All Episodes
Previous Next
March 14, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:46
March 14, 2013, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, my friends.
Welcome back.
It's great to have you here.
Always is El Rushbo behind the Golden EIB microphone for yet another excursion into broadcast excellence.
A telephone number for when we get to the phones and we will.
800-282-2882, the email address, El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
I mentioned right before the break, in Venezuela, the new president promised that Hugo Chavez' body would be on display forever.
And that he was a special guy.
And because of that, his body was not going to decompose like a normal body would.
He's a special guy.
And they were going to go to great lengths to preserve his body.
It's going to be displayed in a glass casket, which, you know, all left-wing dictators do, or many of them.
Stalin, Lenin, Mao, these people that they want people to constantly be able to walk by and thank them for everything they did for them, making their lives possible.
But according to CNN and a number of sources, the plan to embalm Hugo Chavez may have hit a snag.
Now, I just happened to run across earlier this week a fascinating story about this in popular science about embalming and where we are, how far along we have come.
And basically, there are two kinds of embalming, funeral home embalming, which lasts a week or maybe a little longer, and then the kind of embalming that they do for dictators.
And it is an intricate process.
It is long, and it's far more, actually, it'd be, I think, uncomfortable for me to detail it for you here on the radio.
It's a long process.
It's very detailed.
It requires, however, an early start.
Human decomposition begins at the precise moment of death.
And if you don't make the move to preserve the dictator immediately, you are going to fail.
There are things that you have to do.
Again, I'm not going to detail them for you.
If you want to find this and read it, go to the popular science.
Maybe Coco at rushlimbaugh.com can find a wicked link because it's about Chavez.
It's about the effort to preserve him for eternity.
Well, what's happened here?
What's happened, the only real point here, they've hit the snag because they didn't get an early enough start because I'm convinced he's been dead much longer than they said.
They announced his death when last week, he'd probably been dead a lot longer now, which is the snag.
It's probably gone beyond the point where they can do anything.
And so they'll have to blame this on some capitalist problem or George W. Bush or some such thing.
But the guy running the country now, a man named Maduro, said at the opening of the book fair of Venezuela that scientists argued the decision should have been taken much earlier to preserve Hugo for the ages.
That's the dead giveaway to me.
That as is the case in all left-wing dictatorships, they never tell you the truth about when the dictator dies.
We don't know.
Chavez could have been dead for months before they announced it.
And if that, even one, even two weeks, according to the popular science story, even two weeks would be enough if they didn't undertake any preservation efforts just in two weeks, then it's a hopeless lost cause.
And nothing can save it.
Make up formaldehyde, nothing.
As I say, I'm not going to get into details.
This kind of stuff fascinates me, but it would make people uncomfortable.
Now, I mentioned, ladies and gentlemen, also right before the break, that there is a worldwide survey that indicates the popularity or the belief in American leadership has plummeted.
The image of U.S. leadership worldwide weaker during Obama's fourth year than when he assumed office.
And it's important because his election was all about restoring love and respect for America.
Remember, because of the Iraq war and because Bush was a cowboy, we were hated.
The world hated us.
The world never did hate us.
All of that was just made up BS.
It was made up media BS.
And it was all part of the effort designed to get Americans to hate Bush and the Republican Party.
It was all about making sure that Bush's second term was not effective.
But sadly, there were people that bought it.
There were a lot of low-information people that really believed that we were hated around the world.
And who wants to be hated?
Everybody wants to be loved.
So Obama comes along in the campaign of 2008 as this empty canvas.
And he was presented to us as unlike any politician ever before.
Smarter, post-partisan, post-modern, post-racial, post-everything, all these old problems.
All of the traditional dirt and grime of politics was going to be swept away.
There would be no more partisanship.
People were going to get along.
There would be new legislation to fix all the problems.
And of course, nothing of the sort ever happened.
There's nothing new about Obama, except he is the most radical Democrat that's ever been elected.
But they're clearly nothing revolutionary.
And this polling data indicates it now.
So worldwide, respect for U.S. leadership was 49% when Obama was emaculated, 41% today, and now another poll.
And this is from the political.
More Americans cite dissatisfaction with government as the biggest problem facing the country than at any other time since Watergate.
20% of those surveyed called dissatisfaction with government the country's biggest problem.
It's a Gallup survey.
The details out today.
It's up from 16% last month.
The highest percentage mentioning that issue, biggest problem facing America, dissatisfaction with government since June of 1974.
And nothing, nothing was as bad as that.
I mean, that was the worst it had ever been.
And now we've approached it.
Now, what does this say?
I mean, we can cite the polling data.
What does this mean?
What it means is that you are not alone.
You are part of what I think is a growing majority of thought in this country that is totally dissatisfied with this administration and these administration policies.
The problem is the low-information voters who also think the same thing you do, the difference is they don't associate any of this with Obama.
And, you know, we've got soundbites.
Obama was even, he went out and addressed the people at his, well, his campaign organization used to be called Organizing for America when he was in the White House.
Same bunch of people.
It's the same people, the same leaders.
They just changed the name, Organizing for Action.
And it is nothing more than the continuation of the Obama campaign.
And he actually tells the people gathered at this meeting that he really doesn't like this permanent campaign.
At some point, he's going to start governing.
One more bit of evidence of the limbo theorem.
Let's grab the soundbites.
I had them put aside.
It's number one, two, and three.
Here's soundbite one.
This is last night in Washington at the Organizing for Action dinner.
Here's President Obama.
This idea has been viewed with puzzle, some both suspicion and people have been puzzled about what it is that we're trying to do because the usual idea is, well, this must just be a mechanism to try to win the next election in 2014.
And what we've tried to explain to people is that, no, I actually just want to govern, at least for a couple of years.
But I also want to make sure that the voices of ordinary people are heard in the debates that are going to be taking place.
What the hell ever that means?
He admits here that he, I actually just want to govern at least for a couple years.
He has not started governing yet.
He's got this organizing for action thing, which is a continuation of the campaign, the perpetual campaign.
Now, according to the Limbaugh theorem, the purpose of the ongoing campaign is to position Obama outside Washington, to position him outside the arena where events are taking place.
He's outside and still fighting it all.
He's outside, still trying to fix it all.
He's outside.
The people inside are the ones causing the problems.
Unemployment, plummeting, home values, health care, whatever the problems are.
They're all happening because of the insiders, people that are in government every day.
He's outside still.
He hasn't governed.
It's a perception trick.
And of course he's governing.
Don't misunderstand.
I'm talking about the perception that he's creating with the perpetual campaign, the perception among low-information voters.
They think that Obama is still fighting these powerful forces that are doing great harm to the country.
And he's come up with idea after idea.
He had the stimulus to try to fix the roads and bridges.
And he promised that he'd do a health care plan that would lower everybody's premiums.
And he said that whatever program he did would never add a dime to the deficit.
And people believe that.
None of that happens, but it's not tied to him because he's not seen as in charge of it.
It's the magic, the beauty of constantly running against something.
In this case, the Republicans or the bad news or the sorry events that are taking place in the country.
The key for Obama and the low-information voters that vote Democrat is to make sure that he's not seen as having any relationship to these events.
And this is where you and I, for four years, were pulling our hair out trying to figure out how in the world, with all of this bad news, with all this unemployment, with all this stagnant or plummeting economy, no increase in salary, no increase in disposable wages, none of this, no economic improvement at all.
Why does this guy continue to be popular and get reelected?
And it's because nobody associates him with the bad things happening in the country.
And that's why he will never come to an agreement with the Republicans on, say, the fiscal cliff or the debt ceiling or the sequester.
There won't be an agreement.
Because that puts his name on it, and that then connotes some measure of responsibility.
And a further proof of this is when the sequester finally went into effect, Obama then told everybody that was listening, whatever bad economic news happens in the next month, the next two months, three months, six months is because of this, because of this sequester.
And they think he tried to stop it.
They think he tried to prevent it.
They think, well, this is what he wanted.
They think that he was trying to save everybody from the upcoming pain when, in fact, he was inflicting it.
But it's starting to backfire.
And I guess what his polling david means.
It's starting to backfire.
And it's the simple stuff that's causing it to backfire, like the White House tours.
That's something simple.
When people discover that, and this is easy because Obama has been caught now, he's out saying one thing.
He's out saying he's got no control over it.
The Secret Service, why they make all these decisions, not me.
Further evidence, by the way, of the Limbaugh Theorem.
Even when it comes to the White House tours where he lives, he's got no control over who gets in there.
He's not no control over when they get in there.
It's all up to the Secret Service.
And the Secret Service said, we're shutting down the tours.
The Secret Service has people, retired people now, going on TV.
We can't do that.
Who does he think he is?
The Secret Service can't order the White House shut down.
And Jay Carney, the White House spokesman yesterday, day before, said as much.
So the wheels may be starting to come off.
Maybe.
But this polling data from Gallup here, that more Americans cite dissatisfaction with government as the number one issue, and it's worse than any time since Watergate.
The danger in that is that they still are going to associate the Republicans with government.
The media makes it plain that all these problems are caused by Bush.
Obama agrees, blames the predecessor.
The current House Republicans, they're to blame, when in fact Obama has escaped it, i.e., Limbaugh Theorem.
But now I think it's starting to turn.
And he may have organizing for action, and he may continue this perpetual campaign.
And by the way, he was not even being honest with his own people here.
The whole purpose of organizing for action is to win the House in 2014.
And Obama is the lead campaign dog.
And as a perpetual campaigner, what are you doing?
You're running against the status quo.
Well, if you're running against the status quo, you can't be running against yourself.
This is the perception of the low-information voter.
So they think Obama's still fighting for him.
They think Obama's still fighting all these oppressive, powerful, secretive forces that continue.
They're so deeply embedded since the founding of this country.
These intrinsic, deeply rooted problems.
Poor Obama, he thought he could fix it in four years, but is running into more trouble than anybody knew.
But I still think that it's starting to turn.
I don't think he's going to be able to get away, especially now, folks, since we've lifted the lid on the strategy.
We have lifted the lid with the explanation of the limbaugh theorem.
People are now, everybody is now ascribing the limbaugh theorem to what Obama's doing.
They're just not calling it that.
But whenever you hear media people refer to Obama's never-ending perpetual campaign, they're simply citing the Limbaugh theorem.
And they're explaining how it is that Obama continues to get away with being unattached to anything bad that happens.
More theorem-proof.
At the Organizing for Action dinner last night, Obama blamed himself a little bit for allowing the energy of the 2008 campaign to dissipate.
Yeah, we were playing an inside game.
And which is a mistake.
Can't play the, you can't be seen as being on the inside to pull this off.
It's what he told the people in that Telemundo interview.
If you remember, he said to them the 2012 campaign.
Sorry, he said, I learned you can't get anything done from Washington from the inside.
We all smirked.
We all, what the hell kind of was you can't get anything done the inside?
Now I understand it.
He means you only get something done if you're perceived on the outside fighting all this stuff.
And we are back to the phones.
We go to Louisville.
Doug, great to have you.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello, sir.
Brush, it's an honor.
Thank you.
I'm going back to your earlier topic about the new Pope and whether or not he's too conservative on his stance with gay marriage and abortion and such.
I'd like to start by saying that I am a gay man, and I am perfectly comfortable with his conservative stance on those issues.
And here's why.
People seem to be confused about politics and religion.
They've got them exactly reversed.
And I hope the people from Guinness are listening because I'm going to give you a comprehensive definition of both in less than a minute.
Sure.
Faith is not about adjusting your religion to suit your life.
It's about adjusting your life to suit your religion.
Okay?
And that's why I'm okay with whatever stance that particular church chooses to take on that particular issue.
It's a matter of faith, not politics.
Well, let me ask you a question about your gay man.
You support, you want to be able to get married, or are you married?
We had a commitment ceremony.
We intentionally didn't call it a marriage.
You know, what I want out of life, let me just say, gay is an adjective.
There's a lot of things I want out of life for a lot of reasons because I'm a lot of things.
No, I understand.
And you can't have everything all at once.
So why are you not irritated?
Are you Catholic?
No.
Okay, well.
But I understand what religion is.
Faith is about adjusting your life.
See, here's where people miss the point.
You have to have politics and religions together.
And when you understand what they are, they're both useful.
But people have a mixed up, exactly reverse these days.
They're expecting politics from religion and religion from politics.
Politics should be, here's the thing I came up with for politics.
It's not for the pen of law to rule the hearts and minds of man.
It's for the hearts and minds of man to roll the pen of law.
If you understand that that's what politics should be and you understand what religion is and you don't confuse the two, they will both serve you well.
You know, this guy may have a point that people's view of politics and religion are exactly 180 degrees out of phase.
And therefore, neither one of them can serve you properly.
There's a balance.
There's absolutely no question about it.
Look, I'm glad you called, Doug.
Thanks very much.
We'll be back, folks.
Don't go away.
Hi, how are you?
It's El Rushbo serving humanity simply by being here.
That's all it takes.
And, of course, emitting vocal vibrations coast to coast.
So I checked the email during a break.
Rush, what do you mean when you say Obama isn't governing?
Because they referenced the soundbite where Obama said, I do want to govern for a couple of years.
I'll tell you what that means.
I'm going to tell you exactly what that means.
Obama is going to stay in this outside campaign mode until he wins.
Hopefully, the Democrats win as far as he's concerned, the House in 2014.
And the two years after that is when he says he's going to govern.
Now, what he means by govern is probably not what you think it means.
When Obama says, I do, you know, I want to govern.
He wants to rule.
He can't really rule until he gets total control of the executive branch.
And he's not going to have that until the Democrats, until and unless the Democrats win the House in 2014.
And the fact that he denied that that's what the objective is is all I need to know.
That's what it is.
He's talking to his own people.
He's talking to organizing for action people.
And he's saying, well, they're saying out there that all this is effort to win in 2014.
Hell, I don't know.
I want to govern sometime.
And he does.
The last two years.
He wants win the House in 2014.
And then in 2015, 2016, rule.
And those two years would be the first two years of his eight years in office where he would be actually governing.
Now, I realize that this may sound odd because a lot of people, what do you mean, Russia?
He's in the White House now.
He's president.
Of course he's governing.
Well, yes.
But let me put this a different way.
Try this because I really, really want to be understood on this.
There are voters who still think that Democrats look at polls and focus groups to see what voters want.
But that's not what Democrats are looking at polls and focus groups to find out or to learn.
Obama, for example, I'm convinced, uses polls and focus groups to find out what voters can be made to believe.
And this is an important distinction.
It is a fundamental distinction to understand if you're going to understand the limbo theorem.
It isn't hard.
It's about the notion that politics is perception and that the perception is the reality.
So Obama is not scanning polls to determine that people approve of the Second Amendment.
He knows that.
And he's unhappy about that.
He also knows that people oppose Obamacare.
He doesn't need a poll.
There already are polls that show.
He knows that people do not agree with him on the Second Amendment.
They don't agree with him on Obamacare.
They don't agree with him on opening the borders or anything else.
What he's doing, therefore, he's investing in how to appear to be in favor of those things while he does the exact opposite.
That is the trick.
That is the secret to Obama.
Obama doesn't care what you think.
The Democrats don't either.
Except, except to the extent that they can find out what you can be made to believe.
So they'll take a poll that shows that you oppose Obamacare, that you approve of the Second Amendment.
What they will really do then is take a poll to see what they can say, how they can behave, to appear to also be in favor of those things and sell the exact opposite.
Voters say that they believe in bipartisanship.
Voters want there to be bipartisanship.
So what does Obama do?
He gives them images that suggest bipartisanship.
He takes Republicans to lunch.
He has a trip up to Capitol Hill where he meets with Republicans.
That's all he does.
Creates the optic, creates the picture.
You want bipartisanship?
Here it is.
Voters want to trust their doctors.
So Obama goes out and finds some people that he can put white lab coats on and surround him with and make it look like doctors support him.
All the while he's undermining them.
Obama's presidency is not determining what you want and then getting your support by being on the same side as you.
Obama's presidency is about finding out what you will believe.
His presidency is about testing and polling and focus grouping people to find out how to convince them that he is doing what they want while he isn't.
It's a Linsky 101.
It's right out of rules for radicals.
So Obama tells his own organizing for action.
They say that this is set up as a perpetual campaign to win the House in 2014.
No, I want to govern, at least for a couple years, he jokes about it.
He does.
The two years he wants to govern are after 2014 because then he won't be governing.
He's not going to have to reach compromise anybody.
There won't be anybody compromised with.
There won't be an opposition party that he has to worry about if he succeeds in winning the House.
He can rule.
And that's what he wants.
And in those last two years, if all this comes to fruition, those last two years, Katie barred the door, folks, that's where Obama fulfills all that wish list, the bucket list, the dream list that he's had for years with his union buddies.
We've played the audio sound bites.
So in the Obama administration, here's the key to understanding this.
Voters don't get results.
You doubt me?
Are there any?
Look at the polling data.
People unhappy with the direction of the country, the government is the source of most dissatisfaction in the country today.
Voters don't get results.
They get imagery.
They get promises.
They end up being misled.
Obama is paying for research to best sell deceit.
He's a smooth, fully prepped manipulator.
And he's going to be successful as long as reality can be attached to others.
And at the same time, he maintains his trustworthiness or his likability.
That's all he's got to do.
It really isn't that complicated.
It's just tough to believe.
It's tough to accept that we got a guy in the White House for the fifth year who is not governing.
Image-wise, the image, of course he's governing.
Don't misunderstand.
Of course he's in charge.
The image is.
He hadn't had time to govern yet.
There are too many problems he's still trying to fix.
He's still working for people.
He's still trying to get even with the Titans at Wall Street, the evil banks, the evil corporatists, big oil.
He's still.
He's still trying to get even for you.
He's still out there trying to make sure the rich pay their fair share.
He's running up against all kinds of obstacles, the Republicans.
So the perception is that Obama does not have the power that he has.
That's the key to it.
The perception is he doesn't have the power that he has and is using.
If that ever falls apart on him, he's going to be in deep trouble because this is pure optics.
It is pure imagery.
They're not taking polls and focus groups to find out what you want.
They're doing all of that to find out what you will believe.
So he being totally honest with his organizing for action buddies while denying what's obvious to everybody paying attention.
He's in a constant campaign mode and is going to stay there.
Tells these people he's not.
But he wasn't even telling them.
He was telling the cameras.
The organizing for America folks are organizing for action, but they're in on this.
They're part of the ruse.
They know what's going on.
Obama knows cameras that will videotape things to be shown to low-information voters are in that room.
And Obama is denying the perpetual campaign.
And he's saying he does want to govern.
Why is he even mentioning that, by the way?
Could it be because there's somebody out there accusing him of not governing, as in me?
Could it be there's somebody out there accusing him of a perpetual campaign called the Limbaugh Theorem?
Why does he even mention that he wants to govern?
Why does he even mention?
Because now people are starting to pay attention to it.
The bloom's off the road.
The Messiah's gone.
People are now beginning to ask questions they should have asked all during the 2008 campaign and all during the first four years.
But if you want to understand this, you want bipartisanship, Obama takes Republicans to lunch.
And that's it.
And as an added bonus, on the same night that he takes Republicans to dinner, Rand Paul does his filibuster.
And what happens?
Republicans rip into Rand Paul for interrupting the bipartisanship with the president.
So he gets a twofer.
He doesn't do anything but go to dinner and eat things Michelle will not let him eat.
So he does have that bonus.
He makes it look like he's engaging in bipartisanship.
The low-information voters who desperately want all that think now it's happening.
And then McCain helps it by getting upset at his own party for interrupting all the good vibes at dinner.
So it isn't about testing what you want.
It isn't about providing policy or governance that you want.
It's about him being able to continue to radicalize this country while polling aspects of what you will believe when you see it or when you hear it.
Now, as to our last caller, what was the man's name, Mr. Snurdley?
He was Doug from Louisville.
This guy, I'll tell you, he was on to say, he said, he said that people are reversing politics and religion.
And I'm going to paraphrase him.
He didn't exactly say it this way.
But what his point was, I think, was that people, and this is really on point, and it's very curious, people have blind faith in their politics and doubt their religion.
And he thinks it should be the other way around.
You ought to have total blind faith in your religion because that's what religion is about is faith.
You invest in your religious beliefs.
You invest in your church.
You invest the trust in that faith.
You don't doubt that.
It's politics that you're supposed to be a little curious about, uncertain of.
Question those people.
But no, people, blind faith to their politics and doubt their church.
Anyway, I'm a little long here, folks.
So I'm going to say a brief time out.
We'll come back and continue with more of your phone calls.
So do not go away.
Look, folks, it's this simple.
For leftists, and leftists today are Democrats.
I mean, that's the Democrat Party is the repository for liberals and leftists today.
And their church is the state.
There is a reason why Karl Marx and every communist socialist philosopher has wanted to do away with religion.
They want there to be only one faith, the state.
Blind, unalterable faith in the state and the church, any church, is a competitor and therefore threat.
And people who exhibit blind faith in their religion must be found and turned.
I don't care where you go.
I don't care what communist philosopher you read.
They have to wipe out religion.
And they go to great lengths to convince their people that there is no God.
You know, the old Soviets used to do it.
Fifth grade classrooms or whatever the equivalent, they'd put two pots, each containing flowers, in a window.
And they would tell the students, we're going to water one, we're going to take care of one, we're going to leave the other one to God.
And of course, the flowers that they took care of and watered and fed bloomed and flourished.
And the ones that they left alone withered away and died.
And they said, see, the ones, the flowers who left a God died.
There is no God.
And that's how they did it.
And they did it with many more examples than that.
The state.
This is why, folks, I am so unalterably opposed to liberalism.
In order to work together with...
What was that?
The voice of the state.
The computer fired errantly there in a means, in an attempt to take me off of my game here.
Will not work.
One of the many reasons why I'm just unalterably opposed to liberalism.
The state is not the repository of all the answers.
The state is not where you ought to have your blind faith.
The state will never care as much about you as you care about yourself.
The state will never care for you as much as you care for yourself.
The state will never be as concerned about you as you will be for yourself.
But it's hideous.
And so that's why all these leftists in the media and elsewhere constantly attack the Catholic Church and the Pope.
Competitors.
They are competitors.
That's why they must be discredited or manipulated, intimidated into reforming.
It won't happen, but that's what the effort is and why it'll never go away.
Holy cow, folks, I'm holding here my formerly nicotine stained fingers and media story in which they say that Jay Carney is stressed out, burnt out, and may have to leave the White House.
Okay, don't understand.
He just so openly, blatantly contradicted Obama on the White House tours.
He got to be just frazzled and worn out.
▲
Export Selection