All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 31, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:44
January 31, 2013, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back, as promised, Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and talent on loan from God.
Got to say God.
Just can't say God.
This doesn't cover it.
It doesn't penetrate.
Out there.
Anyway, great to have you here, folks.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
The email address, L. Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Mike, I'm going to change up again.
Grab soundbites six and seven.
The biggest controversy at the Super Bowl.
It's hard to say.
You got the Ray Lewis deer antler spray thing, and Ray says, no, that's the work of the devil.
It's a trick.
It's a trick of the devil at the deer antler spray story.
So he's never taken it, never done nothing.
Deer antler spray.
That's got competition.
There's a player for the San Francisco Fortiners by the name of Chris Culliver.
And he was on a syndicated radio program yesterday.
And the host of this program asked Chris Culliver of the Fortiners.
No, okay, I'll explain it one more time.
When I lived in Sacramento, the 49er radio network, the lead announcer was a guy by the name, I think his name was Don Klein.
And I know what happened here.
The guy had done the 49ers games for so long that he didn't want to waste all the time it took to say 49ers.
So over the course of the year of his career, 49ers just came out sort of jumbled as Fortuners.
He's trying to speak too fast and say as fast as he can.
And I, you know, I've always been a mimic.
And I heard that, and it just struck me because nobody seemed to think anything of it.
You know, all hometown radio play-by-play people, baseball radio, they have their own cult following, their own fan base.
And whatever they do, signature things they do are appreciated.
And I don't know if it's a signature thing or not, but it always struck me.
I found it humorous.
So I started trying to imitate it.
And I just haven't let go of it.
Sort of like my love for people in Rio Linda.
I still have it, even though I haven't been there since 1987.
So this play-by-play guy all over their network kept referring to the 49ers as the Fortuners.
Sometimes he would say the Niners, but other than that, it was the Fortuners.
So I just, I like the Reverend Jackson.
You know, one day he pronounced Mario Cuomo, Mario the Pious's name is Kumo.
And I said, well, I better start pronouncing it Kumo, otherwise people are going to think I'm making fun of Jesse Jackson.
Because if he's not, if that's how Jackson thinks you pronounce it, you don't call attention to the fact that he's wrong.
Well, you just say Kumo is Kumo.
That's no different.
Anyway, Chris Culliver was asked a question by the syndicated radio guy, what about gay guys?
Have any of them approached you?
You got any gay guys on the Fortiners?
I don't do the gay guys, man.
I don't do that.
Nah.
You don't got no gay people on the team.
No, they got to get up out of here, dude.
Can't be with that sweet stuff.
Nah.
No, man, we ain't got no gay guys on the team.
Can't be with that sweet stuff.
No, man, they got to get up on out of here.
Well, that didn't sit well with the diversity crowd.
That didn't sit well with the politically correct.
That didn't, I mean, to say that you're not going to be gay guys on the Fortiners, that led to all kinds of, I mean, the media particularly launched into this poor guy, Chris Culliver.
He's too young to know what he shouldn't say.
Too young to divulge the truth about certain elements of the league.
That led to the coach Jim Harbaugh this morning in New Orleans at the Superdome.
He was asked by a reporter, when you heard what Chris Culliver said, that he don't do the gay guys, man.
No, we don't got no gay people on the team.
You know, they got to get on up out of here.
I can't be with that sweet stuff, man.
Nah.
What did you think?
Can you walk us through, Jim, what you thought when you heard Culliver say that?
Can you walk us through, Jim, what you said to Culliver?
No, I wouldn't go to walk you through there wasn't malice in his heart.
He's not that kind of person.
He's not an ugly person.
He's not a discriminating person.
He regrets that.
And that's not, but that's not who he is.
That's not what he really believes in.
And I think, you know, took this incident to, you know, hear those words being said by him and to see them written down on paper for him to realize that those were hurtful and ugly.
Right.
It's the old, that isn't me explanation.
It ain't me.
That's not who I really am.
I don't know how that happened.
I don't know how that happened to be said.
I don't know why I said that because that ain't me.
That's not who I am.
And when I saw it in print, I said, whoa, that is really not me.
They brought me what I said in print.
I said, whoa, it's even worse than what I said when I said it.
Now can I read what I said?
Oh, man, now we're really out of here now.
That ain't me.
Now, I'm wondering, this is an opening.
This is an opening for Obama.
You know, Obama weighs in on this kind of stuff.
The other, well, I know Obama the other day, he said he wouldn't let his son Trayvon play football because it's so dangerous.
This could be another reason that he wouldn't want his son playing football because look at all this prejudice you got going out there in the locker rooms that's under cover.
Not out in the open.
Don't take me there.
Don't even tempt me.
But I'm telling you, you know, President's doing an interview with Scott Pelley.
CBS has the Super Bowl this year.
And I think during the pregame show, like 4.10 or 4.20 Eastern on Sunday afternoon was a 10 to 12 minute interview with Obama.
It's a golden opportunity here.
In fact, Obama could fly down to New Orleans and make a statement of some kind.
Because what this means is the NFL cannot police its own.
The NFL can't handle its own.
The NFL can't handle its injuries.
The NFL cannot handle its medical issues and so forth.
Obama could put legislation, push legislation requiring that gays and women be on active rosters now.
Every team.
We have to regulate this game, folks.
Look at what's happening here.
When you leave it up to the people who play it, when you leave it up to the people who own the team, you leave it up to the league people, when you leave it up to the officials, when you leave it up to everybody on their own, look what happens.
You got racism, you got sexism, you got bigotry, you got now homophobia, you got brain injury concussion.
And again, this reminder, a professor here, a scientist of some kind, has Mark Wilson found this at Gizmodo, which is a gadget tech blog.
There's nothing you can do to stop concussions in football.
The helmet does not do it.
What causes brain trauma will continue to happen as long as they play the game the way they play it.
There's no helmet in the world that'll stop it.
In other words, no helmet that would have saved Junior Sayo.
That's what this guy is saying.
I'm going to tell you, yesterday on MSNBC, middle of the day, he had a panel of left-wing activists talking about the need to regulate the NFL.
I'm just, I'm just, you know, I don't want to see what I mean.
I told you so all the time, but stand by, get ready.
It's coming.
AP Jim Koonin, economic jitters compete with Obama agenda.
Now, stop and think of this.
The economy's tanking.
It's been tanking for four years.
There hasn't been a recovery.
I don't care what anybody says.
Now we have the fourth quarter where the economy shrank, shrunk, whatever.
It contracted by one-tenth of one percent.
Here comes this AP Strassan.
No.
Economic jitters are messing with the Obama agenda.
Why isn't the Obama agenda the economy?
But it isn't the Obama agenda.
It's guns.
The Obama agenda is amnesty.
The Obama agenda is football injuries.
Here's how this story goes.
Just as, just as President Obama is pushing new initiatives on gun control and immigration, the gloomy old problem of a sluggish economy is elbowing its way back into prominence.
How sad.
Boy, it's so unfortunate for Obama.
Here he is.
See, from the standpoint of AP, he's on the verge, folks, of big, monumental, transformational stuff.
He's on the verge.
He's on the verge of major gun control legislation.
He's on the verge of amnesty.
And damn it, here comes the economy again.
And it's making people jittery.
And the problem with that is it distracts people.
The price of gasoline, the price of food, the availability of food, the lack of jobs, that's what people are thinking about.
They're not thinking about, well, and they are thinking about holding on to their guns.
Consumer confidence is falling.
The economy is contracting.
Large automatic spending cuts are threatening to hit the Pentagon and other programs.
Uncertain consequences.
Don't forget the AP story yesterday.
They had to begrudgingly admit that the economy contracting means we may not be able to withstand these tax increases coming this year.
Actually, they said that.
These troubles arise as Obama's public approval is improving.
He's at an all-time high or close to it.
His approval number is at 60 plus percent.
And he begins to use his popularity to promote the key features of his second-term agenda, which do not include the economy.
Shut down the Jobs Council today.
Any immediate economic setback or the perception of one could weaken Obama's clout or at least distract him as he carefully tries to put his imprint on initiatives dealing with immigration and gun violence.
Maybe a sour economy is worth it if it'll distract Obama and delay him from what he wants to do on guns and immigration.
I thought I'd never say something like that.
But who knows?
Anyway, AP, the voice of the administration, the administration press, no longer the Associated Press, the administration press openly worried that a souring economy is going to thwart Obama's agenda, which, again, means that the economy is not part of his agenda, at least not improving it.
So, Dingy Harry, the Democrats are in circle the wagons mode.
The economy is contracting.
This morning on the Senate floor, this is Dingy Harry, the Senate majority leader.
We are in a recovery.
The moral of the fourth quarter is a repudiation of the Republican playbook.
Of course.
Growth went down in the fourth quarter because of reduced government spending.
Of course it did.
And a reticence of the private sector has Congress fought over the fiscal cliff.
That's right.
The economy was rejecting the austerity and brinksmanship.
That's exactly right.
See how this works?
The economy contracted.
Now, I've got to remind you, at the end of September, the third calendar quarter, third year calendar quarter, economic growth rate at the end of September was 3.1%.
Something happened, though, folks.
I don't know what.
Between the end of September and the end of the year, in October, November, December, something happened, and it caused the economy to stop growing.
Something happened.
I don't know what it would have been, but something happened in there that caused the economy to stop growing.
Here's Dingy Harry with the answer.
Oh, yeah, we're still in the recovery.
The economy contracted.
Yeah, but we're still growing.
What that fourth quarter contraction means is just a repudiation of the Republican playbook.
Growth went down in the fourth quarter because of reduced government spending.
That's right.
Didn't you know the Republicans engineered that?
The Republicans cut spending.
Poor Obama couldn't do anything about it.
Poor guy, his hands were tied.
He was handcuffed.
He just won the election.
And the Republicans somehow went in there with swords and stuff, and they just started slashing spending.
They cut a lot of spending out there.
And the people of this country didn't like that.
The American people saw that the Republicans were cutting spending in December, and they didn't like it.
And they got all depressed.
And so they stopped spending money because the Republicans were cutting spending.
This is what Dingy Harry is saying.
You stopped spending.
You stopped buying gas.
You stopped buying cars.
Stop buying TVs.
Stop buying cell phones.
Stop buying iPads.
Who knows whatever?
Because you saw the Republicans slashing spending.
And yeah, they were going to take us over the fiscal cliff.
So the Republicans are responsible.
And of course, folks, the low-information voters soak all this up and believe it.
The truth of the matter is, of course, you know, I know there wasn't any cuts in government spending.
I mean, that's such a laugher.
Spending continues to skyrocket so much that we've got to build and expand a debt limit to accommodate it.
There aren't any spending cuts.
So, age-old question, how do you counter this?
I mean, here you have the Senate Majority Leader lying brazenly, openly, that there were spending cuts, that the Republicans did it.
That caused the economy to shrink, which took everybody's confidence in the economy away.
So it's the Republicans' fault.
They lost the election, by the way.
Republicans lost the election.
I killed them.
They held the House.
But still, they were able in the House, the Republicans were able to cut all that spending.
Obama wasn't looking.
It was a trick.
The Democrats in the Senate weren't paying attention.
The Democrats in the House, well, they were all down at Casa DiCampo down there in the Dominican with Menendez.
So the Democrats weren't paying any attention.
They were having fun with the ladies down there, flying down on Democrat-donated corporate jets.
Bob Menendez, you heard about it.
We're let a troop of people down there having fun with the babes.
And Obama, he was playing golf for what he was doing, and the Republicans went into Bainer with cut spending.
And we didn't know it till yesterday.
We have our caller from yesterday toward the end of the program, Jeremy in Omaha, who was calling to implore me, beg me to stop talking about climate change in the context of whether it's real or not.
And then after that, we were time constrained.
He was speaking quickly.
It was tough for me to understand what he was saying.
So I wanted him back here so he could explain to me.
Because Jeremy, welcome back.
I assume that your point here is the low-information voter already thinks it's happening.
We're not going to talk him out of that.
So we've got to go about it a different way.
Is that what you think?
Yeah, I mean, that's exactly it.
You answered it better than I did and took a lot fewer sentences.
Well, but that's only part of what you said.
You didn't prescribe a new way to talk about it.
Yeah, the argument right now, okay, so we've got an argument, and there's a non-sequitur.
We've got whether or not the earth is warming, that's scientific, and then we've got what the role of the federal government is or should be in the face of some existential threat, whatever it is.
I think what's really scary about it is that the argument is scientific, but it's happening in a political discussion.
So it is not relevant as to whether or not the evidence ends up being that the earth is warming up or not, but whether or not people believe that it is.
And to the victor goes the spoils.
The liberals will run with the spoils in this case, which are the remedy for a problem.
And they have a very bad track record of making anything work.
Okay, now I think I understand it.
Let's start at the beginning.
What you're telling me is, as we proceed here in our quest to persuade low-information voters to change their minds, to get them to join us, on the issue of global warming, they already think it's happening.
No amount of talk will persuade them otherwise.
They think it's happening because they're invested.
They want to believe it's happening.
So therefore, to argue to them that it isn't happening is to lose them.
So you're saying instead, okay, low-information voter, what do we do about global warming?
And you want to have the government fix it.
And then you, Jeremy, want me to tell them or to ask them, for example, well, can you show me where government's done anything right?
Anything at all.
Anything.
I mean, the problem is every single time we Republicans lose an argument, we get a new department.
We've got Department of Education, Energy, HUD, Health Human Services.
We can't even protect the border.
Now we want to protect humanity with a global warming department or something.
It's just, it's impossible.
If we plead, if we make our plea to low-information voters, to any voter, here's the challenge.
Jeremy, here's the problem.
I'm not arguing with you, but I'm trying to, for 25 years, I and a whole lot of people for longer than 25 years have been trying to tell people government is not the solution to your problem, that government's not the source of prosperity.
And an increasing number of people nevertheless think it is.
So the effort, the strategy that you have articulated here has actually been tried.
In fact, it's what the argument is about.
Conservatism versus liberalism is about the role of government's everyday life.
We've been trying to tell everybody the role of government is not the best way to solve any problem, having the government be involved in it.
And I'm troubled.
If we have to accept that they believe lies and then take another route to persuading them, that's a little bit disappointing.
But I appreciate your letting us call you back so you can explain in detail.
We'll be back in a sec.
Yeah, the Chuck Hagel hearings are going on today.
The Secretary of Defense hearing, Senator from Nebraska, former Senator Arino, a Republican in name only.
He's been endorsed by the Iranians, by the way, for the job Senator Jim Inhoff today.
So, why are the Iranians endorsing you?
Why does anybody ask Obama that?
The Iranians endorsed Obama.
Fidel Castro endorsed Obama.
I mean, no, I'm all for asking Hagel.
I don't think it matters who the Secretary of Defense is, folks.
I mean, I know a lot of people get caught up in this, but Obama is the Secretary of Defense.
Obama is the Secretary of Commerce.
Obama is the Secretary of State.
These people are the fall guys for when things go wrong.
But Obama's running everything here.
The reason Chuck Hagel is going to be Secretary of Defense is when something goes wrong, he's going to take the blame for it.
He's the fall guy.
And it's the same thing with Kerry at Secretary of State.
That's all that's happening here.
Barack Obama is not a distant, disengaged leader who's delegating things because he's lazy.
This guy is an activist.
He is energetic.
He is involved.
And he is moving at warp speed, transforming this country.
So the idea that the Iranians would endorse Chuck Hagel, big whoop.
They endorsed Obama.
I mean, every time Mahmoud Ahmadinezad starts talking about America, it sounds like any other Democrat talking about America.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, but it does.
I'm not trying to be scary or threatening or anything.
Back to our old buddy here, Jeremy.
Where was he caught?
Bowling Green, Kentucky.
I understand the, and he sounded like a young guy.
And Omaha, Omaha, I understand.
He was that, look, Rush, these young people, they already believe the low information, they believe they're invested in.
I know that they are.
Young people are invested in global warming because they're seeking redemption by opposing it.
I understand how this works.
They believe the earth is warming and they believe their mom and dads did it.
They believe their parents are responsible for it and they think they are the solution and that's what gives their lives meaning.
And so they're going to support tax increases and bigger government and restrictions on thermostats and cars and gasoline and all that to give their lives meaning.
I know how the psychology of this all works.
So suggestions on the table.
Rush, they believe it.
Don't try to talk them out of it.
They're just going to tune you out.
Instead, Rush, what you need to do is tell them that having the government fix it won't work.
You've got to tell them that the fix involves something other than the government.
I don't know if I could pull that.
I mean, I'm sure I could.
Might try it for a week.
I might try as an experiment, just a little secret between us.
I would tell you in advance I'm going to do it.
And then for a full week, I'd sit here and because the left doesn't listen to the show.
They listen to the media matters what they say about the show.
So you and I, when we had this little agreement, that for a week, I'll say that I know global warming's happening, man-made global warming.
It's happening.
And we'll see how that gets reported and we'll see what the media says about me.
And then if it works, then I'll start proposing solutions to it that don't involve government.
We'll see, it may work.
I'll give it a shot.
I'll spring it on you when you're least expecting.
And I'm going to do it tomorrow.
Everybody be looking for it then.
But just be warned.
But I'll tell you, I'm not all that hopeful.
When does a liberal ever believe government doesn't work?
What was Obama's immaculation speech all about?
Obama's entire message was the government can do anything, which is why we need more of it.
He could have given that speech in those two lines.
Government can do anything, and that's why we need more.
That was his immaculate address in a nutshell.
But then these young people, they all want a cause.
They all want something that they think is bigger than themselves that they can fix.
The great thing about something bigger than yourself is being able to fix it.
That proves how important you are.
That illustrates how much you matter.
You all hear young people running around saying they want to make a difference.
Well, the global warming issue is one of those areas where they think they can.
And it's one of those areas where they blame you, their parents and grandparents, for causing it.
But they are the saviors.
They're the fixers.
So Obama comes along and talks about it and basically echoes what they think.
And, hey, they glom on to it, love it.
So I'll try it when you least expect it.
Now, Chuck Hegel is being ripped to shreds, Senator McCain ripping into shreds for his use of the term the Jewish lobby.
Hegel said, I only said that once in my whole career.
But a lot of people are dumping on Hegel.
All I need to know, folks, is Marco Rubio just said he's voting against Hegel.
So I would too then.
If Rubio's against Hegel, I'm against Hegel.
And I'm winking here, folks.
Don't tell anybody.
It's between us.
At any rate, Hegel is the placeholder.
John Kerry is the placeholder.
Whoever runs a CIA is the placeholder.
Whoever is over at the EPA is a placeholder.
Whoever's over Homeland Security, a big cis placeholder.
Obama is running the show.
But we can be entertained.
McCain, grandstanding.
This is payback, buddy.
His pal was Hegel.
People forget this.
But back in the early 2000s, Hegel and McCain were inseparable.
Before Lindsey Graham became a very close associate of McCain, it was Hegel.
These guys were inseparable.
They were two peas in a pod.
And Hegel was helping McCain and vice versa.
But then in 2008, Hegel endorsed Obama, not McCain.
And that ticked off a whole lot of Republicans.
It didn't surprise me because Hegel's always been a rhino, a Republican in name only.
So whereas in these previous hearings, McCain was kissing the rear ends of Hillary and Kerry, figuratively speaking, although envisioning that is kind of fun, isn't it?
Nevertheless, McCain was kissing their rear ends, but it's personal here with Chuck Hagel.
I'm going to stand by him because I made him.
Were you right?
Were you correct in your assessment?
Well, I would defer to the judgment of history to sort that out.
The committee deserves your judgment as to whether you were right or wrong about the surge.
I'll explain why I made those comments.
I want to know if you were right or wrong.
That's a direct question.
I expect a direct answer.
This is about the surge.
This is the Petraeus surge with Paula Poundstone.
And he's asking.
McCain wants to know if Hegel was right or wrong about Petraeus' surge.
And Hegel won't answer it.
And McCain keeps pressing the issue.
He just wants a direct answer, direct answer.
Were you right or wrong?
And Hegel says, I want to leave it for history to judge that.
McCain did not let up.
Were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam?
Were you correct or incorrect?
Yes or no?
My reference to the surgeon.
The question is, Senator Hagel.
The question is, were you right or wrong?
That's a pretty straightforward question.
I would like to answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you are free to elaborate.
Well, I'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on the other side.
Well, it's a good show that you refused to answer that question.
Now, please go ahead.
Well, if you would like me to explain why.
Well, I actually would like an answer.
Yes or no?
Well, I'm not going to give you a yes or no.
Oh, my God.
These guys used to be best friends forever.
These guys were BFFs, folks.
I mean, you were inseparable.
It really is so sad to see this happen.
I mean, they were such close buddies.
I don't remember McCain asking Hillary or Kerry whether they were wrong about the surge.
You know, Hillary was up there.
She said, what's it?
Petraeus.
Did this suspend disbelief?
They were all accusing Petraeus of lying even before he had testified.
Kerry, all these Democrats were ripping Petraeus to shreds, but McCain didn't hit them on it.
He was patting them on the back, and he was talking about how wonderful they are, his colleagues, and how they great, great choices to be Secretary of State.
And boy, this is a beautiful thing, but boy, Hegel gets up there.
I want to know.
Were you right or wrong?
Just show me, Senator Omni.
You don't want to answer, huh?
You don't want to answer.
That's right.
I'm not going to let the history be the judge.
It's a simple question, Senator Hagel.
Hey, you're right.
Nothing like that to anybody else.
And I'm telling you, it goes back.
These guys, well, here, let's go back to 2000, January 27, 2000, Nashua, New Hampshire is a campaign event, and this is McCain when asked about a possible nominee for Secretary of Defense.
He's running for president, remember, against Bush.
It's the Republican primaries, and they ask him about who he might ask to be his Secretary of Defense.
As far as Secretary of Defense is concerned, there's a lot of people that could do that.
One of them, I think, is Senator Chuck Hagel, could do that kind of job.
Oh, wow.
That's 13 years ago.
13 years ago, Chuck Hagel could have done the job, but today Chuck Hagel can't do the job.
He's a worthless wandering shred of human debris, or may as well be.
And it's all because I'm telling you, well, there may be more to it than this, but Hegel endorsed Obama in 2008.
And again, just to remind you, Senator Inhoff, Oklahoma, asked Hagel, why are the Iranians endorsing you?
And just like Hegel could have gone after, or McCain could have gone after Hillary and Kerry on the surge, they could go after Obama on the Iranians endorsing him as well.
This is all just in an entertaining sideshow to me, but I wanted to let you hear the sound bites so that at the end of the program, somebody didn't say, you know, Limbo didn't even talk about the Hegel nomination.
It's not worth it.
Obama's going to be Secretary of Defense.
Hegel's just the, as I say, the placeholder.
Back after this.
Why didn't Hegel just shout at McCain?
What difference does it make now?
What difference does it make now what I thought about the surge?
The surge was over.
It doesn't matter.
What does it matter what I think?
The only reason I can think more people aren't using it, maybe Hillary is charging royalties for people that use that.
Now, Ray Lewis, by the way, I think this guy, I think Ray Lewis ought to get into the deer antler business, the deer antler spray business.
It makes a difference.
Could be his tagline.
It makes a hell of a difference.
And this is not the trick of the devil.
Okay, here, Joe in St. Louis.
Joe, thanks for the call.
You're up next.
Rush, I love you.
I'd have your baby if I could.
But we're losing this fight.
You would hate.
He said something last night on the five that I agree with.
It's not about numbers, statistics, logical arguments, or nothing.
People just don't like us.
They hate us.
That's all there is to it.
Who are we talking about?
Aside your name, or if you're a conservative, you're hated and you're distrusted, and we want to get even with you.
We don't care if we get anything.
We don't care if our lives are better because our lives are miserable anyway.
All we care about is we don't like you and we want to punish you.
That's it.
Who was Hegel talking about?
No, not Hegel.
Beckel.
Who was he talking about?
He was talking about, well, they were going through all the numbers, the economy contracting, black unemployment, all of these things.
And they asked Beckle, he said, well, why would people vote for Obama?
He said, the bottom line is it's not that they're really voting for him.
They just don't like you.
They just don't like Republicans.
Wait a minute.
What I'm getting, who is they?
The people on the five.
You know, Eric Boeing.
No, no, no.
You know, all Angela Torrey.
No, no.
What people don't like Republicans?
What people are we talking about here?
If you want to call them the uninformed voters, those are the ones that, I mean, I wouldn't use that term, but if you want to call them that, just die-hard uninformed voters, young kids, Democrats, Occupy Wall Street, unions, whatever.
I mean, you can look at all of these units.
Okay, okay.
All right.
So, for example, Beckel was saying that no matter what we do, no matter what the Republicans do, they're never going to get the Hispanic vote because Hispanics don't like them.
That's it.
That's all there is to it.
They've been told how evil you and I are.
We're evil.
All we care about is greedy rich people.
And if we paved the streets in gold and gave them everything they wanted, that would be an ulterior motive, and Democrats would outbid us every time.
Now, I don't disagree in a theoretical sense here.
In fact, I've said it myself that the express purpose is the elimination of any opposition.
I've said that the Democrats despise us more than they despise Al-Qaeda.
We're a bigger threat to them than Al-Qaeda.
So I know what Beckel is talking about, but he's really saying there's nothing we can do.
They hate us.
We can give them anything we want.
I believe that, Rush.
I've told you this back in the, I think it was the 10 election with the gal in Nevada and everything like that.
And you told me if she can't beat Harry Reid as bad and evil as he is, then it might be time to bar the doors.
And I believe it.
I believe we've lost this argument.
I believe we've lost this country.
I really do.
Okay, so I was going to ask you what we can do to change it, and you think nothing.
It's gone.
I don't think we can do anything, Rush.
I mean, Romney was wrong, but he was right.
When he said 47% of the voters are never going to vote for him, I know what he meant, just like I know what you meant when you said, I hope Obama fails.
Romney didn't mean let's write off that 47%, or they're all a bunch of greedy takers or anything like that.
He meant that 47% of the people are never going to trust a Republican and never like him.
He was wrong about it.
So I guess I better find a guest host for the next hour.
It doesn't matter.
Okay, that's it, my friends.
Another exciting hour of busy broadcast excellence complete and in a can.
And on the way over to the Limbaugh Broadcast Museum at rushlimbaugh.com, much more straight ahead.
Two-thirds of the way through today's excursion and be back before you know it.
▲
Export Selection