All Episodes
Previous Next
May 6, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:57
May 6, 2013, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Look, folks, here's a case in point.
This is a great illustration of the, you know, just talking about the Selena Zito piece in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review about the Great Divide.
I mean, all these things that a prosperous Washington has time to care about and demanding that all of us care about it, demanding that all of us get up to speed the same way they are.
They don't have to worry about the economy.
They don't have to worry about their jobs.
They don't have to worry about their health care.
They don't have to worry about any of it because they've got the most prosperous area of the country in the world right now.
But outside Washington, everybody's scared to death of their future.
Greetings and welcome back.
It was just announced via Fox News that gay basketball player Jason Collins is going to do a fundraiser with Muchel My Bell.
Jason Collins is slated to join First Lady Michelle Obama, the swanky Democrat National Committee, gay, lesbian, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender fundraiser.
By the way, they never translate that for you.
They just say LGBT.
Oh, Michelle with the gay people.
Now it's lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender fundraiser.
Starts at $1,250 a plate.
It's on May 29th.
The event, 63rd and Park Avenue, tickets at $1,200 a head, but go up to $32,000 per couple.
If you want a photo with Muchel and Jason and your name mentioned.
Now, do you think the rest of the country really cares that a gay guy in the NBA came out?
A guy who plays six games a season, has a scoring average of 1.2 points a game.
Does anybody really care?
Big deal to them, though.
You know why?
Can I tell you why it's a big deal to them?
There's one main reason, and many reasons it's a big deal.
The one main reason Jason Collins coming out is important to them is because it allows them to stick it to us.
They think they are ramming it right in our face.
They think that they are just, see, you conservatives are bunch of hate Phil Bigot.
Take this.
They're inspired by that.
They're motivated by it.
They love doing things they think dispirit and depress you.
So the gay guy in the NBA comes out, and they're still talking about it.
And now they're going to do a $32,000 top-end fundraiser for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender political action committee.
Everybody in the country, wow, who gives it?
Anybody say jobs?
Can anybody say, don't take my 401k?
And so will you leave my 401k alone?
Would you stop destroying the value of my house?
Would you stop destroying jobs?
But they just love it when they think conservatives have to eat the excrement sandwich.
They just love it.
And of course, they've got time for all that.
Now, Obama was at Ohio State, did the commencement address at the Ohio State University.
We have a couple of sound bites here of the president's remarks.
Here's the first one.
You've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems.
Some of these same voices also do their best to gum up the works.
They'll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner.
You should reject these voices because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted.
Wow.
Okay, so who's he talking about here?
I mean, these are 22 tops-year-olds, 18 to 22.
You've grown up hearing voices incessantly warning of government as nothing more than some separate senator.
Who's he talking about?
He's got to be talking about their parents.
No, Mr. Limbo, he's talking about you.
He can't possibly be talking about, he doesn't think these kids are listening to me.
He's talking about their parents.
He's talking about anybody, actually, that would dare criticize the government.
He can't have that, see?
So he's got to set them straight.
How about these great qualities and characteristics?
Brave, creative, unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted.
Here's the second thing he said.
We have never been a people who place all of our faith in government to solve our problems.
We shouldn't want to.
But we don't think the government is the source of all our problems either.
Because we understand that this democracy is ours.
And as citizens, we understand that it's not about what America can do for us.
It's about what can be done by us together through the hard and frustrating but absolutely necessary work of self-government.
And class of 2013, you have to be involved in that process.
Now, here's one of his passages.
You've been tested and you've been tempered by events that your parents and I never imagined that we'd see when we sat where you sit.
And yet, despite all of this, or perhaps because of it, yours has become a generation possessed with what most American, with that most American of ideas, that people who love their country can change it for the better.
For all the turmoil, for all the times you've been let down or frustrated at the hand that you've been dealt, what I've seen, what we've witnessed from your generation, is that perennial, quintessentially American value of optimism, altruism, empathy, tolerance, a sense of community, a sense of service.
All of which makes us optimistic for our future.
So here he lists the quintessential characteristics of Americans.
Altruism, empathy, tolerance, a sense of community, a sense of service.
What did he omit?
Well, he omitted hard work.
He omitted responsibility.
He didn't mention self-reliance.
He didn't mention enterprise.
He didn't mention imagination.
He didn't mention independence.
And I would think these characteristics and these traits distinguish Americans in the eyes of Americans and the world.
The French are optimistic.
They look forward to their next bottle of Bordeaux.
People everywhere can be empathetic.
People everywhere can be tolerant.
People everywhere can have a sense of community.
People everywhere can have a sense of service.
That's not special.
The things he lists here that define America as something special are common.
They're not exclusive to this country.
The things he omitted are the things that built this country: hard work, responsibility, self-reliance.
That's a dirty word to Democrats.
They want people to believe that self-reliance means you don't do anything with anybody.
You don't count on anybody.
You don't help anybody.
You don't accept help.
You're on your own.
You don't like government.
You don't like anybody.
You're a hater.
You just rely on yourself.
That's how they want self-reliance to be thought of.
They don't want it thought of as accepting responsibility for one's life.
Enterprise, imagination, independence, entrepreneurism.
And all of these things, by the way, contribute to togetherness, the togetherness and the cohesion of a culture, of a community, of a town, of a city, of a population.
All of these things, hard work, responsibility, self-reliance, enterprise, imagination, independence, entrepreneurism, all of those things promote a togetherness and a sense of community that is hardworking, respectful, law-abiding.
Well, what do we get from him?
The usual characteristics and traits of the left: altruism, giving the government your money, empathy, feeling sorry for people, tolerance, accepting minorities, a sense of community, meaning sacrifice who you are and become part of a commune and become a faceless member of a group in a sense of service.
Serve your government.
Do that.
Do not service yourself.
Do not take care of yourself.
These traits that he cites are nothing special and they're certainly nothing unique.
And the ones that he leaves out are the ones that actually explain this country.
Absolutely amazing.
Let's let me take a break here.
I'm going to come back.
I talked about Mo Roka and going to Mexico and explaining how, yeah, we did go to war and we did take your country.
And yeah, it shouldn't really be ours and so forth.
You've got to hear this, and we'll get to that when we get back.
Don't go away.
Here's Karen Dayton, Ohio.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Well, thank you.
And I'd like to say thank you for continuing to be a voice of reason and a beacon so we don't get discouraged.
Well, thank you.
I appreciate that.
I really do.
I was just calling briefly.
I realize there's great big things going on with Benghazi.
Glad that's getting the coverage it is.
But my perspective, two years ago, June of 2011, was at Ohio State, the Ohio State, when John Boehner gave the commencement address.
And I guess I could not, I couldn't describe the difference between what he said and how he approached it and what was said yesterday by Obama.
Give it a shot.
And if you stumble, be confident that I am here to take over.
That you'll cover for me.
Basically, if I had to give the characteristics, John Boehner, he was congratulatory to the students, a little humorous, humble.
But the biggest thing, it was their day.
He recognized their achievement, that they worked hard and sacrificed.
You said three of my words: hard work, sacrifice, and responsibility.
Those students did all of that to achieve their education.
It wasn't the government.
Maybe they had a loan to get them there, but they did the work.
Some of them slept with the professor, but not enough to really count.
Well, and he also focused on that it was their future, that they as individuals with that newly minted, you know, education, you could go out and make what you wanted of yourself, not, again, being supported or, you know, given opportunities to the government.
Well, you're doing great.
So Boehner went out and basically made the day about the graduates.
He praised them.
He complimented them.
He told them what was ahead of them.
He told them the responsibilities they were about to accept.
He didn't make it about himself, right?
Well, and yes.
And I have to say, I had people with us who weren't in my way of thinking, Republican.
They appreciated and liked his speech.
So it was apolitical, I would have to say.
Our local paper gave some direct quotes that were much more political than what you quoted previously.
And all I thought was, everybody at graduation, you want it to be happy.
It's about the students.
It's about the families, not an agenda of Obama, of any politician.
It should just be the typical graduate.
He's not capable of that.
This is my whole point.
I'm sorry to interrupt here, but the constraints of time are such.
Plus, you've hit a hot button here for me.
I've been talking about this all day.
And I'm so glad, Karen, that you called.
It's not possible for a guy like Obama to go to a commencement speech and not make it about him and what he believes.
And what did he do?
Here you've got this huge graduating class at the Ohio State University.
What does Obama do?
He tells them that they must focus on government and ignore anybody who says anything negative about government, that they must sacrifice their individuality.
They must set that aside and become part of a community where there's empathy and togetherness and a sense of service.
And they've got to forget all of this anti-government rhetoric that they've, and Clinton did the same thing during his era when he went out and made commencement speeches.
And he fed off the Oklahoma City bombing when he made his commitment after that occurred.
Clinton, he'd go out there.
There are so many, so many loud and angry voices in America today.
Sole goal seems to try to keep people as paranoid as possible.
And the rest of us all torn up and upset with each other.
That's what Obama said.
It's the same thing Obama said.
You have to ignore these voices.
You have to pay no attention to these voices, these people that don't like government, because government is the sole salvation.
Government's where our country is organized around government's everything.
And it is to him.
It is the most important thing to him.
And he wants it to be to as many people as possible.
He wants people looking to government for practically every problem they have and every need or desire they have.
So of course he's going to tell graduates this.
If he were honest, he could have said, you know, you guys could have saved a lot of money and not even spent four years here because you can do what I want you to do never having had to come here.
You can join a commune.
You can love and appreciate and adore government.
You can join service.
You can be tolerant and you never had to spend a day at Ohio State.
But you did.
And they came here and you asked me to speak to so I'm going to tell you what's important.
But he didn't spend much time talking about them and their future except as it relates to government.
One of the things that Boehner said when he did the commencement address, life isn't always about you.
Being useful to others, being involved in your community, that's what I call humility.
If you do the right thing for the right reasons, good things will happen.
That's what Boehner said.
Obama basically shows up and says, in government, you should trust.
Life isn't about you, it's about government.
Be loyal and devoted to government.
And make sure as many people as you know are also loyal and devoted to government.
Life is about government and being loyal and devoted to the people who lead it.
That's his message.
Love us, respect us, tolerate us, vote for us.
Become one of us.
That's his message.
I'm glad you called Karen.
Thanks much.
We'll be right back.
Talent on loan from God.
So I just checked the email.
I can't tell you the number of people who think I am all wet when I say Obama was not talking about me at the Ohio State University commencement when he said, unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate sinister entity.
Rush, what do you tell me?
He has to be talking about you.
One person said, from the minute these kids go to kindergarten, all they hear about is how wonderful government is.
Grade school, kindergarten, junior high, middle school, high school, all they ever hear is how wonderful you're the only voice he could possibly be talking about.
These people don't listen to their parents.
And my, that may be true, folks.
I just must tell you, my ego is just, I do not immediately think I am the focus of every news story.
I do not have that kind of ego.
Elder, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate sinister entity.
Like, okay, I know he's got to be in part talking about media, but I honestly thought he meant, I mean, we're talking about 18 to 22-year-olds.
He's got to be talking about their parents.
All right.
All right.
Snerdley thinks I'm so full of it.
No, I'm not trying to be falsely humble.
I'm telling you, I just don't automatically think these people are talking about me.
But Snerdley said, wait a minute, Rush, come on.
White House correspondence dinner.
Whatever it is, 2,500 people in that room.
First words out of his mouth.
Rush, Limbaugh warned you.
Second term, baby.
Snerdley says, Look, there are 300 elected officials that are totally opposed to Obama, and none of them get under his skin, except maybe the House budget guy.
But you do.
And I said, well, why is that?
Snerdley said, The reason you do, you're the only guy who has them nailed and tells everybody.
Now, that I'll have to admit, I'm one of a precious few who does dare properly define these people every day.
Just like I know, just like I did with Clinton.
At any rate, last Friday, after playing audio of Obama's speech to the students at the Anthropology Museum in Mexico City, I analyzed it.
There was a portion of his speech where he talked about America imposing its sovereignty on Mexico.
And at first, I said, what the heck is he talking about?
And then it struck me.
And I said on Friday that Obama apologizing to the students for America imposing its sovereignty on Mexico is a dog whistle.
Huge dog whistle to radicalize young Hispanic voters.
What he did was send signals to that voting block beneath the radar, because most people are not going to understand what a sovereignty business.
That block that's underneath the radar.
Telemundo, Univision, he's telling them that he agrees with them that California should still be Mexico and that New Mexico should still be Mexico.
That's what he was saying.
That's what he, when he apologized, it was a dog whistle.
So let's go to the audio soundbites.
Sunday morning, CBS this morning, we have a portion of a report by a correspondent named Mo Roca about the impact of the Mexican-American war on today's debate on immigration reform.
Now, as part of this is a Penn State University professor, Amy Greenberg, who has written recently that we had no business going to war with the Mexicans, and we had no business taking California from them.
We had no business taking anything else from them.
And it really is theirs.
And that's the focus of this report.
This is what Mexico once looked like.
It's the first war that is fought for greed rather than principle in American history.
So there was no great ideological reason why we were going to war against Mexico.
It was the first war that was started with a presidential lie.
James K. Polk went to Congress and said American blood had been shed on American soil, but almost nobody except Americans claimed that the land where the blood was shed was actually American soil.
Polk had a vision to complete America's manifest destiny.
He really firmly believed that it was America's destiny to spread to the Pacific and to take California, and he was going to do anything necessary to accomplish that goal.
God had singled him out to do this.
Boy, is this loaded or what?
That's Amy Greenberg.
She has written that the Mexican-American War was totally invalid, unjust, immoral.
And as you heard her say, it's the first war that was fought for greed rather than principle in American history.
So there was no great ideological reason why we were going to war against Mexico.
It was the first war that was started with a presidential lie.
James Polk, an extremist right-wing Christian, went to Congress and said American blood had been shed on American soil, but it wasn't because it wasn't American soil.
It was still Mexico.
He really firmly believed it was America's destiny to spread to the Pacific and to take California.
He was going to do it.
God had singled him out.
That's the dogwood.
Obama was telling the students in Mexico City that he agreed with that, folks.
That's why he went there and apologized for us opposing our sovereignty on Mexico.
Here is the next soundbite.
Now, you got to keep in mind, in the low-information liberal world, as we discussed earlier on the program, it's George Bush who lied.
And Obama is the guy who stopped him.
Obama's the guy who opposed him.
So the next bite here, we learn that Abraham Lincoln opposed the Mexican-American war.
Now, what's important about that?
Well, to the low-information crowd, Lincoln is the guy in the Spielberg movie.
And in the Spielberg movie, Lincoln is just like Obama.
Here's the bite.
It inspired the first national anti-war movement when journalists reported atrocities suffered by Mexican civilians.
One staunch opponent of the war, a young congressman named Abraham Lincoln.
His first major political address on the national stage was in opposition to the war with Mexico.
And he paid for that.
He did pay for that.
He got a lot of flack from his constituency back home.
He ended up being elected president, though.
So what flack did he take?
Just like LBJ.
Oh, yeah, what a great leader.
He was so great, he couldn't even be re-elected.
But the left loved him.
It inspired the first national anti-war movement when journalists reported atrocities suffered by Mexican civilians.
One staunch opponent of the war, a young congressman named Abraham Lincoln.
And remember, now the low-information crowd watching this, this is the Lincoln of Spielberg's movie, Who Is Obama?
Finally, we're told that many Americans now live on land that is rightfully Mexico.
And we should all think about that as we debate immigration.
How do Mexicans today view this war?
Well, that's a disaster.
Mexico lost the half of their own territory.
It's called the Mexican-American War in the U.S. What is it called here?
Indación Americana, American invasion.
This conflict matters today because a lot of people live in land that was taken from Mexico in this war, and they're not aware of that.
I believe a lot of the immigration debate that's going on now operates in a vacuum where people are not realizing that, in fact, Mexicans are here in lands that once belonged to Mexico.
Right.
And the reason they're crossing the border in record numbers is because they're just coming home.
They're simply retaking what is theirs.
And you people that live in California, you better understand it's Mexicans' land.
It's not yours.
And you better understand that as we debate immigration.
They're coming back to their own country that was taken from them unjustly, immorally, and illegally.
But aren't Mexicans living on territory they took from whatever natives that were there, whatever happened to Mayans and the Incas and the pencils.
I mean, you never know, folks.
You never heard of the pencils?
Go along with the Incas?
Well, James Carville, I mentioned this too, he's on this week, Sunday morning, this week.
By the way, this sovereignty, Obama was dead serious, folks.
Sit here and laugh about it.
This Mo Roca, you notice how dead serious he is in interviewing Amy Greenberg and how dead serious she is.
Well, a lot of people in California don't understand that they're living on land that was Mexico.
And I think they should understand this in the immigration debate because it's operating in a vacuum.
People don't realize that Mexicans are here in lands that once belonged to them.
Folks, if this stuff isn't, if you see where this is headed.
With Obama apologizing for this?
Mr. Limbaugh, do you really think that Obama would give Mexico?
No, no, I don't think he would give California back.
That's not the point.
He may not have to, is the point.
Anyway, Pennsylvania, by the way, where Amy Greenberg lives and teaches, used to belong to the Native Americans.
Is she ready to move out?
Probably.
I bet she is.
I'll bet she's laden with guilt.
I'll bet she does think about it.
I'm telling you, I know these.
I'll bet she does have guilt every day that she lives on land that was once occupied and owned by the Native Americans.
Anyway, I go back to that carville.
You got to hear this stuff.
This is on the roundtable on this week's Sunday morning in ABC.
And George Stephanopoulos said, James, one of the things you saw this week, even Marco Rubio is a big proponent of the immigration bill, saying that he doesn't think it can pass the House.
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh, all right, and he made the case.
He said he's telling us that something.
We're Democrats.
We listen to everybody.
And he said, this is what you hear from a political standpoint.
You're going to bring all these people in.
You're going to make them legal.
You're going to help them do that.
And they're not going to vote for you.
And you have 4 million people that sit back every election because we're doing this.
So the Limboyan, and this is a lot of other Republicans' calculations, you're not going to get credit for this anyway.
The Democrats are going to get the credit, and you're going to have a lot more Democratic voters.
I don't say that I agree with that, but that's where the politics hits the ground and there's a lot of opposition to the Republican Party.
James Carville just accurately portrayed what he heard me say, and he got it dead right.
He said that the Republicans are going to do this.
They're going to bring them.
They're going to help them make them legal, but they're not going to vote Republican.
They're going to vote Democrat.
You have 4 million people.
That 4 million people that sit back and don't vote.
Those are the white voters that did vote Republican in 08, but didn't vote in 2012.
He heard that discussion.
He heard me explain why I thought they didn't vote in 2012.
So he's essentially saying the Limboyan view here is that the Republicans are creating an automatic Democrat majority.
Now, he did say, I don't necessarily agree with that, but of course he does agree with it because he knows it's going to happen.
Another brief timeout, my friends.
NBB back with much, much more.
Don't go anywhere.
Sue in Southern California, i.e. Mexico.
Hi, welcome back.
Hi, thank you so much for taking my call.
I don't know.
My voice is echoing in here.
And thank you for all you do.
And I just wanted to mention that I don't know.
I was taught in junior high in this book.
This is America's Story by Wilder, Ludnam, and Brown.
And it's from the LA City High School Free Textbook.
It said in here, in 1850, or close to it, we paid Mexico $15 million in cash and then agreed again later to, I guess, pay some more millions to the Mexican government.
And I don't understand why they can't mention this.
And we still are.
And we still, that's correct, Bill.
We still bail them out when they need it, and we take their citizens.
You know, take their poor people that come up here, free everything.
They drive newer cars than I do.
I love my old car, but...
Right.
Well, do you want to know why they don't mention that?
Right.
It's because America can't be the good guy in this battle.
just hurts me you know my whole life my parents amnesty is the objective and And amnesty, one of the justifications for it is because America is so mean.
No.
I'm telling you, this is how they sell it.
One of the reasons we must do amnesty is because America, because Republicans hate Mexicans.
And we've got to show them that the Republicans are wrong and America loves them and America's guilty.
America did things that were reprehensible.
And this is how we're making amends and apologizing.
And folks, please do not doubt me.
That is incumbent.
By the way, the warmonger president who took Mexico, James Polk, was a Democrat.
Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.
That treaty, the Treaty Guadalupe Hidalgo, we paid Mexico $15 million.
It was 525,000 square miles.
Didn't include Texas.
That's equivalent to $313 million in 2006.
Plus, we want a bunch of Oscars for making movies about it.
So, see you tomorrow, my friends.
▲
Export Selection