All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 17, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:42
February 17, 2014, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Right there it is in the New York Times.
NBC pushes too far in bringing Bodie Miller to tears.
And we're gonna, after after we fix that, we're gonna move on to the NFL, and we're gonna clean up those locker rooms.
Ha!
How are you?
Wonderful to have you with us.
Rush Limbaugh having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Our telephone number is 800 282-2882, the email address, El Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Can I I need I don't draw a comparison here?
Something just struck me.
Cookie, I just hit me.
I wish this would have hidden me during the break so I could have asked Cookie during the break.
You know what we need to do?
Cookie, I want you to get the interview that what's her name?
Uh Aaron Andrews did with Richard Sherman following the Seahawks victory over to Forderners.
And I want to play that.
Do an AB side-by-side comparison of Richard Sherman being interviewed by Aaron Andrews and Bodie Miller being interviewed by Kristen Cooper.
Because I think it's an interesting comparison.
I'm going to go ahead and make my point because Cookie will take her a while to roll that off.
But here you have, let's do Richard Sherman.
Richard Sherman just essentially made a play that saved a win for the Seahawks against the Forderners.
He broke up a pass from Colin Capernick, intended for Michael Crabtree.
Right after the game was over.
Excuse me, Aaron Andrews goes in there and starts asking you about, and Sherman just went off.
As you all remember, went off on Crabtree, rent off on anybody daring to be critical of him and the Seahawks, and it just lit up the country.
And Sherman in that case, after that interview, it was the athlete who was vilified in social media.
Twitter and Facebook lit up, and it was all critical of Richard Sherman.
Remember that?
In this case, when the athlete cries, it is the interviewer who is vilified.
And I think it's a fascinating comparison.
Now let's add something to this mix.
I mentioned earlier that as I have uh I've read the report, the Ted Wells report, the 144 pages of what went on in the Dolphins locker room, and made the point that there's not one player on the Dolphins critical of Richie Incognito or John Jerry or Mike Pouncey.
The three guys who were engaged in what is called the bullying of Jonathan Martin.
The entire Dolphins team, there's not one exception, supports the bulliers or the bullies.
They don't look at it that way, though.
They don't look at incognito in these guys as bullying.
They looked at Martin as weak.
And then they looked at him as a snitch.
I'm not saying there's anything right or wrong.
I'm just telling you what happened to the Dolphins locker room.
While the country and the league and the media is outraged over what went on in the Dolphins locker room, as far as the Dolphins are concerned, there's nothing to see here.
So there is a huge dividing line in the locker room.
The Dolphins, nothing to see here, man.
No big deal.
Outside the locker room, everybody thinks that what went on in there is atrocious, outrageous, mean, extreme, bullying, intolerable.
But the people in the locker room, fine and dandy, nothing to see here, everything's cool.
That's a that's a huge demarcation.
Now, here we have an NBC info, babe, Bringing Bodie Miller to tears, and the country is mad at the interviewer.
In the Richard Sherman case, it was the athlete who was vilified in social media by the people of the country.
It could be argued.
Now I'm I and I fully expect some of you to have a have a fit with this.
But it could be argued that strength and confidence and bravado, as exhibited by Richard Sherman was seen as a problem.
As not good, as it bad.
And Bodie Miller being reduced to tears and collapsing in tears is celebrated and defended.
And then what does that mean?
It means that the country might, and I'm just extrapolating here, uh these are off the top of my head thoughts.
It could all mean that the country more easily identifies with victims or perceived victims, and has sympathy for the victims.
Now, I don't know that Bode Miller is actually a victim.
He's a bronze medal winner in the Olympic games.
But he's seen as a victim because of the mean interviewer and her unrelenting tactic of forcing him into tears, thinking about his recently deceased brother.
Whereas on the other hand, everybody was worried that Aaron Andrews was in a dangerous position, that this Sherman guy was out of control.
And oh no, look at what could have happened.
I I just find it a fascinating comparison.
And I'm you know, I'm always I'm studying this stuff, folks.
I make note of it, I study it because I I do relate this to politics.
You know, how how how do you get people to vote for you?
What is it you must do to get them to vote for you, care about you, feel simpatico with you?
And that's why this stuff fascinates me.
And interests me.
And I just think it's it's uh the Dolphins locker room, nothing wrong as far as they're concerned.
But outside it, that people can't relate to it, think it's horrible, outrageous, mean-spirited, the players that were in there, hey, hey, it's uh standing up really perceived, no big deal, nothing to say here.
Bodie Miller reduced to tears, country hates the interviewer.
Richard Sherman, confident, defiant.
Don't anybody attack us, you can't beat us.
You think you can beat us, you're a fool.
Richard Thurman, Sherman is a thug.
And the Twitter and Facebook universe initially lined up against him.
Just uh okay, let's do it.
Let's do the A B side-by-side comparison.
And let's do them in order.
Here's Richard Sherman, and he's talking to Aaron Andrews.
This is January 19th, after the Seahawks had beat the San Francisco Fortiners.
On the best corner of the game, will you try me with a sorry receiver like Crabtree?
That's the result you won't get.
Don't you ever talk about me?
Who was talking about you?
Crotchy, don't you open your mouth about the best?
I'm gonna set it for you real quick.
Crabtree!
Crabtree, don't you open your mouth about best?
Almost shut it up for you real quick.
Don't talk about memorable crab tree.
Twitter lights up hating the guy.
Who does he think he is?
Now, Kristen Cooper talking to Bodie Miller.
Bodie, you're showing so much emotion down here.
What's going through your mind?
Um, I mean, a lot, obviously.
Just uh a long struggle coming in here.
And uh just a tough year.
And uh I know you wanted to be here with Chile, really experiencing these games, and how much does it mean to you to to come up with a great performance for him and was it for him?
Um I mean I don't know if it's really for him, but I wanted to come here and I don't know, I guess make myself proud, but when you're looking up in the sky at the start, we see you there, and it just looks like you're talking to somebody.
What's going on there?
And now head in his hands, and he's collapsing while crying.
That's what's going on.
Okay, so there you have it.
Side by side.
The Twitter universe thinks that Kristen Cooper is the embodiment of Corella Deville.
They have to say horrible, rotten to the core, mean spirited, extremist, insensitive, and all that.
The Richard Sherman interview, they hate it, Sherman.
And there's I guarantee you, you do not, when you listen to Richard Sherman, the last thing you think of as victim.
When you listen to Bodie Miller, you think, well, this poor guy being victim.
just one here and this woman is making him cry.
It's horrible.
It's mean.
Yes, interesting to me.
Gotta take a brief time out.
We'll do that, be back.
It's time to get your phone calls in here, too, folks.
People have been patiently waiting.
Sit tight, much more straight ahead.
What?
Me?
There is no way.
I don't care what would ever happen.
I will never be seen as a victim of anything.
Not by the drive-by, is not by the left.
Snerdley says, hey, you know what could you pull off if you could make yourself a victim?
I couldn't.
Anything bad happens to me, I'm it it's gonna be well deserved.
It's gonna be about time, it's gonna be long overdo, whatever.
There's no way I could ever be if I wouldn't want to be a victim.
Number one.
I'd be embarrassed if I was being looked at as a victim.
Oh no.
But I couldn't be anyway.
I mean, victimhood is reserved for for only certain types.
I couldn't be a victim.
If I if I if I cried on national TV, they would laugh and call me weak.
They would not call me a victim.
They would not be sympathetic.
No way.
Ain't gonna happen.
I wouldn't do it anyway.
That's not the point.
I'm just making a illustration.
Well, before we go to the calls, you gotta hear Pat Cadell.
I mentioned this, but I want you to hear Cadell say it was last night on the uh on the Fox report on the uh Fox News channel talking about the IRS targeting Tea Party groups.
The reason is the establishment of Republicans want the IRS to go after the Tea Parties.
Got it?
They want to go after the Tea Parties because the Tea Parties are a outside threat to their power hole.
And I'm telling you, the lobbying consulting class of the Republican Party and Republican leadership who have been attacking the Tea Parties and alienating them, they want the IRS to the That is a serious charge.
That is a very serious charge.
That the Republican establishment is aligned with Obama and is okay with Obama.
Using the IRS to investigate the Tea Party.
But it's believable.
Because we know the Republican establishment, the political class in Washington, is spreading the word that they are not gonna criticize Hillary.
It isn't gonna happen, and we shouldn't either.
It shouldn't happen.
It won't help anybody to criticize the Clintons.
At least not from the 90s, maybe go after her on Benghazi.
But but if anybody does that, they'll say, no, no, no, leave Benghazi alone.
And pretty soon they're gonna say no criticism of the Clintons.
That's not gonna help us.
You watch.
Here is Stephen Daytona, Florida.
Steve, I'm glad you waited.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hey, thank you very much for taking my call rush.
And uh I appreciate all you do to keep us peons uh in the end of the game here.
Hey, you know, one thing you uh you forgot to mention when you're talking about how far the Democrats uh like to reach to find items they can uh bring up against uh potential candidates is uh how far they went back for George Bush's uh DWI.
Oh hell, you're right.
But not just that.
Do you remember back in nineteen uh ninety-two?
They accused George H.W. Bush of getting on an HR seventy one and flying to Paris and negotiating with the Iranians to keep our hostages in hostage.
Absolutely.
You know, it's not what really happens, it's what they think might happen.
It's the seriousness of the charge, not the nature of the evidence.
There you go.
But you know, here's the deal.
The Republicans either need to go for the throats and and and get it over with or get out of the game.
I mean, you know, enough's enough.
No, no.
Steve, here, look, this is this is it's now, it's now clear what's happening.
Folks, there is no conservative movement inside the beltway.
The conservative movement is everywhere throughout the rest of the country, but there is no conservative movement in Washington.
There's no conservative movement in the media.
There isn't any conservative movement in the Republican Party.
There is not that there is not the closest that you would come would be Heritage.
Heritage Foundation, uh Hillsdale College has uh a satellite office there.
Freedom works, but but they're really not of Washington.
They're outside get office there, but they do their work out in the grassroots.
In terms of Republican electoral politics, there is no conservative movement inside Washington.
And therefore there's no conservative uh impetus in the consultant class, in the political class, uh, in the elected establishment class, what there is is quite the opposite.
There is an effort to undermine the conservative movement inside the beltway.
And that's what Cadell is saying here.
If if the Republican establishment is willing to side with Obama on IRS investigations of the Tea Party, the meaning is pretty clear.
They do not want the Tea Party to have anything to do with a Republican, and they really, they really would prefer to lose rather than win with the Tea Party claiming credit.
Any part of credit.
If the Republican Party wins because of the Tea Party, not good.
And if you doubt me, let's go back to 2010, the midterms, a clear Tea Party landslide.
You know as well as I do that the Republican Party made no effort to connect with the Tea Party at that time.
It was a made-to-order connection.
Here you had average ordinary Americans getting involved in politics for the first time in an organized way.
And they were so successful.
And what were they opposed to?
Obamacare and the debt.
They were opposed to the Democrat Party.
And they simply stood up and said no more.
And delivered one of the biggest landslide defeats for the Democrat Party in our lifetimes.
And the Republican Party didn't move an inch in their direction.
Now there are some Tea Party members in the House and Senate.
And they've always been, even before they were called Tea Party people, they were there, conservatives.
But you look how they're marginalized by the establishment.
So it's clear to me the establishment Republicans would just as soon lose a couple of elections if that meant getting rid of the Tea Party.
Now you probably say, why, Rush?
What?
It's all about the Republican establishment is really no different than the Democrats in terms of wanting there to be a big government.
That's what Washington is big government.
Everybody that works there wants to control it.
Everybody there wants the power of being in charge of the big government.
The people that want to reduce the role of government, reduce this, they're the enemy.
They're Democrats, Republicans, they're Martians.
They're the enemy.
It's all about money and controlling it.
Being in charge of it.
Nobody wants it to get smaller there.
Nobody there wants it to get smaller.
They want to run it.
They'll trade winning elections back and forth, the party establishments will.
However, the thing that remains the enigma to me is the Republican establishment doesn't seem to get that the Democrat Party establishment does not want to coexist with them.
They don't want to share stewardship of big government, election to election.
The Democrat establishment wants to wipe them out.
And on the surface, it doesn't appear the Republican establishment gets that.
That's the curious thing.
Anyway, I appreciate the call, Steve, very much.
We've got to take another obscene profit timeout break here, but we'll be back before you know it.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Ill Rushbo, executing his signed host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
And a Floyd Iowa next.
This is Jennifer, great to have you on the program.
Hey Rush, how are you doing today?
I'm well, thank you very much.
Good.
Hey, I was just calling about the um the Republican Party, I feel like the head of the Republican Party, they're Democrats.
They're telling us not to say anything critical about Hillary Clinton.
I mean, that's just what the Democrats want.
Well, not only that, they're telling us not to say anything critical about Bill Clinton.
Mm-hmm.
Yes, and um I just I look at that, and they to me it's like it's just a game to them.
And they should be fighting for this country.
They shouldn't worry about this game.
They should worry about getting the right person to office who helped bring this country back to the way it is.
Well, you know, you've just you've just hit on something else that that Jennifer is really important to note, and that is this.
The Republican establishment does not think the country is in crisis, as you and I do.
This level of debt, uh Obamacare, unemployment, economy, it's just a cycle.
Like there are always cycles in the country and in politics.
But there is no crisis.
The country as founded is not threatened.
That's that's kook talk, they think.
And they really do.
And that is uh I think one of the most important points to make in illustrating the differences.
There is no crisis.
There is no need to save the country.
The country's not threatened, is founded.
That's silly talk, they think.
Now, you and I look at this entirely differently.
We think there is an assault on the country by the Democrat Party and by the worldwide left.
We think there is an existential threat to our children and grandchildren.
That the American dream for them is getting harder and harder and harder, and it's being done on purpose.
The Republican establishment don't even want to consider that.
They don't even want to go there.
That to them is embarrassing kook talk.
And to sign on with that, to agree with that is to be compared to the kooks who believe it.
So there's not even really any any common ground there.
Now, as to the criticism of the Clintons, it really shouldn't surprise anybody that this is the Republican view.
They don't want there to be any criticism of Obama.
There are two reasons why they don't want Hillary being criticized.
Well, there's more to two, but the two basic reasons are Hillary's a woman.
And the Republicans are in the middle of being accused of running a war on women.
And so any criticism of Hillary feeds into the idea that Republicans hate women.
So they don't even want to go there.
The second reason is that they look at the criticism of the Clintons in the 90s as unsuccessful.
They look, in fact, not only unsuccessful, they think that it hurt.
They think the never-ending criticism of the Clintons and harping on Lewinsky and impeachment Actually damaged the Republican Party.
And they just don't want to revisit it.
And there are smaller reasons in addition to those two big ones.
But the war on women and it didn't work last time are two of the big ones.
Maybe a third reason that's equally as as relevant is along the lines of the of the war on women, first woman president, perhaps, potentially, they just they just don't want to go there.
They don't want to do that kind of criticism.
They don't want to have to defend people to do it.
They believe that.
I'm telling you, don't doubt me.
They believe this notion that's been put out there by the media and so forth that the independents don't like criticism of anybody.
The independents, if you start criticizing Democrats, be it Obama or Hillary or Bill, the independents are going to leave you in droves.
The independents want us to work together.
They don't want all of this partisanship.
I'm convinced actually believe that.
And I recent history.
No.
Snerdley just said, well, they got their way with no, they think Obama won because people like us were being too critical of it.
We would just, if we'd have just stayed away from Jeremiah Wright and all that stuff, that Obama might have been beaten.
But no, we had to go make it personally.
Independents didn't like that, blame the whole party for it.
guarantee you they think that.
Now, the Hillary candidacy, you know, I'm going to remind you of this.
I have been wrong every time I have predicted Mrs. Clinton's future movements.
And I'm a student of the women's movement when walking behind it.
And that's how I've observed Mrs. Clinton.
And every time I have predicted she wouldn't run, I've been wrong.
I didn't think she would run for New York senator, and she did.
That's really the only time I thought she would.
There might have been a second time.
But I'm I'm right, but I don't think she's going to run in 2016.
And I'll go further.
It's even if I'm wrong again, and if she does run, I don't think I don't know of any front runner who has actually won anything in a long, long time.
And she is the presumptive front runner right now.
But then you get Charlie Cook doing a story, you know, she's too old.
She's going to be too old in 2016.
What he's not saying, what is it, what does her age matter?
Well, guys, don't make me say this, folks.
But nobody had a problem with Reagan's age.
She'd be just as old as Reagan when he ran.
But why is it Charlie Cook himself says here?
If Hillary is elected, she'll be as old as Reagan was in his first term.
Well, nobody holds that against Reagan.
Even now.
So why are we holding it against Hillary?
Well does it matter that she be as old as Reagan?
If it wasn't a problem for the country when Reagan was elected his age, why would it be for Hillary?
Well, it is physical.
It has to do with appearances.
We are who we are.
And look at folks, connect the dots yourself.
You know what I'm saying?
There's no need to state it here.
What's what is the only difference in Hillary Clinton at 70 and Ronald Reagan at 70?
You're saying that Botox and plastic surgery can overcome this.
Okay.
Okay, then you're then it's not a problem.
Then you're saying that Charlie Cook is wrong.
She's not going to look old because of Botox, the John Kerry Treatment and uh uh other other kinds of uh okay then if if that's okay if if if that if they can make Hillary not look her age, which is what you're saying.
Because that's what's gotta be what Cook's talking about.
What is this too old?
Reagan wasn't too old.
Why is she too old?
It's gotta be something else.
But there's another factor to this.
And right here it is in the National Journal.
I don't know who the author of the piece is.
This is where Ron Fournier writes.
Maybe it's him.
I know it doesn't say.
Is Hillary Clinton blocking a new generation of Democrat leaders?
In other words, there are going to be already are here in the media.
National, you got Charlie Cook, she's too old.
And now here's the National Journal.
Is she blocking a new generation?
In other words, there are some Democrats in the media start saying, wait a minute, okay, we have we have given her her chance.
We we she ran in 20 uh 2008.
That was her chance for paybacks where we paid her back for all of the excrement sandwiches she ate during the Clinton years in Arkansas and the White House and all that.
Are we gonna do it again?
Are we are we gonna go out of our way to make sure this woman gets to be president just so she gets paid back for what she did for us all those years ago?
In the meantime, when you go back to the Democrat Convention, they had that there were well, they had they had that young um mayor from San Antonio.
He and his brother.
Ah, what's the name?
I'm having a medal block on the name.
His mother is a huge community organizer activist there.
Um they didn't have, other than that guy and his brother, the mayor of San Antonio, and they and they Julian Castro, Julian Castro, right?
Or Julian, yeah, Julian Castro.
His mother's Rosie.
Rosie, and she's like a godfatherette.
Now you don't want to, you you.
So, other than that, they didn't have any young people on their in their convention.
They didn't have a bench, but there are some people in that party, I guarantee you, who are even now quietly buzzing.
Are you kidding me?
We've got to put up with another presidential run by Hillary.
Can't we move on?
They're gonna be up, they're gonna be some Democrats.
Remember, when it comes to primary elections and politics, the unity gets kind of thrown away.
You look at the battle between Hillary and Obama, for example.
And there are going to be some Democrats who are gonna think, hey, look, it's our turn.
It's our turn to shine.
We're younger, we're the future.
We don't want these old decrepit grave robbers hoping these funeral crashers.
We don't want these people continually running the party, and on the other side of that, you're gonna have Bill Clinton reading the riot act to them and telling them what will not be their future unless they get in line behind her.
So it's gonna be fascinating to watch.
Because Clinton wants back in there as much as she does, if not more.
But I mean they both do.
But in Mrs. Clinton's case, there's this huge item on the resume not yet done.
POTUS.
And as far as she and Bill are concerned, the job has been hers since 2000.
When he left, she was next up.
Now, not that year, but there would there's been this deal in the Democrat Party that Hillary is owed big time for what she's done.
If she hadn't behaved the way she did, if she hadn't remained supportive, who knows what would have happened to Clinton?
And she gave up her own life to advance his.
So it's it's been payback time ever since she left Wellesley and went to Arkansas.
And now supposedly 2016 finally is when Hillary gets to dot the I across the T on her resume, that there's gonna be some younger people in the party who are gonna say, wait a why do we have to put up with this?
Why do we, you know, the same old people that say, are we always going to have either a Clinton or Bush?
Will you with the occasional asterisk like Obama?
So, and now you've got this story.
It's Hillary Clinton blocking a new generation of Democrat leaders, Charlie Cook.
Hillary's going to be too old in 2016.
I'm just telling you the ripples.
The ripples are beginning.
And the Democrat side of things.
Yeah, I need to explain this.
Check the email.
Rush, why don't you know who writes these stories you're talking about?
It's there's a reason.
Um the the Mac OS 10 has a has a feature on their internet browser that's called Reader.
If you click on it, it strips everything but the text out of a web page.
All the ads, all every just the text, but it does not for some reason print the name of the writer.
Prints the link and the text body of the story, but it leaves out the line, the byline.
I do not know why.
And if I do not make a written note, or if I don't if I don't make a specific effort to copy and paste that line with the writer's name, then it doesn't print.
Uh that's why.
I mean, I so when I can't that doesn't say here who wrote it, it means I can't remember and I didn't make a note of it.
The second thing, the National Journal's story on on Mrs. Clinton actually is about the fact that there aren't any young Democrats.
That the Clintons have frozen out the that there is no bench, that this Hillary inevitability is keeping the Democrats from coming up with a group of potential young candidates.
That they all think they don't have a prayer because the power structure has rigged a game that it's gonna be Hillary come hell or high water in 2016, and nobody's gonna waste their chance.
And that's basically what the story's about.
And they're worried in the story, is she's too old.
What if she loses?
Then the Democrats got nothing.
They got no other than Biden.
Big whoop.
But they do have a bench.
They've got that Castro guy, the mayor of San Antonio, and there are some people there.
You know they do.
They've got some young people that want it.
You just don't know about them.
Because the the Clintons, as Kathleen Willie said the Clintons take all the oxygen.
They use it all up.
Here's John.
We have a 10-year-old young man on the phone who wants to talk to me about Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims.
His name is Johnny.
He's from Smithon, Illinois.
Hi, John.
Hi.
I'm so glad that you called.
Yeah.
Yeah.
How are you?
Good.
Well, that's wonderful.
What is it that you wanted to say?
I wanted to tell you how good they are.
I mean, I really like them.
My dad got the first one for me for Christmas, and I read it, and I really liked it.
I can't wait until the next one comes out.
Oh, that is just that is so cool.
That I can't.
John, I don't know if you know yet uh what it's like to make other people happy.
But you have just made me really, really happy.
You have given me one of the best compliments anybody could give me.
And I I can't I appreciate it.
I think there's another book coming.
Uh we put it up for pre-order on well, two Fridays ago, and it actually will be for sale on March the 11th.
And it's called Rush Revere and the First Patriots.
And it's about the Boston Tea Party, but actually more than that.
But that's the that's the event that it is uh uh built around.
And I just want to tell you, I think you're gonna like it as much, if not more, than the first one.
Yeah, I hope.
My dad's getting it for me for Christmas.
He I mean, my birthday, he already pre-ordered it.
Oh, really?
Okay, cool.
So it's it's it's on its way as soon as it's released.
Yeah.
Well, you know, John, uh, I I'll tell you what I want to do.
I I want to send you uh who's your favorite character in these books?
I really don't know.
I like them all.
Okay.
Well, then I'll tell you what, I'm gonna sign one to you, and I'm gonna send when the new one comes out, I'm gonna sign one to you and send it to you, and I'm gonna send you an audio version of Rush Revere and the and the and the Brave Pilgrims.
Just hang on so Mr. Snerdley can get the address for me to send this stuff to you when it's ready.
Don't hang up.
That's it, folks, for this busy broadcast hour, but sit tight.
As you know, there's much more on the other side here of the uh top of the hour, obscene profit timeout.
▲
Export Selection