All Episodes
Previous Next
March 5, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:03
March 5, 2013, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings to you once again, music lovers, thrill seekers, and conversationalists all across the fruited plane.
We are back.
Broadcast Excellence, all yours for the next hour.
And if you want to call, if you want to attempt being on the program and chatting at telephone numbers 800-282-2882, the email address, lrushpo at EIBNet.com.
We've been talking about the sequester.
Obama purposefully inflicting pain on people in order to experience political gain.
Now, one of the challenging things about this, as you all know, we are attempting outreach to the low-information voters out there.
And I've heard people say, but Rush, by definition, the low-information voters are not listening to you.
Oh, yes, they are.
You must understand, but most low-information voters don't think of themselves as low-information voters.
You remember when Mitt Romney made his campaign appearance last May to the usual batch of Republican donors, fat cats, rich people who hate the poor and all that?
And he said, 47% of people never going to vote for me.
We've lost them, and everybody jumped on him for that.
And I said, he better not apologize for that because most people in the 47% don't think they're in the 47%.
And by definition, most low-information voters don't think of themselves that way.
In this instance, they don't know who they are, but we do.
And as such, outreach to them is useful.
It's worthwhile, and it's well worth the time.
Look, we've heard reports, the audience growth here expanding proportionately to the number of times we mentioned the Kardashians.
We have evidence that this is happening.
So don't doubt what we're doing here.
I have it under control.
I know exactly what I'm doing.
And the best marketing plans, you don't tell people about them.
You just execute them.
And that's what we're doing here.
Now, we're talking about Obama purposefully inflicting pain.
Now, who wants to believe that?
Certainly not an Obama voter.
An Obama voter, there's no way somebody voted for Obama is going to, even though it's true.
And this is the key to Obama's success.
He's president, but he's not.
He's not governing.
He's not seen as governing.
He's campaigning.
He's opposing all this bad stuff that's happening.
In truth, he's causing it, but it's not seen that way.
So the fact is, we have the sequester.
It's minuscule budget cuts not even going to be noticed unless they're hyped.
And we've gotten the circumstance now where the president of the United States, and the New York Times just acknowledged it, the president of the United States benefits from the pain that results from spending cuts, the supposed pain.
The pain is not even real.
It's going to have to be hyped.
But he, as the nation's top Democrat, not the president, will benefit from the pain and suffering because it's not going to be seen as his fault, even though it is.
So in trying to make the case to people that the president of the United States, for the first time maybe in American history, we actually have a president who is seeking to benefit from inflicting pain and suffering on elements of the population.
And there's no question.
The New York Times is very, very concerned about this now.
The story we shared with you in the last hour, they know he's on a tightrope, and he's doing two things at once.
He's acting as the top Democrat and acting as president.
See, he's really not.
The key to Obama is he holds the office, but somehow he's magically pulled off this trick where he is not associated at all with what's happening.
He's seen as fighting it.
Now, the idea of inflicting pain, you don't think anybody can be made to believe it.
The regime, this is a Washington Times story.
The regime denied an appeal for flexibility in lessening the sequester's effects with an email this week appearing to show officials in Washington that because they already had promised the cuts would be devastating, they now have to follow through on that.
It's an email that was sent Monday by Charles Brown, who's an official with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Office.
And he sent a letter to Washington.
He sent an email asking for guidance on how to behave during the sequester.
And he wanted to know if there, this from the letter, is there any latitude in how to spread the sequester cuts across my region, he's in North Carolina, to lessen the impact on fish inspections.
He said he was discouraged by officials in Washington who gave him this reply, quote, we have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that APIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage.
Here's the upshot.
It is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure that you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.
So the regime is sending a letter to this guy at the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
And this guy is asking, how do I handle, I want to lessen the impact.
They said, no, whatever you do, you've got to make sure the impact is severe.
That's what their note to him said.
You can't contradict what we're saying in Washington, and we're saying it's bad.
So you can't do anything that contradicts that.
So there's no doubt that there is purposeful infliction of pain, or at least a perception, and that Obama seeks to benefit from it.
And folks, this is, I've never seen this in my lifetime.
Now, members of Congress are different things.
Remember Dick Gephardt, you know, very happy he said every 100-point drop in the stock market, we pick up a seat in the House.
That's one thing for, I mean, those are partisan people.
The president is supposed to be the president of everybody.
He's not just the top Democrat, but that's what Obama is.
He has pulled this trick off where he is not seen as the president.
He holds the office, but people do not attach what happens in this country to him or his policies.
It's the most amazing thing.
But just for those of you low-information voters, and you don't know who you are, but trust me, you're out there.
And if you can't believe it, don't doubt me.
I have no reason to lie to you about it.
There's nothing in it for me to make anything up ever.
I have nothing to gain.
The whole purpose of this program, as I have said on several occasions, the whole purpose of this program, A, is to attract the largest audience I can and hold it for as long as I can so that we can charge our advertisers confiscatory rates.
That's the first reason I'm here.
After that, the purpose of the program is to simply create.
I've always believed that the way this country gets done, things get done, is an informed population voting.
People get what they want.
So the whole premise here has been to create the largest universe possible of informed, participating, caring individuals who actually try to affect change in their country based on being informed.
And we've done a magnificent job.
We've just been outnumbered.
We can't compete with the combination of Hollywood, TV, music, books, higher education.
We're simply outnumbered in the contest for young skulls full of mush and their minds.
But I've got no reason to make any of this up.
I have no reason to lie to anybody about anything.
I don't run any conservative organization.
I have nothing to do with the Republican Party.
My only interest is the greatest country in the history of the world and reacquiring it again and then maintaining it.
And I believe that only happens when you have a population of informed people pursuing excellence, fulfilling their ambition to be the best they can be.
And that's not what's happening now.
We have a president who's telling people that it's bad and getting worse, and it's Republicans' fault.
We don't have any leadership that's inspiring people.
There is no motivation from the top.
There's nobody in Washington, any party, telling the American people that this is the greatest country on earth, talking about American exceptionalism, telling people how important they are, how good they can be.
Nobody's raising expectations.
We're lowering them.
We are accepting mediocrity and trying to find excuses for it.
Blame the Republicans for it.
You're not amounting to anything because the Republicans love the rich and not you.
And Obama, he's not trying to inspire anybody.
He's not trying to motivate anybody to be the best they can be.
That's what this program has always been about.
So, look, it's a roundabout way of telling you, particularly those of you who are low-information voters, by the time I'm through, you are going to know who you are and we're going to fix it.
You're not going to be the low-information.
You can't be a low-information voter for very long and listen to this program.
But I'm just telling, when we talk about the president being president but not president, he is not governing but campaigning, I've got no reason to lie to you about it.
When I tell you he is purposely inflicting pain on people so that he can politically benefit from it, I've got no reason to lie to you about it.
There's not one thing I gain.
My life is not made happier simply by virtue of Obama losing or being defeated.
The reason I'm interested in that is the country benefits, not me.
I'm fine.
I'm okay.
I'm cool.
As a caller said yesterday, and you know, this is an interesting thing.
Snerdley, you remember this caller from yesterday who was asking me if it was hopeless.
We're outnumbered.
And she said, I'm not going to live long enough for this change to take place.
It was the last call of the day.
She wanted to know if I had given up, if I was ready to tell people it was panic time and move to New Zealand.
And I said, no.
She said, well, what's going to change it?
And I said, well, we're to the point now where it's going to take events.
Words aren't going to do it.
The words are there.
The foundation of understanding is there.
It's going to take a series of events, maybe a big cataclysmic event, to open people's minds.
But one thing I've noticed, you know, I've been doing this program.
We're in our 25th year.
And prior to that, four years in Sacramento.
So 29 years.
I've been doing this long enough to see all the cycles in politics, all the repetitiveness.
The 1995 Budget Act.
Back then, Newt Gingrich and the Republicans were going to starve kids.
And apparently, their parents are going to sit by and let it happen.
Yep, they were going to cut the school lunch program, except they weren't.
But that was the charge.
The Democrats had little kids in New Orleans writing letters to Washington.
Mommy, mommy, please don't let the Republicans starve me.
I can't learn when I'm hungry.
Please, please.
And they sent these letters off to members of Congress.
Republicans panicked.
Oh, no.
Went on TV.
No, we don't want to starve.
It was silly.
But that was the charge.
Now, the same thing.
1995, 2013, leading up to the sequester, guess what?
We're taking food out of the mouths of babies, the Republicans.
So I've seen all this stuff repeat.
The one thing that always impressed me when I was much younger, and I'm still a very youthful 62, easily 40 more years of life ahead of me.
But I've always been, even when I was much younger, I was always amazed at people who I thought in their 70s and 80s clearly had fewer years to live than they had lived, still as interested in the fate of the country as they were when they were 25 or 30.
They weren't going to be around to see any improvement from where they were significantly, but they cared about it just as much.
And those are the people who have defined this country's greatness.
People who, no matter about it long after their death, they care about what they bequeath to future generations.
And that's something that we're all very much concerned with here at the EIB network as well.
So the woman who called yesterday, well, I'm not going to be alive.
That doesn't matter.
Because this has to change.
The country cannot continue like this and provide prosperity for your grandkids today.
It's just not going to be possible for them if this stuff isn't corrected.
You know, the older people get, the more they realize how important it all is.
And every parent and grandparent cares solely about the future of their kids and grandkids.
And that's what inspires them and motivates them to care right up to their death.
And it's those kind of things.
It's a long, drawn-out, circuitous way of saying that that's why I don't lose faith in the country because of the people.
If we had in politics, if we had at the electoral level somebody who could articulate conservatism passionately from the heart without a teleprompter, without notes, we wouldn't be in this mess.
People respond to it when it's properly explained, but it's been so castigated, besmirched, impugned, that many conservatives are defensive about it.
And now there's a popular movement on, well, we have to moderate our stand on immigration.
We have to actually maybe be for amnesty.
I'm going to moderate our view on abortion and kind of forget about the social issue.
We're going to have to forget being concerned about any kind of morality now.
That's the only way we're going to get re-elected.
And That's why we're losing, because we keep nominating moderates.
You know, Mitt Romney, one of the most decent men ever to run for the presidency in my lifetime and probably in many people's lifetimes.
Totally decent guy.
But 4 million Republicans didn't vote in 2012.
4 million fewer than did in 2008.
The Republican conservative base stayed home.
Had they voted, we wouldn't be talking about Obama's second term.
There wouldn't be one.
Anyway, I got that brief time out here, my friends.
Sit tight, much more straight ahead.
Dan Rather was on with Piers Morgan on CNN last night saying we need more Dennis Rodmans.
Back in just a second.
Don't go away.
We have a study here, my friends, a declining lifespan for some American women.
Details coming up.
First, let's go back.
Let's go back to the archives.
Yesterday, Sunday, Dennis Rodman on this week needs David Brinkley talking about his trip to North Korea.
I sat with him for two days, and the one thing he asked me to give Obama something to say and do one thing.
He wants Obama to do one thing.
Call him.
He wants a call from President Obama?
That's right.
He told me that.
He said, if you can, Dennis, I don't want to do war.
I don't want to do war.
He said that to me.
He loves basketball.
Oh.
And I say the same thing I said.
Obama loves basketball.
Let's start there.
Let's start there.
Right on, dude, right ass Dennis Rodman.
And Kim Jong-un, he just wants Obama to call him.
He don't want war.
He don't want no war.
Dennis Rodman, acting as Secretary of State.
Here's the second.
We got two more of these.
Just to refresh your memory, because you won't believe what's coming.
Here's the second one.
He's a great guy.
He's just a great guy.
If you sit down and talk to him, you know, perception is perceiving how things are.
He's a great guy who puts 200,000 people in prison camps.
Well, you know, and guess what?
It's amazing how we do the same thing here.
Okay, stop the change.
Perception is perceiving what's happening.
That is profound.
That is Dennis Rodman of the Detroit Pistons and other teams.
Perception is perceiving what happens.
And he said, you know, Stephanopson, well, they got political prisons.
Rodman's the same thing we have here.
This is on this week.
Dennis Rodman, who maybe has the IQ of a pencil eraser, acting as de facto Secretary of State on TV.
So last night on CNN's Piers Morgan and I talking to Dan Rather.
And Piers Morgan said, you know, this great superpower, United States paralysis of leadership, both sides scrapping over each other.
This political system is really demeaned.
Americans need to see it now in the context, which is one of the more important contexts.
Each side is now running a political campaign for the next election.
2014 is what it's about.
Because what's needed here is leadership.
And it will only take a few good men and women in each party to exercise real leadership to say, look, if it beats me in the next election, so be it.
But I'm going to do what's best for the country.
They're mocking someone like Dennis Rodman, who at least went and talked to the other side.
Right.
Right?
I mean, in Washington, they don't even talk to each other.
I saw that John Dohn and Brackenburg.
I say, CNN, stop the tape, wonders why nobody is watching.
So Dennis Rodman, at least he went and talked to the guy, and Rather agreed.
At least he's talking.
At least he went and talked to him.
Lord save us.
It is embarrassing.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
As usual, my friends, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
I'll get to your phone calls here in just a second.
There is a new study out, ladies and gentlemen, that offers compelling evidence.
But it was from the administration press, the AP.
A new study offers more compelling evidence that life expectancy for some U.S. women is actually falling, a disturbing trend that experts cannot explain.
For those of you in Riolindu, what this means is that some American women are dying earlier than they should, and nobody knows why.
The latest research found that women aged 75 and younger are dying at higher rates than previous years in nearly half of the nation's counties.
Many of them rural, many of them in the South, many of them in the West.
Curiously, for men, life expectancy has held steady or improved in nearly all counties.
So clearly we have some discrimination here.
Whoever's causing this is discriminating against women, particularly women in the South, women on the farm, and women in the West.
Whoever's responsible for this, some Republican, obviously, is discriminating against, well, aren't they responsible for everything?
The study is the latest to spot this pattern, especially among disadvantaged white women.
So now we're adding even more info to the mix.
Disadvantaged white women are dying earlier than ever.
Well, earlier than their compatriots, and nobody knows why.
Now, some leading theories blame higher smoking rates, obesity, and less education, but several experts said that they simply don't know why.
Women have long outlived men, but that was before feminism.
The feminazis took care.
I think if you want to really get to the bottom of this, you're going to have to look at feminism.
You can't, especially folks, when the phenomenon of some women losing ground appears to have begun in the 80s.
The 80s.
What happened in the 80s?
Reagan.
This program started in the 80s.
However, studies have begun to spotlight it only in the last few years.
I think what's going on out there, folks, you may have your own theories.
Hypothetically, we'll accept the survey as factual.
I don't think there are any disadvantaged white women.
As I pay attention to the news and I read everything, there aren't any disadvantaged white women.
So I think the story is bogus.
But that's just me.
Other people are going to believe it because they're inclined to believe this kind of stuff.
So let's take the hypothetical.
White, rural, uneducated women who smoke are dying prematurely.
What could possibly explain this?
And I really think that you have to look at the feminazis.
The feminazis, what did they do?
They basically went out and told women, you can do anything.
You can be anything.
You can have it all.
And women are exhausted.
They're simply exhausted.
They're trying to do everything, trying to meet the standards set forth by the early Feminazis.
It's either that or the war on women has been going on a lot longer, Snerdley, than anybody knew.
And by the time the White House press corps gets hold of this, it'll be, wow, we didn't know the Republicans' war on women had been going on this long.
Maybe they'll blame fracking.
Fracking takes place in the South and the West.
Anyway, it has got a lot of people puzzled because it's only women that are dying sooner, not men.
Okay, back to the phones.
Heidi in Fort Braggan, North Carolina.
I'm glad you waited.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
We love you out here.
Thank you very much.
I'm going to try to get to the point because I was crying.
I was so upset.
I'm sitting in a parking lot here at Fort Bragg.
My husband's been in the Army for 30 years, and he's deployed again.
And I'm sick, and I'm alone here.
I was diagnosed last week with some cysts and some tumors and things, and I'm in pain, and I'm sick, and I'm scared.
And I came out here.
Apparently, our referral office at this hospital on post has, from what I've heard from someone in an office next door, has let go of 50 people.
There's a sign on the door blaming the budget cuts.
And when I asked someone about it, I said this was probably before the March 1st apocalypse, right?
And she tried not to laugh.
She said, yeah, they let 50 people go.
They knew it was coming.
And I cannot get a referral.
I'm sick and I cannot see anyone.
I feel like there's no respect for the military.
Wait, wait, hold on.
I need to understand some things first.
Okay.
What do you mean you can't get a referral?
There's literally no one to speak to to get a referral.
They've shut their hours.
Apparently, they've said they've let 50 people go before the March 1st, and I don't think there were 50 people in that little office to begin with.
And the phones are literally the message says, we cannot take a call.
There's no more room in the mailbox.
I cannot speak, literally cannot speak to anyone to get my referral.
And since someone here told me this was already done before March the 1st, it sounds like they were going to do this anyway.
They had already set this up.
You know what I mean?
No, they did.
There were, I think, 2,500, just to give you an example of how you're right.
There were 2,500 illegal aliens let out of prison three weeks, a month prior to the sequester going into effect.
Right, I saw that.
So, the idea that they would shut down, is this a, I don't understand.
I still don't know what a referral is.
To me, a referral is somebody's referring you to a doctor.
That's obviously not what you're talking about.
A referral is a hospital or a doctor's office.
I have seen a doctor off-post, and he saw my test, but he has referred me to a specialist, a gynecologist, and that's who I cannot.
Oh, you can't?
Now, are you limited in the kind of doctors you can see because of who pays for your treatment?
Yes, right there.
Uh-huh, yes.
So you have to see military personnel.
Is that it?
Oh, they can be civilians as long as they take our insurance.
And that's limited?
By what?
Not every provider chooses to take our insurance, which is TRICARE.
And then some doctors I'm seeing, one of my doctors is seeing almost 60 people a day because they're just cutting so much into our military.
And now I'm, like I said, I'm sitting here sick.
I'm alone.
He's deployed.
And I literally cannot speak to a human being to see a specialist about these.
You know, you hear two of these.
Okay, let me just.
Heidi, let me just tell you something.
Okay.
Last week, as we were paying attention to this deadline coming up, we learned a lot of things.
We learned that it takes a month to furlough anybody.
It takes that long for the paperwork and for the action to actually occur.
And there has to be a 30-day notice before any furloughing takes place.
So for your circumstance to have happened, this would have had to have been done a month ago, Heidi.
Okay.
And this would have had to have been done by somebody anticipating that this was going to happen or being ordered to do this.
This is very painful.
I think you need to get some names of the people who told you that doctors were let go and that offices were closed and find the name of your local congressman.
Hopefully he's a Republican and call him.
Call that office and explain to them what's happened here.
This, there's no excuse for this.
We could have cut funding to the Salamander Preservation Project.
We could have cut the two or three programs we're spending on feeding kids who are on spring break.
There's any number of ways.
This is the kind of thing, this is the equivalent of in your local community when they threaten budget cuts.
The mayor says, well, we have to close the fire department.
And the townsfolk say, no, no, no, don't get rid of our fire truck.
And they support the tax increase.
What they're doing here is trying to inflict this pain so that you, Heidi, will never, ever again support the government getting smaller or budget cuts or what have you.
But I this is the wrong way around because I know exactly who to blame.
And I get to go home and worry about a deployed husband and turn on the news and see my money going to Syria, for example.
Yeah, or Egypt.
Yes.
John Kerry sending money.
Do you know, by the way, I've got a story here in the stack.
I shouldn't tell you this because it's going to make you even angrier.
You mean the Muslim Brotherhood?
No, no, no, no, no.
About the federal government hiring people.
They have job applications out.
They're asking for people to apply for jobs.
I've got it here in the stack somewhere.
While the sequester is going on, the federal government is accepting applications for employment in certain areas.
There simply is no excuse for you in the United States military not being able to see a doctor, particularly if your husband is uniformed combat personnel deployed.
There is no excuse for this.
There is no rational reason whatsoever.
I have to think that this is, it's suspicious to me.
I'm sorry.
Here it is.
Here at Washington Times, the sequester cuts are now officially in place, but many government agencies appear to be hiring.
The U.S. Forest Service on Monday posted help-wanted ads for a few men and women to work as recreation aides this summer.
The IRS advertised for an office secretary in Maryland.
The U.S. Mint wants 24 people to help press coins.
The Agriculture Department said it needs three insect production workers to help grow bull worms in Phoenix.
So they're out there hiring.
But they're cutting what is the most important or urgent to us.
It just is very suspicious to me, too.
That's why I called.
I know you love the military.
I feel like no one in Washington, what is the Army doing about this?
Are they just putting up with it?
Are they being ordered or blackmailed?
Well, no, this is a very sensitive subject, too.
Yeah.
Because Leon Panetta announced that 800,000 civilian Pentagon people get furloughed with the sequester.
800,000, Heidi.
What it means is they work four days a week instead of five.
In your case, they've shut down this medical office.
The military unfortunately has got two kinds of generals.
You got the warrior generals, you got the political generals.
Every organization is like this.
You got people devoted to the cause and others devoted to their advancement.
I don't know.
I don't have any idea what happened to make your situation happen, but there's no excuse for it.
There is no excuse for military families in this country not having access to health care.
That we're spending way enough money to be able to accommodate.
This is outrageous.
Get names of people you've talked to who've told you what, and call your local congressman.
Okay, well, thank you for talking, Timmy.
My husband's the one that turned me on to you.
I was raised a Democrat, and never again.
God bless you.
If I was a doctor, I'd have you into my office for nothing.
I feel frustrated.
Well, at least people know about it.
People know that they're purposely cutting what is going on.
Two.
Would you give Mr. Snerdley your phone number?
Because I have a feeling something's going to happen here.
We're not going to give it to anybody.
Don't misunderstand.
But if somebody offers to help you, I want to be able to follow through on it.
So would you give him your number?
Well, sure, Rush.
Thank you.
Okay, don't hang up.
Okay.
Don't hang up.
I appreciate the call.
We've got to take a quick time out here, folks.
Be back in just a second.
Yeah, they are cutting.
I've got a lot of email from people.
They're cutting TRICARE, which is what's affecting Heidi.
And it would be a great place to cut if you want to call attention to it, if you want to cause some suffering and pain, and have everybody understand that there's a lot of suffering and pain.
Cutting TRICARE is a place to do it.
This is what people are talking about when the sequester cut's being done on purpose to inflict pain for the political gain.
That's hard for people to believe, but there's no reason.
We're not cutting any money.
We're just spending less than was projected.
There's no excuse for this.
Be right back.
Don't go away.
That's it, folks.
Another exciting excursion into Broadcast Excellence in the Can.
So happy that you have had time to be with us today.
Actually, I know you wouldn't miss it, as I wouldn't if I were you.
And can't wait for tomorrow.
Thank you so much for being part of the program.
Be back in 21 hours, revved up and ready to do it all over again.
▲
Export Selection