All Episodes
Previous Next
May 9, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:39
May 9, 2013, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings to you music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists all across the fruited plane Rushlin Boy, America's real anchorman and truth detector and doctor of democracy revved up and ready to go for another three hours.
Broadcast excellence, not much going on out there today, folks.
There really isn't very much.
The big news continues to be the Jody Arias verdict and the guys in Cleveland, the alternative lifestyle guys in Cleveland.
The Benghazi hearings, you may have heard about them.
They're taking place in Washington.
You may not have heard about the Benghazi hearings, actually.
It's just the Republicans' latest attempt to politicize a highly successful Obama administration policy.
And once again, the Republicans are showing that not all they have is their partisan chops.
Nothing really to see here.
Jay Carnegie at the White House, the spokesman says, nothing really going on.
In fact, at Yahoo News, which is a favored news site for low-information voters, they have one story on Benghazi.
And what they do, they basically publish the feeds from ABC and AP and Reuters.
That's what they do in general.
Not just Benghazi, but that's Yahoo News, ABC, AP, and Reuters.
And the one story on Benghazi at Yahoo News has the headline, Democrats, GOP fails to show scandal in Benghazi deaths.
So if you are a low-information voter and you go get your news at Yahoo, what you know is that the Republicans just trying to find some scandal there to trip up our poor president and they failed.
And no scandal in the deaths there.
The White House still claiming the Republicans are trying to politicize the tragedy in Benghazi.
Because you see, the White House never politicizes anything.
Straightforward, right down the middle, trying to help people.
From the Tucson shooting to the Trayvon Martin shooting to Superstorm Sandy to the Aurora and Newtown shootings, they don't politicize anything at the regime.
So in addition to the Jodi era, there she is right there on Fox.
There she is right there on CNN.
The verdict was yesterday, and the news is still Jodi Arias.
I must tell you, I'm America's anchorman.
I never heard of Jodi Arias until about five days ago.
I still don't know what she did.
No, I really don't.
I know this is not good for my low information outreach.
What?
What's nerdling?
And they found her guilty for that?
She stabbed her boyfriend 27 times.
What else?
Shot him.
Hold up.
No, wait.
She shot her boyfriend.
She stabbed him 27 times.
What else?
Slit his throat and shot him.
Was the throat slit one of the 27 stabbings or was it so?
27 stabbings and slit the throat and then shot him.
And they found her guilty for that?
See, there's a war on women in America.
You just, it's, it's a, look at right here.
L.A. Times, short first names mean bigger paychecks, study says.
What's in an LA Times?
The paper that the Koch brothers are threatening to corrupt by taking over.
Still waiting on half the staff to walk out there.
What's in a name?
Apparently, the key to people's earnings.
Oh, and do you know that the federal budget may show a surplus in April?
In fact, the federal budget, Obama's economic Obama's economic policies, combined with the sequester, have been so successful, the federal budget may show constant surplus by 2015.
And that's from Jim Pethakucas at the American Enterprise Institute.
I knew if we were just patient that Obama's policies combined with the industriousness of the American people, this economy would eventually rebound.
And that the policies of Obama would be appropriately credited for this rebound and this forthcoming upcoming surplus.
This surplus is expected to be announced in 2015 right into the campaign of Mrs. Clinton to become the next president.
See how this is all setting up.
Now, back to the LA Times.
What's in a name?
Well, apparently, the key to people's earning potential, according to recent study, the shorter your first name, like Jodi, J-O-D-I, the shorter your first name, the more you will earn on average.
This according to an online career site called The Ladders, and the Ladders did this study.
In fact, every additional letter to a name correlates to a $3,600 drop in salary.
Those who go by a shorter nickname also outearn counterparts who go by a corresponding full name, study found.
So if your real name is Rush, you're going to clean up.
But if you use El Rushbo, you're going to lose money.
If you're Archibald, it's over.
If it's all right here.
Bills, people named Bill, usually score a bigger paycheck than people named William.
See?
If you go by Bill, you're going to earn more money than if you go by William.
Debbie's earn more money than Deborah's earn.
There's a companion story here.
The LA Times has a link to it.
How much do you know about California's economy?
Answer: zero.
Don't even bother to click on it.
Now, even those people who have the same name but spell it differently will see a wage difference.
Michelle with one L will earn more than Michelle with two L's.
Philip with one L will speed past Philip with two L's on the wage scale.
And the same with Sarah versus Sarah.
Sarah without an H, Sarah with an H.
The Sarah without the H earns more money.
The top five highest paid male names are Tom, Rob, Dale, Doug, and Wayne.
They're all five letters or fewer.
Now, women break the pattern a little bit.
The highest paid female names are Lynn, Melissa, Kathy, Dana, and Christine.
But here's some food for thought for soon-to-be parents.
The top 25 most popular names will earn $7,000 more on average than everybody else Per year.
Exhaustive research done by an online career site called The Ladders.
This is what will determine how well you do in life.
Let's go to the audio soundbites.
This is the headline news special coverage of the Jody Arias trial verdict last night.
There is a verdict guilty on murder one.
Five voted for premeditated murder.
Seven, both premeditated and felony murder.
Everyone, a verdict, a verdict of murder one guilty has been rendered by this Arizona jury.
Repeat, guilty, guilty of murder one in the death, the slaughter of unarmed Travis Alexander.
That's what America heard all night on headline news last night.
That's Nancy Grace letting the world know that Jody Arias was found guilty.
This is it, folks.
This is low information news.
Soap operas are even losing out to this.
Yesterday afternoon, on Neil Cavuto, your world with Neil Cavuto, he had Greta Van Sustrin on there.
And Cavuto, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, while the Benghazi hearings are taking place, Neil Cavuto said to Greta Van Sustrin, what happened with this case?
I remember when it started, but then I remember how quickly it also cascaded into for another news channel, just a mesmerizing ratings magnet.
And everybody just started talking about what happened here, Greta.
It became a little bit of a freak show.
We all sort of wanted to tune in to see, you know, what's Jody doing today?
And it became so bizarre.
It just kept growing on all of us, much like Days of Our Lives or One Life to Live or some other soap opera.
It just kept growing and growing.
And it's terrible that it's become such a spectacle in some ways, but it's also fascinating.
Yo, I'm telling you that the American people are eating it up.
It's still after the verdict.
And now we find out in Cleveland that the hero have you heard about this?
The sad story of the hero in Cleveland?
It turns out that this guy is a repeat domestic abuser.
And this is from the Smoking Gun, the Cleveland man credited with helping free female captives.
By the way, the brothers of this Castro guy, Zip Zero Nada, Cleveland law enforcement said they have nothing to do with it.
We don't have any evidence linking them at all.
If we could put them in jail because of the way they look, we would, but we can't.
They didn't say that.
That's just my mind in an undisciplined way running away with me here.
The two brothers had nothing to do.
Then they found a note.
Is this guy's name?
It's Ariel.
You notice that Jody Arius, Ariel Castro.
And this has many low-information Americans confused as to which story is which.
That's why we're going to work hard today to keep people focused on which is which.
Ariel Castro is the evil man in Cleveland that kidnapped those girls.
They found in there, when the cops went in, they found a note this guy had written in which he called himself a sexual pervert and asked for help.
Said he needed help of some kind.
He was a sexual predator and he was not right.
Well, yeah, he wrote the note to himself, but I guess it was intended to be discovered In the, what do they call those things?
You have a cornerstone in the, what do you, what do you call it when you put it?
No, you're not the headstone.
That's for later.
When you put it, you put stuff that you want to open up 100 years from now.
Time caps.
He wrote it for the time capsule of the cornerstone of the house.
But anyway, he's not the story yet.
Charles Ramsey, whose 911 call and subsequent TV interviews have made him a micro-celebrity, was once a repeat spousal abuser whose marriage ended in divorce following a 2003 felony conviction for battering his wife.
Charles Ramsey's 43, he said that when he heard captive Amanda Barry screaming and trying to escape from neighbor Ariel Castro's home on Mondays, I figured it's a domestic violence dispute.
He would know.
I'm sorry.
Now, apparently, he would know.
Ramsey has also reportedly said that he went to help Barry because he was raised, it's a quote, he was raised to help women in distress.
He's a repeat domestic abuser, was raised to help women in distress.
I saw this guy, TV is dumbfounded what was going on in the Ariel Castro estate.
He said, My barbecued with the dude.
We went out, we drank beer, we barbecued, and no clue what was going on in that house until he heard the screams.
That was the trigger.
He'd heard them before.
Ramsey's first domestic violence charge came in February 1997.
He entered a no-contest plea.
A year later, he was found guilty of the count by a Cleveland municipal court judge.
While waiting to be sentenced, Ramsey was again arrested for domestic violence.
At the time of his second caller in July 1998, he was already the subject of an arrest warrant issued in connection with his failure to appear for a court hearing in the first domestic violence case.
As a result, Ramsey was jailed for violating terms of his release on bond.
He subsequently entered a no-contest plea to the second case and was again found guilty by Cleveland judge.
The domestic violence cases apparently were consolidated for sentencing in August of 98, where Ramsey was ordered to serve six months in jail, placed on five years probation, and directed to attend a domestic violence counseling program.
The hero is getting trashed.
Now, the White House is claiming that the Republicans are trying to politicize what happened in Benghazi.
They claim that the Republicans are just trying to harm President Obama, who did everything by the book here.
There was really nothing to see in this story.
It's a very unfortunate, sad thing.
But the Republicans, according to Yahoo News, failed to show any scandal in the Benghazi deaths.
So, let me take a brief timeout.
Wait a minute.
I'm being asked a question about the Jody Arias trial.
Why was the crowd outside the courtroom chanting USA, USA, when the guilty verdict was announced?
Because The American people love a victorious America.
The American people love it when America wins.
The American people love it when America triumphs.
What else would it be?
Why else would they be cheering USA, USA?
Anyway, my friends, a brief time out here on the EIB network.
Back with much more after this.
George Patton, George Patton, said it.
He was a great general in World War II.
Americans love a winner.
Americans are always going to love a winner.
And so the American people thought somebody won yesterday with the Jody Arias verdict.
Now, as a woman, her boyfriend told her that he was going to break up with her, essentially.
Just move on.
She got mad, obviously got mad, 27 stabbings, slit throat, and shot him.
It's a little overkill.
But she was obviously very mad at this guy.
And she didn't want to put up with being left, so she did away with him.
And the jury got to ask questions in this trial.
And the jury was asking her for lurid details about the sex she had had with the guy before the stabbings and the slit throat and the gunshot.
I mean, it was lurid.
It's the jury wanting to know details about sexual behavior and escapades.
And it had the American people apparently riveted to their TV sets.
There was one day when the jury was asking these lurid questions, and they were lurid.
And it happened to be in the afternoon when Shep Smith was on Fox.
Shep was appalled at this kind of stuff being asked on TV, and he bumped right out of it.
It's not real.
That just sent people right over to Nancy Grace and Headline News, where detail was provided.
Now, the Ariel Castro, this is, I wonder, has anybody in the mainstream media yet decided to condemn Mr. Castro for his alternative lifestyle?
Numerous women, shellacked and chained, kept against their will.
What this guy did, this guy kicked these women in the stomach to force them to abort their babies.
That happened at least five times.
Will the mainstream media ever ask what would have happened had any of these women had a gun?
Welcome back.
It's El Rushbo on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
You know, the news earlier this week, is this Thursday already?
It is.
We had news earlier this week.
In fact, it might have been yesterday, if not yesterday, the day before, about the falling numbers of gun deaths and gun crimes.
It was yesterday.
It's striking.
The amount of murders with guns since the mid-1990s is plummeting.
I think they're down like 39, yeah, 39%.
And overall crimes with guns are down 69%.
And the story was, this is the LA Times, by the way.
The story was the American people don't know this.
The American people think that crime with guns is on the uptick.
And they think this because of the focused coverage of places like Aurora, Colorado, and the Gabby Giffords incident, Sandy Hook Elementary.
No, yeah, no.
I get that confused with the no, no, Newtown, Connecticut.
I'm going to get confused with the hurricane location.
Anyway, they think gun crime is just going through the roof when it's not.
Gun crime is down.
Now, here's a headline in the Christian Science Monitor.
With gun violence down, is America arming against an imagined threat?
Oh, yeah, you people are arming up.
The threats that you feel out there are illegitimate.
You've got no reason to be arming up.
Gun crime is down.
Murders with guns, way down.
What are you doing arming up?
What are you doing buying all those guns?
You've got no business doing this.
Mass shootings, frantic gun buying, and more Americans legally carrying guns on the street all point to a country fighting a gun violence epidemic, right?
Not necessarily.
As part of a broader trend of declining crime, gun violence in America has dropped by 49% from 1993 to 2011.
Non-fatal gun crimes dropped by 69%, according to the U.S. Justice Department.
But that slow-motion decline in Americans turning guns on each other has failed to register with most people.
Only 12% of whom answered the question correctly when asked by the Pew Research Center in a poll released Tuesday.
Some 56% of respondents said they believe that gun violence had actually increased over the last 20 years.
Dave Koppel, research analyst at the Independence Institute in Denver, said the gun prohibition lobby has long promoted this idea that reducing the number of guns is a good idea, that fewer guns are better categorically.
But here we have a real-world experiment which shows the opposite, where we have a huge decline in gun crime at the same time as there's been an enormous increase in the firearms supply in America.
It doesn't prove the increase in gun numbers or license carry caused the decline, but it sure does contest the theory that more guns equals more crime.
Now, I don't think that the Christian Science Monitor, I don't think the left intended this correlation.
I think when they put this story out, gun crime way down.
There's no reason for you to have a gun.
That was what they wanted to convey.
Gun crime and murders with guns, way down since the 90s.
What business does you have buying a gun?
You don't need to be buying guns.
You're arming up over an imagined threat.
What the media doesn't get is, as the American people have armed up, gun crime has fallen dramatically, 49 and 69%.
Gun crime and gun murders.
Gun violence is down as gun ownership is increased and concealed carry permits have to.
With gun violence down, is America arming against an imagined threat?
The media and the headline writer here at the Christian Science Monitor, you know, you people with guns, you people are actually nuts.
You're wackos.
I mean, you're out there, you're buying all these guns.
There's no threat.
Gun crime is down.
You are, you're arming up against an imagined threat.
And they don't, even when they go talk to the guy from the Independence Institute in Denver who points out, you know what?
Isn't it strange that as Americans have armed up, as you say, that gun crime has plummeted?
Because the left loves to say that all these guns out there and all that ammo out there, why, that's just going to increase gun crime.
It's just the exact opposite.
And I have to laugh here because the drive-bys thought they were onto something and they don't even see the correlation.
Now, the Christian Science Monitor says the paradox provides a poignant backdrop for a national gun debate that had primarily Democrats, but also key Republicans pushing for more gun controls, including expanded background checks in the wake of a string of mass murders.
Why do people think that gun crime is up?
That's obviously clear because of the media attention and focus on these mass shootings.
Do you know that mass shootings are down too?
Amazingly so.
You go back all the way to the 40s and 50s, and you will see that mass shootings like at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown or wherever, they're down.
They don't happen nearly as much as they used to.
But in the past, they didn't get the media coverage they get today.
Saturated media coverage.
And we don't just get coverage of the event.
After each event, we get weeks and weeks of hand-wringing on TV.
Oh, my Lord, woe is us.
How terrible this is as we run.
Why are these people doing it?
We've got to get guns off the street.
And it's just the opposite.
Just the exact opposite.
There's also a move out there, understandably in the Democrat Party, but within certain elements of the Republican Party to go after, discredit, and basically blow up the Heritage Foundation study on immigration and the cost of amnesty.
Remember, we made available to you, if you wanted to go to the Heritage Foundation website the other day, earlier this week, they were giving you the report free.
If you go to the website was askheritage.org, you could go there, you could get the whole thing downloaded, and the five-page summary was really pretty much all you needed to read.
Didn't want the detail.
The summary was just powerful, and it talked about $6.3 trillion of net cost.
Well, all kinds of people, predictably from the Democrat Party, but some of the Republican Party are not coming out to discredit the whole thing, discredit the scholarship, the math.
One of the criticisms is, those guys at Heritage, they analyzed this in a static way.
They didn't calculate any of the dynamics.
What they mean by that is, oh, wait a minute.
Yeah, some of these new arrivals may end up on the welfare rolls, but some of them are going to be paying taxes too, and that's going to wash out whatever benefits they get, was the theory.
But that doesn't quite wash.
But anyway, that's just what's out there.
Now, USA Today, in a story here by Alan Gomez, one of the authors of a Heritage Foundation report that panned a Senate plan to overhaul the immigration laws, argued in his doctoral dissertation that immigrants generally have lower IQs than the native white population of the United States.
Oh!
Oh!
You see now the long knives are out for anybody at Heritage who had anything to do with this.
Jason Richwine, who received his doctorate in public policy from Harvard in 2009, joined, it says here, the Conservative Heritage Foundation in 2012, wrote in his dissertation titled IQ and Immigration Policy that immigrants in the U.S. have lower IQs than Native Americans, and that difference is likely to persist over several generations.
The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market.
That's what Jason Richwine wrote in a story first reported by the Washington Post selecting high IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S. while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.
So now it's trash the messenger time.
There is no argument in this piece about whether or not Mr. Richwine's doctoral dissertation is right.
Not even raised that question.
They are attempting to discredit Mr. Richwine and the Heritage Report by pointing out that this guy in his doctoral dissertation suggested that immigrants to America have lower IQs than Native Americans and that the difference is likely to persist over several generations.
And it's something that we ought to consider when analyzing and coming up with immigration policy.
You're not supposed to bring that kind of stuff up.
You're just not supposed to talk about it.
That's not politically correct.
Even if it's true, you are not supposed to bring it up.
So the entire Heritage Report on immigration that disagreed with the Senate Gang of Eight plan under assault now, because one of the authors in his doctoral dissertation wrote that immigrants have lower IQs than Native Americans.
And they don't dispute that.
In the USA Today piece, as far as I read, they don't dispute that.
Snurdly is asking me if it's true, shouldn't it have an impact?
Well, maybe in a different era, yeah.
But not today.
It might have mattered policy-wise in a different era.
But today, no, you're not even supposed to talk about this.
We're supposed to reach out.
In fact, the lower the IQ, the more welcoming we are to be to show how good we are and compassionate and how understanding.
The lower the IQ, the more welcoming we should be.
Now, Rich Wine was one of two co-authors of the Heritage Report on Monday, predicted $6.3 trillion economic loss for the country if the bill that would legalize 11 million immigrants becomes law.
On Thursday, the Heritage Foundation said that Rich Wine's doctoral thesis did not factor into its report and emphasized that the data used in the study is sound.
So Heritage says, whatever he wrote his doctoral thesis on had nothing to do with our report.
Our reports about money.
The IQ of arriving immigrants is not part of our study.
It's not part of our report.
Doesn't matter.
His doctoral thesis was written about this, and as such, he's automatically discredited as a bigot and a racist and whatever else.
And therefore, the entire Heritage Report is disqualified.
That's what's underway in the drive-by media.
By the way, Jodi Arias was found guilty yesterday in Phoenix.
She stabbed the guy who wanted to break up with her 27 times, then slit his throat, then shot him.
A little overkill, but still she did it.
She was mad that he wanted to break up with her.
That's stray that convicted her for that, but war on women and stuff, but still.
Views expressed by the host on this program, documented to be almost always right, 99.7% of the time.
This is Craig in Lake City, Florida, as we start on the phones today.
Great to have you, Craig.
Hi.
Hey, Rush.
I've been a big fan of yours since 1989.
I just wanted your thoughts.
I read an article.
Governor Mark Dayton in Minnesota had made a comment he didn't feel comfortable about the Vikings releasing Chris Chloe and wanted the football teams and sports teams to be more honest about why they release players.
I just thought it was another example of them sticking their nose where it don't belong.
Yeah, I saw that.
Folks, let me bring you up to be a Chris Chloe as the punter for the Minnesota Vikings.
He's not had stellar performances in the past couple, three seasons.
He ranks near the bottom of NFL rankings of punters in many categories.
In addition to that, Chris Chloe has been quite vocal and active in his support for gay marriage and urging that gay marriage become the law of the land.
He's been one of the two loudest voices as such in the NFL for that, the other being a linebacker for the Ravens, Brendan Endon Bedio.
Now, Chloe was cut by the Vikings this past week or so, and they said that it had nothing to do with it.
They drafted a punter in the fifth round, and they said they needed some competition because Chloe has not been performing.
Chloe at first thought, no, no, no, my activity has nothing to do with it.
Then he changed his mind and thought maybe it does.
The Vikings said, no, it doesn't.
I mean, he's been talking like this for a long time.
We didn't do anything about it.
This is strictly an on-the-field performance issue.
We drafted this guy into fifth ground.
He's a younger punter, and we're going to go with that.
The governor of Minnesota is not satisfied.
The governor of Minnesota is demanding that a private business, the Minnesota Vikings, explain why they cut Chris Chloe, the punter.
Now, I'm going to tell you, this is, folks, I don't want to sit here and keep saying, see, I told you so, but your game of football is simply changing.
The idea that a politician would demand that a team explain its roster moves just last year and beyond would not have been foreseeable.
But it's not just in Minnesota.
There is a lawyer in Jacksonville who is demanding and urging the NFL convince the Jackson Jaguars to sign Tim Tebow.
So there are people seeking the authority and power figures in football.
You make the Jaguars pick Tebow.
It's not fair.
Tebow deserves.
You make them.
And now the governor of Minnesota is demanding that the Vikings explain why they cut Chloe.
And then he wants every NFL team to have to be more forthcoming in explaining why they cut every player that they cut.
These are private businesses.
But if it's ever found they cut Chloe because the Vikings don't like the distraction involved in his public statements, hell would break what's going to anyway.
Ted Cruz is continuing his crusade to make sure that there is no pathway to citizenship in the immigration bill.
▲
Export Selection