All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 6, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:38
February 6, 2014, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Views expressed by the host of this program, documented to be almost always right, 99.7% of the time.
How you be, folks?
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
You know, I should add one thing.
Now, maybe I'm naive and maybe you disagree with me.
The reason that I believe it would have a giant great payoff if there were a massive education information campaign to instruct people on ideology, who liberals are, what they do, how to identify them, and how you don't want it is rooted in the belief that I think most people, a vast majority, would reject it.
I think most people that vote for liberals do not really know what they're doing.
Now, there are some true believers.
Don't misunderstand.
I know this.
This is why I still have faith and hope for the country, folks.
I really do.
I look at the polling data.
20% of the country self-identifies as liberal.
In whatever poll you look at, 40 people self-identify as conservative.
Forget Republican and Democrat.
The Democrats win that one, but it's a shrinking majority that they have in that or advantage.
But I don't believe that all these people voting Democrat are true believer liberals.
And the reason I don't believe that is how many of them are persuadable.
How many of them do convert once they learn?
There are two things they have to learn.
They have to learn what liberalism is, how to spot it, and how damaging it is.
The other thing they have to learn is everything they believe about conservatives is wrong because they've been told it by liberals.
Now, before I get to Evan Sayette here in this, which I find this utterly fascinating because it's a quest of mine to pull this off, or it's not pull it off, it's a quest of mine to continue working on this objective to have, I'll tell you what it is.
I'm trying to inform and educate as many of you as possible to be able to go out there and help liberal or help people understand what liberals are and who they are.
Forget that they're Democrats, but just instruct them about liberals.
Can't do it myself.
You are a participating part in this.
Before I get to this, though, I just saw something.
Dick Turbin, in the midst of everything going on, the Senate is going to be voting soon, I think it said, on the extension of unemployment benefits.
And it reminded me, I had a story in the stack, and I found it during the break from thefreebeacon.com, Washington Free Beacon.
Only 1.6% of American workers make the minimum wage.
A new study by the American Action Forum found that just 1.6% of American workers make at or below the federal minimum wage.
And it argues that raising the rate would do little to help the working poor.
And it goes on to talk about how Obama's pushing for an increase in the federal minimum wage, $10.10 an hour.
And by the same token, what's to tie in with the unemployment benefits?
Well, because they oftentimes will combine the two.
And so the question, if you look at it this way, less than 2% of the workforce makes minimum wage.
Why do politicians keep pushing for it?
Well, I think the answer is, A, it has nothing to do with the minimum wage.
This is another classic illustration of how liberals are tugging at emotional heartstrings.
They're not concerned about the substance of this at all.
All it does is allows them to position themselves with the disadvantaged, with the victims, as their saviors.
It also allows them to indict this unfair and unjust capitalistic economy.
The fact that less than 2% of people make minimum wage, you're not supposed to know that.
That's irrelevant.
Regardless how few people make it, it's obscene.
It's so low.
You can't be a family of four.
And the Democrats simply use it as part of their class warfare bludgeon.
And the Republicans don't know how to respond.
They respond with typical think tank answers on the minimum wage, and they lose people with that stuff.
Even though it's dead on right, they still lose people.
So here, anyway, Universal Field Theory of Liberalism, Why the Mainstream Media Gets Most Every Story, not just wrong, but as wrong as can be, was the title of a lecture given by Evan Sayette, conservative comedian and a lecturer, on January 7th at the Conservative Forum of Silicon Valley.
Conservative Forum, Silicon Valley.
There must have been five people at this.
He said, liberals believe it is an act of bigotry to be an objective reporter.
Now, I will admit, I find that brilliant.
I wish I had come up with it.
It explains a lot about trying to understand the drive-by media today.
Being objective is bigoted.
Why do you think that is?
Well, if you're objective, it means you are unfeeling toward victims.
You are ignoring the pain.
If you don't see the pain, if you don't see the failure, if you don't see the suffering and champion it, then you are worthless.
You are a bigot yourself.
The modern liberal, there's something about his ideology that leads him to invariably and inevitably side with evil over good, wrong over right, the lesser over the better, the ugly over the beautiful, the profane over the profound, and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success.
Is that not true?
It is.
Every word of it's true.
Modern liberal, something about his ideology that leads him to invariably and inevitably side with evil over good, wrong over right, the lesser over the better, the ugly over the beautiful, the profane over the profound, and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success.
I asked Cookie for some sound bites.
Sam Zell was on CNN today and defended this Perkins guy from Clanner Perkins who said that there's a witch hunt out there for the richest 1%.
And Carol Costello, our former stalker here, CNN reporter, just livid at the way Zell.
And I've got the bites.
I'm going to try to find them and I'll get to them here in a second.
Dovetails with this.
Number 16, thanks.
Okay, well, if I we'll get to it here in just a second.
Mr. Say it again: if no religion, if no culture, if no person, if no behavior, if no form of governance, if nothing is better than anything else, then success is unjust.
And there it is.
If no religion, no culture, no person, no behavior, no form of government, if nothing is better than anything else, then success is unjust.
Why should a person, a nation, a government, a religion succeed if it's not better than any other?
So liberalism says everything is equally good.
Man coexist, doesn't make everything meet in the middle, it makes the better bad.
If no religion or no culture or no person, if no behavior, if no form of government, if nothing is better than anything else, and that, by the way, manifests itself often in liberalism, it's how you arrive at believing success is unjust.
Why should a person succeed if that person's not better than anybody else?
And a person can't succeed by being better because he's not permitted to be better.
Because that's unfair.
That is itself unjust.
So when liberalism, in order to make things right, says that everything's equally good, you can't condemn anything we do.
It doesn't make everything equal meeting in the middle.
What it does is enable the bad to triumph.
And it also stigmatizes the better by making it bad.
Failure, as proved by nothing other than the fact that it has failed, is proof positive that some injustice has taken place.
Failure alone, in an individual, in a government program, in anything, just the fact that there is failure means that some injustice has taken place.
Why should a person, why should a country, a nation, a business, why should it fail if it's not worse than anything else?
And by the same logic, just by extension, if success and failure are both proof of injustice, then great success and great failure is proof of great injustice.
And at a certain point, great and sustained success and failure, Such as 6,000 years of Jewish survival thriving when it's not oppressed.
America, the longest surviving, most successful democracy.
You wonder why they hate America and Israel most?
Great and sustained successes.
And failure is proof positive, not just of great and sustained injustice, but that this injustice is intentional and part of an evil conspiracy.
In other words, there is no difference in good, evil, or bad.
You can't, bad's not worse than good.
Good's not better than evil.
Because the lesser, the failure, the injustice is always going to get the attention or the excuse or the sympathy.
Because there's always injustice to explain it.
People do not fail because they didn't try.
They didn't fail because they weren't prepared.
They failed because of an ingrained injustice, an unfair set of circumstances, an imbalance, a rig game, a what have you.
And because this is the case, you cannot say that failure is bad.
You can't say that good is better than evil because good is biased against evil.
And that's why you can't be an objective journalist without being a bigot.
Because you cannot exist as a journalist without favoring the failure, favoring the evil, favoring the because it is only failure and only evil because of the injustice of the good and the successful and the long surviving and the thriving.
There wouldn't be any evil if not for the good.
There wouldn't be any failure if not for the successful engineering it.
You may think this sounds convoluted.
And by the way, I'll submit here that 80%, 70% of people that vote for liberal don't think this way at all.
Don't misunderstand.
They can be moved by it.
They can be led to believe that this kind of convoluted thinking is rooted in compassion and fairness and diversity and equality and all.
That's what all this really to synthesize this to the modern liberal vernacular, all this is talking about is the justification for the liberal pursuit, like Obama's on this inequality pursuit now.
No, it's all rooted in this.
There isn't, there shouldn't be any failure, and because there is, it's success's fault.
And so we're going to side with the failure.
We're going to side with the lesser over the better.
We're going to side with the profane.
Take a look at pop culture.
What's loved and adored?
What's given all the sympathy?
Minorities, downtrodden, failure, Democrat Party, they rise to the top.
That's the resume enhancement.
He compared the liberal view to a game of roulette where no number is better than any other.
You can't say the winners are smarter or work harder or better than the losers.
It's just pure luck.
After the same people win and the same people lose repeatedly, you can see the losers looking over at the winner's pile and saying, you didn't build that, which is the manifestation of built-up resentment over the fact that success always succeeds.
And then, at the end of the day, to put this all into focus, who are we to judge anyway?
And that's why it's bigoted to be objective.
Because the judgment must always favor the profane, the failed, the evil, because those properties exist as the result of injustice born of the majority of success, of happiness.
And this is the perverted, convoluted, this is the way the true believers who are teaching your kids on college campaign, who are working in the basements at think tanks, devising Democrat policy papers.
This is how you get to an Obamacare health care bill, by the way.
Got to take a break, but there's more, and I still got a lot to do.
And I promised I told you I'm not going to get it all in today, and I'm not, but that just means tomorrow yearns.
And I get this.
The White House just tweeted the following, ladies and gentlemen.
Quote, worth sharing, here are six ways the Affordable Care Act benefits our economy.
And they link to an article on the White House website that talks about the CBO report.
Now, the CBO report devastates Obamacare.
Here are six ways the Affordable Care Act benefits our economy.
And I'm sure 2.5 million jobs lost people no longer imprisoned in job luck.
See what Obamacare is doing for you, freeing you up from having to have a job in order to have health care.
And they tout that as a benefit.
You think that's good for America?
Now, let me just, folks, let me wrap up this Evan Syat business with a different way of looking at this.
What the liberal mind is passionate about today, and it's been always, but for some reason in the past five years, it has really surfaced and become totally obvious.
The liberal mind is passionate about a world filled with pity, sorrow, neediness, misfortune, poverty, suspicion, mistrust, anger, exploitation, discrimination, victimization, injustice.
The people who occupy that world are called workers, minorities, the little guy, women, the unemployed.
They're all miserable.
They're all sad.
They're in poverty.
They're angry.
They're exploited.
They're discriminated.
This is what excites them.
This is what they see as this country's economic system producing.
They see people who are poor, weak, sick, wronged, cheated, oppressed, Exploited and victimized.
And of course, they bear no responsibility for these problems.
Oh, no, no.
None of these agonies, none of this misery, none of this unhappiness, none of this hopelessness is attributable to them, their ideas, or their own failings.
Nor is any of this the result of poor choices, bad habits, faulty judgment, wishful thinking, lack of ambition, low frustration.
No, no, no.
This is all the fault of success.
Or it is all the fault of happiness.
It is all the fault of triumph.
And what is the cure?
Massive authoritarian government getting even with the people who are making everybody miserable and unemployed and exploited and discriminated against.
And that's what animates them.
That's their orgasm.
That is what gets them passionate.
And that's why it's a 24-7-365 existence for them.
And they will never run out of occupants because they need that, that permanent underclass.
They need it.
It is the oxygen in their blood.
They need dismal, disappointing failure and misery to rally around.
And they love blaming success, preparedness, ambition, hard work, stick-to-evident, all the virtues that create the opposite of those circumstances are what come under attack.
And the people who hold those virtues are maligned and impugned, trashed, laughed at, made fun of.
They're not hip.
They're not cool.
No, in many cases, they're mean extremists.
Some cases, they're even the 1%.
And it's just hideous.
If you want to read more about this, there's a guy who's an author, Lyle Rossiter Jr. MD, The Liberal Mind, The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.
Madness.
He wrote it in 2006.
And it's just excellent.
And this kind of stuff is what fascinates me.
I mean, I understand it.
I see it.
I have no question, zero doubt about any liberal and what animates them and what their policies are going to be.
And it is why I think that A solution or a great step forward would be to get as many people educated and informed as possible to this.
Because until this changes, the left is always going to side with the evil over the good, failure over success.
It is why journalists will never be objective, because being objective means ignoring the plight of all of those oppressed.
Being a journalist today means finding the people responsible.
That's what journalism is today.
Find the people responsible for the misery and the destitution and call them out on it every day.
So let's go to the audio soundbite.
Sam Zell, real estate developer and so forth, is on Bloomberg TV in the Loop with Betty Liu on, I guess this is Wednesday.
And she said, let me ask you about Tom Perkins, because you're part of the 1%.
How did you feel when you read that letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal he wrote and when you heard his comments?
I guess my feeling is that he's right.
The, quote, 1% are being pummeled because it's politically convenient to do so.
The problem is that the world and this country should not talk about envy of the 1%.
It should talk about emulating the 1%.
The 1% work harder.
Okay, fighting.
Whoa, no, they're the blame.
They're the reason this is all bad.
They're the reason that there's misery.
And you're telling us we got to emulate them?
You're telling us we got to be like them?
No, no, no, no, no.
They're the responsible party.
They're the reason for the hate and the misery and the disgust and the failure and the discrimination and the victimization.
They're the reason for it.
So Zell has, he stepped in it, doesn't even know it.
Betty Lou said, but Sam, but Sam, to the person who's on minimum wage who's living below the poverty line, see?
To the person who's on minimum wage and living below the poverty line, they should try to emulate the 1%.
How are they going to do that, Sam?
How are they going to do it?
Lots of people have come from nowhere and become part of the 1%.
The politics of envy, the politics of class warfare, are what has separated America from many parts of the rest of the world.
And we have benefited dramatically from not having class warfare, from not having envy.
William Jennings Bryan in 1896 was the first person to run publicly in the United States on a platform of class warfare.
He lost.
And wisdom at the time said, this is not America.
And I think it still is not America.
Former stalker Carol Costello, CNN, played those two soundbites on her CNN show today.
And after, she just, she was beside herself.
The 1% simply work harder.
And the rest of us are simply envious of Mr. Zell's incredible wealth.
Seriously, Mr. Zell worked harder than a single mother working two jobs?
Mr. Zell talks about envying the 1%.
It's not envying all the money they have.
It's sort of like lower middle class people probably don't really respect the rich because they think the system is rigged against them.
It's not that they're envious of all this money that wealthy people have.
No, you are.
You are blaming them, Carol.
This is the exact point.
They want to be like them.
The point is, if you're going to have examples for people to follow, there's nothing wrong with following the example of people who got there by hard work.
But the left eschews that, impugns that, and trashes that, and instead says that's a hopeless route because the game's rigged, just like Carol said, you can't get there with hard work because they didn't get there with hard work.
They got there by cheating.
They got there with connections.
The only way to get where you're going to get is to let government get you there, is what they believe.
That's what's, it's sick, folks.
And that's why liberalism is destroying people's futures and taking away, stripping away their human dignity.
Here's Emile.
Emily, sorry, Emily in Idaho Falls, Idaho, she's 11 years old.
Oh, another young crumb cruncher.
How are you?
Pretty good.
How about you?
I'm never better.
I'm so glad to hear from you.
What's up?
Well, I've been reading your book, and it's awesome.
I love it.
Well, thank you.
Thank you.
Have you read it all the way through?
No, I haven't read it all the way through yet.
I'm still reading it, but it's really good.
Have you learned anything?
Well, I didn't know that the Pilgrims wore colorful clothing or that they even wanted the Speedwell before the Mayflower.
Oh, really?
Uh-huh.
Yeah, a lot of people are surprised at the Speedwell.
They never heard of the Speedwell.
I wasn't taught about the Speedwell either.
Yeah, neither was I. I've never heard of it until your book.
Yeah, I also wasn't taught about those two rotten kids that were always getting in trouble.
There was little, you know, there's creeps.
It was fun writing about those guys.
And yeah, but I'm so glad that you enjoy it because it was so much fun to do.
Yeah, thank you for writing it.
Oh, it's my pleasure.
You have, you made my day by thanking me.
The fact that you like it is icing on the cake.
Because it was written for people just like you, Emily.
It really was.
Because there's a, you know, love the country.
I want you to love it.
I want you to know the truth of how it came to be.
There's every reason in the world to be proud of your country, of the United States.
And there are too many people telling you that you shouldn't be.
And they're not telling you the truth about things.
And so I'm so happy that you got it and that you enjoy it.
Okay.
Have you heard the audio version?
No, I haven't yet.
Well, well, well, well.
We can expand your enjoyment even beyond the written page because I recorded the audio and it takes about four and a half hours straight through to listen to it.
So if you'll hang on, the nice man that answered you, was he nice when he answered your call, by the way?
Yeah.
Okay.
The nice man who answered your call, well, there was no hesitation, and it's good.
He'll get your address, and we'll send you a audio version.
It's on some CDs.
And I'm going to throw in our Ted T. Bear.
Oh, yeah, you'll love that too, Emily.
I guarantee you.
And I just, if you, if you, if you like this book, are you going to have a chance to listen to the radio show tomorrow?
Probably.
Well, don't miss it.
There might be something tomorrow that you might think is pretty cool.
Okay.
Yeah, just like 21 hours from now or so, and you'll find out.
So hang on.
Don't hang up so Mr. Snirdley can get the address that we can get the audio version and Ted T. Bear sent right out to you.
Well, I'm not going to have time as it turns out because it takes her all 28 seconds to get there.
Wanted you to hear the sound bite of Sheila Jackson Lee.
I mentioned this earlier, but I wanted you to hear.
She said that the Congress is going to be answering the call of all America by writing the executive orders Obama can sign with pride.
That's number 20.
Hold that over to Lamar.
But it's one thing when I say, well, you've got to.
▲
Export Selection