All Episodes
Previous Next
June 11, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:39
June 11, 2013, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I don't want to sound like a National Honor Society candidate.
I'm not trying to sound naive here, folks.
But this business of like this, this pue poll today that in the Washington Post poll that shows that massive amounts of Democrats totally support the Obama spying programs.
And it's Denny Hoyer out there saying, it's so much better than it was under Bush.
Yet to me, you know, John Bolton says, look, all three branches signed off on this.
By the way, hi, Rush Limbaugh, 800 2822882.
Okay.
All three branches signed off on it.
I'm sorry, in my mind, and I'm sorry to be naive, that doesn't make it legal.
All three branches signed off on the internment of the Japanese during World War II.
Did that make it legal?
I mean, everybody knew that was happening.
The courts knew it.
FDR did it, the Congress knew it.
Well, was it legal?
Was it legal and just not right?
Or was it, or was it legal?
All it means is when when, you know, and I love John Bolton, I have an incredible amount of respect for John Bolton, but all three branches signing of the this is the most massive amount of spying and data collection ever.
And it's happening in the midst of news stories of how this administration is openly targeting for punishment its political enemies.
I'm sorry, that's not a vacuum.
There's a context here.
It matters who's collecting this data.
It's all about the potential for abuse.
Anything can be abused.
It's why it's so important who we elect to high office.
This is why character mattered so much to the founders.
It's why we ought to do everything we can within our realm of ability to do so to elect trustworthy people.
We haven't been doing that lately.
How in the world, in the midst of what we know this regime was doing with the IRS, and how they've tried to cover up what happened.
And you blame some little video maker, some pathetic little video maker, who's still in jail somewhere in a dungeon in Texas without bail on some bank fraud charge.
I mean, there is using the old adage intelligence guided by experience, there are reasons for red flags all over the place about this.
And I'm sorry, the fact that three branches signed off on it doesn't make it legal.
It just means it's consensus.
Yeah, consensus, but it just means they're all in on it.
But just because they're all in on it, does it make it how about amnesty?
They're all gonna be in on that.
You're gonna have the courts, they're gonna say fine if it ever gets to them.
You're gonna have the legislative branch get the ball rolling.
Obama's gonna sign it, all three branches are gonna sign off on it.
Is it legal?
Well, yeah, you could say that we have the provision in the law for granting amnesty to people, but is it right?
Just because three branches sign off on it.
Seems to me that we are in the midst of really lowering our standards here.
And we are willful not we, not you and me, people are willfully ignoring what's right in front of their I'll tell you this IRS scandal, that is not an insignificant thing that happened.
And by the way, do you know Lois Lerner is still on the case?
Lois learner is still working.
She'll still still have her computer.
She's still signing in.
Let me find a story in my stacks of stuff here.
IRS caught on tape telling nonprofit, keep your faith to yourself.
Have you heard about that one?
This is from LifeNews.com IRS scandal is deepening as a New tape has been released showing a disturbing phone call the IRS place to a nonprofit organization, the Alliance Defending Freedom, a pro-life group, legal group, made the audio tape available of IRS officials telling a group that provides support to women in abusive pregnancy situations to keep its faith to itself.
The IRS telling this group that's applying for nonprofit status.
You keep your faith to yourself.
In the recorded conversation, an IRS agent lectures the president of the organization about forcing its religion and beliefs on others, and explains that the group must remain neutral on issues like abortion.
That's not right.
That's the they cannot, they cannot demand that a group do that.
Remain neutral on abortion, they can't do it, but they're doing it.
And the same people are doing all this data mining.
It does matter.
I'm sorry, here's uh, let's see.
Lois Lerner, and this is uh this from our old buddies at National Review.
Uh Eliana Johnson.
Lois Lerner, the Internal Revenue Services Director of Exempt Organizations currently on paid leave, has not only or has not had any of her computer access restricted since she abdicated her responsibilities according to an IRS source with knowledge of the situation.
She was placed on administrative leave on May 21st after refusing to resign.
She logged into the IRS's computer system using her agency computer as recently as a week ago.
She has the ability to access the same information that was available to her before she was placed on leave.
She's drawing her full salary.
She continues to log into the IRS computer system.
I thought President Obama really mad about what she was doing.
Don't I recall him acting he was really mad?
Yeah, he went on TV, and in putting a limbaugh theorem in in into into full motion.
He said he wasn't going to put up with this, that he was as mad as you are about this.
He was going to get to the bottom of it.
He was going to find out who did it, and he's going to take care of it, and he was going to make sure it didn't happen again.
And he and he demanded resignations here from somebody who was leaving anyway.
And they made a uh a show of getting rid of Lois Lerner, and she's still on the case.
Obama said the agency's misconduct was quote inexcusable.
Obama said Americans have a right to be angry about it, and I'm angry about it.
It shouldn't matter what political stripe you're from.
The fact of the matter is the IRS has to operate with absolute integrity.
Everybody operating in there is carrying out his wishes.
I hate to keep saying it, but it's what it is.
It's the Limbaugh theorem.
Here he is positioning himself outside it, shocked and stunned, just like all of you, all these rogue people, and by golly, by God, he's going to bring it to a screeching halt.
And he has no intention of bringing it to a screeching halt.
He just wants you to think he's as angry as you are, so that you don't tie him to it.
And people aren't.
A lot of people aren't.
So it's that administration that is collecting all this data, process revealed by Mr. Snowden.
You want to hear something hilarious?
I had a piece here from a website called RT.com.
They talked to Vladimir Putin on the NSA story.
Vladimir Putin in this story is lecturing Obama on the proper way to do government surveillance.
Putin told RT while visiting the channel in the Capitol, I don't know where this RT is.
But it's it's it's I think it's Turkey.
Data surveillance is an acceptable measure if done within the law, Putin said.
Quote, such methods are in demand, but you can't just listen to the phone call in Russia.
You need a special order from court.
And this is how this should be done in civilized society while tackling terrorism with the use of any technical means.
If it's in the framework of the law, then it's okay.
If it's not, it's unacceptable.
Putin was answering questions from the RT editor-in-chief, Margarita Simon, commenting on Obama's statement you can't have 100% security and 100% privacy.
Putin disagreed, saying it is possible if you do it within the law.
Russia today.
Yeah, okay, cool.
Russia's not Turkey.
It's Russia today.
Now, granted, it's probably state control, but still, I never see the day where a former KGB officer is lecturing the president of the United States on the proper way to surveil citizens, and you gotta do it within the framework of the law.
Putin.
That's Putin's mouthpiece.
From what I'm told RT Russia Today is practically Vladimir Putin's personal media outlet.
It's sort of like the Washington Post is to Obama or the New York Times is to Obama.
That's the way to look at Russia today.
It's just Putin's version of New York Times.
Speaking of which, ladies and gentlemen, when I came back from a well-deserved vacation in Europe, I told you that I picked up on some things over there in looking at foreign media.
And they're all upset over there, the global warming people are, that there hasn't been any warming in 15 years.
And what I picked up on was that the way they were going to use that was this gives us a second chance.
This unexpected halt in the warming that everybody knows is coming, has given us a second chance, has given us additional time.
So rather, this is how leftists do it, rather than look at the data and admit that they're wrong, that they're totally making it up, which they know they're doing, by the way.
they instead are going to take the data and apply it to what they claim to believe anyway— And say we got a second chance.
It would be like if um, well, Ted Danson.
I mean, when we started this program in 1988, Ted Danson said we had 10 years to clean up the oceans, and if we didn't do it, it'd be the end of civilization.
So in 1998 got here, we of course were all still here, and the ocean was still there, and the cruise ships are still on the ocean, polluting it, whatever they do.
Well, they pollute it just by being there in the eyes of the environmentalist lacos.
So what did Danson do?
He said, Well, hey, you know what?
We've caught a break.
We got 10 more years.
That's how they do it.
They just never stop.
So anyway, in the New York Times story today by Justin Gillis, what to make of a warming plateau.
As unlikely as this may sound, we've lucked out.
I'm folks, exactly what I picked up on on Europe is in the New York Times today.
As unlikely as this may sound, we have lucked out in recent years when it comes to global warming.
The rise in surface temperature of Earth has been markedly slower over the last 15 years than in the 20 years before that, and that lull has occurred even as greenhouse gases have accumulated in the atmosphere at a record pace.
The slowdown is a bit of a mystery to climate scientists, but it is also fortuitous.
As you might imagine, those dismissive of climate change concerns have made much of this warming plateau.
They typically argue that global warming stopped 15 years ago or some similar statement, and then assert that this disproved the whole notion that greenhouse gases are causing warming.
That's right, these crackpots like me probably say that because global warming did stop 15 years ago.
It did stop.
There is no global warming.
There is no man-made global warming.
It stopped 15 years ago, and I'm the crackpot.
And the New York Times is the reasonable, scientific oriented mature thinking publication.
Rarely, however, do these crackpots mention that most of the warmest years in the historical record have occurred recently.
And then they go on and describe uh you know a bunch of propaganda.
They say, what to make of it all?
Well, here's a crucial piece of background.
It turns out that we had an earlier plateau in global warming from roughly the 50s to the 70s.
Scientists don't understand that one either.
A lot of evidence suggests sunlight blocking pollution from dirty factories may have played a role.
The pollution was ultimately reduced by stronger cleaner air laws in the West.
Factory pollution in China has picked up the slack.
Anyway, they got a second chance.
That's right.
And it the lack of global warming is due to the lack of pollution.
Which, of course, that should be a good thing.
Here's my question.
If you're global and you and if if you're global warming scientists or global warming advocate, and you claim you're not political, there's nothing to do with the political agenda, you just are pure scientists.
You're warning everybody that the warming is taking place at a rate that's unprecedented and it's dangerous and it's catastrophic, and we've got to stop it or else.
And then you learn there hasn't been any in 15 years.
Wouldn't you be happy?
Wouldn't you be going, man, we dodging a bullet here all right?
No.
No.
They're flat out paranoid, frightened, scared, disappointed.
They want the warming because it is political.
Because it allows them to grow their governments, it allows them to raise taxes, it allows them to control the population, it allows just like Obamacare does.
Pure and simple.
And yes, I wasn't making it up, a bill that stigmatizes gay people and bans giving children any information about homosexuality won overwhelming approval Tuesday in Russia's lower house of parliament.
Hours before the state Duma passed the Kremlin-backed law, you got this, the vote was 436 to nothing.
436 to zip.
There was one abstention, and he hasn't been heard from.
More than two dozen protesters were attacked by hundreds of anti-gay activists and then detained by the cops.
The bill banning the propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations, quote unquote, still needs to be passed by the appointed upper house and signed into law by President Vladimir Putin.
But neither step is in doubt.
So I'm guessing that uh gay marriage is uh not in the cards.
And go ahead, folks.
Admit it.
Face it, be public.
You are addicted to this show.
It's the only healthful addiction known to exist in the free or oppressed worlds.
EIB spread by casual contact, and when you get it, you are cured.
Here's John in Chicago.
Great to have you, sir on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, thanks for taking my call.
I appreciate it.
You bet.
Uh I'm sort of calling about the third-tier subject today.
I know that this is sort of low on the on the totem pole of issues today, but way back at the beginning of the show, you referred to the morning after pill as an abortion pill.
And I just, in the interest of uh everybody being high information, I just wanted to point out that just as a condom stops sperm from ever getting to an egg and therefore prevents pregnancy from ever occurring, the morning after pill, what it actually does, and maybe you don't know this, is it it slows ovulation and suspends the release of an egg to ever get to the sperm.
And so pregnancy never takes place.
It can't possibly cause an abortion.
And in fact, if an egg is fertilized and implanted in a uterine wall, it has no effect.
Okay, so what happens if low information dick and low information Jane get together on Friday night and they copulate and have coitus and the sperm of low information dick uh connects with the egg of low information Jane at like 1 a.m. and then at 10 a.m., low information Jane goes and takes the pill.
What happens?
Well, so long as there has not been an egg fertilized, there can't be any pregnancy, and the morning after pill will prevent that from ever happening.
So the morning after pill will not.
No, but if in my example, if Jane's egg is free, if there has been a connection of low information sperm and low information egg in my example.
If they've if if the sperm got there and bamboo, you got an embryo.
She takes the pill, she's still gonna get pregnant.
It has no effect.
It only is effective if the egg has not yet been fertilized.
And therefore, it's it prevents pregnancy from ever occurring and can and therefore it can't possibly cause an abortion, as you said.
Well, in the spirit, what it is permitting is activity which is not productive to young people whatever in any way to occur without consequences.
And it is, it results in cultural decay and cultural rot, and that is the ultimate point of this.
But you may be scientifically correct that it might not cause an abortion.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
Okay, folks, time for a little biology lesson, and as is the case of so much of what we thought we knew, we don't know, Jack.
If you're like me, back when you learned about the sperm and the egg, what you learned was that there were thousands of sperm.
And they were in a race to find the egg.
And they're swimming in there like Michael Phelps.
They're going like bats out of hell.
This is life.
They're swimming up there, and there are thousands of them, and they are in search of that egg.
And they, you know, they got to get past the goalie, they gotta do a lot of obstacles, but they're gonna get there.
And when it happens, you've got conception and bam o we're off to the races and other human life.
Now, it turns out, it turns out it can take, if some of you have Ryan Lochby sperm, it can take six days to get up there.
Uh to get there, not up now.
Well, it's just to get there.
Some of you have Michael Phelps sperm.
You get there real quick.
Now, here's the way, at best I can tell, the way plan Borgs.
And this still does not change anything about my impression of it.
The idea that a 14 or 15-year-old can run to a drugstore and take this thing is a sure sign of cultural decay and rot.
That doesn't change.
What plan B does is prevent an egg from implanting.
Yes, right, from descending and so the the American College of Obsttics uh the sorry, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology defines pregnancy as the implantation of a fertilized egg into the uterus, not conception.
Conception in the scientific community does not equal pregnancy.
Pregnancy only happens after a fertilized egg implants into the uterus.
And plan B prevents that.
Plan B prevents the egg from implanting.
It does not prevent conception.
Now there are 50 to 500 million sperm cells swimming in every race.
I mean, it's it's a battle.
It's a crowded field, and there aren't nearly as many eggs.
50 to 500, depending on fertility, so forth.
Plan B delays the release of the fertilized egg to the uterus.
They're more it basically runs out the clock.
It is the goalie.
It is all about how the College of Obstetrics and gynecology defines pregnancy.
Pregnancy is not conception.
Pregnancy is when the fertilized egg implants into the uterus.
Now, plan B pills will all carry a warning label that says the drug may inhibit implantation by altering the endometrium, which are the inside lining of the uterus.
The truth is that people still aren't sure exactly how it works.
Recent studies have found that plan B might only prevent about half of possible pregnancy.
It's a crapshoot.
Now, if you're if you're what do you mean they don't know how it works?
I remember the first time that I had I have not had I've had the first time I had surgery was my implant.
I think that was the first time.
No, I did not have back because that surgery would go through the larynx, and I can't do that.
That's too risky.
I couldn't, yeah, when I had the uh the pincher, which I still have.
Anyway, um so I think I think my implant was, and when the when the nurses and everybody came in, and the anesthesia said, I'm just you know, this is the first time it's ever happened.
Oh no, I take it back.
It was the second time.
I did have surgery previous.
But this time, when I had my implant surgery back in uh whatever it was, early 2000s, I asked them, how does this anesthetic work?
They don't, they we don't know how it works, and I could not believe that.
You don't know how it works?
Well, how in the world was it invented?
And they were insistent that they couldn't tell me what it actually does.
Well, how it did what it does.
They know what it does, it puts you out.
But this nurse, I'm telling you the truth, insisted.
I kept, I said, I because I couldn't believe it.
What do you mean you don't know how it works?
We don't.
We just know that it does.
Well, how many of these are there?
There are all kinds of different general anesthetics.
There's propophil, uh propophyll, the Michael Jackson thing.
Jackson juice.
There's uh any number of others.
I I don't know what I was given.
I don't recall, but I was stunned when they don't know.
Well, it's the same thing here.
Scientists are still not exactly sure how plan B works.
And there are recent studies that have found that it might only prevent about half of possible pregnancy.
But all of this is in my mind is to miss the point.
What we are essentially saying is to 14 and 15-year-old girls, have at it, babe.
Go ahead, because we got this thing here that's going to prevent any consequence.
We are encouraging behavior that no parent would recommend.
No parent.
I don't care.
I well, look it.
There might be some wackos that would incur, yeah, have as many kids as you want, baby, as well for I don't know.
But with you know, within the realm of civilized society, you and I are talking about, there's no Parent that would recommend.
I remember back in the 90s when the schools were giving away condoms for the same purpose.
The theory was kids are gonna have sex and you can't stop it.
Well, then why are you trying to keep them from smoking?
Smoking is an actual addiction.
And you can't, well, but we can stop that.
Well, what how but kids are gonna have to these people wanted it.
They were encouraging.
I got a call on this program from a mother in Long Island who told me that she was going to set aside a room in the house for her son to bring in the girlfriend rather than have him do it in the car because she thought it was cleaner.
And I said, Are you gonna put a pack of cigarettes on a nightstand?
You can't stop that either.
The point is we the the recommended about teenage pregnancy.
Nothing.
It's just the exact opposite.
So the whole point of plan B, or anything like it, is not what it does pharmacologically, but is what we as a culture are suggesting by making it available.
And Al Joker, God bless him, he just now found out.
But his instincts as a parent are right.
My 14-year-old daughter, I don't know what I like the fact that she can go in there and is taking the parents out of the equation.
Al, if you'd have been up to speed on this like a couple three years ago, and you being on the Today Show, you might have had an impact here.
But that's, I know.
What am I saying?
But anyway, his instincts are right.
And everybody else's instincts.
Why do we need a prescription for medicine for our dogs?
But not for girls of any age.
They just all of this is under the umbrella of women's rights.
I just think it's corrupt.
I think it's corrupt.
I think it's promoting behavior that is destructive.
The behavior itself is destructive.
There's nothing to recommend it.
There's no good outcome.
That well, you know that's right.
You can't get you can't get a prescription for the penicillin, the amoxicillin, or the cipro or whatever to cure the gongrena that you're gonna get.
That's true.
But you can certainly go in there and get plan B the morning after or three days if you're spermer like Ryan Lochdy.
I know, I know it's gonorrhea, my health teacher in the seventh grade called it gongrena, and I've never forgotten it.
Okay, let's let's let's close the loop on this plan B business because it all really depends on how you define pregnancy.
If you define pregnancy as conception, then plan B does cause an abortion.
If you define implantation as pregnancy, then plan B does not cause an abortion.
And the American Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology defines pregnancy as implantation in a uterus.
So under their terms, and by the way, isn't any wonder they define it that way as it relates to plan B. So if you define it that way, there's no way that plan B can be said to be an abortion pill.
But if you define pregnancy as conception, then plan B does indeed in essence result in an aborted or destroyed pregnancy.
all depends on how you define it.
Our caller, John, wanted to define it as implantation.
Catholic church, pregnancy Is conception.
Speaking of Plan B, folks, I've got there are a couple stories here on the State Department.
There are there's a scandal brewing there, and there's a whistleblower there.
And I I'm not gonna have time to get into it today.
I will save them for tomorrow.
But I'm gonna tell you Mrs. Clinton is probably wishing for a plan B that worked on the State Department.
Basically, let me just tease you with this.
She created a culture where it was okay to buy women for sex.
That's what this is about.
State Department whistleblower has accused high-ranking staff of a massive cover-up, including keeping a lid on findings that members of Hillary's security detail and the Belgian ambassador solicited prostitutes.
So again, I don't want to try to get into the details of that with our limited amount of time.
Also, a soundbite here, Obama J. Carney.
I didn't have anything to do with plan B, but he supports it.
But I had anything to do with it.
Jay Carney.
Obama had nothing to do with plan B. He's all for it, but he had nothing to do with it.
James in Toronto.
Have a little over a minute.
I wanted to get to you.
I really glad you called.
Hi.
Thanks, Rush.
It's uh Jason in Toronto.
I want to thank you, sir.
On behalf of uh millions of Canadians and hundreds of millions around the world, your allies, uh, thank you so much for everything you've done for decades, sir.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
Thank you very much.
From the bottom of my heart.
Uh, I want to say, sir, very quickly, uh, this is a bit can conspiracy theory.
Maybe it's for a uh a midnight show and not a respected show like yours.
But do you think perhaps uh Obama uh they're leaving a bad taste with this NSA in people's mouth so that people will want to get rid of it so that many of his allies, the Occupy Wall Street movement, the Marxists, the militant Islamist, they are not going to be watched as much because this will be taken away.
Do you think this is sort of uh part of the plan?
I love midnight hours being discussed from noon to three.
Did you catch that?
This is something for the midnight shows, but I want to bring it up.
Uh is this a plan to do away with and limit surveillance of groups like Occupy Walls.
No.
I I don't believe that any aspect of this has been made public for the purposes of getting rid of it.
Um that's not gonna happen.
That's not that's not who if if if Occupy Wall Street gets caught, you just let them go, like the new Black Panthers.
Hey, folks, let's have some more of these midnight uh uh ideas and subjects tomorrow.
From noon to three Eastern.
▲
Export Selection