chuck Hagel reportedly being considered for Secretary of Defense.
They're not people of color anywhere.
And by the way, I just want to make that official.
I am withdrawing my name for consideration from Secretary of Business.
And I'm not going to allow the regime to create another bubble and put me in it.
Everybody comment on that as another feint or distraction for what's really going on, which is the fiscal cliff and where we're going to end up with there, which is also pretty predictable.
So I don't know if you've heard about it, but Eric Schmidt turned it down.
I also am withdrawing my name from consideration for Secretary of Business.
I am El Rushball, your cornball conservative brother here at the Excellence.
You don't know what that's about?
Oh, where have you?
You haven't heard about the latest racist incident on ESPN?
Yeah, this black reporter for ESPN was on some typically pointless, designed for controversy only ESP intro.
His name is Rob Parker.
He used to be in Detroit.
And he said that RG3 is not down for the struggle.
He's not an authentic black.
Might have a, it does have a white fiancé, might have, might be a Republican.
Can't be an authentic black, not down for the cause.
And he's a cornball brother.
He's not really, not a black guy.
He's not one of us.
And, of course, this is being debated as though there is some possibility that Parker's...
A lot of people outraged by it, naturally, but it's just, you know, depending on who you are and what your skin color, you can say anything and have it treated as an intellectual addition to the public domain and have it discussed.
Now, this is not like going after Clarence Thomas, who's an acknowledged conservative, or not like going after Walter Williams or Shelby Steele.
RG3 is the most popular black guy in D.C.
He is single-handedly saving the Washington Redskins.
There's still playoff potential there with the Redskins.
Going after this guy as a conservative, as a Republican, is not an automatic score for you.
But once again, who is it in our culture that are the real racists?
And who is it that's determining who's authentically this and who's not authentically that?
Parker said this Rob Parker guy's, yeah, well, he's black.
He kind of does his thing, but he's not really down with a cause.
He's not one of us.
He's kind of black, but he's not really the guy you'd really want to hang out with because he's off to do something else.
Essentially, he's too white.
He's not authentically black, snurdly.
He's not.
This is the kind of stuff, by the way, that they were talking about, not as pointedly, about Obama during the 2007, 2008 campaign.
That's what the L.A. Times column, the Magic Negro, was all about.
I can't believe you hadn't heard about that.
It's been ESPN's response is they are looking at it.
ESPN's looking at it, determining what they might want to do about it.
Here, let's grab this on by the boy.
Here's Rob Parker.
It's on the program called First Take.
And this is the show that he appears on with Skip Bayless.
And Stephen A. Smith is on the show.
And the co-host, Carrie Champion, says, what does this say about RG3?
My question, which is just a straight, honest question, is he a brother or is he a cornball brother?
He's black, he does the thing, but he's not really down with the cause.
He's not one of us.
He's kind of black, but he's not really like the guy you really want to hang out with because he's off to something.
We all know he has a white fiancé.
And there was all this talk about he's a Republican, which there's no information at all.
I'm just trying to dig deeper into why he has an issue because we did find out with Tiger Woods.
Tiger Woods was like, I don't want to, I got black skin, but don't call me black.
So people got a little wondered about Tiger Woods early on about him.
This guy's a separatist.
This guy doesn't want any kind of integration.
This guy's a full-fledged separatist.
They're investigating to see if he's a Republican.
And if it can be proven that he's a Republican, then the ESPN will probably say no foul.
If they can prove that RG3 is a Republican, then this would be no problem, and Parker would get even more airtime.
So they're investigating whether he's a Republican.
No, that's going to be the determining factor.
RG3 has said, look, I don't want to be defined by my race.
That's a big problem.
He doesn't.
And he has said publicly, he doesn't want to be defined by race.
He wants to be defined by the kind of person he is, like Martin Luther King said.
Content of his character, the degree to which he performs well, character in public.
That's how he wants to be known, and that's how he wants to live his life.
He doesn't want to live his life as a skin color.
And so he's not down for the struggle.
He's not down for the cause.
It used to be the cause is exactly right.
It used to be the cause.
The color of your skin was supposed to not matter.
Colorblind society.
But who is it?
Who is it that is hell-bent on making the color of your skin matter?
And it's militant blacks, and they're all Democrats.
They're all liberals, white liberals, same thing.
Parker continued, Skip Bayless.
After Parker said, Skip Bayless, who's a token white, a token flamethrower.
I mean, this is a programmer, ESPN said, we want controversy, and we don't care whether it's true, what you say.
We don't care how outrageous it is.
Just get us eyeballs.
Just get us some attention.
So, Bayliss, after what you just heard, Bayliss said, well, okay, Parker, what do RG3's braids mean to you?
What do they say to you?
Now, you tell me, what is the point of that question?
Skip Bayless.
What do you mean he's not a brother?
Look at the braids, right?
He looks like a brother.
That's what Bayliss is saying.
He looks like a brother, Parker.
He got the braids.
What did the braids say to you?
To me, that's very urban and makes you feel like I think he would have a clean cut if he was more straight lace or not.
Wearing braids is your brother because he got braids on.
Yeah, so the braids confuse it because the braids mean he could be a brother, but he's also maybe a Republican, which wiped out the braids.
And so you got to investigate whether RG3 is a Republican.
And then, if he's a conservative, probably.
This is why, folks, so many of us think we've gone over the cliff all and we have the tipping point long ago reached.
I mean, this is.
We're supposed to reach out to this.
Walt Disney's ESPN, Walt Disney owns the ESPN.
We're supposed to reach out to this, find common ground with this.
This is what we're supposed to understand in order to peacefully coexist with that, not pay for this, coexist, period.
So, Stephen A. Smith, Stephen A. Smith, been hearing, listening to all this, and then he said.
Well, first of all, let me say this.
I'm uncomfortable with where we just went.
RG3, the ethnicity, the color of his fiancé, is none of our business.
It's irrelevant.
He can live his life any way he chooses.
The braids that he has in his hair, that's his business.
That's his life.
He can live the life.
I don't judge someone's blackness based on those kind of things.
I just don't do that.
Well, but what then does he judge somebody's blackness on?
I think, Stephen, well, Stephen A. Smith has on previous occasions let it be known that he does lean right now and then.
And he's paid the price for that, by the way.
They keep shuffling him around.
Since we're looking, folks, we're on a roll here with language emanating from urban America.
Let's go to the floor of the House.
And African American Hank Johnson, Democrat from Georgia, had some comments Wednesday.
Put 30 midgets in with the giant.
And the midgets then have a chance collectively.
And so that is how the situation has unfolded here in America.
75 years ago, almost 75 years ago, Congress passed the National Labor Relations Act, which helps to protect American workers' rights to organize and negotiate the terms of employment with corporations.
The midgets get a chance to speak with one voice to the giant.
This is well-known mental giant, Hank Johnson, Georgia Democrat, complaining about the midgets having no chance with the giants.
Now, apparently, his use of the word midget, it's now the M-word, by the way.
His use of the word is now socially unacceptable, and he had to go back to the House floor and try again.
Last night I used an analogy that some find offensive, and I certainly was not meaning to be offensive or use a derogatory term.
Okay.
You know, everybody knows what the N-word is.
We don't say the N-word.
We refer to that word as the N-word.
I had never heard of the M-word.
To my discovery, just within the last 12 hours or so, I have found that the use of the midget, excuse me, the use of the M-word is no longer socially acceptable.
Now, the M-word refers to a group of people, the little people.
And in some cases, we're talking about their brains, Hank.
There are many mental midgets, you may be one, that permeate throughout our little people.
M-word, he didn't know.
He didn't know that to say the word midget was a pejorative.
Hank, you might want to go see the movie Django.
I mean, I think the N-word's used like a thousand times in that movie.
You might say, who is this Hank Johnson guy?
Who is that?
You think you've heard the name Hank Johnson.
You have heard the name Hank Johnson.
Well, he elaborated.
He wasn't.
Folks, I got to take a break.
I just saw the clock.
I got two more Hank Johnson soundbites, and I know you can't wait.
So don't go away.
Rushland boy, your cornball conservative brother, here in the EIB network and Open Line Friday.
And I'm just told an ESPN suspended Rob Parker.
I don't know for how long.
It doesn't say, I just got the story.
I had a chance to read one line, and I've got time crunch here.
We got two Hank Johnson bites.
He continued here, he elaborated on his midget controversy, M-word controversy for his low-information constituents.
I'm not talking about the 47%.
I'm not talking about the takers instead of the makers as some would describe them.
I'm not talking about the middle class, working people, poor people, working poor people.
That's not what is meant by the little people term.
It really refers to medical condition.
Dwarfism is the name of that medical condition.
And sometimes I guess one can even say abnormally small people, abnormally small people, which to me is, I like that term better than dwarfism.
There you have it.
Folks, abnormally small people, midget, medical conditions, insulting.
Here's Hank Johnson, March 25th of 2010.
You might remember.
This is an island that at its widest level is, what, 12 miles from shore to shore, and at its smallest level, smallest location, it's seven miles between one shore and the other.
My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize.
We don't anticipate that.
I'm afraid of the island capsizing.
If you populate it with midgets, it's less weight, and it wouldn't happen.
Hi, how are you?
Welcome back, El Rush Ball, the cutting edge of societal evolution.
That's where we are.
It's Open Line Friday.
By the way, I don't know if you know this or not, a midget is about 47% of the size of an average person.
We ran the numbers on it.
I'm going to call Hank Johnson's office so that he knows, because that island he was worried about tipping over with too many people.
As I said, if you populate the island with midgets, it would weigh less.
They're 47% of the average person.
And in that way, you might save the island.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, I have mentioned over the course of the past several months, and I share my passions with all of you, is what I do here.
Oh, snurdly, by the way, have you heard there are a lot of people that are analyzing the future talk radio, that it's in trouble just like the Republican Party is.
And apparently, for talk radio to survive, hosts are going to have to be funny.
Right.
You think we should try that, maybe?
Being funny?
Well, yes, I know, I know, I know, I know, but I mean, I've been doing this for 25 years, and then people are coming along saying, lecturing stuff ain't going to cut it anymore, which I didn't think we did anyway.
They said, no, you're going to have to be funny.
Well, I don't know.
I don't know.
Have you heard that?
Have you heard that?
There's a start being funny.
Michael, when did we stop?
Anyway, one of the things I was telling you about, folks, I share my passions with you.
I always have.
And one of the things, and I read tech blogs, I'm just fascinated by the advancements being made in high-tech and how I can play, I can take advantage of it.
So I'm reading all these things that I used to really never read as frequently as I do now.
And it's been very educational for me because these are young professionals, but they're journalists at the same time.
And when someone's a journalist, they are identifying themselves pretty uniformly.
When somebody's a journalist, you can make book on the fact that ideologically they're liberal, they're pro-big government.
And I would go so far as to say that they're ill-educated, mal-educated.
I think the public education system and even institutions of higher learning have been dominated for decades now by the left, and it matters.
It really does matter.
It's so pervasive that it matters a great deal.
So I just pick up little things that serve to remind me the task that we have.
If, for example, we are to beat a path back to an America as founded, because as you know, and as we've discussed in recent weeks, I am convinced that Obama's mission is to transform this country into something other than what it was founded, because he doesn't believe that this country was founded in a moral or just way.
In his view, this country has been, if not criminal, it has been unjust, illegitimate, in fact.
This country has been a rigged game from the outset, with a select few identified as the beneficiaries, and with the rest of the people getting the shaft.
And that's his view of capitalism, but it's also his view of the founding of this country.
There's nobody, by the way, that could talk me out of that.
I think it's so easy, but it's also frightening to admit that.
It's much easier, if you're a commentator inside the Beltway, for example, to look at Obama as just the next in a long line of Democrat presidents.
And you plug Obama into the hole that you plug all presidents into.
And there are assumed to be things that all presidents have in common.
Among them, they all appreciate the founding.
They all want to reduce debt.
They all want to cut spending.
They all want economic growth.
And that's where I think all of these people are missing Obama.
It's much easier just to plug Obama into the traditional cliched puzzle and discuss him and the events of the day within that framework.
And I think he's totally outside that framework, as I've spent the last four years saying.
And I just reiterate that I think this fiscal cliff business is really all about Obama trying to destroy the Republican Party as a legitimate opponent for the Democrats, which is politics.
I mean, nice work if you can do it.
I would love, I'd love to make liberalism a minority political entity if I could.
I would love to.
It's the objective is to beat them.
So I don't think that there's anything quote unquote criminal about that.
The problem is when the Republicans don't recognize that that's what's about to happen to them and thus do not respond, defend, react, fight back accordingly.
But the evidence is all over the place, everything.
In fact, later in the program, I'm going to go through a long list of things that are now being assumed to be responsible for all of the problems that exist in this country.
And they all happen to be free market, conservative, capitalistic-oriented things and policies.
The latest one is tax cuts.
The mission that Obama and the Democrats are on.
Jay Carney admitted it yesterday in a briefing of the White House.
Jay Carney admitted that what they're out to do is to convince people, well, they are blaming the tax cuts of 2001, 2003 for this mess.
They're blaming 230 years of capitalism for this mess.
And Obama, he's only had four years to fix it.
It's going to take longer than that.
You don't just fix a 230-year mistake.
Now, don't misunderstand.
Obama wouldn't dare say it that way.
And Jay Carney doesn't dare say it that way.
They don't have to.
They intimate, just take one little element, the tax cuts of 2001, 2003, and then throw in the Reagan years.
And that's the biggest economic expansion in this country, the biggest economic expansion, any country in the history of the world.
And of course, how's it rewritten?
What's the history revision on the 80s?
That it led to the widest gap, rich and poor.
It ended up taking money away from the poor, and the rich got richer.
That the same old stuff, tax cuts, the subprime mortgage crisis.
Whose fault is that?
Republican bankers.
It's not the fault of the Community Redevelopment Act.
It's not the fault of the government demanding banks make loans to people they couldn't ever pay back.
No, no, no, no.
We're in the middle of history revision.
And what's happening is that the Republicans are being identified and their policies as the reasons why this mess exists.
If they can succeed with that, then they've got a free road.
They've got a free ride.
And, by the way, a road with no opposition as they head on down the road socialism and expansionist government and what have you.
So when I read these tech blogs, I look for evidence that they're succeeding.
And I find it everywhere.
Now, high-tech is not populated with idiots, at least scientifically, but it is populated with people who don't think.
It's populated with liberals who feel, who've been propagandized, in my view, who have been ill-educated.
They've been lied to about this country and the things that make this country wrong or unfair or unjust.
Here's just one little example.
And it's actually not that little.
It is a post from one of the many tech blogs that I read, try to keep up with what's going on with Apple and Samsung and the latest gadgetry because I love that stuff.
I want to know what's coming.
The gizmos and what they can do fascinate me.
So I read this stuff.
And here's a blog entry on Eric Schmidt, the Google chairman, defending his tax avoidance.
Now, you know the story.
Google has found a way to put $10 billion in places the U.S. Internal Revenue Service can't get to it, legally, by the way.
And that $10 billion has in it $2 billion, which is owed in taxes that they are able to not pay.
Now, Google is an accepted, appreciated stamp of approval corporation because they're a bunch of libs.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the founders, they're big liberals, they're big Obama bundlers and supporters, all of Google is, and so there's less heat on these guys when they avoid taxes.
There's still some heat, but it's of a different variety.
It's more like these bloggers scratch their heads and wonder why, because Google, that's good guys.
Why are they shafting the government?
It doesn't compute with them.
They're really bothered by it.
They think, because the way they've been educated and the way that they have been, and these are guys, these are that cover the business side of high-tech.
And they're clueless as to what the purpose of a business is.
You can tell it when you read what they write.
And as I say, it just, I read this to remind me what we're up against.
And it's everywhere.
It's pervasive.
So here's Google.
They've been able to run some income, quite a bit of it, through Ireland to Belgium, to the Bahamas.
And in so doing, and by the way, all of it legal.
And in so doing, they escape paying $2 billion in taxes.
Now, the story from a particular blog here is about Eric Schmidt defending Google's tax avoidance and the strategy.
Here's the post.
Google Chairman Eric Schmidt has a decent rejoinder to people upset that his company is sheltering profits in Bermuda shell companies.
Under the rules, governments have written such behavior is perfectly legal.
Per the Sydney Morning Herald, Eric Schmidt this week said that he was, quote, very proud of the structure that Google set up, close quote, to keep his company's taxes as low as possible, while adding that, quote, we did it based on the incentives that the governments offered us to operate, close quote.
So here's what's Google saying, our job is to pay as little in taxes as possible.
But see, Schmidt can get away with it because he's a good liberal.
Let me say that, and they're going to send out the dogs for me.
Or let any Republican talk about the fact that tax avoidance, it's not even tax avoidance, it's just following the rules.
Keeping taxes low, good for Google.
Why is it not good for America?
Why is it not good for an individual if it's good for Google?
Now, the difference, here's Eric Schmidt, who's fearless.
He's proud to stand up and say, screw you.
My job is to make my bottom line as big as it can be.
And if I get a chance to avoid paying taxes, I'm going to do it.
He doesn't make one excuse.
He doesn't beg for forgiveness.
He doesn't ask for any sympathy.
He basically rams it down the critics' throats, which is what Republicans ought to do.
And then he said, look, governments gave us these incentives if we would come there and set up in these countries.
They want our business.
They gave us these incentives.
We'd be foolish not to take advantage of it.
But here is the blogger's rejoinder.
While Google's behavior may be legal, there are still important questions about whether governments should put up with it.
Governments designed it.
Governments designed the law or the laws.
Government offered the incentives to Google to get them there.
But here's this little blogger who doesn't know what he's talking about, thinks he does.
I'm sure that he thinks he's a big, compassionate, caring individual.
But look what he wants to do.
You got Google, which is doing more for people than government could ever hope to think of doing.
And he wants them punished.
Yeah, Google's behavior may be illegal, but there's still important questions about whether governments should put up with it.
Is there some young kid who thinks government's God?
Government can do no wrong.
Government is the solution.
Government's the answer to every question.
Government is holy.
Still important questions about whether government should put up with it.
The question is: when are we going to stand up and say we're tired of putting up with government?
Hey, I got to take a break.
A little long here.
Be back after this.
Jack in Denver, it's Open Line Friday.
Always going to grab a call in the first hour if we can and make it look good here.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Thanks, Rush.
Mile high dittos.
Thank you.
I appreciate your call.
Rush, I think it was last week you were talking about how women scrutinize and leer at other women harder than men.
I found that to be true.
I agree.
And after listening, it's not just that.
It's in a disapproving way.
Right.
I mean, women use a scrutinize good.
While we're ogling women, look, we don't see the women shooting daggers at them.
How dare she wear a skirt that short?
Who do you think she is?
RG3, and I can't help but wonder if there's a segment of the black population that does the same thing to other blacks.
Meaning, scrutinize other blacks.
Of course they do.
That's what this illustrates.
RG3, he's not down for the cause.
The braids don't get him over the hump.
He's not down for the struggle, white fiancée, traitor, Republican, traitor.
He's worthy of their disdain.
And he's one of them, the way they look at it.
I mean, it's just an.
I don't know how you reach out to people like that.
We're supposed to.
This Rob Parker is just a buffoon.
It makes sense.
He's at the ESPN.
By the way, did you see the news last week, ladies and gentlemen?
Hillary Clinton was ill.
Did you see that?
She was one of the reasons she haven't been able to testify.
She was rushed to see her doctor.
She was deeply worried.
And according to a source I read close to the situation, Hillary got in to see the doctor.
Said, Doctor, take a look at me.
I woke up this morning.
I looked in the mirror and I saw my hair all frazzled.
My skin was blotchy and pasty.
My eyes are bloodshot and bugging out.
I just looked worn out.
What's wrong with me?
And my sources say that the doctor looked at her and said, well, the good news is there's nothing wrong with your eyesight.
Welcome back, El Rush Bowl.
Open line Friday here at the cutting edge of society.
Well, you know, I found myself in an elevator with Mrs. Clinton once.
It was at a wedding, Brooklyn.
Doors locked.
She hits a stop button.
She said, oh, Rush, I've wanted to see you for so long, and nobody would believe it.
Would you make a real woman out of me?
I said, sure, let's take off our clothes.
So I took mine off.
▲
Export Selection