All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 10, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:34
January 10, 2013, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, folks, my New Year's resolution to adopt a lower profile is now totally blown.
Once again, I was the focal point on two different discussion top, maybe three at CNN yesterday.
We got the evidence.
It's all coming up.
It's great to have you here.
I am Rush Limbaugh.
No matter how low a profile I try to keep, I still end up dominating here at the EIB network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, the email address, lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
One of the things they went into a tizzy about over at CNN is Biden yesterday said that we're going to be looking at everything on this gun problem.
We're going to be looking at executive orders.
We're going to be looking at legislation.
We're going to be looking at all kinds of things.
And I said, okay, if you've got two avowed leftists like Obama and Biden talking about guns and executive orders, what in the world are you talking about?
Confiscation.
And I said, who knew that executive orders trumped the Second Amendment?
That sent them into a tizzy.
They went out and got experts and said that the executive order doesn't trump the Second Amendment.
It was a rhetorical question for crying out.
The level of, and I'm serious about this.
You know what the biggest mistake I make in the course of hosting this program is?
And not with you, and not with callers, don't misunderstand.
The biggest mistake I make is assuming that people elsewhere in the media are relatively intelligent, relatively aware, relatively informed.
And every time I do that, I make a mistake.
They are not.
It really is stunning the degree to which the narrative, whatever it is every day in the media, dominates everything.
And it is amazing the group think.
And we've chronicled it here, but it still blows my mind.
The first time we did this was when Bush chose Cheney to be his vice presidential running mate.
And the media, we had about 35 different media people using the word graffitas.
I mean, every media person in the world used graffitas to describe the pick.
And we've had that Biden, we've used it because it was entirely illustrative, illustrated for those of you in Riolinda, of the groupthink and how one single take, one single reaction, one single opinion point of view becomes the only and dominant point of view.
So there is no growth in the mind.
There's no curiosity.
There is just a smug, arrogant, know-it-all attitude when they don't know much.
And I constantly overestimate the knowledge and yes, the root intelligence of other people in the media.
And the things, also, I also, I should never forget this, and you shouldn't either.
They don't have a sense of humor on the left.
I mean, not on their issue.
On very little else.
I mean, they've got their, even their comedians, their comedy is nothing but rage and anger.
We've even got a sports writer today.
You know, nobody got voted in the Hall of Fame.
Bonds, Clemens, Sammy Sosa were all up, didn't get in.
We all know why.
The sports writers who vote him in didn't want to vote him in because of steroids.
Now, what does it say about Major League Baseball?
You could look at it as a problem, or else maybe they're in the way of the process of solving a problem.
But arguably, the greatest home run hitter ever, without the asterisk or with it, arguably one of the best pitchers ever, not in the Hall of Fame, and may not be, but they played.
Bonds hit those home runs.
He hit those home runs.
They happened, but he's not in the Hall of Fame.
Roger Clemens got those outs.
He won those games, but and so said Ditto.
I was a little surprised Craig Biggio didn't get in.
Mike Piazza is a great guy, but he was not part of the steroid investigation, but the scuttlebutt is that he was using, but nobody knows.
And so there's some reluctance.
Even the New York sports writers write about that today.
Anyway, there's a guy, and I've got the sound bite.
Here, grab number 21.
This is Ken Rosenthal.
And this is yesterday on the MLB network, the Major League Baseball Network.
And this is a that's a sort of an illustration of what I'm talking about.
It's not complete.
It doesn't totally fit the bill.
It's not 100% analogous, but still, I don't know the kind of thinking that leads them.
But here's a guy: blaming the Tea Party is what he does for the fact that nobody got voted in the Hall of Fame.
I'm serious.
It's the Tea Party.
And what about the Tea Party?
Well, the Tea Party brought partisanship, a great divide to the peoples of this country.
And the Tea Party divide has now even wormed its way into baseball.
Here's Ken Rosenthal.
Actually, he says Fox Sports Senior Baseball Writer.
And here's his take on it.
I will say this about Morris.
I don't vote for him, but the level of discourse against him by certain segments of the Sabre metric community right now is over the top.
It's almost a crusade and it's ridiculous.
And one thing that has bothered me at times, some of us, is the almost polarized view of the world now that has come to pass.
And it's as if the Tea Party is taking over one part of baseball discussion, and that's not right.
I mean, the Tea Party, and I've been compared to the Sabre metrics crowd, but you know the Sabermetrics is Bill James, money ball.
That's the Sabre metrics crowd.
Billy Bean, Oakland A's.
And now, apparently, the way of analyzing players, putting together a team, analyzing their careers, you got the Sabre metrics crowd, and then you've got the traditional conventional crowd, and apparently it's a big partisan divide.
And this is because of the Tea Parts, like the Tea Party issue.
It's just mind-boggling.
Now, we get to the CNN soundbites on guns.
Like the CNN people, folks literally cannot believe.
And they even go out and find a conservative guy named Will Kane to agree they cannot believe that anybody would actually think that Obama would try an executive order to trump the Constitution.
Not even after he's done it.
He has done it on immigration.
He's done it.
I forget the other instance.
And this is even after Obama has done it, we have people who've witnessed him do it say he would never do it.
It's not possible.
And they get into a long, drawn out.
How could anybody think this?
How could anybody think?
All I did was raise the question.
You know, you get Biden and avowed leftists talking about using executive orders when we know what they want to do is get guns out of people's heads.
What else are they talking about?
What else are they thinking?
Might have something to do with ammo, but I'm going to have to find a way to stop this.
I am going to have to find a way to stop.
I have concluded, and not that I care, I think it's just fascinating.
You know, I get into all these controversies with these people, and it's literally because, A, they don't listen to the program.
They get it second party, third party from Media Matters or whatever.
But even if they did listen, I don't think they would get it.
They are not up to speed.
Either they're not informed to the degree that you and I are, they're not certainly as intelligent.
It's really surprising to me.
I have to be honest about it.
Which is more real?
The Republicans' war on women or the Democrats' war on gun owners?
And by the way, many of the country's gun owners are women.
Here's Obama and his regime, and they don't have one woman in the cabinet.
By the way, media finally starting to notice that.
I got a little nervous about it, but still cutting Obama slack on it.
As though he must have a reason that they and us, we just not bright enough to see.
There must be a reason why all of Obama's close advisors are white guys with an occasional minority thrown in there and no women.
It must be because Obama's smarter than they are that they can't figure it out.
What's that old saying?
Guns don't kill people, abortions do?
Way till they hear that one.
And how about Bill Clinton?
Bill Clinton, have you heard?
Two things.
He went out to the Consumer Electronics Show, which is in Las Vegas.
He was on the Samsung guest roster, speaker roster.
He's one of the attractions Samsung used.
And to be honest about the Consumer Electronic Show, Apple isn't there, so nobody really expects big stuff there.
And software is where it's at in high-tech now.
And the Consumer Electronics Show is basically a hardware show.
So we're in a period where the electronics trade show is sort of time is passing it by.
And they know this out there.
So they bring Clinton in the draw credit.
Clinton goes on an anti-gun rant at the Consumer Electronics Show.
And the people at CNN express amazement and shock that you and I are actually thinking that people on the left want to take people's guns away from.
They have said that they want to do this.
It's no, Obama doesn't want to usurp the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment is not being discussed here.
I've got these people on tape saying it.
The Second Amendment, nobody wants to change the Second Amendment.
The hell they don't want to.
If they could write it out, if they could erase it, they would.
Everybody knows this.
Where do these people live?
It's not just alternative universe stuff.
I think it really is the fact that they're just not anywhere near as aware or informed as they think they are.
And while they sit there in their comparatively ignorant state, they think everybody else is who's stupid.
Breathtaking to behold.
So Clinton's out there with his rant on guns at the Consumer Electronics Show.
I mean, you maybe could have used the occasion to talk about the dangers of violent video games, but nah, you wouldn't do.
They get too many friends and donors in Hollywood and the high-tech community to talk about that.
So what Clinton did, he went on a tear about large gun clips.
I wonder Bill Clinton ever asked his Secret Service detail what size clips they carry.
Do you think he did?
Do you think he cared?
Or did he just trust that the people guarding him had what was necessary to keep him alive?
And do you think he cared what kind of clips they were carrying?
There he is at the Consumer Electronics Show going on and on and on about gun clips.
And then he's named Father of the Year.
Speaking of the war on women, Bill Clinton named Father of the Year by the National Father's Day Council.
You know, this guy down in Atlanta, the new show, All My Baby's Mamas, the rapper, Shawty Lowe, this guy probably thinking he was in the running.
I mean, this is a guy, 11 kids with 10 baby mamas.
He's got a TV show on the Oxygen Network, but they're going to follow him around as he goes through his life dealing with his enlarged family.
11 kids, 10 mamas, all my babies' mamas, the name of the show.
You think this guy might think he would be father of the year, but if they give it to Clinton, and Clinton's running around all excited about it, do you realize who was the father of the year in 2007?
John Edwards, the Breck girl, was the father of the year in 2000 with the same group.
Everything is corrupted.
Everything.
Father of the year, something as simple as Bill Clinton, Father of the Year?
Anyway, folks, we barely scratched the surface.
The mayor of Washington, D.C. picked up on Cortland Malloy's piece in the Washington Post yesterday.
The Redskins are going to have to get rid of that nickname because it's racist and it's bigoted.
Oh!
And the results are in on the medical research into the brain of San Diego Chargers Great Number 55, Junior Sayo.
Severe brain damage.
All the concussions.
He suffered damage to his very brain cells.
Sayao, you know, committed suicide.
And at the moment it happened, people, why?
He had everything to live for.
He owned San Diego, popular restaurant, great career.
So this is Junior Sayao, the highest profile now, NFL player, biggest name in football to be linked to severe brain damage from taking too many hits to the head as a result of playing football.
Jobless claims, weekly applications for U.S. unemployment.
Listen to this.
I'm going to read this to you from the AP.
I'm not going to change a single word.
Ready?
Weekly applications for U.S. unemployment benefits ticked up slightly last week.
The latest sign of stability in the job market.
4,000 new applications, seasonally adjusted total now, 371,000, the highest in five weeks is the latest sign of stability in the job market from the people at the AP.
Is that, would you say that that's intelligent?
Of course not.
That's bias or agenda.
But still, how stupid do they think we are?
Weekly applications for U.S. unemployment benefits ticked up slightly last week.
The latest sign of stability.
Stability as we gain people.
We increase people who are on unemployment.
I have a question.
Junior Sayow story.
If an organ, a human organ, a bodily organ, if an organ is more susceptible to debilitating disease after repeated blows, should Bill Clinton be concerned with the Junior Sayow news.
You know, HR just reminded me of something in my New Year's resolution.
I didn't tell anybody about it.
What's the point?
You know, you don't announce marketing plans.
You just execute them.
But HR pointed out something that's really true.
Everybody needs support, particularly New Year's resolutions.
When you have major life changes, you need support.
Here I am hanging out there all alone.
If Oprah announced again that she's going to go to a diet, would the media send her a truckload of ice cream?
No.
They send her a truckload of tofu if they send her anything.
Now, I didn't announce, so you can't really blame CNN.
But it wouldn't have changed anything.
If I would have said I have a New Year's resolution being less talked about, less known, less lower profile for the year, they probably would have just ranched it up coverage anyway, just despite me.
They did it anyway.
You'll hear it coming up.
Here's Vincent Gray.
Vincent Gray is the mayor of Washington, D.C. Said this last night.
I think it has become a lightning rod.
And I would love to be able to sit down with the team, and I'm happy to do that.
To sit down with the team and others who are concerned with this and see if a change can be made.
Obviously, our basketball team did that, you know, with the bullets being changed to the wizards.
But did you know the basketball team in Washington used to be called the Bullets and said that was offensive.
So they changed it to the Wizards.
Honestly.
And so as the mayor said, yeah, we got to get rid of Redskins.
We got to get, that's on the warpath now.
No pun intended.
Oh, gee.
I don't know.
It wasn't that anybody was offended by the bullets.
It was that bullets conjured up negative images.
It encouraged kids to like bullets.
So went the thinking.
By the way, being Obama and usurping the Constitution, what did he do to the Catholic Church?
Make them give away contraceptives.
Violated their first.
Don't tell me he wouldn't usurp the Second Amendment.
Great to have you back, El Rushbaugh, with a question.
There used to be the Washington Bullets.
And the term bullets was deemed, I don't know that it was offensive.
I'm not aware that anybody in the Washington area said they were offended by it.
Somebody said, you know what?
Bullets, we don't need kids wanting to be bullets.
Kids emulate athletes.
We don't want kids liking bullets.
We don't want bullets to become, and it's ammo.
So they changed it to wizards.
Doesn't the Ku Klux Klan have wizards?
I know they've got grand cyclopses, and they have grand Kliegels.
It's the Cheets Bird.
The late senator from West Virginia was, I think, a Kliegel.
Maybe he was a Cyclops.
Maybe you have to be a Kliegel before you were a Cyclops, or vice versa.
Who knows?
But I know that they got Wizards and Grand Wizards at the KKK.
I wonder if they thought of that when they changed the name from the Bullets to the Wizards.
Speaking of basketball, we told you yesterday a big, big dispute raging between Kevin Garnett of the Celtics and Carmelo Anthony of the New York Knicks.
It happened on Monday night.
all during the game at Madison Square Garden, and it continued even after the game, Carmelo Anthony waiting by the Celtics' bus outside their locker room in the bowels of Madison Square Garden.
He didn't like what Kevin Garnett had said to him during the game.
It was discovered that during the game, Kevin Garnett said to Carmelo Anthony that his wife, Lala Anthony, tasted like honeynut Cheerios.
And this did not sit well with Carmelo Anthony.
He was separated.
Well, it was an estrangement.
I don't know, full-fledged separation.
I wasn't up to speed on all the details.
But they were not living together.
But Carmelo Anthony's still deeply in love with Lala Anthony.
And the Garnett guy, a trash talking during the game, yeah, your wife tastes like honeynut Cheerios.
And we have to admit, there are just certain things one man doesn't say to another man, and that would have to be one of them.
And your wife tastes like honeynut Cheerios.
I mean, how would he know?
It's not that tasting like honeynut Cheerios is an insult necessarily.
I mean, people like honey nut Cheerios.
It's that, how would he know?
That's the question.
Anyway, the latest news here is from the New York Post that Carmelo and Lala Anthony, who have been living separately, Lala has decided she is going to stand by Carmelo and will not split from the NBA star.
Right on.
Good news here to EIB.
We're happy to share the good vibes and the love with you.
Friend of the couple said that it's true they haven't seen much of each other in the past few months.
She's been away filming her show, Lala's Full Court of Life in London, New York, and L.A.
They have a house in L.A., so she's always there when she's doing auditions and filming her show, Lala's Full Court of Life.
She liked the way he came to her defense when she was said to taste like honeynut Cheerios.
So now Mello and Lala have melded.
Once again, and all's cool there with the Knicks.
Jim Abelum this morning on ABC's Good Morning America as they divulged the latest medical research into Junior Sayao.
A giant in the game, Junior Sayao, is now perhaps the biggest name in football linked to severe brain damage from taking too many hits to the head.
ABC News and ESPN learned exclusively that before his suicide, Sayao suffered damage to his very brain cells.
No, no, did you hear that?
Did you hear that?
Sayow suffered damage to his very brain cells.
That's what Jim Abela said.
Sayo suffered damage to his very brain cells.
And now he's obviously the highest profile NFL player to scientifically linked suicide because of repeated blows to the head.
You watch now the fallout from this.
This is the greatest fuel that the people who want to change this game could get.
They're going to now be on the warpath out there.
Federal regulators, for the first time, are laying out rules for the first time.
This is from the AP.
For the first time, federal regulators are laying out rules aimed at making sure that people who borrow money for mortgages can afford to repay them.
Do you realize what this means?
Do you realize what this?
Federal regulators, for the first, that's 2013, for the first time, this is a tantamount admission.
Nobody's calling it this except I, El Rushbook, except me.
I'm telling you, it's a tantamount admission that the subprime mortgage mess was exactly what it was.
It was people who were given loans that could never pay them back, and they were not picked on.
It was not predator lenders that ran out and found them.
This was social engineering by Democrats, the American dream.
Everybody should have a house.
It's not fair that certain Americans have houses and other Americans don't.
And so here came the subprime mortgage plan.
And it basically was federal program that ordered banks to lend money to people who had no way of paying it back.
Lend money to people who didn't have to take a credit test and pass it.
Lend money to people that everybody knew would never pay it back.
By the way, if you're new to the program, I want to explain this again because the economic mess that we are in was caused and is the result of predominantly, there are a lot of factors, but the big thing that led to the 08 crash was the subprime mortgage market.
And I just, if you're new to the program, I want to tell you what it was.
There was a thing called a Community Redevelopment or Reinvestment Act.
I'm not sure the title.
I always get it confused.
It was originally proposed by Jimmy Carter, but it sort of languished after Carter proposed it.
Bill Clinton in 1998 rejuvenated it, reignited it as a means of distracting people from the Lewinsky scandal.
It was a plan designed to help the downtrodden.
Community Reinvestment Act.
It was a plan designed to get people into houses who had no business being in houses because they couldn't afford them.
People that were never, ever going to be able to pay back a loan were given loans.
They were urged to go get loans.
And you might have heard predatory lenders in this, and you might have heard that the banks were responsible, that the banks did this.
The banks were under federal orders to do it.
Janet Reno, the attorney general for Clinton, threatened banks with investigations and punitive results if they didn't lend money to these people.
That's where this started.
During the Bush years, attempts were made to regulate this and fix it.
And at every congressional hearing before the banking committee, when regulators were brought in to talk about solving it, the Democrats would swarm all over them and humiliate them and intimidate them and call them racists or whatever because most of the beneficiaries of the subprime mortgage were minorities, racial minorities.
So anyway, millions of people who could not afford bank loans were given them.
And they went out and bought houses.
And this led to the utter crash of the housing market.
People that couldn't afford houses were in them and not making payments.
Therefore, the housing values plummeted, but the banks didn't just sit there and absorb the loss.
The banks, working with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, packaged these worthless mortgages into pools of worthless mortgages and called them mortgage-backed securities and sold them under false premise, essentially.
You pool together, just pick a number for the purpose of illustration here, a thousand mortgages.
You pool a thousand mortgages together and you call it one mortgage-backed security.
You go out and sell it.
The eager buyer thinks he's got an income stream of 30 of 1,000 people making monthly payments.
He doesn't.
He's got worthless paper.
The banks foisted off worthless paper to people who didn't know what they were buying until they figured it out.
Then that bunch of people decided to repackage them as something else and sell them again.
And all the while, they were insured by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Worthless paper, worthless loans that everybody knew were worthless kept being passed down to other investors until finally there were no more SAPs left to buy them.
And that's when the crash happened.
And that is the Cliff Note version of what happened, but that's your subprime mortgage problem right there.
And it should have never happened.
People that can't afford to pay back a loan should never get a loan.
I don't care how discriminatory it sounds.
I don't care how mean-spirited.
It's not mean-spirited.
It's common sense business.
But the politicians wanted to be able to say that they were responsible for every American having a house, the American dream.
So this is how they did it.
People didn't pay the loans back because they couldn't.
Many of these people are unemployed.
Many of these people with food stamps didn't have any money to pay back a mortgage.
So the banks package them, sell them to other unsuspecting buyers.
The buyers end up realizing they bought something worthless and they repackage it and sell it again.
This keeps happening until the crash happened.
And that was it.
So now, after all of that, that went on for 10 years.
Now, after all of that, federal regulators, for the first time, are laying out rules aimed at ensuring that mortgage borrowers can afford to repay the loans.
The way I see this, this is a tantamount admission that what I just told you is in fact true.
If these rules had been in place, say, in 1998, 1999, we would not have had the subprime mortgage crisis.
We wouldn't have had the problem because the guidelines would have been in place to prevent people from getting these loans.
So for the first time, folks, our wizards of SMART in Washington, federal regulators, are now making rules aimed at making sure that people who get mortgages can repay the loan.
A tantamount admission that such guidelines have never existed.
Now, I know what you're thinking, but Rush, but Rush, every time I got a mortgage, I didn't prove it.
Yeah, well, you weren't the target of the subprime program.
None of you who could afford a mortgage were the problem.
You had a mortgage or could afford it.
You were in a house or not, but it was your choice.
We're talking about people who had no prayer of ever being able to afford a house, not in their current circumstances.
So now they're coming along and basically admitting that they lent money to people who couldn't pay it back.
And so to make sure it never happens again, all of a sudden, for the first time ever, for the first time.
Now, another thing puzzles me about this is because we've gotten reports in recent years how the mortgage regulations have been fixed.
I've seen these stories about once a week for the last four years.
But apparently all that was BS because now the federal regulators for the first time have laid out rules making sure that banks only lend to people who can afford it.
Lenders, well, the rules are being unveiled today by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The rules impose a range of obligations and restrictions on lenders, including bans on interest-only and no documentation loans that it says here helped inflate the house.
They helped inflate it.
They caused it.
So they're admitting here, no more, they're admitting what caused the financial crisis.
Lenders will be required to verify and inspect borrowers' financial records.
Now, I know you're saying, wait, I've had to go through that every time I got a loan.
Right, you have.
Understand what this was.
This was for people who didn't, never were going to be able to repay.
They didn't have to go through it like you did.
That's what the scam of the program was.
I got to take a break.
We'll be back.
Federal regulators, for the first time, laying out rules aimed at making sure that people that borrow money for mortgages can afford to repay the loan for the first time.
For the first time.
Again, I know you've had to go through this.
You're thinking, what do you mean?
The rules have been in place.
I've had to do this.
Yes, so have I. Remember who this was aimed at?
They're admitting what they did back in 1998.
They gave money to people that couldn't pay it back.
The banks were forced to do that.
Now, this story, it's an AP story, says the following.
Lenders will be required to verify and inspect borrowers' financial records.
You know what Obama and the Reverend Jackson and the Democrats used to call that redlining when the banks would look at people's financial records and determine whether or not they could pay them back.
If they couldn't, they'd line them out in red and they wouldn't get the loan.
And of course, the civil rights crowd kept racist, racist, racist, because the minorities were among the largest group not being given loans.
And they said this wasn't because their inability to pay.
It's because people are racist at the banks.
So they changed the rules to give them the money.
But Obama and the Reverend Jackson used to call these new regulations redlining.
So look at, we've closed the loop now.
We're back to where we were before the problem happened.
And in the process, people here have unwittingly admitted what caused the financial crisis.
Let me grab a call, Gene, in Collieville, Texas.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Hey, it's great to be here.
I was just going to tell you, 50 years ago, I started out in the banking business, and my uncle, who was a senior loan officer in a bank, said there's only three things you need to know to make a good loan.
And the first one is, can he pay?
In other words, has he got the income to cover the debt?
The next one is, will he pay his past credit history?
And then the last thing was, if he doesn't pay, can I make him pay, which is collateral.
He said, if you can answer those three questions, yes, you've got a good loan.
If any one of them comes up, no, don't make the loan.
And by the way, he was a hardcore Democrat.
Damn right he was.
But that's what was blown up.
That's what was thrown out.
Those requirements were thrown out, and it didn't matter whether those three questions were met.
The people were given the money to go out and buy houses.
This was what I was talking about earlier.
This was just genuine stupidity.
I don't care about good intentions in this case.
They wanted to help everybody be in a house, but this is not how you do it.
Look at what it caused.
The laws of economics and mathematics are etched in stone, and there for a reason.
I appreciate the call.
We'll be back.
Okay, that's it for the first exciting hour of busy broadcast excellence.
But there's much more straight ahead.
We'll get into how my low-profile New Year's resolution was a failure again yesterday.
▲
Export Selection