All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 29, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:35
January 29, 2013, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Hi, folks.
Greetings, thrill seekers, music lovers, conversationalists all across the fruited plane.
Time for broadcast excellence hosted by me, your guiding light, El Rushbo, meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
And we are into our 25th year and still growing here at the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
As I say, a thrill and a delight to have you with us.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, the email address, LRushbow at EIBNet.com.
The drive-by media, the state-controlled media, is a buzz.
With the fact that Senator Marco Rubio will be our guest on this program in exactly one hour.
They're all talking about it.
And the subject, of course, is amnesty.
Sorry.
Immigration reform.
Comprehensive, meaningful, comprehensive immigration reform, my boy.
That's what it is.
It's not amnesty.
We don't call it amnesty.
I'm sorry.
It's exactly right, Senator.
It's meaningful, comprehensive immigration reform.
And look, we put together a montage of the media all Twitter about Senator Rubio's appearance here in an hour.
Today, he's going to talk to Rush Limbaugh.
With Right-Wing Talk Radio folks are saying, well, let's hear what Marco Rubio says.
Gonna be on Rush Limbaugh today.
Rush Limbaugh today.
He is the point person in talking to that universe.
One thing I'd say to watch is that Rush Limbaugh interview, because Rush Limbaugh on his show yesterday said, I want to call on Fox News and others to join me in defeating this plan.
Rush Limbaugh still has juice with the base.
I didn't say that.
Did you hear me say that?
I'm going to call on Fox News and others to join me in defeating this plan?
I don't recall saying that.
That doesn't matter.
I'm quoted as saying things I never said constantly.
But you see, it's out there.
Now, there's something fast, and I'm going to withhold some of the stuff about immigration until we get Senator Rubio, but the president is flying to Las Vegas today, and he's going to announce his own immigration reform plan.
And the Democrats, a lot of Democrats, are begging him not to do that.
You know, don't insert yourself.
Let the Senate handle this and then deal with whatever comes your way.
But the president is going to propose something that if people who have already spoken on the record mean what they say, this thing doesn't have a snowball's chance of seeing a light of day because the president has said, see, the common denominator here, when you get down, when you get down to the brass tax, when you take the politics out of it and the motivation, why the Republicans are doing it, I have to have that discussion.
The meat and potatoes of this comes down to border security.
That's the common denominator.
That's what the gang of eight is promising.
This gang of eight senators is promising.
It's not going to be like 86.
We're going to make sure we secure the border for their prompt, just like they did in 86, by the way.
And just like they did in 2007, just like they always do.
They are promising that border security will happen first and that the law will be enforced.
And only then will the process of assimilation and dealing with the whatever number of illegals are in the country, only then will they be dealt with.
Only then will the path to citizenship be spelled out.
Well, folks, the president's going out to Las Vegas today, and he is going to make the point that he doesn't want any border enforcement in his immigration bill.
He's going to oppose that aspect of the Senate bill.
He's going to make a point of saying he doesn't want border enforcement in this, and certainly not first.
Now, this goes to something that I have always said, well, always, but I've said frequently.
When you get down to the basics of Republicans versus Democrats, there is no common ground.
There is no place for compromise.
The Democrats are not even into compromise.
The Democrats have no desire to compromise.
Certainly the president doesn't.
He's all about victory, victory, which that's politics.
And I'm not being critical of that.
I mean, don't misunderstand.
It's politics and, you know, the cliché, all is fair in love and war.
I'm saying the Republicans don't, I'm not sure they understand what they're up against.
You know, everybody talks about bipartisanship and compromise, and the Republicans buy that.
Okay, that's what the voters want.
They want us to get along by partisan compromise.
And so they come up with compromise plans.
President's not going to compromise anything.
He's not going to compromise.
He doesn't want to compromise.
He is all about ultimate total victory.
He wants to eliminate any viable opposition to him in the media, in the Senate, in the House.
He doesn't want, he didn't negotiate on the debt limit.
He said he's not going to negotiate on the fiscal cliff.
He didn't say he's not going to negotiate on the dead limit.
He's not going to negotiate on anything.
As far as he's concerned, he doesn't have to.
He won.
Yet we are, by Isaiah, we, the Republicans, are going into this with the idea that they're going to compromise.
Is that what people want?
There is no compromise.
As such, there is no common ground.
There wasn't any common ground in the fiscal cliff deal.
There isn't any common ground in the debt limit deal.
There's nothing in common.
Compromise is not what the president, and I actually think by extension the Democrat Party themselves are interested in.
And if you were them, why would you want to compromise?
You just won in your mind.
You just won everything and you want it big.
And you're running around thinking the vast majority of American people are with you.
So what is this compromise business?
And the media runs around thinking they're a little shocked.
You remember that press conference, F. Chuck Todd and Major Garrett?
Well, Mr. President, why won't you compromise?
Don't you think the Republicans gave?
I'm not going to compromise.
And he went on to talk about how the Republicans, the greatest threat to mankind the world has ever faced.
And his objective is to eliminate them.
It's a political force.
So if the gang of eight makes it clear, and they did in 86, Jim, and this is a way to sell it to you, if they claim that nothing's going to happen until they secure the border, that's going to happen.
They promise.
They're going to secure the border.
Ted Kennedy said he was going to do it in 86.
McCain said he's going to do it in 07.
They're saying they're going to do it now.
They're going to secure the border.
And only then will we then start talking about a path to citizenship.
But if the president is not interested in it, then what really is going on here?
See, my question is, does the president really want an immigration reform bill on his desk that he can sign?
Or would he prefer to have this as an ongoing, unsolved issue over which he can beat the Republicans' heads?
He can talk all day long about his balanced approach and how the Republicans refuse to meet him halfway when it's the exact opposite in reality.
He'll use the same language, balanced approach, fair this, fair that.
Everybody having a fair shot, level playing field, equal opportunity.
Everybody's got to give a little bit to come up with the straw men that he claims are standing in the way of this.
They'll all happen to be Republicans.
And because I'm telling you, to me, I'm just a casual observer here.
But if the gang of eight is promising everybody border enforcement will happen, that's the common denominator.
That's the thing that has to happen.
And the president's out there saying, I'm not going to have any border security.
I mean, Obama's going to go to Vegas and make a speech and oppose the Senate bill's border enforcement requirements.
Does that tell you that he's interested in any kind of a deal, in any kind of a compromise?
It doesn't say that to me.
I think the president's having a grand old time, folks.
I think he is enjoying beating the Republicans up left and right.
I think he's enjoying the media helping him do that.
I think he's having the time of his life.
Why stop now?
He knows he can get this immigration thing anytime he wants it.
Why go ahead and do it now?
And by the way, if the president can play this the right way, he can win the House for the Democrats in 2014 by once again exposing the Republicans as racist, anti-Hispanic, unwilling to compromise, unwilling to meet him halfway in his usual fashion.
Here's Obama's itinerary today.
By the way, that's true.
You know what?
This quote in this soundbite, and I don't know who is it that's oh, Jim Vandehey at Politico.
He's the one who said, because Rush said on his show yesterday, I want to call on Fox News and others to join me in defeat.
I didn't say that.
Not only did I not say that, I said that I didn't even think Fox News was on our side in the amnesty debate.
What I said was, I think we're all alone out there, folks.
I don't think Fox News is even on our side.
The Wall Street Journal's not on our side.
And the same people that own the Wall Street Journal own Fox.
Anyway, President's itinerary, 9.20, that's three hours ago.
He left for the, departed the White House, 11.25 Pacific, and that would be 2.25 Eastern.
He arrives in Las Vegas.
At 2.55 Eastern, delivers his speech on immigration at Del Sol Haskruel.
At 2 p.m., 5 p.m. Pacific, rather.
He departs Vegas and comes back.
This guy is flying nine hours to make a 30-minute speech in Las Vegas and then return.
Nine hours total, four and a half out, four and a half back, basically.
And he's making a point that he is not going to support this whole notion of border security.
Of course he's not.
The Democrat Party doesn't want a secure border.
The Democrat Party, you know, as long as a bunch of media people are listening, let me just Democrat Party needs a permanent underclass.
We've discussed this before.
You people in media may have missed this.
Democrat Party needs a permanent underclass.
They need a certain number of voters constantly in economic distress, constantly in need of assistance of government.
And open borders is a great way to provide an influx of what I call the need that they have here for permanent underclass.
They're also future voters.
And I'll repeat again: you know, when the election results were in, everybody was a little bit surprised at the outcome.
What were the two things that were said by Democrats and by the media?
You know, you Republicans, if you're ever going to change your own fortunes, you're going to have to change your attitude on Hispanics and immigration and women and abortion.
You're going to have to.
You're going to have to.
You're going to have to become open border state.
You're going to have to support amnesty.
You just angering all the Hispanics out there.
And when I heard that, my first reaction was, really, the Democrats are trying to help the Republicans.
They feel so bad over Romney's defeat that they're offering advice.
Hey, you Republicans, you know, you're really going to have to do more Hispanic outreach.
You're really going to have to relax your hard views on border control and immigration.
And the Republicans and the consultant class fell right in the line.
That's exactly right, they said.
We are perceived to be much too anti-Hispanic, anti-immigration.
We've got to totally moderate our tone on that.
We've got to be much more open to the idea of open borders and illegal immigration, a path to citizenship, and so forth.
And I thought, that's very strange.
The Democrats actually offering to share some of their voters with us.
The Democrats actually offering to give us some of their voters, not just Hispanic voters, but women voters too, because they told us that we're going to have to change our mind on abortion and have to become more pro-choice.
If we did that, we'd get more women voters.
Really, the Democrats are interested in us getting more of their voters.
How nice of them.
Whoever thought these guys would be that magnanimous in victory?
That they won by so much that they're willing to give us some of their voters if we'll just change and compromise on our core principles.
Now, I want to repeat a proposal as we go to our first obscene profit timeout.
I want to repeat a very simple proposal I made back in November because I am interested in compromise.
I am interested in everybody getting along.
I'm interested in solving problems.
And I suggested this.
I said that I will openly back amnesty.
No questions asked.
Blanket amnesty if there would be a ban on illegals voting for 25 years.
You remember that?
Remember that proposal?
I, L. Rush, I will lead the charge for amnesty.
I will lead the instant legalization, instant citizenship of everybody who is here at the moment illegally.
With one proviso, none of them could vote for 25 years.
I didn't have any takers.
Nobody in either party offered to support me, or neither party opened their arms and welcomed me to the fold here.
I mean, here I like to, I'm all for amnesty.
Here's my idea.
Because if my point is, if it's really about citizenship, if it's really about freedom, if it's really about opening the country to the oppressed, fine, let them in.
They can't vote for 25 years.
And if they can't vote, then my point was to illustrate how valuable are they, really, in terms of this immigration debate.
And I just wanted to remind you: I made that offer, I made that proposal, and even as we speak now, not one taker.
One other little interesting tidbit about President Obama and his immigration plan that he will announce in Las Vegas today.
Same-sex couples will be a part of the proposal for addressing immigration reform.
Obama is scheduled to unveil today in Las Vegas.
This has been confirmed by a website called BuzzFeed.
Democrat source said same-sex couples will be part of his proposal.
A second source confirmed that unlike the Senate framework and a gang of eight released on Monday, same-sex binational couples, B-I-national, binational couples, those with one American and one foreign partner, will be included in the White House principles.
There's nothing like mixing agenda items here to get everybody totally confused.
So they're going to have same-sex binational couples, those with one American and one foreign partner, included in the White House principles.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered American citizens simply have no way to confer citizenship on their romantic partners, assuming it's automatic for straight couples.
That's not fair.
So it's going to be added in there to Obama's immigration bill.
Hubba hubba.
Am I misreading the clock here?
Oh, okay.
On the clock, I'm showing 29.30 right now.
Was it 28.30?
Okay, a broadcast format is nothing changed here, folks.
I've got an analog clock I'm looking at.
You know what happens?
Sometimes the minute hand gets ahead of where it ought to be.
I was hustling to finish that right at the time I thought the ear-splitting tone was going to hit.
And then it didn't hit, and nobody said anything.
So I looked at the clock.
I said, hmm.
And normally things like this are never my fault.
So I didn't immediately think that.
Anyway, now we got to take the break.
We'll do that.
Brief time out.
We will continue in mere moments after this to do not vanish.
Do not go away.
And we're back.
And a cutting-edge rushlin boy having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Dawn, let me ask you a quick question.
When you go to bed at night, do you lock your front door or your back door?
Are you not afraid that that will offend your neighbors?
Well, I mean, it's the same thing as border security when it comes to immigration.
People who claim to oppose border security say that it's going to offend people.
That border security is basically a message.
We don't want you here.
So really, we shouldn't do that because it sends a bad message.
And I was just wondering, it's not saying it's border security, but you don't want your house to be secure, so you do lock the door, right?
And do you worry about your neighbors being offended?
No, I didn't think so.
Consumer confidence.
According to the poll from Reuters, consumer confidence fell much further than expected in January.
January consumer confidence reading fell to 58.6.
Economists had forecast that consumer confidence would fall to 64 from last month's reading of 65.
I don't know what these numbers mean.
I don't know if 120 is great confidence, 115, but it's plunging and it's plunging far faster and far further than any of the economic experts expected.
Here's a story right up Snerdley's alley.
Twin Cities.
The University of Minnesota, University of Minnesota, I'm not kidding here, is set to hold an event this spring designed to help its female undergraduate students achieve more and greater orgasms.
The university's official online description of the event entitled The Female Orgasm describes it as open to both male and female students.
Orgasm aficionados, as it says here, orgasm aficionados and beginners of all genders are welcome to come learn about everything from multiple orgasms to the mysterious G-spot.
Reads the description posted on the scrolls official events calendar.
Whether you want to learn how to have your first orgasm, how to have better ones, or how to help your girlfriend, Kate and Marshall, cover it all.
Are you coming?
It asks.
The description of the event, which is hosted by the university's Office of Diversity and Equities Women's Center, it's a university-sponsored event.
Doesn't say whether there is an age requirement.
While the average age of undergraduates at the University of Minnesota is 21, it's not uncommon for students to enroll the age of 17.
By the way, batteries are not included at this event.
You have to bring your own.
University spokeswoman Patricia Mattern suggested there is, in fact, no age requirement.
The educational workshop is open to the full university community and participation is voluntary.
The program is going to cost the university $3,406 and is part of the university's mission of research.
Now, I don't think that this is a satire piece.
It could well be.
The website is called Campus Reform and it's ostensibly from the University of Minnesota at Twin Cities.
Orgasm aficionados.
Attending an event designed to help female undergraduate students achieve more and greater.
Dawn, if your daughter attended this school and that thing, what would your reaction be?
You wouldn't be happy, right?
How many of you guys hearing this thing, you volunteered to be professor?
How many of you say, hey, I'll show up and teach?
No charge.
I'll do it.
Gradus.
I'll comp it.
This sounds like a thing made to order for Shawty Law, the guy in Atlanta, the rapper, 11 kids with 10 baby mamas.
I'm not making it up, folks.
The university's Office of Diversity and Equities Women's Center.
And I don't think this is a prank post.
There's a poster for it.
I love iHeart the female orgasm.
Jim Harbaugh, the coach of the San Francisco Fortiners, was asked to respond to President Obama saying he probably would not let his son Trayvon play football today.
Harbaugh, the media conference that the Fortiners had at their hotel in LA yesterday when they got into town, reporters said to Harbaugh a few days ago, President Obama made a comment that if he had a son like Trayvon, he wasn't sure he'd want his son to play football.
Are you concerned that there's a perception that the game of football is unsafe and a lot of parents might feel that way?
If President Obama feels that way, then there'd be a little less competition for Jack Harbaugh when he gets older.
That's the first thing that jumps into my mind if other parents are thinking that way.
But it's still early.
Jack is only five months old, but he's a really big kid.
He's got an enormous head.
That's Jim Harbaugh, the coach of the Fortiners, talking about his five-month-old son.
It's a great answer.
Well, if President Obama feels that way, there's going to be a little less competition for my son.
And we mentioned this.
I don't know.
The press release here on the orgasm seminar at the University of Minnesota doesn't say anything about lessons on faking it.
I got an email.
Well, why assume hands-on experts?
How else are you going to do this?
But there's nothing here about fake orgasms.
And I don't know whether they're going to be giving away cigarettes.
Everybody knows that orgasm leads to smoking.
Everybody knows that.
And I'm assuming that orgasms are covered under Obamacare.
This cost of this thing $3,406.
That's what it's going to cost the university.
Why is this going to cost anybody anything?
It must be.
The $3,000 must be for the cigarettes, the post-coital tobacco bliss.
Exactly right.
So Jim Harbaugh is not bothered by the president's position.
They're basically saying that football is unsafe.
Let's take a brief timeout, another obscene profit timeout.
El Rushbo at the EIB network.
And again, a reminder, Senator Marco Rubio on immigration at the top of the next hour.
Talent on lawn from God.
An Eastern Pennsylvania has scruple says that vandalism has forced it to create a policy in which toilet paper has been taken out of the boys' bathrooms.
Boys at Mahanoy Area High School, or Mahanoy, I guess.
Boys at Mahanoi Area Haskral must now go to the principal's office, the school office to request toilet paper and sign it out.
The principal, Thomas Smith, says that it's helped solve a major problem.
Students intentionally clogging the toilets.
It's been going on there for two years.
The principal says that boys have to sign out the toilet paper and then they have to sign it back in.
The newspaper, the Republican Herald of Pottsville, reports that some parents are protesting the policy.
One parent, Karen Yedsina, says some students are too embarrassed to go to the office to get toilet paper.
They're going home sick instead.
I don't understand that.
Okay, so you've got to go now.
You got the boys, not the girl.
The boys have to go to the principal's office and request toilet paper.
There's none in the bathroom because these guys have been clogging the toilets with us.
They took it out of there.
Okay, so you got to go in there.
You have to sign out toilet paper.
In a lot of instances, you don't have this kind of time.
So you go sign out the toilet paper and you go in the bathroom.
Then you've got to take it back and sign it back in.
And one parent said that a lot of students are too embarrassed to go ask for toilet paper and they are going home sick instead.
I guess what that means is that the child is going to the principal's office.
I'm sick.
I feel horrible.
I've got to go home as an excuse to go home and use the bathroom because they're too embarrassed to go in there and ask for toilet paper.
Because I assume that the parent says, look, everybody knows what's going to happen here when you go in and ask for toilet paper.
It's a little embarrassing thing to do.
Wait till Cheryl Crowe hears about this.
She's going to love this.
She had this idea of one sheet, one sheet per person.
This is back when she was dating Lance Orms.
Hell, I would dope too.
Let's say, David, near the Colorado border, welcome to the EIB Network.
Great to have you here.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
I've been listening to you for over 25 years when I lived in California until now.
This situation about the Hispanic vote, that's all it is that they're trying to get.
They keep trying to make the Hispanics like a prize.
David, let me interrupt that.
Let me interrupt to ask you a question.
I need to ask you a question.
Do you hear me?
Yeah.
Okay, I need to ask you because you said something very intriguing to me.
Are you Hispanic?
Yes, I am.
I'm Puerto Rican.
I was born in New York in Bethett-Suyveson over 75 years ago.
And I'm tired of people trying to treat us like we're the prize.
Treat us with respect and integrity.
Stop making a fuss over Hispanics.
We're not any better than any other American in this country.
And I get sick and tired of these people trying to make us the prize.
If people want a good country to live in and a decent salary and a decent way of life, that's all they need.
Hispanic, Italian, Jewish, French, whatever.
And stop making the situation like we're some kind of prize that we're going to get and we're going to get welfare.
Why did you leave out the Irish?
Are you anti-Irish?
No, no.
If you know where Bethett-Stuyves is in Brooklyn, I was born with every nationality around me that you can think of, including Chinese.
I lived one block from a black neighborhood, one block from a Jewish neighborhood.
I understand.
So the question I have for you, you are of the opinion.
You're basically saying you resent being pandered to.
You resent being treated like a pawn because what you think this is all about is simply getting your vote.
You don't think that any of this is about you as a human being.
No, it is not.
They're treating us like, like I just said, like a pawn.
You know New York, you worked out of there.
And 75% of it is Democrat.
They'll promise you everything in the world.
And this president has come up with everything that he can think of to get your vote.
He don't honor you or, you know, take the point, David.
I mean, you've hit on this.
This is precisely in a lot of people.
I'm not saying everybody who is interested in immigration reform is this way, but I'm going to say the vast majority of politicians who are focused on this are purely seeing votes.
That's exactly what you are.
You are a pawn or you're to be used.
You're a object of, well, you've been objectified.
Let's put it that way.
You almost, as an Hispanic, you've been stigmatized.
You're unfairly treated.
That's the assumption.
And we've got to go overboard to treat you fairly.
But it is about your vote.
You know, the question has often been asked in recent years, why do immigrants come here anymore?
It used to be, without question, without any debate, immigration, people that immigrated here sought freedom.
They sought freedom from oppression where they lived.
They simply wanted to be free.
They wanted liberty, and they wanted to be Americans.
And they wanted to come here and assimilate and become part of the United States of America.
That's not so much the case, certainly not universally anymore.
Heather McDonald, Manhattan Institute, and a number of others have done academic research on this.
And they have found that in terms of Hispanic immigrants voting Democrat, it has nothing to do with immigration policy.
It's all about the fact they believe in government as the source of prosperity.
And that's what the Democrat Party loves.
They want people thinking government's the source of prosperity.
I think the number was astounding.
I think if I remember right, in the Heather McDonald piece, 75% of the Hispanic vote for the Democrat Party is not about immigration.
It's about their belief.
It's maybe a little bit strong to say they're voting for the welfare state, but they certainly believe that government is the source of prosperity.
They believe in it.
They believe in the party of government.
A lot of Republicans seem to think that it's still all about liberty and freedom and being the best you can be and escaping oppression.
And it is for some.
But it's not universal anymore.
Certainly not as it used to be.
David, thanks much.
You're Jennifer in Columbia, South Carolina.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
We are really proud to say that here at the University of South Carolina, we have evidently pamphlets all over about the female orgasm course that's going to be taking place at 8 p.m. tonight here in Columbia.
So I just wanted to make you aware that it sounds like it's not just one year.
Wait a second.
You telling me that this is nationwide?
Well, I can say that it's here in South Carolina.
And, you know, honestly, I think President Obama should weigh in on it because for some people, sex and orgasms can be deadly.
So he really, it could be very dangerous for our universities to be teaching this, and he needs to weigh in on it.
Well, you're talking about the concept of orgasm fairness.
Well, sure, absolutely.
Orgasm redistribution.
And as a married woman of 19 years and 41 years old, a successful executive here in Columbia, I mean, I am not offended at all.
Let's just say it that way, by having to be told what to do with my husband.
And for young women not to be able to figure that out with the person of their voice is just ridiculous.
So, you know, maybe they need, I have two sons.
They might need to have the class for the sons, too.
Because I'm not sure they can figure it out.
So, you know, just let's be fair about it.
You think there's some guys that may not, okay, well, we're learning things.
It's not just the University of Minnesota where the orgasm seminar, female orgasm seminar taking place.
Lots of questions about the female orgasm course being offered apparently now at multiple universities across the country.
I do not know if the orgasm course is being offered on the internet.
Something you'll have to look into yourself.
Okay, top of the hour break.
And when we get back, Senator Marco Rubio at the top of the next hour, don't go away, folks.
▲
Export Selection