All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 19, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:46
September 19, 2013, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, sir, Bob, we're back having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
And you know why that is?
Because I am doing what I was born to do.
And I would wish that for everybody.
It's so great to have you here.
This is the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the one and only Rush Limbaugh program, the one and only Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
We're doing Open Line Friday on Thursday today because I'm off tomorrow.
Mark Stein will be in here tomorrow.
Thanks in advance.
Stein's great.
Great to have him here as always.
A lot to do here in this final hour here.
There's still a lot of stuff in the stacks.
There's some sound bites I want to get to, as well as your phone calls.
Now, where is this?
This UK Daily Mail.
Jennifer Flowers is back in the news.
And it's in the foreign press.
Of course, what media is foreign?
With the internet the way it is, the UK Daily Mail is accessible by everybody, but we don't know how widely it is.
But still, this is foreign media.
And basically, well, here's how it starts.
The 12-year affair made Jennifer Flowers one of the most high-profile mistresses in America.
Now, 20 years after they split amid scandal, the former news reporter from Little Rock, Arkansas, wants to sit down and talk with Bill Clinton in an exclusive interview with...
Stick with me on this, folks.
Stick with me here.
In an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail online, Jennifer Flowers has spoken of her deep regret at turning down Clinton's pleas to talk some eight years ago.
She revealed her belief they would still be together today were it not for the birth of Chelsea.
Let me give you some pull quotes rather than treat you to this whole story.
And I don't know.
Are we bad people for wanting to relive this?
Because there's actually some new stuff in this.
Here's Jennifer Flowers.
It obviously worked for them, but I've never considered theirs a traditional marriage.
When rumors surfaced recently of an affair between Hillary Clinton and Huma Weiner, her transition office chief, Jennifer Flowers, says she wasn't surprised.
According to Jennifer, the promise of the presidency for herself one day was what bound Hillary to her faithless husband across the years.
She said absolutely that was her reason for sticking by him, and he's going to be, he's going to stick by her because he owes her that.
The only difference now, she said, with advances in technology, would have been unable, Clinton would have been unable to deny the affair as he did for several years.
She said, I had recorded telephone conversations, thank God, but I hadn't had those.
And if Monica Lewinsky hadn't had that blue dress, we would have been cast out as crazy stalkers.
I think today Bill and I would have texted every opportunity we got.
So I would have had tons of texts from him.
It was a defining moment in American culture, absolutely.
And to an extent, I paid a high price for my honesty, she says.
And here are some other assertions.
Two decades, and this is exclusive to the Daily Mail.
Look at me.
Look at me.
20 years after her affair with Clinton, she reveals they'd be together now if it weren't for Chelsea.
And she reveals how Bill Clinton confided in her that Hillary was bisexual.
Flowers' 12-year affair with Clinton was exposed in 1992 during his campaign.
She rejects rejecting him when he begged to see her eight years ago.
He is the love of her life, she says.
Launching a career as a sex columnist, she says Bill Clinton taught her everything she knows about it.
Bill told her that Hillary was bisexual and that he had no problem with that.
Now, this is a UK Daily Mail.
The story goes on.
That is essentially, though, those are the highlights.
What?
Right, right, I know.
How dare they print such salacious material?
It really is.
You know, she's talking here about these, that this is an interesting point.
I want to expand on this that had nothing to do with them, but she made an interesting point here that if she and Clinton had had an internet of today, social media of today, when they were having an affair, there's no way that it would have been kept secret.
There was no way that he could have ever denied it.
It's true.
And this has, I think, there are lessons to be learned from this.
You know, I was talking to some people yesterday over at the NAB convention.
I was kind of surprised at this.
These are management types who were telling me that they really sense in this millennial generation a bunch of kids who don't think hard work is where it's at anymore, that their expectations are for something else.
And, you know, I said, you sure, you know, doesn't every older generation look at the young generations and think they're a bunch of slackers?
And they said, yeah, but this is different.
And he said, let me tell you, back when I was their age, we had daily measurements of how we were, we had report cards.
There wasn't any of this social media.
We weren't able to fabricate lies about who we were for other people.
We were who we are, and people who knew us knew what we were and what we weren't.
We didn't have any way to put all these great pictures of ourselves, a supposedly great life that we're having on the internet.
We didn't think about becoming famous.
We didn't think about wanting to be on reality TV.
We weren't consumed with our image.
The only choice we had was to work hard.
We didn't all get a medal.
We didn't grow up with this massive demand that everybody think about us.
We didn't grow up expecting everything simply because we were getting older.
I mean, the guy was very pointed about this.
He was really pointed.
And he was talking about it within the framework, okay, that's a rising demographic that he wants listening to his radio station.
And what's it going to take?
What are they doing now?
And he said, when it was their age, media was an entirely different thing than it is now.
Media was something that most people didn't aspire.
I think it's a really good point, and it might be something you argue with.
It may be, but he said most people, and this guy's probably 60, to give you an idea.
So close to my age.
He was saying when he was growing up, kids and young people, those who aspired to be in the media were few and far between.
Yeah, people wanted to be actors and actresses and all that.
But most people interacted with media as audience and never attempted to become part of it.
Never attempted to become part of every story.
He said, today, all these young people want to be the media.
And I thought about something that George Will said during the Princess Die funeral.
The procession, remember all of those people on the street lining up and everybody brought flowers.
Probably weren't any flowers left in Great Britain that day.
And George Will's theory was everybody wanted to be in the story.
It was not that they all loved and adored Diana.
They knew that there was going to be the attention of the world focused that day and they wanted to be in the picture.
And I think there's a lot to that.
Now, this guy was talking to me from the standpoint of, okay, what do we do as radio broadcasters to make what we do appealing to these people that are cutting the cord on cable TV?
There's a whole generation of people, these millennials and young people.
Honestly, folks, this is a, it really is true.
Trust me on this.
I know what I'm talking about.
I read these tech blogs.
They hate cable TV.
They hate that they have to pay for it.
They despise it.
There is piracy like you can't believe.
TV shows are being downloaded from pirate sites.
Episodes are being watched as they can be downloaded on their iDevices, or if they can get them screened to their TV sets, fine.
But there are people, they're cutting a cord on cable.
They're cutting a cord on satellite, and they're finding other ways to watch their video.
And he wonders, you know, he's in radio, what's he going to do?
And I told him, I said, you know, it's fascinating.
He owns a bunch of radio stations, some FMs too.
And I told him I was, I said, this is going to be fascinating because it is to me.
It was just last week I was reading a tech blog.
These people on these tech blogs, these people write these things, folks.
They are 24, 25.
They're probably not being paid much.
They're geeks.
Some of them are pretty smart.
But they're snarky.
And they're smarter than everybody else.
And you can, in many of them, not all, of course, but you can read it.
But anyway, this one guy was talking about iTunes Radio.
And this is not an Apple story.
But part of the new offerings from Apple with all the stuff they got going in this week is a music streaming service.
Now, the two big streaming services for music that people are using are Spotify and Pandora.
Apple has all of that content on iTunes, but it's never been a streaming service.
Now they're introducing one actually today, yesterday, when the iOS 7 went out.
And this tech blogger had discovered it.
And he thought it was fascinating.
The concept of music on a radio station.
He had never thought of that.
To him, music is from iTunes, Spotify, Pandora.
The idea of listening to music on radio was so foreign to him.
He thought it was the greatest thing ever.
Now, this kind of thing demographically fascinates me.
Then he went on to write, you know what this iTunes radio is, this is like the old-fashioned ancient days where you had to discover music on FM radio.
And I'm thinking, holy, because for me, discovering music was AM radio.
And to this little snarky little blogger, take the snarky back.
I'm assuming he is.
This was not snarky.
He was just dazzled with the concept of music on a radio station.
These people are using media in whole different ways.
And this is what this guy was talking to me about in terms of young people today and how they differ from when he was that age.
And the measurements that we all had versus in the social media today, these people can live in their basements and manufacture this whole life story about themselves.
They can Photoshop pictures of themselves with people that they've never really met and so forth.
And he says, so many of them are living fantasies that are nowhere near truth, but that's how they're being known to people.
It was high-end stereo.
Exactly.
Stereo to them is two little speakers on either side of their iPad or a Bluetooth speaker arrangement.
You know, they'll fit in the palm of their hand.
I think that's cool.
Anyway, so when I see Jennifer Flowers talking about how if during her affair with Slick Willie there had been the internet and texting and so forth, how different it would have been, how they'd have never gotten away with it.
Or at least when she had decided to go public with it, she'd have had all the evidence.
But Clinton did.
He got elected by denying this.
60 minutes he went on there and denied it.
And he sat there with Hillary and he denied it.
She had tapes of him insulting Mario Cuomo as a mafia guy.
Remember that?
Yeah, Mario Cuomo guy.
Jennifer, he reminds me of some mafia Don.
I mean, you don't want to cross that guy.
He had to apologize to Cuomo, which, of course, it was accepted.
Anyway, I don't know.
This stuff kind of fascinates me because this radio station guy is right.
I mean, these people still are potential listeners.
And how do you attract?
I said to him, content.
Content, content, content.
It's not marketing.
It's not peer.
It's content.
Something they want to listen to, they'll find it no matter where it is.
A.M., FM.
It's still true.
It's being worn out even today.
All right.
Let's take a.
Hillary scores again.
What do you mean she gets to be?
You don't think this is going to hurt her being a bicep?
Being bisexual is going to help Hillary.
You may be right.
Of course, what does it really mean when you look, I don't even want to, I don't even.
What does it really mean when you cop to being biased?
What does it really mean?
Yeah, Bill Clinton, at first he denied that the Jennifer Flowers tape was of him.
And even after denying that, he apologized to Mario Cuomo.
I guess now we know why Hillary likes pant suits, if nothing else.
Christopher Bonteer, Missouri.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hi.
Meghado's Rush.
I'm one of the young people that you reached, and I've kept coming back for more.
My comment today, sir, is about the Obamacare law.
I'm a nursing student, and we were supposed to do an ethics paper and discussion on the Obamacare law.
And all the resources we had were from the Kaiser Institute, sites, everything.
And I kept looking and scouring for websites that actually referenced the law by actual passage.
And your website was one of the few ones.
You had an article about a Duke professor, and that's what I used in my paper.
And I really want to commend you for doing that, and we'd encourage you to put more things up there for people like us in college that are conservative.
I just wanted to thank you for that, right?
That's a great appreciate that.
We work really hard at this website in documenting everything I say.
It's not easy.
I speak about 50,000, 100,000 words a day.
To get that transcribed, organized, and posted on a website takes a lot of time and attention.
And the stuff I cite is a whole nother library.
And you noticing that is really great because the people who put the website together are going to really appreciate that you note the work that goes into it.
And I want to thank you because we do.
That's exactly what we have on the Limbaugh Letter or the Rush 24-7 website about Obamacare is indeed my opinion on it, but we've got the facts right from the law itself.
So how did you find it?
You're looking at all of these things, all these different internet sources for historical truth or factual truth about Obamacare.
What led you to my website?
Were you already a subscriber and knew that it was there?
No, sir.
I looked all over the internet, and most of what I saw, even at some conservative sites, just talked about what the opinion was of it.
And I finally searched Rush Limbaugh and healthcare law, and that came up.
And I delved into your website and found that because I figured, knowing you as the guy you are, that there would be something to back what you had said.
So you, but you, would you Google it, Rush Limbaugh and healthcare?
Yeah, I Googled Rush Limbaugh, Obamacare, Affordable Care Act.
Wow.
And it came up, and with the interpretations, I can't remember the professor's name, but he's from Duke University.
Well, Google guys hear about this.
They're going to change the search results.
I'll guarantee you that.
Probably.
But I would really, I want to say thanks.
I've been a lifelong listener.
My grandfather introduced you to me to you, and never turned back.
I was drawing political carton tunes in 1992 listening to you as a second grader.
So I just wanted to thank you.
It's such a thrill to talk to you, Rush.
So thanks.
Did you say second or seventh grader?
Second, as in two.
Second grader.
Wow.
Wow.
Okay.
Well, I appreciate that.
And everybody involved, really, thanks you for your nice words about rushlimbaugh.com because, you know, they're part of the overrated staff, too.
And it is hard work.
Do you realize just the amount of data that is put forth on this program each day that it has to be documented and put in order and has to make sense the way it's transcribed and edited and then the graphics that attach to it that we create or find.
It is a Herculean task every day.
And it has to be done instantaneously.
In the old days, it took them three hours to be able to update the site to reflect the contents of each day's show.
And as technological advances have taken place in the way websites are built and modified, we can now do it during the program.
So things that were discussed in the first hour are up in many cases by now and even sooner.
But then citing the source for all the stuff that is said here is another task.
And I really, Christopher, I appreciate your call that you noticed that.
We've always felt good about this website.
It's encyclopedic, in addition to being a website that reflects the sterling personality of the host.
It is indeed its own encyclopedia and library.
I'm grateful that you saw that.
Let me detail for you one of the pieces that our last caller was talking about that he found on rushlimbaugh.com.
We talked about an article by a Duke professor who explained what Obamacare, what the bill actually says.
And the professor, John David Lewis is the professor's name.
He's at Duke.
And he did a great piece in explaining what the bill itself actually says in layman's terms.
And that was the title of his piece, What the Health Care Bill Actually Says.
It was excellent at breaking it down into layman's language.
It got rid of all the legalese and the whereases and here-to-fours and why the hells and whatever that you find in legislation.
And it was just great.
He's a professor of classics at Duke.
And that's what our caller was referring to.
That's who we cited about Obamacare.
We talked about that article back on August 12th of 2009.
And Christopher, the caller, was able to find it.
He's a nurse student who was assigned with the research project, and he found it and was able to use it in his research.
And if you go back now, even if you go to rushlimbaugh.com and you find it, a Duke professor explains what the health care bill actually says.
Use that as a search term or anything like it from it, and you'll get it.
If you go back and read that piece, it is even more clearly prescient than we thought at the time, because now a year has unfolded since his piece was published.
And he explains what Obamacare is really like, what it really says.
And there have been things happen since he wrote the piece that bear out what he says.
So it would be well worth your time to go back and get it.
Sharon in Sun City, West Arizona.
Great to have you.
Hi.
Thank you very, very much, Brush.
It's a pleasure to talk to you.
It's a pleasure to talk to Beau.
We love your tea.
We voted online, as you requested, against Obamacare.
The reason I'm calling, we moved here 11 years ago from the state of Washington here to Arizona.
At that time, we had Napolitano in office.
When she went out, we were $3 billion in debt.
Jen Brewer took over within two years.
She brought us into the black.
She fought the Democrats all the way.
I think this is probably going to be answering my own question, but I cannot figure out why the people in office in our capital, why they can't get our budget in place by just looking at some of the things that governors, et cetera, in our state have done.
Let me ask you a question.
Yes.
Do you really think they want, in the case of Obama, do you think they want to balance the budget?
No, because you know what?
They wouldn't be able to balance it and still keep paying all those entitlements.
And I want to tell you how hard it is in this retirement community to go up to a grocery store line and the people in front of us that are young and using those entitlement cards and the things they're buying.
My husband and I have been married 54 years.
We've always stuck to a budget.
We both always worked.
We were hard workers, dedicated, loyal, good workers.
Karen, let me just tell you, the Democrats don't want to balance the budget.
They don't want any limits on their spending.
That's how they create dependency.
It's how they buy votes.
It's how they buy power.
It's how they become Santa Claus.
They don't have to balance the budget.
The governor of Arizona does.
She can't print money.
She can't borrow money if her state's in such debt that the credit rating doesn't exist.
So she's got to balance the budget.
Every governor does.
Well, the California governor doesn't for some reason, and the Illinois governor doesn't.
But every other governor seems to have to.
But the Democrats in Washington, last thing they want to do is balance the budget.
Obama doesn't think we've got a debt problem now.
Balance the budget.
We're printing a trillion dollars a year.
The Federal Reserve is, that we don't have, and it's backed up by nothing.
Sharon, I appreciate the call.
Thank you, Susan in Henderson, North Carolina.
Greetings.
Great to have you here.
Hi.
Thank you so much, Rush.
It's such an honor to speak to you today.
Appreciate that.
I was listening to the radio a little while ago, and the local news break came on, and they were playing some Nancy Pelosi clips.
And the one that really struck me was when she called the Republicans that told them that they would be committing legislative arson if they did the defunding Obamacare as part of the debt ceiling fight.
Why can't the Republicans use some of the same language and do some of the same types of things?
If the Republicans said that about the Democrats, they would be pilloried.
This is true.
They would be pilloried.
They would be excoriated.
They would be savaged for using such partisan, mean-spirited language.
They would be accused of inciting violence.
Exactly.
All kinds of things.
But see, the way this works is the Republicans already are arsonists.
Pelosi is just confirming what everybody already knows.
And so there's a double standard, and it's always been around.
And I don't see it changing.
The Republic, they call me a bomb thrower, and I've never even seen a bomb.
I've never seen a bomb.
The closest I've been to a bomb is a sign.
Folks, when I was in Sacramento, honestly, for some reason, this just cracked me up every time I saw you.
You go to the Sacramento airport to get a departing flight.
And so you're at the area, this is before the TSA.
This is in the 80s.
This is just, you're heading down the wing where departing flights are, and they've got all these signs warning you of what you can't do.
But they're just pictures, no words, because I guess the airport officials didn't trust that enough passengers could read.
So they had pictures of things that you couldn't take on the airplane, and they had a picture of a bomb with a line drawn through it.
Like a cannonball with a firecracker, sticking out the top with a with an explosion, a little explosion graphic with a line drawn through it as long as no bombs permitted.
So I just, every time i'd go to the airport, I kept waiting for the one guy who'd look at the sign and look at his bomb and turn away and go home.
And I never saw it.
So I just got an email from Seton Motley who says that there's a, there's a, a post at the Daily Cause.
And the post of the Daily Cause says, Limbaugh comes out against drinking water.
All because I oppose Mocella Obama trying to force everybody to live the way she thinks everybody ought to live.
She got this stupid water initiative, anti-soda pop initiative and all this kind of stuff.
Limbaugh comes out against drinking water.
Wait till I hear the waitress quote from the first hour.
That water quote is going to be deep six and it won't even matter anyway.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, I want to uh grab audio sound by 16.
I just mentioned this.
Uh, Obama said that the debt ceiling doesn't raise our debt.
I want, I just want you to hear him say it.
I just want to remind people in case you haven't been keeping up, raising the debt ceiling, which has done, been done over a hundred times, does not increase our debt.
It does not somehow promote profligacy.
All it does is it says, you got to pay the bills that you've already racked up.
Congress, it doesn't.
This is just incredible.
The national debt's up six trillion dollars since this guy took office.
It was ten trillion actually.
It's up maybe seven.
It's close to seventeen trillion dollars now since he took office, raising the debt set a hundred times.
You know we couldn't be in debt 16 trillion dollars if the debt limit hadn't permitted it.
But see, it's all about Congress has to pay the bills.
Same same pap that comes along every continuing resolution.
Now Basher Assad wants a billion dollars to get rid of his chemical weapons.
You talk about a shakedown.
Basher says it's going to take him a year and a billion dollars to get rid of his weapons.
As I said, the relation depends on the credibility of the administration.
We never looked at the United States as enemy.
We never looked at the American people as enemy.
We always like to have good relations with every country in the world, first of all the United States, because they're the greatest country in the world.
That's normal, that's self-evident.
Really, Putin doesn't think so, not anymore.
Greatest country in the world, the United States.
Of course we love the Americans.
We're not going to look at American policy.
They want us to have no nukes.
We'll have no nukes.
They want no chemical weapons.
We'll have no chemical weapons.
If it's going to cost you, we want one billion dollars.
That's the next bite.
Number 18, Sunbite 18 needs a lot of money.
It needs about one billion.
Uh, it's very detrimental to the environment.
If uh, the American administration is ready to pay those money and uh, to take the responsibility of bringing toxic materials to the United States, why don't they do it?
Man, do these people know how to play us or what?
Their chemical weapons are very bad for the environment.
And uh, we need a lot of money.
It needs about a billion dollars.
A billion dollars, very detrimental to the environment.
The American administration ready to pay those money?
Those money, a billion dollars, to take our chemical weapons?
What are we going to take the weapons?
Is that part of the new deal.
We're going to buy them now, one year to get rid of them.
A billion dollars to get rid of them, and we're going to get them.
That's not going to happen.
Putin's gonna get them and they're gonna go to Hezbollah, but I don't doubt Basher is gonna get his billion.
Obama buys everything he needs.
Okay, my good friends and buddies, that's it for me.
Mark Stein will be here Estermagnana.
Thanks so much for being with us today, and have a great weekend.
Another NFL weekend coming up with concussions and ACL injuries, nurses, doctors, ambulances, and some teams will win.
▲
Export Selection