All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 17, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:57
September 17, 2013, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Great to have you with this El Rushball and the EIB network.
And the Limbo Institute.
For advanced.
I'm pausing here because now the FBI is saying that the shooter did not have an AR-15.
The drive-bys and CNN tried to say he did have an AR-15.
And then they said no he didn't have an AR-50.
And the mayor came out and said, Oh, yes, he did have an AR-15.
And said, no, he didn't.
And the sheriff came out and said he had an AR-15.
The same weapon used in previous, don't you know?
And now the FBI said, we don't have any evidence that the guy had an AR-15, and a couple shotguns and a handgun, pure and simply.
CNN's covering the FBI briefing right now, and that's what the FBI is saying.
Anyway, folks, great to have you here executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
Phone number 800 two eight two two eight eight two.
Get this from the Washington examiner.
President Obama has once again waived a federal law.
But Obamacare can't be defunded now.
Ah, see.
Obama has just waived a federal law in this instance.
Get this.
Obama has waived the ban on supplying arms to terror groups in order to help the Syrian rebels.
Half of whom are known to be hardline jihadists, may even be Al-Qaeda.
Let me repeat that in case that kind of went by and you're not sure what you heard.
President Barack Obama.
Mm-mm-mm.
Nope.
Let me just do it straight without anybody thinking I'm mocking.
President Obama waived a provision of federal law designed to prevent the supply of guns to terrorist groups in order to clear the way for America to provide military assistance to vetted opposition groups in Syria.
See, John Kerry said we're gonna vet these rebels, and we're gonna find out which ones are good rebels as opposed to the bad rebels.
And the bad rebels we're not gonna give any guns to, but the good rebels we're gonna give them guns.
Just the moderate rebels who are gonna give them guns.
But now wait, there's a federal lawsuit can't do this.
But that doesn't matter because Obama's waving it.
That's right.
I'm president, and I can do it.
Who's gonna stop me?
And that's the bottom line.
Who's gonna stop him?
Mitch McConnell, Boehner, Eric Cantor, McCain, who's gonna stop him?
So he says the hell with American law, hell with federal law.
We are going to arm Syrian rebels in violation of federal law under the guise that there are moderate rebels.
There are good rebels, but not the bad rebels.
We're not gonna give the bad rebels any guns.
I know you're asking, well, how are we gonna make sure that the bad rebels don't take the guns from the good rebels?
Well, we can't be assured of that.
All we can do is vet the rebels and find the moderate ones.
There aren't any moderates, rebels or otherwise in Syria.
Not in this fight.
There are no moderates.
It just gets so tiresome.
But that's what we're gonna do.
Who is gonna vet these people?
The same people who vetted Hassan Nidal.
The Fort Hood shooter, the same people that vetted the Senarev family in Boston.
The same people that vetted Edward Snowden, the same people that vetted Aaron Alexis, the shooter in the Washington Navy Yard, the same people who vetted the Libyan rebels who later killed four Americans in Benghazi.
Who's doing the vetting?
John Kerry?
Kerry knows good rebels from bad rebels.
He knows the moderates.
Meanwhile, Obama wants to take guns out of your hands.
Obama wants to blame the law abiding in this country for the acts of the mentally unstable, who are allowed to kill people with impunity because no weapons are permitted on military bases.
And that's a that's a Clinton era law, by the way.
So thanks to Bill Clinton, military bases are unarmed, if you can believe that, leaving them mentally unstable to go out and get some weapons and open fire with impunity.
And what shuts them down?
Other people showing up with guns.
Same thing at Sandy Hook Elementary, same way everything.
They pick places where there are no guns.
They're at least mentally stable enough to figure that out.
And so Obama wants to take, and the Democrats want to take your guns from you, but we're going to waive federal law and we're going to arm Syrian rebels.
Yes.
Who may be Al Qaeda, who may be hardline jihadists.
This is how we're going to get even with Putin.
Because Putin embarrassed our brave young, courageous president.
We're going to get even with him.
Putin's on Assad's side.
We want to get rid of Assad.
So we'll get we'll give the rebels guns.
The good rebels, not the bad rebels.
The bad rebels we're not going to give anything to.
Because Obama doesn't deal with bad people.
Obamacare will question your sex life.
Ladies and gentlemen.
Be ready to answer questions such as, are you sexually active?
If so, with one partner, multiple partners, or same-sex partners.
Be ready to answer those questions and more the next time you go to the doctor, whether it's the dermatologist or the cardiologist, and no matter if the questions are unrelated to why you need medical help.
And you can thank Obamacare.
New York cardiologist, Dr. Adam Budzikowski, which is a great name for a cardiologist, Budzikowski, said this is nasty business.
He called a sex questions insensitive, stupid, and very intrusive.
He could not think of an occasion when a cardiologist would need such sex information.
But he knows that he's going to be required to ask for it.
The president's reforms aim to turn doctors into government agents, pressuring them financially to ask questions they consider inappropriate and unnecessary, and also they consider these questions to be violative of the Hippocratic oath to keep patients' records confidential.
Are you sexually active?
If so, with one partner, multiple partners are same.
Now what if the doctor's asking you this stuff?
And you're thinking, okay, what's the wrong answer here based on who wants to know?
What if you think it's going to help if you say that you have same-sex partners when you don't?
What if you think it might facilitate your medical care if you answer in the right way based on who you think wants to know?
I thought it was the Democrats who wanted to keep everybody out of the bedroom.
People like Obama and the Democrats.
Get out of our bedroom.
Every day we learn more and more.
I don't know why there isn't greater impetus on the part of the Republicans.
At least make the effort.
Okay.
Latest news involving the National Football League and the chickification of same.
Four.
National Football League linemen.
These are the big behemoth guys.
These are the guys who qualify for the team by living at their refrigerator.
They have to eat five times what a normal person eats to maintain the weight required to play the offensive line.
And in some cases a defensive line.
And I know this because I've talked to some who've had to do it.
And I've met them after they retired and their sticks compared to the way they looked when they played.
At any rate, just to describe, I mean, these are huge behemoth guys.
And four of them have signed on to endorse moistened toilet paper for men.
This is a product being developed by a small company in Venice, California.
And they're trying to crack a new market here, so to speak, with moistened toilet wipes.
Now there is a moistened toilet wipe business sector.
3% of the toilet paper category is moistened.
What do you think?
Just in terms of economics, what do you think the toilet paper sector of our economy is, dollar wise?
It is $8.7 billion.
The toilet paper business is an $8.7 billion economy.
So this small Venice firm is trying to get in on it with an innovation.
Moistened.
Toilet wipes for men.
They have a name, One Wipe Charlies.
The players who have signed on are the center for the Dallas Cowboys, Travis Frederick, John Sullivan of the Minnesota Vikings, Eric Wood from the Buffalo Bills, and Nick Hardwick from the San Diego Chargers.
Those four NFL linemen will be part of a marketing blitz entitled Clean Snap to kick off in two weeks.
They're going to be advertising One Wipe Charlies, Moistened toilet paper, if you will, for men.
This idea is the brainchild of a guy named Mike Dubin, who is the CEO of Dollar Shave.
And he told the New York Post, most of the centers, these are all centers, they play the center, but most of the centers that we approached were game to try it.
They're guys that not a lot of people are reaching out to.
But they want their endorsements too.
And they're signing up here.
We wanted to make something just for men.
It's aspirational.
A way to get it done in one is the slogan.
Do you know what aspirational means?
Well, the low information crowd may not know, and a real Linda may not.
Aspirational means just something you really want.
Like for many people, an iPhone is an aspirational thing.
Or a Mercedes is asked for it.
Something that you aspire to if you become successful.
This product, one wipe Charlie's, known as clean snap, is considered aspirational in the toilet paper business.
This is something, it is theorized here, that men will aspire to, will hope one day they can own.
One Wipe Charlies.
A survey conducted by Dollar Shave found that 89% of wipe users were very satisfied with the cleanliness of their posterior after using One Wipe Charlies.
Now the number of people who are satisfied using standard toilet paper, 58%.
After one wipe.
The big deal here is one wipe.
And the satisfaction rate 89% with one wipe Charlie's, as opposed to only 58% with traditional like Charmin.
Or, you know, if you go to a cheap restaurant and you've got the two-ply stuff in there.
Mike Dubin, the CEO, says, yeah, I've been using wet wipes for years.
It's an enjoyable experience.
Is it the kind of thing that you'd take a day off from work to do just because you enjoy it?
Thank you.
Honey, I'm not going to go to work today.
I want to use my one wipe Charlie's.
Oh no, it's happening out there.
I just I'm I'm bringing the news to you as it uh lines up here in the uh stack of stuff.
Yes, sad news out of Phoenix, folks, very, very sad news out of Phoenix.
Uh EcoTelity.
The electric car charging company that operates more than 600 charging stations in Arizona may be about to close its door.
Last month, EcoTality disclosed a myriad of problems with the Securities and Exchange Commission in that filing, Ecotality released the following statement.
Quote Although the company is currently exploring options for a restructuring or sale of the entire business and or assets of the company, the company may need to file a petition commencing a case under the United States bankruptcy code as part of any process, or otherwise in the very near future.
EcoTality was heavily involved in the federal government's EV project, the electric vehicle project, sponsored by the Department of Energy.
The goal of that program was to install charging stations and electric vehicle infrastructure throughout the United States.
In the filing, Eco Tality says that the Department of Energy stopped making payments to them.
It also claims that it's charging stations are not making a profit.
Well, why wouldn't their charging stations not be making a profit?
Maybe because there aren't enough electric cars being sold to drive into the electric charging stations.
And if you're no longer getting your Obama subsidy because you have long since served your usefulness to Obama in getting elected, then it's Sayanara ecotality.
So what the government can give the government can take away.
Back to the phones we go.
This is uh this is David Walla Walla Washington.
Great to have you on the EIV network.
Hi.
Hey, Rush, thanks for uh having me on and taking your call.
You bet, sir.
Hey, look forward to uh getting that book of yours.
Um my kids are actually interested in it as well, so um can't wait for that.
Um Thank you sir very, very much.
I um I I'm I'm excited by it, and I I uh I hope everybody enjoys it.
I really do.
It's it's it was so much fun to do.
I appreciate that.
I really do.
Thank you.
Um well I found an interesting article in our Sunday paper in our local, um, talking about starting October 1st, individuals can buy their health insurance plans through insurance agents uh exchange um statewide, and looking at these premiums are just crazy.
Um for 21-year-old and under, they're um 175 up to 200, depending on what you how big of coverage you want.
And for 40-year-old and more, they're uh 200 to up to uh four hundred dollars a month, and for sixty-year-olds, there are four hundred to seven hundred dollars a month.
Um, and there's no catastrophic plans available at this point, so you're stuck um with these three options, and then they even have the platinum, um, which they haven't really indicated how much that's even gonna cost.
Well, now wait isn't that cheaper than what you're currently paying?
Well, for me, um, luckily, I'm actually work working in a federal um position right now.
Um, so I haven't seen or heard anything for me.
Um, but I was just recently, you know, out there in the in the workforce, and you know, this is just a uh and it's I the way I see it, it looks more like an attack on the uh middle class because the twenty-one aren't going to care about it at this point.
Well, but they're gonna either have to have that or pay a fine.
The answer to your question is your observation around the money.
Where's the money in the they gotta pay for this somehow, right?
Well, those are the Where's the money?
Most people are middle class.
That's where the money is.
And that's where the money is.
Right.
And six year olds, I mean, I mean, they can't afford four hundred or six seven hundred dollars a month.
Um, well, they're gonna have death panels to deal with.
They don't have to pay any money and death panels take care of them.
Right.
And and for smokers, I don't know how they're gonna be able to determine that, but you know they're gonna go up and pay seven to twenty percent higher than those that are non smokers.
So you know, this is just smokers are the ones who deserve the price break.
Well, yes.
They're paying for health care for kids.
Smokers deserve medals.
Smokers deserve a break on health insurance.
Because they're paying for a lot of it for the children's health programs are specifically funded by tobacco taxes.
And if it weren't for these uh tobacco addicts buying the stuff, those health programs might not exist.
Smokers they're among the most least respected people in our society, and they actually deserve a lot of thanks.
If anybody deserves a price break, it would be them that are already paying through the nose because of their their their habit.
Yes.
Exactly.
But you and I know they're gonna get hit because we hate 'em.
We despise smokers.
They're as bad as terrorists.
We make 'em hang outside in the cold, huddled like masses at Ellis Island.
We uh we don't like 'em at all.
We're really frown on 'em.
Anyway, David, uh I appreciate the call.
Thank you again very much.
I really do appreciate it.
Brief time, folks, we're gonna take a break timeout and be back with much more in a moment.
By the way, folks, speaking of books, um way back during the uh well, not way back, it was a month or so ago.
Six weeks ago when uh when Detroit and its bankruptcy and uh all the itinerant things for the news, I uh I read to you uh from a portion of a book that told the truth about what happened to Detroit.
According to the author Zeb Chaffits, Devil's Night and Other True Tales of Detroit.
The book from two thousand No, from nineteen the nineteen ninety something, and it was out of print.
But I I had uh a copy of it and I read a a brief summary.
And because you had expressed so much interest, the the publisher reissued it in paperback and ebook.
And it's out now.
Devil's night and true t the other two tales of uh of Detroit.
If uh if you tried to get it and it wasn't available, it is now.
I just wanted to mention it by Zev Chaffetz, who uh did the biography of me.
Uh called an army of one.
John in Savannah, Georgia.
Hello, sir.
I appreciate your patience.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Uh, I'd like to thank you first of all for uh what you do to put common sense and conservative values out there in front of the indoctrinated NASA.
Well, I prefer thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
Uh my comment was uh brought uh to to mind by uh previous scholars uh discussing the issue of global warming, uh climate change or whatever you want to call it these days.
Um I I uh am a retired aerospace engineer and uh done a lot of work with math models and uh that sort of thing.
And uh I think one thing that people don't realize when you're building a math model, uh generally the uh the work you do is built on the work of others.
Uh in other words, rarely are you building a model from first principles where you go through the physics of the situation and that sort of thing.
You basically rely on work that is done by previous individuals.
Not only that, aren't aren't you relying on the past to predict the future as well?
I mean, what what what are kind of data input do you have?
Well, uh actually the math models themselves uh predict uh the future, however, they should also uh jive with the uh models uh data of the past.
In other words, you check your models with past data and uh then use it to predict future data.
Now that's a fundamental problem is you know there were scandals in Great Britain, uh, where the data was actually fudged uh because it didn't uh match up with uh existing models.
Um, didn't match the agenda.
Well, yes, yes, I believe it is the agenda.
Uh I I think there are basically, as you discussed a little earlier, two uh different approaches to this.
One is the the true believer, uh, and the other is the one who's gotta get his research funded.
And uh uh that is brought over mass media to the American public and they swallow it hook line and sinker.
But uh specifically to the the comment I was going to make, uh a great deal of the work on uh and you you know the term uh runaway uh repeating or the greenhouse effect.
Uh most of that, or uh I would say all of that is based on some work that was done on stellar atmospheres in the early 1900s, uh back when Einstein and other physicists were looking at at how stars evolved and grew.
Uh a gentleman, and I don't have his name in front of me, um, did some work uh on stellar atmospheres looking at the heat and light transmission through stellar atmospheres.
Uh now these stellar atmospheres take um uh looked at things like photons uh starting from the center of the star, moving out.
It takes tens of uh and hundreds of years for a photon uh to emerge from the sun from the center.
It bounces around in there and it takes that long.
Now, this fellow was looking at that.
He used uh differential equations, which uh some of your listeners may be familiar with.
I doubt very many.
But uh these uh equations are notoriously hard to solve, and uh there are many equations that cannot be solved explicitly on paper.
That's exactly that is exactly right.
And so that what what what then is relied upon is the complexity, and you must just trust us.
We wouldn't lie to you.
And so we are the only ones capable of running these models and putting them together and then analyzing what they say.
It's so complex.
Just trust us.
But one of the problems here, John, is that the scientists refused to release the data after a whole lot of Freedom of Information Act requests, and the hoax was exposed when the data was leaked from the University of East Anglia.
There had been people asking for the data, hockey stick data, all of this stuff.
They've been asking for it.
The stuff in the models you're talking about.
They wouldn't release it.
Too complex.
You wouldn't understand it.
It could easily be distorted.
It takes professionals like us to be able to analyze this and tell people what it really says.
And we're the only ones capable of charting it and graphing it and putting it in an understandable format for people to see and absorb.
But then somebody at East Angle says, you know what?
And leak some data that's in these emails, and they found out that they were plugging data in, as you say, to fit an outcome that they wanted or had predicted or that the models had predicted.
They were fudging it.
They were fudging because they they it's like economic models.
You cannot factor dynamism, or they refuse to.
In an economic model, a left, the CBO, whatever.
Tax cut, tax increases proposed in a law, then they do a static analysis of it because they cannot model dynamism.
And and they can't, just like they can't model cloud cover.
They can't analyze it, they can't predict it, they can't explain it.
And it's a huge factor.
So ultimately, here John and Savannah is right on the money.
And I must take a brief time out.
We'll be back.
Don't go away.
By the way, our previous caller, John from Savannah talking about photons and how long it takes them to get anywhere from the middle of the sun.
Let me tell you something.
Apple has found a way to capture them fast.
The new iPhone 5S has not expanded to megapixels in the camera.
It's still eight.
But they've opened the aperture to F2.2.
More lights going to get going to be able to capture more photons.
So the global warming modelers may have a tough time with their photons, but Apple has it covered.
They found a way to capture them like that.
To even improve on your pictures.
Not a plug, not a plug, just photon news.
Williams, somewhere in Michigan.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Uh, Mr. Russ Limbaugh, let me tell you, my friend, I have respected you for many years, and after you have commented about the smokers a few minutes back, I have a new and different respect for you.
Thank you, sir, for the appreciation of smokers.
It's really appreciated.
Well, somebody has to.
Somebody has to be something.
Well, I'm I'm a smoker, and I'm tired of being blamed for everything.
And and uh tobacco taxes are through the roof.
I re I've said this for a long time.
I've I primarily to irritate people, but the truth can do that.
Smokers, the taxes on cigarettes are astronomically high, and those taxes are paying for children's health care programs.
We ought to be thanking smokers instead of you know treating them as outcasts and so forth.
Well, that actually makes me feel better.
Like I said.
Hey, by the way, on a second note here, Mr. Limbaugh, my mentor.
Uh, this one wipe Charlie deal, all right.
I think it's a fantastic idea.
I know there are other little, you know, Cottonell's got a thing out there, uh, you know, wet wipes or what have you.
You can use baby wipes, whatever, but I think it's a great idea uh because I'm sick and tired of spitting on the toilet paper at certain times, right, to cleanse myself, my man.
Well, I hear you.
I I hear you.
The spitting on the toilet, particularly if you're within mixed company.
I mean, who that really is problematic.
And I agree with you.
I mean, what guy wants to use baby wipes?
And now, because of American entrepreneurism, there's an answer.
One wipe Charlie's.
Or, yeah, one wipe Charlie's.
If you're just joining us, I'm not kidding.
Four offensive centers, National Football League are starting to endorse a product.
One wipe Charlie's.
And it's moistened.
Toilet paper for men.
One wipe.
89% satisfaction rate.
Documented market survey data.
What do you mean, what's wrong with bidets?
What man wants to use a bidet?
What man even knows how?
Well, there's going to be a lot of guys that want to use the wet wipe.
Nobody's ever going to see it.
Who's ever gonna know?
You wait.
You wait.
This wet wipe, this one wipe Charlie thing is going to be big.
It's gonna be huge.
I predicted.
I wouldn't be.
I guarantee you, our Salesforce is on.
Anyway, I appreciate William, thank you.
Here's Judy in Lake City, Tennessee.
Great to have you on the EIB network hive.
Leave us a little mystery, Rush.
This uh Obamacare, uh, the whole reason behind it was there were 30 million uninsured, not untreated, but uninsured.
And so, as of three weeks ago, this administration had spent six hundred and eighty-four million just in promoting Obamacare.
We could have given each one of those thirty million uninsured, twenty million dollars apiece to set up a medical savings account.
And Fox has had several programs about how depressed the young people are.
What do they figure out since Obama took 719 billion out of Medicare and it's running out of money?
Not only will they have to pay for their insurance or fine if they don't get it, they'll be paying for their parents and their grandparents medical treatment.
Yeah, exactly right.
You you um by the way, you are uh right on the money.
When you talk about if the objective really was to insure the uninsured, we could have done that for I I forget the real number, but it it chump changed.
I mean, nothing compared to what Obamacare is going to cost.
Nothing.
Which just goes to show that funding insurance and covering the 30 million or whoever who didn't have it was bogus, a false premise, and a lie.
It wasn't about that at all.
Well, that's it, folks.
Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence in the can.
And on the way over to the Limbaugh Broadcast Museum at Rush Limbaugh.com.
But we'll be back tomorrow, revved up and ready to go, as uh as we are every day.
Despite the long odds, we are here every day and revved and ready.
And as always, thank you so much for being with us.
It is always a distinct pleasure to have you here.
▲
Export Selection