All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 1, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:00
January 1, 2013, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Here we go.
Diddle Cam's on.
And if I got everything going, you would not.
I'm amazed I got everything done.
We're snurgly.
And When to get the door.
Who's at the door?
Why would it matter who's at the door when it oh, FedEx, never mind.
Probably Apple stuff.
Okay, that's cool.
Greetings.
Welcome back, folks.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh, as promised here on Thursday, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
What a hectic morning.
And we are ready to go.
I'm amazed I got all this stuff done prior to the show.
Stuff that has nothing to do with the show.
I did show prep, and I had stuff that had nothing to do with the program.
You know, personal stuff that most people take days off to do.
I do it while working.
Happy to have you here.
Telephone number 800 282-2882.
And the email address, L Rushball at EIBNet.com.
You gotta hear this.
Richard Stingle.
You thought it was going to be your story on the castration guy, right?
That's coming up.
Now you gotta hear this.
Richard Stingle, a Time Magazine guy, the editor.
You know, yesterday, he was on today's show, announced Obama as the uh person of the year.
And he said the reason why that they named Obama person of the year is because the no information voters love the guy.
They're transforming America.
They thought, they actually said this.
Time magazine says remarkable, he's worth being person of the year, because he's the guy that ended up being able, the first politician to get votes from people who don't care about anything and who aren't paying attention.
That is worth honoring in 2012, almost 2013 America.
The person of the year, and it's what the guy said.
I'm not putting words in his mouth.
I mean, I'm I'm I'm paraphrasing, but it's what he said.
This noteworthy, finally, we have a politician who is able to get votes from people who don't pay attention to anything.
If only we had more people who could get the votes of people who don't know anything, who don't care about anything, who aren't involved.
The morons, the low information voters, this guy's not through.
Stingle was on Charlie Rose last night.
And the more this guy talks, the better it gets.
Now, the reason why the first debate actually did not help Romney because the low information voters loved Obama appearing out of it.
That meant to the low information voters that Obama is not a typical Washington politician.
That he doesn't play the game.
The fact that he acted like he wasn't there and couldn't have cared less whether he was there was an attractive thing to the low information voter and and and that's this Time magazine guy said these are the people that inspired us to name Obama the person of the year.
So the the um Charlie Rose says he's Obama person of the year.
What what what what about this?
Can you tell us?
The Obama campaign discovered that these people who say they're not interested in politics, who do not like the Republicans, who do not like the Democrats, who do not like Washington, you know what they do like?
They like Barack Obama because they sense something about him that he's not really a part of it.
So even that first debate, which we all thought was a debak, a lot of those people thought, well, I I like that because he's not playing that game.
He's not playing gotcha.
He's not saying nasty things.
That helped tip the balance for him.
I don't know, folks, what you know that this this I think I mean it's gotta be over, doesn't it?
It just this is if it either that or the only can save us is that Obama's a cult figure and all this insanity will end when his second term ends.
Uh let's let's parse this.
Because you did hear what you just heard.
The Obama campaign discovered that these people who say they're not interested in politics, who don't like Republicans, don't like the Democrats, don't like Washington, Like Obama.
He is Washington.
He's more Washington than any president has ever been.
This guy is government.
He is Mr. Insider.
But remember, the exit polls, he didn't get blamed for the economy.
Bush did.
It was as though Obama was in the office for four years, but nothing attached to him.
And now Time magazine says that the first debate was not a debacle.
It actually helped Obama win because the low information voters determined the outcome, and they like seeing a guy disengaged.
They like seeing a guy not interested in what's going on in Washington.
That's cool.
Because they don't like Washington.
They don't like Democrats, don't like Republicans.
And Obama acted like he didn't want to be there either.
That's our guy.
That's what the Time magazine editor is saying.
I like that.
He's not playing that game.
He's not playing gotcha.
He's not saying nasty things.
That helped tip the balance for him.
Now there, folks, I hate to tell you this.
There may be something to it.
Because the politico has a story today.
How do I set this up?
The politico has a story today about how independence no longer determined the outcome of elections.
If that is true, I have to tell you, in terms of the campaign consultant class, the inside the beltway class.
if independents no longer determine the election and And instead, by the way, what determines electoral outcomes today is who gets their base out best.
And in this election, I have to tell you that's that Romney killed independence.
He killed with the independence.
He won Ohio's independence by a vast.
He won the independence in three of the five swing states, double digits, and lost the election.
Now these consultants, for my my entire life, and you've heard this too, that the model for electoral victory is based on this belief that the Democrat candidates are going to get his 40% of his base, and a Republican's going to get his 40%.
That's a wash.
The 20% undecided independent in the middle, that's where you win or lose the election.
And every campaign consultant tells every candidate, I'm the guy that can get you those voters.
I know how to get the independence.
And the Republicans, whoever, I don't care, Romney, McCain, they all hire these consultants who claim to be experts in getting the independence.
And the Romney campaign got them.
And the Romney campaign lost.
Because Obama did turn out his base better than Romney turned out his base.
And the reason Romney didn't turn out his base as well is because the Republicans did not go for the Republicans, the Republican establishment, as you and I've discussed, are largely embarrassed of some elements of their base.
They're embarrassed of the pro-life religious right crowd, as you well know.
And some of them are very embarrassed of the NRA crowd.
And so the Romney campaign bought the belief the elections won with the independence, and that's what they aim for, and they got them, and they still lost.
And so now the uninformed, the low information voter, the unengaged or disengaged, the voter not paying attention to anything, but still shows up to vote.
That is who determined this election's winner.
Now let me ask you this.
If that's true, and it's your job to get those people's votes, how would you do it?
By definition, they don't care.
By definition, they don't pay attention.
By definition, they hate Washington, they hate Democrats, they hate Republicans.
So how do you get them?
I think this explains that Obama is a cult figure.
He has an appeal that goes beyond to these people anyway.
And I think that the only reason this is reality is because the media's never vetted him.
And the Republicans didn't.
The Republicans were afraid to.
The charges of racism, all the criticism.
So these low information voters genuinely are low information.
They don't know a thing about Obama.
They don't know anything.
The media hasn't vetted him.
By definition, they're not listening to this show.
I mean, you cannot listen to this show and not care.
You cannot listen to this show and be disengaged.
So they aren't here.
So they're not going to hear about Obama.
They're not going to we vetted him.
We spent four years informing people who he is, where he comes from, the things that determine who he is in animated.
They don't know.
They didn't care.
He's something entirely different to them.
Now I'm going to go back to October 4th, 2012.
And I I want to replay some of my analysis.
After that first debate, all the smart people said that independence were the key.
And that they went for Romney big time, but he still lost.
Because the low information voters actually prefer to zonk out, uninterested Obama spouting cliches.
They didn't like Romney because he was aggressive and focused and looked successful.
That's that's what Time magazine is telling us.
That's a Time magazine editor is telling us.
Snerdley, you can frown at me all you want.
The fact of the matter is Romney won enough.
If if the standard formula that has been in play for 50,000 god awful years had worked this election, Romney would have won this thing in a landslide.
The rule of thumb is you win the independence double digits, and you are being coronated, not inaugurated.
And he won independence, big margins, three of five swing states and lost.
This this I don't care what Stingle is saying, and I don't care what these wackos are saying about the disengaged, uninformed, low information voter, that fact alone, the fact that the independents no longer at least in this election were irrelevant.
You realize how monumental that is.
You realize what a shakeup that is to professional campaign consultants whose job it is to get candidates elected.
I'm serious.
If future elections, if they're gonna take from this one that the way you win future elections is win the votes of people that don't care and aren't paying attention, how the hell do you do that?
By definition, how do you reach people who don't like you?
How do you reach people who aren't paying attention to you?
How do you reach people who don't know anything?
And then once you reach him, what do you do when you reach him?
Act stupid.
I what it's fascinating to me.
Here's what I said.
This is my uh on-the-spot analysis after the first debate.
An independent, a moderate who doesn't listen to partisan media, radio TV talk shows, or whatever.
But watched the debate last night.
Only knows Mitt Romney by virtue of the TV ads he or she said.
You understand their heads swimming last night.
Well, wait a minute now.
Uh where's the war on women?
Where's this guy that wants to it wasn't there?
Not for one second last night was Mitt Romney.
Even close to the way he has been portrayed by the Democrats, the media, and Barack Obama for the past two years.
or even six years.
In fact, it was Obama near the end of the debate who finally, after wandering in vain for a cogent thought all night, Finally had no recourse but then to descend to his own cliches.
Billionaires, millionaires, tax cuts for the rich, all the vacuous empty nothingness that has defined Obama and the left for so long, all condensed into 90 minutes last night.
It looked pathetic, it looked old and tired and worn out just as Obama did.
And that is what looked attractive to the low information voter.
That's what looked attractive.
That Obama, he's so disinterested, he didn't want to be there.
That's our guy.
We're so fed up with Washington.
Now, of course, the irony here is that these low information be so fed up with Washington.
If they had the slightest clue what was going on, they wouldn't be anywhere near the Democrat Party or Obama.
That's the irony of this.
You know it and I know it.
I take a break.
Sit tight, much more straight ahead here on the excellence in broadcasting network.
Don't go away.
Hey, welcome back.
Great to have you.
By the way, uh, folks, the uh it wasn't just three of five battleground states that Romney cleaned up an independence.
It was five of the eight.
It was in five of eight battleground states, Romney, I mean he didn't just win independence, he trounced Obama in independence.
But Romney didn't get his base out.
And that's all Obama focused on.
Now, Snerdley, and I'm sure many of you are in a panic.
Some of you may be thinking, what the hell, a world ending Friday, it already did.
We just don't know it yet.
Snurdis, this is depressing.
I mean, is it is this is this the future?
Independence no longer matters.
I don't think so.
Folks, I've I could be wrong, but I think this is all confirming that that Obama's a cult figure to a lot of people.
He's still whatever they want him to be.
Because they don't know who he is.
By definition, low information means that they're ignorant.
They don't know anything, and they don't care to know.
And there are enough of them to offset traditional voting patterns, apparently.
There are there are, and you you know.
You you look at electoral returns, election returns, every election.
We have a country of 300, what 200 million adults.
Look at the number of adults who vote.
Every every four years we have inside the belt, we people wringing their hands over the lack of participation in our democracy and our people don't care.
You know there are a lot of people that don't vote.
A lot of people that don't care.
They did this time.
Obama vote totals were down three to four million from 2008, 2012.
But look who made up the difference.
The morons.
And I think I'm actually being charitable with uh with that term.
Now I know, I know it's time magazine saying this.
And I'm not I'm I'm not agreeing with this because time is saying it.
I happen to think there's something to this, because this the law, the political law of winning elections, forever it really has been.
Whoever wins independence wins the election.
And it didn't work out that way this time.
And there's a reason why.
And I think the low information voter is a is a relatively new phenomenon, at least in in in being so labeled.
And it just it it adds even more insult to the injury we're already facing, but we already have a debacle.
You know, you know what the real worry here is?
Given this.
If you don't feel bad enough yet, let me let me let me add this.
Ronald Reagan, and and Obama knows this, by the way.
Ronald Reagan was the last transformative president we had.
A man who genuinely changed the direction the country was going.
Substantively genuinely changed it.
He was not a caretaker president, he was transformative.
That's what Obama wants to be.
And here's the danger.
The danger is, and we're already on this road.
Obama is a socialist.
Obama is a liberal.
If that ends up being seen as Reagan-esque, not ideologically, but in the sense that that he's a transformative president.
And even the Democrats hate Reagan, but the country doesn't.
The country loves Ronald Reagan.
His funeral was populated by millions.
I mean, you you saw it if you paid any attention.
The country loves Ronald Reagan.
And in many ways, it's not simply because of his politics or his ideology, he just he was he was that big, that important.
And that's what Obama is angling for.
And if Obama's politics, socialism, redistributionism, big government expansion, all this, if if if this becomes seen by a lot of people as transformative and good, then we're going to lose the country for a generation or two.
We're all I think in the process of well, we're we're at risk of that anyway, but but this further illustrates how.
And that's this the low information voter phenomenon, something serious to be dealt with.
Let me tell you, folks, it isn't all bad.
There are positives to be gleaned from what we think we've learned here.
What do we think we well, we know, we know that independence for the for the first time in many, many moons were of no relevance to an election outcome in 2012.
Romney won huge in independence, five out of eight swing states.
And therein lies what is intriguing to me.
Now, Romney may not have been Reagan.
Romney may not have been articulating the full bore conservative message.
But Romney was clearly an alternative to Obama.
Would you agree with that?
I mean, he may not have been as pedal of the metal conservative as you and I would like, but he clearly was an alternative to Obama.
And where did the independence go?
The independents, maybe you don't want to say they went to Romney, but they certainly abandoned Obama.
From 2008 to 2012, they abandoned Obama.
And so a message, and maybe it wasn't even a message, maybe it was that the independence just wanted no more of Obama, like the rest of us didn't.
Maybe Romney didn't attract them.
Maybe it was just anybody but Obama to that.
But regardless, that's still good news.
The good news here is that the independents in striking numbers wanted no more of this.
And here is more good news, but it's challenging good news.
It means that either a conservative message, a watered-down conservative message, or simply no desire for socialism, led independence to the Republican Party.
However, the problem now turns out to be, and we know that four million, between three and four million white Americans who voted in 2008 for McCain did not vote in 2012.
We know, and I have to assume that many of those are conservatives.
We know that that some conservatives didn't vote for for whatever reasons.
And what that means is the Republican Party did not get out its base.
This is the good news.
Had the Republican Party had Romney torn off the blinders, gotten rid of the boundaries, had the Republican Party run a cheerful, informative, conservative, I mean, unabated, undiluted conservative campaign, Obama would have lost.
I think it's safe to say, knowing what we know now, the independence abandoning Obama for whatever reason, and it's for whatever reason it's good news.
Also the good news, the Republican Party knows what they've got to do now.
The question is, and this is the big question, the big question, the Republican Party have the slightest clue.
You and I know what they have to do.
You and I know what would have won this election.
And that's exactly what the Republican Party's afraid of.
And by the way, every damn one of their consultants is afraid of it.
The Republican consultant class, I mean, these people hate conservatism.
Well, hate is a strong word.
They think they are, but they they're embarrassed by certain elements of people who call themselves conservative.
But it's it's it's I think now crystal clear.
Had the Republican Party had Romney won, run a full-fledged conservative candidate, would not have scared the independents off.
They were already attracted, they were already repelled by Obama.
You see, you see, the Democrat trick worked.
The Democrat media trick is do not criticize Obama.
The independents don't like that.
You'll you'll you'll you'll force the independence right back into Obama's arms if you do that.
And of course, the wizards are smart and the Republican Party said, yeah, yeah, you can't criticize Obama.
We got somebody's a nice guy's just in over his head.
He's a wonderful family man just in over his head.
He's trying really hard.
We really just doesn't know what he's doing.
And so because we were afraid, not you and me, but the party was afraid to tell this country who Obama is, because they were afraid the independence.
They were afraid of losing independence.
This whole Republican campaign was based on fear of losing the independence.
They were so hellbent on getting the, and they had them.
They had them starting in 2010 without doing anything.
And they were afraid that they were going to lose them if they if they if they sounded at all conservative.
They've bought hook line and sinker, this stupid idea that independence will not tolerate criticism or partisanship.
What a crock.
So the Republican Party shackles itself, puts itself in a straitjacket, believes all this BS, and ends up losing elections.
Now it's clear what could have happened.
So here we are, ladies and gentlemen, in what appears to many to be dark days.
And it is I, El Rushbo bringing a glimmer of light here, because it's it actually it's a little maddening and frustrating.
We could have won this, and we could have won this big with conservatism.
We could have won this with the with the independence that Romney got, if we'd have just pulled out our base, like Obama got his, this wouldn't even have been close.
So, in a real sense, we haven't lost the country, but Obama won, and so we got big problems now.
Because the low information voters are now the new kings.
The morons, the people that don't pay attention.
They're being honored today because they voted for Obama.
They're being celebrated.
They are the reason Obama's person of the year.
Obama's the magician, the brilliant guy who found a way to reach out to the low information, uninformed, don't care, apathetic voters, and turn them out.
And so politics is going to be made up of campaigning to those people.
What did Obama do?
Obama offered a government safety net as a safety net, Santa Claus for unemployment.
He offered himself as a sympathetic understanding guy to the slackers.
And so these low information, non-participating people in this country, were allowed to feel good about themselves and their and their situation.
So now basement dwellers are the new welfare queens.
Now that may not be the right phrase, but I mean you know what I mean.
So it is.
There's little glimmer of hope.
Now what we have to do.
Now the real task at hand, and the Republicans had better get a grip And and and man up here and stop thinking that what they have to do is go along with Obama and go along with the Democrats if they're to survive.
They had better the biggest mistake they could make is thinking that they've got to cave to the Democrats because the people want the Democrats.
The people want the liberal way, the people want the Democrat.
The Republican Party's problem is that its own supporters won't turn out for it.
at least in presidential races.
If Obama, as a quasi-socialist, certainly a liberal, if Obama is allowed to be seen as transformative, as Reagan was, not ideologically, but in terms of greatness, and changing the trajectory, and changing the direction of the country, for what people think is good.
And don't discount that.
Remember now, the X is about 54% No, it was higher than that.
Blame Bush for the economy.
People aren't blaming Obama for any of this mess yet.
Obama's getting credit for trying to fix it, folks.
Obama's getting credit for trying to deal with that's got to change.
He's got to own this stuff.
Now we haven't been able to make him own the last four years.
I don't know how you make him own the fiscal cliff, for example, but that's the challenge here.
Otherwise, we're looking at a generation lost.
As we've been talking all week.
Well, in the last two weeks.
If Obama selling?
Obama is selling the country was founded unfairly and unjustly.
The country is founded as a rigged game, a stacked deck.
And the people who founded it, we all know who they were, arranged it so that the country was always going to be theirs.
And then what'd they do?
They ran around the world and they took from that country and they took from that country and they stole this resource and monopolized that resource, and they tortured their opponents in war and all that.
And that's how we became a superpower, and we don't deserve that.
And these people who benefited from this unfair founding, time they paid their fair share now.
Look at all the people who are signing up for that.
Look at the polling data.
Look at all the people signing up for the noise.
Time to make the rich pay their fair share.
It's clear that Obama is selling the notion that what's wrong in this country is that one to two percent of the people have always had all the money.
It's time to take it back from them.
And that'll fix everything.
That's transformative.
If somebody's able to sell that, if somebody's able to convince hundreds of millions of Americans that the problem is that 1%, 2% of people have all the money, and now we got to go get it from them.
I don't know if you've noticed, but in terms of matters of race, we're heading back to the pre-Civil Rights Act days.
We're heading back.
Jamie Foxx joking about how much fun it was to kill white people.
In uh in the movie.
I mean, this it's this represents something.
I mean, it is an example of a cultural societal shift and change.
It's like almost as though the grievances that have existed since the founding never have been dealt with.
It was all phony, all the civil rights act.
Nobody really meant that.
Nothing really ever changed.
We never did really get rid of slavery.
I mean, that's what's being sold now.
Only now are we really dealing with the mistakes that were made when this country was found.
Only now that is what Obama is selling.
And he's selling himself as the transformative politician that's finally going to get this country right.
We'll be back.
We will continue with much more after this, so don't go away.
Yeah, we're stepping up the uh number Christmas tunes in the bumper rotation today, folks.
And it's uh once again more manheimed steamroller.
Uh one of my all-time favorite Christmas combos.
Of course, they may not like being called a combo, but I just used that for the sake of alliteration.
You remember, for example, when Obama went on a radio show hosted by somebody called a pimp with a limp.
And when Obama did that, we had a number of reactions to it, and they were all understandable.
What's he doing going on low rent?
Guttural stuff like that for.
You know, you you and I remembered the president of the United States wouldn't dare go on late night TV.
It was unseemly.
It was it was unpresidential, it was undignified of the office.
And now we've got a president who lives in these host in these places.
Late night TV, multiple times.
Wife late night TV, pimp with a limp type shows.
And it worked.
It did not hurt Obama's chances.
Just the exact opposite.
Now there's no way Mitt Romney could have gone on the pimp with a limp show and triumphed.
Just it wouldn't work.
Bill Clinton could.
Hillary Clinton could.
John Kerry couldn't.
McCain couldn't.
Bite me couldn't.
There are very few of these Democrats that can have the Clinton still with his resume with the shame that he has experienced the shame he's put himself through, the being disbarred, lying under oath, I mean, all these things that do, you would never, never accept this kind of stuff in a president in my lifetime.
Today Bill Clinton's a hero.
And to the people we're talking about, he's a hero because he got away with it.
To these low information voters, Clinton's a hero.
Because these mean establishment people, all these stuff shirts are going after him.
He outfoxed him.
That's our guy.
And this is uh I don't know whether Democrats strategized this or they swerved into it, but this it all these things are factors.
Meanwhile, we got people on TV talking about the gross negative GDP as opposed to the seasonal adjustment GDP based on what the BLS is saying about last month's unemployment numbers of one armed amputees, 58th and 6th in Manhattan.
And we finish with that.
We then get into the um uh negative growth rate brought on by the manufacturing deficiency in the inventory sector.
And after we finish telling everybody what's going wrong with inventories and why economic growth is really not because of growth, it's just because people were restocking inventories.
We think we're scoring points.
And the low information voters say, what is an inventory?
What is unemployment?
In fact, low information voters.
Low information voters don't even know what a weekend is.
Because every day is one.
So what does all this mean for me going forward, ladies and gentlemen, as your host?
What does it mean for me?
I one thing it might mean is it maybe an hour or two a week.
I become a low information guy myself.
Uh to appeal to I mean, I just uh uh two a week, I become a moron.
I don't know anything.
Um I may even go up to Fort St. Lucy and stop in the McDonald's and answer some McNuggets.
And when they don't have any, uh call 911 and then the newspaper, so they find out about that.
I did it.
There got to be some way to relate to these people.
Maybe something besides McNuggets, but you know the drift.
▲
Export Selection