All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 15, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:52
January 15, 2013, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 Podcast.
And we want to welcome back to the broadcast today, Mr. Bo Snerdly, the official screener of calls, the official Obama criticizer, who uh may have some input this week, by the way.
The official Obama criticizer was overwhelmed by the performance of the president yesterday in the press conference.
Bo snerdly back today, after suffering minor injuries, being thrown 30 feet from a car after being run over by a truck in a foreign country, unfriendly to Americans.
Great to have you here.
Telephone number 800 282-2882 and the email address L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
You know what amuses me today?
I'm of all these media types.
Let me take you back.
Leading into the debate up on the debt ceiling, remember, even going into last year, debt ceiling and now the the uh the well no the fiscal cliff first and then the debt ceiling.
You remember all these people saying to the Republicans, look, you guys just go ahead and and and and agree to tax increase on the rich and all that stuff, and then Obama will have to negotiate.
He will.
And I was incredulous.
I said, Who are these people?
And it was, and it was a lot of people pressuring the Republicans, other Republicans, uh media types.
You guys do this, and then the owners are gonna be on Obama.
And I thought, how how naive.
Obama, he's gonna negotiate with anybody on anything.
And so the Republicans cave, they confess, agree to raise taxes on the rich, and now we get to the debt ceiling debate, and Obama had his press conference yesterday, and lo and behold, I have to tell you I was surprised.
F. Chuck Todd of NBC News, and then Major Garrett, who um left Fox, and I forget where he is now, White House correspondent for somebody because he was there in the White House.
And they're both incredulous that Obama won't negotiate.
And I'm thinking, how do these guys I mean, these are the state-run media, these are in the you know, the palace media, this is the the the king and his court.
These guys even got discombobled.
Even these guys who who who were just incredulous that Obama wouldn't negotiate, and he was adamant he's not gonna negotiate, doesn't have to, he's not going to.
Uh Republicans have a gun to the nation's head.
Uh uh he's not gonna pay their ransom or whatever it is, and these two guys were incredulous.
And then I read today and in some stuff, show prep and other sound bites that that others are shocked.
I mean, on the left in the media that Obama won't negotiate.
And I'm asking myself, really, folks, seriously now.
Remember the last couple of days, and including last week, I said uh one of the things I'm trying to do as we end up this new year, have my new year's resolution lower profile.
That's kind of blown, but I tried, and I'm still trying on that, by the way.
Then I also realize that one of the mistakes I make in doing this program is assuming that the people I'm talking about are intelligent and informed and aware.
And I have I have I've come to the conclusion that I always, practically without exception, overestimate, and I'm serious now.
I'm I'm not trying to be insulting.
You know, my objective here is to communicate.
They don't understand subtle humor, they don't understand parody, they don't understand sarcasm, particularly when they're the targets of it, but any other time either.
And I'm looking at F. Chuck Todd and and and Major Garrett, did they really believe that just because the Republicans cave that meant Obama would negotiate?
Did they really believe because judging by their behavior yesterday, they're really stunned Obama won't negotiate.
Did they really not know this guy?
Even them in the palace media.
Do you know how frustrating it is?
This is my point.
Do you know how frustrating it is to apparently be in a really small group of People who perfectly understand who Barack Obama is, despite it being easy to see, easy to conclude, who the guy is, what he is, what his plans are, why he's what he is, why he's doing what he's doing.
It's as easy to see as the sun coming up in the morning, and yet hardly anybody does.
You people do, don't misunderstand.
You do.
That's why you're here.
But they don't.
And it is mind-boggling to me that even after four years, people don't get, while they're right in the middle of it, up close and personal to it, understand what is happening to this country.
We have a president who has no problem behaving in a dictatorial fashion, and he's getting even more arrogant and condescending about it now with his re-election.
The idea that he's going to negotiate?
You go back and read what Obama has himself said on the debt ceiling?
Which I, of course, have here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers.
Here's what he says.
This is March 20th, 2006.
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.
It's a sign that the U.S. government can't pay its own bills.
It's a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies.
Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally.
Leadership means that the buck stops here.
Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.
Americans deserve better.
He has just described himself.
Failure of leadership.
Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally.
This is why I know that he knows what he's doing.
I just listened to him.
I've listened to him tell the unions what he intended with health care.
I've listened to him describe how he feels about the country from audio tape interviews in the 90s and the early 2000s.
I know it's not hard to find.
And here are his own words from now almost seven years ago.
I mean, Republicans, if they want to, I mean, one of the one of the this could be one of the most fun ways to do this.
Instead of coming up with their own statements and their own reaction, just send Boehner and Cantor and everybody else out to read this.
Any Republican in the House, just go to a microphone and read the following.
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.
It is a sign that the U.S. government can't pay its own bills.
It's a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal...
What is anybody going to say?
Well, this is what Obama said himself back in 2000.
Oh, the circumstances are different.
Well, okay, modify it to relate to the current circumstances, but it doesn't need any modification.
Dumb down their debt ceiling argument to his.
Anyway, we'll have more on this as the as the program unfolds.
I just I I uh I just wanted to be honest with you, tell you I'm I'm I'm really shocked that so many people were really expecting that Obama would negotiate just because the Republicans caved.
Okay, Republicans did their part.
Now this is what the Democrat president is traditionally done.
Now let's negotiate.
So that we have a story.
Lance Armstrong yesterday and the Oprah win-free interview.
I wonder, we won't know this because nobody's talking about it.
We won't know this until it by the way, two-parter now, Thursday and Friday.
It went so long, 112 questions.
112 questions, and Oprah said that's how many she prepped, and she asked almost all of them.
But I'm wondering if Oprah thought to ask Lance Armstrong about his position on gun control and whether or not it's pro-choice.
Because you know, a few well-chosen answers by Lance Armstrong, and he could be home free.
All he's got to do is come out, yep, pro-choice all the way, Oprah.
And get rid of guns?
Well, how can they?
I mean, they'd have to embrace him.
What faster way to get back in the good graces of the dominant media culture in this country than to do that?
Armstrong could also point out, you know what?
I just found this out last night.
Lance Armstrong won seven tours defense.
And he's been stripped of all the titles.
But do you know that the guys who finished second have not been awarded the title because they too were doping.
The bicycling agencies, authorities are having to look really hard to find anybody who wasn't doping.
So it's a fair race.
That's one of the things that Lance Armstrong can say.
Say, look, I was all giving back his titles.
I mean, the DOJ Department of Justice today might join a whistleblower suit.
There is a lawsuit going at Armstrong to claw back all the uh endorsement money he got, because it was now under false pretense.
He cheated.
He didn't really win those contests legitimately.
And one of his sponsors was the Postal Service, and they they paid Armstrong 30 mil.
And so the Justice Department, I think they have to decide today or tomorrow, I'm not sure.
They got to decide quick whether they want to join that lawsuit to go back and get their 30 million dollars back.
And if they do decide that'll tell us that Armstrong's a Republican.
Eric Holder not going to pursue a Democrat like this, but if Armstrong, if they find out, we don't know.
He was a he was going to run in Texas for governor against Rick Perry, but he's never really said what he is.
But we'll know.
If if the DOJ joins this whistleblower clawback lawsuit, we will have a pretty good idea that Armstrong is a Republican.
Now Oprah has announced that Lance Armstrong admitted to her that he cheated.
This ended up being a two and a half hour interview.
It's still not clear, however, whether she cried.
He did.
But we don't know whether Oprah did.
We don't know whether Oprah officially forgave him.
For that, we're going to have to tune in to the broadcast.
Well, it's probably a safe bet that she cried.
And I'm told that Lance cried too.
He's got, he better had cried if he expects to be forgiven by low information voters.
On her network, the the own network that nobody watches.
Well, I had to go to, I had this, I had to Google search it to find where it is on DirecTV.
DirecTV is even tough.
Their website's tough to search.
It's really odd, but I found it, and I have set it up.
Uh uh Catherine wants uh it recorded, so I've set it up to um to record, obviously.
But I'm I'm wondering um, I'm gonna watch all this, and I'm wondering what the rules are here.
Are there any crimes that are too big to be forgiven by crying on Oprah?
Is there any limit?
Like, does it work for even homicide?
If you kill somebody, you go on Oprah, ask for forgiveness and cry.
Yeah.
Well, okay, if you don't use a gun, it could work for homicide.
Is this really all I mean what we joke, go on Oprah.
Every every celebrity gets in trouble, we joke, go on Oprah, and the joke is now real life.
All you have to do is say forgive me, Oprah, for I have sinned.
State religion.
The own network.
Excuse me.
Now, according to TMZ, and they should know.
Oprah says that she prepared 112 questions for the interview, and she got through most of them.
Oprah said that there were times Lance got emotional.
No details though.
Oprah says she was so tough with her questioning that Lance asked her to lighten up.
And after the interview, Oprah says that both she and Lance were exhausted and satisfied.
Well, I was gonna say, yikes to that.
I mean, if it if uh TMZ said that that Oprah and Lance were both exhausted and satisfied.
That's like too much information.
TMZ says that Lance's lawyers were not in the room during the interview, and that Oprah is suggesting that Lance's people are the ones leaking details about the interview to the uh to the AP.
We have a couple of sound bites here.
This is Oprah.
She was on CBS this morning.
She's on with Gail King, her best friend forever, BF.
Uh, did the interview about the interview, and uh Gail King said to Oprah, tell us, tell people how did you get this interview?
I stayed over an extra two days in order to accommodate his schedule, and uh he came to visit me in Maui.
He lives on another island.
I had uh nobody in the house, including, you know, people who usually are there for help and the you know, even the people who do the lawn, I removed all those people.
So there is Oprah, uh, ladies and gentlemen, describing the personal hardship that she went through to get this interview.
She had to stay two extra days in Hawaii at her mansion in Maui, because Lance lives in a different island over there, and he had this, so that was and and then she had to get rid of the servants.
That was a real, real hardship, and Oprah wanted she wanted to make sure she wanted to make sure everybody know how hard she worked and committed to uh to getting this interview.
And then Gail King said, Well, it's being described, Oprah, as uh as a as an emotional interview for Lance.
Well, I would say there were a couple of times where he was emotional, but emotional doesn't begin to describe the intensity or the difficulty that I think that he experienced in talking about some of these things.
I would say, you know, all the people who are wondering if he actually goes there and answers, I think that you will come away too, understanding that he brought it.
He really did.
Uh oh, he brought it.
He brought it.
That means he opened up, right?
That means he delivered.
Brought his egg.
Okay, it means he delivered.
If you're wondering if he actually goes there and answers.
Well, we would hope so.
I mean, you're the freaking Oprah.
It's two and a half hours if he didn't.
What was the point?
It's Rush Limbaugh with today's low information news for today's low information voters.
Great to have you here.
Executing assigned host duties flawlessly, Dr. Keith Abloh.
A well-known psychiatrist, Tufts University School of Medicine was on Fox this morning.
He was asked to diagnose Lance Armstrong's lying.
Who does that?
Well, the Lance Armstrong's and Bernie Madoffs of our world, right?
Who are willing to perpetrate Ponzi schemes or false athletic careers because the need is so great.
Somewhere deep inside Lance Armstrong is a battered person.
He must be loved by millions, or he is unloved and unworthy and has no value at all.
That kind of fuel will keep a man lying because to turn around and face whatever happened in his life.
We know some of the things abandoned at age two by a father, he has nothing to do with a stepfather then coming into his life.
He has nothing to do with him.
Bad things happen.
Oh, wow.
So Lance Armstrong, battered person, must be loved by millions, or he's unloved and unworthy.
No value at all.
That kind of fuel keep a guy lying.
Does that sound like anybody you know?
Somebody has to be adored, has to be the focus of attention in the room, whatever.
Does that sound like anybody you know?
Who?
Who?
Clinton.
I was thinking Clinton, maybe Obama, but certainly Clinton.
So this is amazing.
So then the question, well, look, uh, is this a specific disorder, Doctor?
Some people throwing around terms like narcissism.
Does he fall into that category, Lance Armstrong?
This is somebody who will lie to a camera, who will throw people under the bus who thought that they were his friends.
Sure, there might be a diagnosis that can describe that, but it won't tell us the story of this little boy who came to believe the truth has no value, and nobody will help you, and you ought not help anyone else.
That's Keith Abloh on Fox today describing Bill uh uh Lance Armstrong uh from afar.
It's not uh not one of his patients.
There's a new video game out where you can shoot and murder the NRA president.
Be back after this.
Katie Pavlich has the details from the town hall.com, the tip sheet blog.
A new online video game is taking political discourse to a whole new level.
The Town Hall people already reported the death threats that are being received by NRA executives now a video game which allows users to shoot.
The NRA president David Keene in the head has been released.
The creator of the game, identified as Gizmo, 1942, said share this everywhere, especially gun nut and anti-game websites.
Also see if you can't send it to the NRA somehow.
Like through the feedback on their website or something.
This uh gizmo guy provides screenshots to viewers, which are attached here to the tip sheet story.
The game is available for download, comes in the form of a zip file, which means it's compressed.
During a press conference in December, the executive VP Way Montier berated the video game industry for their use of violence, saying, Isn't fantasizing about killing people all day really the filthiest form of pornography?
And so this guy has created a video game that does feature the head of David Keene, the NRA president, in the crosshairs, through a telescopic site, and you can blow his head off.
In this video game.
It's all part of the left's effort to raise the political discourse to elevate civility in uh in this country.
So, Dr. Keith Abloh, back to Keith Abelow for a second on and and the uh uh analysis of Lance Armstrong.
He's he is what he is because his father abandoned him.
He's uh is is is a liar.
He is just totally dependent on being loved and adored by everybody, not just a couple or three people.
He's got to be loved and adored by everybody, and if he's not, then he's got no self-worth at all.
This is Keith Abloh's analysis.
Well, Obama's father abandoned him, as we all know, and Clinton's father abandoned him.
As I say, Armstrong will have to watch this Oprah interview, but if he came out against guns, you know, for gun control, and if he somehow snuck it in there that he's pro-choice.
He's got a leg up in being forgiven here by the dominant media culture.
Bill Clinton, by the way, father of the year.
Don't forget that.
Snurdly, did you know that?
Did you hear about that while you were gone?
Bill Clinton was named Father of the Year.
The National Father of the Year people.
There's this father of the year group.
I don't know.
Well, he was named Father of the Year.
Don't know.
Anyway, Bill Clinton, as you know, is the Golden Globes.
And he was backstage.
Asking actresses to meet him in a special room.
And we know this because the actress Claire Danes, she won the Golden Globe for best actress in the drama.
She was on Access Hollywood, one of our favorite shows here.
The uh EIB network.
Do you know what you don't miss it?
The host Billy Bush, Access Hollywood said to Claire Danes, you you came straight back here.
you haven't stopped anywhere since you got the word.
We're your first stop, right?
President Bill Clinton asked if I would come and meet him in some special room.
So I just hung out with Bill Clinton.
That's where I came from.
What kind of room was it?
Actually, he was talking to Jessica Alba and Rosario Dawson, and I thought, wow.
Well, so Billy Bush was not her first stop.
With the uh with the father of the year.
Bill Clinton, male members of a jury, some CBS Eyeball News in Connecticut, male members of a jury, are more likely to find a defendant guilty if the accused person is an overweight woman.
Men, in other words, are more likely.
Did you know this, Don?
Men, that's why you listen to this program.
Men are more likely to find fat women guilty.
According to a recent study by Yale University psychologists, male, not female, male jurors, are also more inclined to believe it a fat woman is a repeat offender who had malicious intent.
The researchers gathered a group of 471 pretend peers, varying body sizes, described to them a case of check fraud.
They also presented them with uh one of four images.
A large man, a lean man, large woman, lean woman, identified the person in the photograph as the defendant.
Participants rated the pretend defendant's guilt on a five-point scale.
No fat bias was present when the female pretend peers evaluated the fake female defendants, or when either men or women assess the guilt of men.
But when male pretend peers pronounce judgment on the fake female defendants, physical bias weighed in on their decision.
And the skinnier the male juror, the greater the bias against the fat woman.
Now you laugh at this, but this is stuff that defense lawyers are going to keep in mind.
And jury experts, these uh jury assembly experts, this is gonna get filed away.
Men are more likely to find fat women guilty.
From the New York Post, more New York City co-eds.
Now, for those of you in Rio Linda, co-ed is a female college student.
More New York City co-eds are turning to a new source of income, sugar daddies, to cope with the rising cost of their college tuition.
This, according to surprising statistics released yesterday.
The majority is enrolled at New York University, according to the Sugar Daddy Dating site, Seeking Arrangement.com.
Did you know that there was one of those?
Did you know you didn't have sugar daddy dating side?
It's in the New York Post.
Nearly 300 New York co-eds joined SeekingArangement.com and their service last year, seeking a mutually beneficial arrangement with a rich older man, and that's a 154% jump over the number of women who did it in 2011.
Second highest number of new members for any college in the country.
Hundreds more young women from Columbia, Cornell, and Syracuse universities, have also recently signed up for the Sugar Daddy Web Service, using sugar daddies to pay their way through school.
You know, a lot of angles to this story.
It's a little like black markets forming for overtaxed items like cigarettes.
But here you have the cost of college is staggering.
It's skyrocketing.
Nobody wants to go into debt.
Student loan debt is skyrocketing.
College is becoming unaffordable, unaffordable for most people.
And so women are turning to sugar daddies.
Joe Biden, the vice president of the United States.
We were told last week that Biden was heading up a commission made up of administration Officials and cabinet officials on what to do but guns and the increasing proliferation of guns.
One of the things that Biden suggested was they're looking at, well, legislation, uh, executive orders, so forth and so on.
The politico, a joyous politico, I should say, has a story today.
The White House has identified 19 executive actions for President Obama to move unilaterally on gun control.
This is what Biden told a group of House Democrats yesterday.
Only 19.
Only 9.
We were worried the second amendment was in trouble here.
Later this week, Obama will formally announce his proposals to reduce gun violence, and these proposals are expected to include renewal of the assault weapons ban, which look, I don't want to I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud here, but we'd already did one of these once, and it didn't matter, folks.
We've had an assault weapons ban before, and and it the see the problem is there really isn't such thing as an assault weapon.
It's just a it's it's a creation, it's nothing more than a name that Democrats and people on the left created to gin up anti-gun sentiment among people.
But there really is no official classification of assault weapon.
It doesn't exist.
What gun isn't an assault weapon?
I mean, even if you're shooting skeet, you're assaulting the skeet.
So it's purely a psychological creation, the title here.
So the recreation of an assault weapons ban, universal background checks, prohibition of high capacity magazine clips.
These are just some of the brilliant ideas.
But Biden spent two hours briefing a small group of sympathetic House Democrats on the road ahead in the latest White House outreach to invested groups.
The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation, a topic that Biden did not address on Monday's meeting.
Now, uh, ladies and gentlemen, pardon me for a moment as I take a few minutes here, very few precious minutes to say something to the low information voters in the uh in the audience.
I know you're there, and you know who you are.
I want to talk to you about executive orders.
You see, there is there's a thing in this country, it's called the Constitution.
And while presidents and members of Congress and mayors and others run for election every year, every two years, every four years, depending.
The Constitution is constant.
There's not one elected official who has the power to change it.
There is a way to amend the Constitution, and the Constitution spells out the procedures that must be taken to change it.
Presidents cannot.
Now I know this is gonna shock many of you in the low information community.
Many of you believe this is what you've been taught, This is what you have been educated, and many of you have been taught to actually support this kind of presidential power, that a president, if he doesn't like something, can just fix it.
But there is no such power granted to the president by the Constitution.
And executive orders are not a way for the president to get around the Constitution.
Executive orders were not established for that purpose.
Executive orders are to take care of emergencies during times when Congress is not in session, as one of many examples for their usage, but the executive order does not contain the power to violate the Constitution.
The executive order does not give the president the authority to say, I don't like the second amendment, and I'm going to write a law that supersedes it.
No president has ever had that power.
No president today has that power.
Barack Obama doesn't have it.
If he acts in such a way, he is in violation of the Constitution.
The Constitution is what holds this country together.
The Constitution is what defines this country.
There isn't enough knowledge, nor there is there enough respect for the Constitution in our country today, which is why I'm trying to help a little bit here.
Nineteen executive orders to deal with something they are not permitted to deal with.
In a way they're not permitted to do it.
But if nobody is willing to stand up and oppose the president and this usurpation of power which does not exist and which he does not have, then of course he will get away with it.
But I just want you to know, those of you in the low information voter community, that executive orders do not exist so that the president can break the law.
They do not exist so the president can change the law.
That is not why they exist.
Executive orders do not grant authoritarian dictatorial power.
The founders of this country never intended the chief executive to have anywhere near that kind of power.
And I just want you to understand and know this.
And I also want you low information voters to know I would never lie to you.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
Once again, ladies and gentlemen, from this joyous politico story on the White House looking at nineteen executive order actions on guns.
The politico says it's Reed Epstein doing the story.
The focus on executive orders is the result of the White House and other Democrats acknowledging the political difficulty of enacting any new gun legislation.
A topic Biden didn't address in Monday's meeting.
What that means is this is a tantamount admission that this administration cannot muster the votes to legally create new legislation on guns.
You see, the laws of this country, again, pardon me for a second as I address the low information voter community.
The laws in this country are written in Congress.
That would be the Senate and the House.
The President does not write laws.
The President does not make law.
Well, not supposed to.
Judges are not supposed to make laws.
Judges are not supposed to create law.
That's only supposed to happen in Congress.
When Congress refuses to vote for a law, then it's dead.
What the administration and Biden are admitting here is that they can't legally enact the gun laws that they prefer.
So they're just going to do it unilaterally with the executive order.
And I'm not lying to you when I tell you that is not what executive orders permit.
It's not why they were created.
It's not what they're for.
Executive orders do not grant dictatorial power to presidents.
They do not grant the power to the president to violate existing law.
Executive orders do not grant the power to the president to write new law.
The president and his team will be in violation of the Constitution if they do this.
...
Now there are certain things that can be done with executive orders, but they can't write new law.
But if nobody stops them, what's the point?
They can get away with it.
There's always a way to get away with it.
If Congress doesn't oppose what the president does, then it's all a political power struggle, and if the Congress is going to cede to the President the authority to write law, then he'll get away with it.
Washington Post, White House To announce gun plans today.
They're all excited too.
Their tongues on the floor.
President Obama unveil a sweeping set of gun control proposals at midday Wednesday, including an assault weapons ban, universal background checks, limits on the number of bullet magazines.
These are not plans, these are what they intend to do with executive order.
They may go to Congress and try to get some of this stuff passed.
But if they fail, legally, constitutionally, it is over at that point.
Claire Danes of Homeland said this about meeting Bill Clinton after the Golden Globes.
And I quote, I was very touched.
I'll bet she was.
In that secret room, I'll bet she was touched.
Sit tight, folks.
▲
Export Selection