All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 11, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
32:57
December 11, 2013, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, right oh.
I know.
Well, welcome back, uh uh ladies and gentlemen.
Rush Limbaugh, this, the nation's most listened to, the most talked about, the most imitated, never duplicated, and the most envied.
And let's see, the uh obviously most influential uh radio talk show out there.
Hey, Rush Limbaugh program, the EIB network, it's also the most listened.
I said that.
I got pretty much covered it.
A telephone number if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882, the email address L Rushbo at EIB net.com.
I sort of gave this little drive-by hit at the beginning of the program.
And let me deal with it here with um, oh, I guess a little more depth, maybe at a slower pace.
I kid you not, my email, both from friends and from the public email box, or rushboard eIB net.com, and subscriber email, members of Rush Limbaugh.com.
I can't tell you the number of yeah, and the most blamed radio program as well.
Anyway, I I can't tell you the number of people that sent me notes saying, you know, you're the reason why Time magazine named Pope the Man of the Year.
And I immediately discarded it.
Uh because I don't I'm not the opinion things work that way.
I mean, I realize I irritate the left and so forth, but man of the year, that's a serious thing for Time magazine.
They're gonna their criteria is gonna be more than just did it irritate Rush Limbaugh.
That was my thinking.
And then somebody said, Well, before you dis before you reject this, this is an email that I got after I started the program today.
Before you reject this, take a look at what has actually happened.
And then somebody puts a timeline.
Okay, so the Pope issues his papal document ripping capitalism.
You are practically the only prominent national person to reply to it in highly analytical, critical form, taking it apart word by word as you had it.
And what I had was a Reuters story that was reporting via the translation of the of the Holy Father's remarks.
And in that translation were unfettered capitalism, a huge, huge hit on what the Pope was said to have called trickle down, uh a plea for leaders of the world to do something about income inequality and about poverty and so forth, as though no one's been doing that.
I was I was I remember when I saw it, I was really shocked.
I could not believe.
Well, I don't need to, I don't need to revisit it all.
You were here that day.
You heard it.
But anyway, I did I I didn't hold back.
There was none of it was personal.
I just I've been to the Vatican more than any place else outside this country.
I've been back there two or three times.
I've uh well, I mean, I've I've I've been to London a couple times, but uh internationally, that's I'm fascinated by the place.
I I'm not gonna repeat myself in all this.
Uh I've I've explained earlier my close friendships, associations with the ranking members of the Catholic Church, Cardinal O'Connor and so forth.
But my point is I've got no bias against it, quite quite the contrary.
And I was literally stunned by what I read in that Reuters report, because if it weren't for capitalism, there wouldn't be Catholic Church.
There wouldn't have any money.
People wouldn't have been able to support it, to contribute to it, to donate to it without capitalism.
And a full 60% of the Catholic Church wealth comes from the United States donations, I think I read that.
And that the they're the largest landowner in Manhattan, for example.
Where are they going to get the money?
So, and it didn't jibe with anything of previous posts, particularly John Paul II's.
Anyway, this person says, Rush, look at what's happened here.
You're the only one.
But more importantly, who is the Pope?
You realize what Time magazine has done here?
They have just named as man of the year, a man who stands for things they despise.
The man is pro-life and unalterably so, and there isn't anybody at Time Magazine who is.
The man believes in God and Christ, and that is also controversial for people on the left and in the media.
But for the for Time magazine to name as man of the year somebody who is forcefully pro-life, forcefully anti-abortion.
Remember, Rush, the email says, as you have pointed out, abortion is the sacrament for liberals.
It is the if if if liberalism is a religion, abortion is their sacrament.
In addition, the Pope is unwaveringly opposed to gay marriage.
And there probably nobody at Time magazine who was opposed to gay marriage.
So look at what they've done.
They've taken one thing that they think the Pope said.
The Pope, as far as everybody's concerned, totally ripped into capitalism.
And when you do that, you're ripping into the United States.
Where else is there anymore that is predominantly capitalist?
Every place else in the world is either a uh a socialist democracy or communist or some degree of it, Marxist.
The United States is it.
And Time magazine names as their man of the year.
Look at the choice they had to be.
They had to set aside their literal opposition to the man on abortion and gay marriage and choose him as man of the year because he attacked capitalism.
Now you, Rush, are the only guy who attacked the Pope, or is thought to have attacked the Pope.
And this is why this emails, this is why the question was put to me.
If you had not made a big deal of this, would the Pope be the man of the year Time magazine?
That that's question.
And that's where I said, no, I don't I don't go for that because I don't think they're not sitting there in their meetings on Man of the Year and say, okay, who can we choose that would tick off limb?
But that's just not how they do it.
And but I'm I I'm telling you, I still have uh overwhelming numbers of people writing me claiming that.
I mean, the Pope is even against birth control pills.
Folks, do you understand that a seminal, the foundational building block of Obamacare is free birth control for everybody?
The Pope opposes that.
The Pope opposed this Pope, too, opposes everything the left stands for except he ripped into capitalism, they think.
Why else would they name him man of the year?
He hadn't been in office that long.
Why else would they do it?
Is there any other reason?
What else would be noteworthy?
He hasn't been there long enough, right?
There's no official record yet.
Uh this hasn't been in office long enough.
And this is the theory behind those trying to convince me that I and then we get this call from this guy who was watching this worldwide Catholic network, the homily on EWTN, where I am ripped to shreds, but not by name.
So I don't know.
I might have to rethink this.
The Catholic Church is the largest landowner on the planet, not just Manhattan.
They wouldn't have much of what they've got were it not for capitalism.
I mean, charity didn't build them.
Look at uh the Nobel Peace Prize people gave Obama his Peace Prize on the cum.
Do you think they'd like to pull that back?
You think they would?
Now, oh, there's one folks, there's one one the NSA, the yeah, yeah, the spy.
The drones, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
The selfies.
One other thing, and I mentioned this, this is Wednesday, so I must have seen this over the weekend and talked about it on Monday.
Was I here Monday?
I was here, but I have read, have you read this too, Snerdly, where the where the Catholic Church of the Vatican is preparing a clarification on the Pope's remarks on capitalism?
You've seen that too.
Okay.
So I'm not the only one who's seen that.
And I I re I referenced that earlier in the week.
Now I don't think Time Magazine knows that.
Now, if the Pope, if the Vatican issues a clarification on the Pope's remarks on capitalism and claiming that it was not translated properly, whatever they say, and if the Vatican tries to walk it back a little bit, what's time gonna do then?
Because that's the only reason.
What else?
Why else at this stage of his papacy name him person of the year?
And that's not to put down the Holy Father.
is simply...
You know, I thought it'd be Miley Cyrus, because you know, there any anything that assaults American culture, they they they love and dig over there at Time Magazine, Time Warner, Time Life.
So that is all I want to say on it, just sharing with you basically the um emails that I have received from Gawker, a study released this week purports to show that more attractive high school students tend to make better grades.
Hot students do better.
Now, this is going to be a problem when we start making girls wear burkas to avoid being gazed at.
Science has already proven that attractive people earn more and get more job interviews and are generally just treated better by society.
But the average among us, and we average people know who we are, we had at least some consolation that there existed at least one period in life when everybody was equally awkward.
Hascruel.
But alas, we must say goodbye to that myth.
The new paper, which will be published on Friday, compared findings from the national longitudinal study of adolescent health with the GPA data and found that yes, beautiful people do better.
They get better grades.
The study that the attractiveness data comes from, recorded all kinds of data on a set of teenagers during the 1994-95 scrual year, and has followed up with them on a regular basis ever since.
So in the 90s, in the 90 history, you could get paid by rating the attractiveness of confidence comprised adolescents.
Now, again, somebody has to sit in judgment of who's attractive and who isn't in order to do a study like this.
And we don't know who that is.
Okay, so you say the attractive get better grades.
Well, who are the attractive?
Who's who is deciding that?
Is that universal?
Is for example, you guys snurdly and I, and we're just gazing at people.
Would would would Snerdley and I agree on everybody we look at attractive, unattractive, or would there be differences?
Well, the point is that somebody's sitting there in judgment of this, and we don't know who it is.
Young women say sexism happens, but not to them.
Now, this is one of those stories that is again going to require unique ability to analyze, and that would be me.
Story is from CNBC.com.
Young women say sexism happens, but not to them.
Young women in the workforce know that there is horrible and awful discrimination against women out there, but they do not report it in their own jobs.
And most do not experience it, they say.
So what does that tell you?
You hear you have a subset of women, a large subset of women studied by the Pew Research Center, by the way.
And they say that 60% of women between the ages of 18 and 32 think that men earn more than women for the same work.
More than half a millennial women also said it's easier for men to get top executive jobs in business and government.
But the report also found that vast majority of women think that there is sexism all over the place, but it never happens to them.
So how can it be all over the place if it never happens to them?
What is the explanation for that?
Well, let me give you an analogy.
When we have Republican presidents, the media constantly reports either a bad economy or an economy on the verge of collapsing.
It's standard operating procedure.
A Republican in the White House and the news every day, every week will be either we're on the verge of economic collapse or the economy has already collapsed.
And yet they'll go out and talk to people, ask them how they're doing.
In fact, there's never been better.
But I know there's a lot of suffering out there.
There's a lot of people in pain.
I know the economy's not good, but I gotta tell you I'm doing great.
Well, wait.
How can the economy be doing really horribly?
How can it be so bad?
But you're okay.
Well, I don't know if it's okay for me.
But I'm I'm reading all it's just really rotten out there.
I mean, I know the economy is we've got to think about getting rid of this Republican president because the economy's really in the tank.
But you're doing okay.
Oh, yeah, I'm fine, I'm fine.
What about your neighbors?
Well, everybody I know is doing pretty well, but it says in the news that the economy really sucks.
Well, so maybe what we have here is the same thing.
Maybe we have a media telling women multiple times a day, week, month, year, that there's sexism and discrimination and anti-women and a war on women going on, and then you talk to the women individually, and they say they've never experienced it.
How can that be?
They think sexism's all over the place.
They think there's a war on women, but they have yet to be attacked.
Simple explanation.
People believe the lies in the BS that is supposedly the news every day.
It's not the news, it's the agenda.
Disguised, the liberal agenda, disguised as news.
How are you?
Welcome back.
All right, folks, I'm gonna tell you what I think really happened on this Pope business.
I do not think, and nobody is ever going to be able to convince me that Time magazine named Pope Francis Man of the Year to thumb me in the eye or any of that.
I don't I don't think that's what happened.
Here's Here's what happened.
Whether you want to believe it or not, the left hates and despises Christianity, and particularly the Catholic Church because it's the biggest.
They do not like it at all.
I firmly believe that the left has been infiltrating the Catholic Church over the years with the full intent of discrediting it from within.
There is no respect for the Catholic Church or love or appreciation.
As I say, the left and abortion, the left and gay marriage, the left and birth control, the Catholic Church leads the opposition to those things.
And yet, Il Papa has been named Time Magazine's Man of the Year.
And Time Magazine is the left-wing media.
They are Time Warner.
They are it.
They're as much ranking members as any other organization.
New York Times, Washington Post, you name it.
I think what happened here is they became aware of what Il Papa said about capitalism aided by me.
I did make a big deal of it.
I think when they found out about it, they were so excited that the Catholic Church, which they've been trying to destroy, sided against some aspect, a major aspect of this country that they had to reward it.
I think that's what happened.
Dick Cheney was asked, let's see, where was he?
It was on Neil Cavuto last week.
Before Time Magazine had picked their man of the year, there was just a list of candidates out there.
And they asked Cheney, Cavuto asked Cheney what he thought, and he said, uh, you know, I'm speechless.
Uh, it's a pretty crappy list.
And the people on the list at the time Cheney commented were Edward Snowden, Kathleen Sabutius, Basher Assad, and Miley Cyrus.
Those were the potential candidates for man of the year last Thursday.
But then the Pope entered the scene at the last minute.
Teddy Bruski, the former great linebacker for the New England Patriots, has ripped into the NFL for their new rules.
The great tight end for the Patriots, the Gronk, Ron Gronkowski was hit and totally blew out his knee Sunday afternoon, a game against the Cleveland Browns.
And the defensive back, TJ Wardo hit him, said, Look, I'm going low because if we go high, we're going to get penalized and fined.
Helmet to helmet stuff.
I'm not going anywhere near the head.
I'm not going anywhere above the waist.
Bruce ripped into the NFL's crackdown on hits to the head yesterday, predicting that knee injuries are going to replace concussions as the new standard of unacceptable, horrible, ghastly injury in the NFL because of the way players have responded to the application of the new rules, claiming you can't use the crown of the helmet, you can't go, you know, no more helmet to helmet stuff.
It's gotten so bad that shoulder to shoulder hits are being called helmet to helmet now.
And the referees have been told, don't take any chances out there.
If you, if anything looks like it's a helmet to helmet hit, you call it.
And they're calling it, and the replay is showing that many of these, not all of them, but many of them are shoulder to shoulder.
They're not helmet to helmet.
Players are frightened of being fined for helmet to helmet hits.
So the new phenomenon, and see, this is another example of dynamic versus static.
So here's the NFL.
Concussions become the big thing we can't have anymore.
It's horrible, it's rotten, it's bad, can't have it.
So rules change.
And no more helmet to helmet.
And so it's not considered well, what's going to be the reaction to this?
I mean, the defense still has to tackle people.
They're going to go low.
And they're blowing out knees now.
And Brucey thinks that they're going to be so many knee in the and the bron the Gronk's injury was pretty it was a graphic thing to see.
And the Gronk even suffered a concussion on the hit when his head hit the turf.
And he wasn't even hit and head.
Brusy has a point.
These guys, I don't care where rules makers.
I know where to go, where you find them.
But if they in any way tend to dictatorial or authoritarian, they have no concept of a dynamic response.
Tax increase rule or any kind of economic rule, new regulations.
There are going to be people that will find ways around it that will cause pain and suffering elsewhere that people don't consider.
And then they throw up their heel.
Oh my God, oh my God, we never thought of this.
Well, it's too late now.
And uh knee injuries in the NFL, they're just as devastating in the sense it can end a career with one hit.
I mean, literally, and a career.
Uh Essex Vermont, Bev, you're next.
I'm glad you waited.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Yes.
Um, before I make my really, really serious comment, can I make a high lighthearted one about football?
Oh, yeah, by all means.
I heard what you just said, and I'm thinking, you know, I think they're gonna have to go to flag football instead of this uh tackle stuff.
Well uh the politically correct crowd's gonna take him right there.
It just get people are gonna say it's like this guy Bob Ryan at the Boston Globe.
You know, I it's a c he wrote he's been covering football for decades.
He says, I apologize.
I apologize for being responsible for promoting this game that maims people, and it says horrible things about our country.
This is not some little schlub getting started in a small town.
It's Bob Ryan of the Boston Globe apologizing for the role he's played in popularizing this game that maims people.
And it doesn't make any sense in America that it's the most popular sport that actually kills people, maimes people, and shortens their lives.
How can we be doing this?
And I'm I'm I don't think the people in the NFL understand the forces on the left.
You make a joke here about flag football, and and but the problem is when you start making jokes about the left, they almost always at some point come true to one extent or another.
Wow.
Well, I called uh really quickly because I was on my way home from my class and I heard your um percentages dealing with Barack Obama, and I got home and I called right away and was shocked I actually got through.
But I totally, totally feel that he doesn't care beans about his percentages go down.
I I think now that he's in his second term, he could care less what we think about him.
He's gonna have, you know, a free ride pretty much for the rest of his life.
I think if he's got people pulling his strings, which I kind of think he does, then he's gonna try to keep them happy because uh What do you mean, people pulling his strings?
Uh well, I think that he's got people that are paying him money.
I mean, all the um You mean he's not his own man, he's not his own boss, they're powerful forces that are that got him nominated, got him elected, and they're basically able to tell him what to do.
He may think he is at some point, and I personally think that he has a lot of people that are telling him what to do.
And I think he doesn't really care about the American people other than trying to keep or quote unquote safe face.
But after all of the different things going on, I personally, like I said, when I heard what you were saying, I think he laughs at us.
I totally think he just uh closes the door and just laughs at the literal fools he's making of the American people.
And it irritates me to no end, but I just f firmly believe that.
You are not alone.
I can tell you that uh a lot of people think that there's a power structure behind the throne that issues orders and uh promises great things if they're followed uh riches and money after leave office.
A lot of people think this.
And a case of Obama, I I think there's a lot of uh truth to what you say, in the sense that the day-to-day effect of his policies-I don't think he cares.
I don't think he cares the website doesn't work.
I don't think he cares.
I think he desperately cares about transforming this country.
I think he's totally motivated by whatever he thinks is wrong with this country.
And I think he's inspired by his chance at finally...
Finally cutting this country down to size or transforming into what he thinks it ought to be, because he thinks it was founded in an unjust, unfair, unequal way.
And uh I I think there's a lot of anger behind people like Obama.
And now, day-to-day minutia, he doesn't care.
Because he cares about the end result, where it's all going to end up.
That's that's his objective.
I also think that you're you're right in the sense that he doesn't care about public opinion and its impact on the outcome of his policies, particularly in the second term, but he is a narcissist.
And he does love being loved.
Um I I now you sound like you think he is one of these uh authoritarian dictators who doesn't mind if people hate his guts because he still rules them.
He's still got power room.
It doesn't matter what they think.
And you may be right.
I I uh I happen to think that he requires a lot of adulation.
I don't think he is a strong person, like maybe when you're talking about a dictator like people that are to be feared, um, like in the other countries with communism and those type of things, I believe that he I think what you just said about him loving adulation is probably right on, but I think he doesn't care.
Look, the thing is being a dictator.
The thing to remember about Barack Obama, you know, all these personality things are fine, fun to talk about.
But the thing to remember the guy's a statist.
He is a socialist.
He believes people are incapable and incompetent in running their own lives.
He believes that everybody ought to be controlled by government.
He believes that government is good, government's the answer, government discover he believe he wants power.
He thirsts for power over people.
He doesn't care about the Constitution.
I mean, uh the the personality quirks, I mean, they're they're, you know, whatever they are.
But the threat posed by Obama is the threat posed by every statist.
And that is their total disregard and dislike for the U.S. Constitution, and their willingness to govern totally outside it.
That's the threat.
And what they cause to happen to the country in the process, creating endless dependence, breaking up and destroying families, creating a woeful, horrible economy with no opportunity for economic advancement.
Those are the real life results of everybody who's like Obama, everybody in the Democrat Party believes what Obama believes.
I I don't know that he's pulling his strings.
I think he's pulling his own.
I don't doubt their powers behind the throne, but I I don't think he needs any guidance at all in what he's doing.
Hey, folks, it's not all bad news for Obamacare.
I kid you not, Washington Post.
Under Obamacare, nearly three times as many women are getting free birth control pills.
Obamacare is a roaring success in that sense.
Three times as many women are getting free birth control.
I want to get this guy, Paul from Chicago.
Paul, I've got one minute.
I hate to give you that little time, but can you do it?
Sure can, Marsh.
Mega Catholic dittoes.
Thank you.
I just wanted to bring to your attention this whole business about the Pope and him being anti-capitalistic.
That this is a this is uh a trap by the left.
And the left, as we know, uh they uh see everything in their own graven image.
Right.
And that's exactly what they're doing in this case.
You have to understand one thing about uh about uh Catholicism, and that's that socialism, as far as Catholicism is concerned, is dead.
And the church will not address that which is already dead.
Why, why, why, why why do you why do you say that the Catholic Church thinks socialism is dead?
Not from the perspective of uh of uh the it continues to surround us and and be a problem, but from the perspective of being a viable uh philosophical and uh and economic model, the church has already addressed this.
Pope Pius XI has already said one cannot be a good Catholic and a lot of people.
Okay, so because of that, capitalism is the alternative, they're going to critically uh uh they're gonna have positive they're gonna have uh constructive criticism for capitalism.
I have to look I've got to go, but that's fascinating to me now because I hadn't heard that before.
So we'll have to delve into that when we get back at some point.
Don't go away, folks.
Well, if the Catholic Church has spoken out against socialism, it's even more curious, uh, the Pope's remarks on capitalism.
But we'll delve into that sometime soon.
We have to go now.
Thanks for being with us, folks.
▲
Export Selection