All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 24, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:22
February 24, 2014, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 Podcast.
There's a lot in the news today that surprises me that it's in the news.
And the reason that I'm surprised that it's in the news is that nobody cared about it the first time.
So why do they think anybody's going to care about it now?
Specifically Susan Rice.
Apparently she went on TV yesterday and she was perfectly cool with her previous performances where she lied to everybody about Benghazi and video and everything.
And he said she went on TV again yesterday and she didn't have any re why should she have a remorse?
What happened?
What went wrong after her TV appearance last absolutely zip zero nauticals nobody cared about what went on in Benghazi.
I mean, the Republicans didn't even care about it as a campaign issue.
And then we've got hi, folks, how are you?
Rush Limbaugh, EIB Network off and running here.
Brand new week broadcast excellence, 800 282-2882, and the email address, Lrushbaugh EIBNet.com.
Now you've got this this business in uh in in Ukraine.
And there's one reason why the regime is not happy with what's going on in Ukraine, and it's not what you think.
The only reason, well, I wasn't the only, but I would I would predict to you the primary reason the regime is upset with what's happening in Ukraine right now is that Obama and his people are not happy with you being able to see the problems of communism right before your very eyes.
I mean, this they don't care about what's happening to Ukrainian people.
They don't care about what uh it's just that what's playing out here is the way a totalitarian state acts, and that's what they don't want anybody to see.
If anything, Obama probably called Pussa, what are you doing to me, pal?
I told you just be patient.
Be flexible with me after I win the election.
Now you're doing this and you're making you're giving people a heads up on what's heading our way here.
You gotta back off, man.
You gotta be you can't do this with the news media watching right over there at the Olympics.
Seriously, I just I just all over the uh the blogs today and in Fox News, everybody's going bonkers over Susan Rice.
Who cared about it the first time?
I'm talking about the people, the low information voters.
Nobody cared about it the first time.
Anyway, folks, it's good to be with you.
The uh telephone number, again, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-288-2, the email address Lrushbo at uh EIB net.com.
You know.
Samantha Power, if I'm talking about Susan Rice, I've got to mention Samantha Power.
Samantha Power is our UN ambassador.
Now, if you uh you may not know who she is.
If you were watching the State of the Union show, you may remember this.
Every so often the camera cut to people in the House Chamber watching the state of the coup speech.
And every so often, the camera hit on a red-headed, really freckle-faced woman who appeared to be in absolute agony and pain.
And that was her.
That was Samantha Power.
She was not in agony or pain.
She was in full total groupy adulation.
For what she was hearing from Barack Obama, she is the wife of Cass Sunstein.
is all in in terms of extreme liberalism She's also a full-fledged, as many liberals are, full-fledged, absolute idiot.
She delivered the Daniel Pearl lecture at UCLA.
And she met with Daniel Pearl's parents.
And after her lecture, you remember Daniel Pearl, Daniel Pearl, a Wall Street Journal reporter who was in route to a meeting, an interview with uh with an Al-Qaeda leader, somebody in Pakistan.
He was he was kidnapped on the way to that meeting.
And Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9-11, currently done at Club Gitmo.
We have a song he sings, New York, New York, when the trial was going to be here.
He was longing about the days he might end up being a cab driver in New York when he gets out.
Thank you.
Of Club Gitmo.
He beheaded Daniel Pearl on video, which was seen by anybody who wanted to watch it.
It was it was it was grotesque.
It was not password protected.
Anybody who wanted to watch the video of Daniel Pearl being beheaded online could.
So she is the UN ambassador.
She went out to the US UCLA and did the Daniel Pearl lecture and met with his parents.
And afterwards, this is what she tweeted.
And I defy anybody.
Not even I can translate this.
Are you ready?
Here is her tweet.
Daniel Pearl's story is a reminder that individual accountability and reconciliation are required to break cycles of violence.
That is gobbledygook.
That is utter total incoherence.
I have no idea what this means.
But I'll tell you what the root of it is.
The root of it is Samantha Power.
Just like every other leftist, and just like everybody in the regime, and just like everybody in our current populated State Department, militant Islam is not a problem.
We are.
Militant Islam is not what it is.
In fact, mainstream Christianity poses a bigger threat to this country than radical Islam does in these people's minds.
And do not doubt me on this.
Here is a Wall Street Journal reporter who was murdered on camera, beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Mohammed.
Daniel Pearl's story.
This is our UN ambassador.
Daniel Pearl's story is reminder that individual accountability what is it, his fault.
Daniel Pearl's story is a reminder that individual accountability and reconciliation?
What?
It's his fault.
We need to be accountable for what we've done, and he, as an American journalist, represents us, so we need to be a company.
She's an individual accountability and reconciliate with who?
With whom do we need to reconcile?
When it comes to militant Islam or Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.
Who?
So these two things, individual accountability and reconciliation, are required to break cycles of violence.
So Al Qaeda, the Taliban, militant Islam, worldwide international terrorism, is just part of the cycle of violence.
And somehow we need to break it.
And the way we're going to break it is with individual accountability and reconciliation.
It makes literally no sense.
All this is is a bunch of platitudinous feel-good words that she tweets makes herself feel really warm inside.
Because she has such tender feelings, and she's willing to do whatever for there to be peace and love and all that in the world.
It's absolute incoherence.
There's nobody who knows what this means.
Did the Wall Street Journal murder somebody at Al Qaeda?
Is it what kind of reconciliation or individual accountability?
Did Daniel Pearl behead somebody before Khalid Sheikh Mohammed caught him?
Now the reason I'm focusing on this is because these are the kind of people that are all over the government leading this country.
They are literal loons.
And, you know, there's the story about the FCC monitoring his back.
FCC backs off newsroom study.
You know, there are two things happening with this.
A, they never back off anything.
They just set it aside for a while, when they can bring it back when nobody's looking.
When they propose something like this that gets a lot of pushback, then they shelf it.
And they bring it back at a time when nobody will know that it's happening, or when they think there won't be any pushback.
And the way they're trying to mask this is no, wait a minute, you all are misunderstanding.
This was not about monitors in newsrooms for content.
If you go back and look at what the what the stake was actually saying, Philly mean uh mignon cleiber, she really is concerned about minority ownership.
That's all this what well right.
The questions about story selection and why and why not, it has to do with minority ownership.
It's not about minority ownership at all.
The thing, again, that is really cockaming about this is the media's already thrown in the towel.
Monitors are not needed.
Folks, there are no monitors needed in most of the newsrooms in this country.
Television, newspaper, radio, most of the places monitors aren't needed.
The media has already chosen sides.
The media's all in already.
The media has given up any pretense of accountability.
The media has chosen the narrative that they wish to support every day.
They are all in for the agenda.
These monitors aren't needed.
The guidance isn't needed.
The media has, it's very predictable.
You get a Democrat administration, you're going to get a media which promotes it and attacks its critics and makes excuses for it.
Whatever it has to do to advance the agenda.
Get a Republican, and you're going to have nothing but constant accountability, constant lies, constant misrepresentation, constant hounding, and everything is going to happen to make sure the American people hate and despise whoever the Republican president might happen to be.
That's the game.
That's already happened.
You know it as well as I do.
That's why I get frustrated, and I'll admit it to you when I get phone calls here from people, well, Russia, we gotta somehow we gotta get the media.
Media's gone, folks.
They're not, it's not even the media anymore.
There is no news.
That's uh I'm getting, I know I'm sound like a broken record on this.
But that's there is no news media per se.
Well, speaking of Piers Morgan, Piers Morgan just got lopped at CM.
What took them so long?
This guy hadn't an audience since his first day.
So they they import a Brit.
A not particularly nice sounding brit.
I mean, some British accents are kind of seductive, and okay, this just sounded nasal.
Every time I listen to Piers Morgan, I want to clear my throat and blow my nose.
I thought, my God, the guy needs a saliva drain in his mouth.
Anyway, he's gone.
They finally got rid of him, and they're chopping it up.
Well, well, chalking it up two things.
A imported Brit, and he just wouldn't let go of the second amendment, and Americans love their guns and they don't like peers and peers gone.
New York Times has a story today that they're blaming his accent as the reason he failed to connect with Americans is British.
That's bogus.
The American people are suckers for British accents.
The American people think a British accent sounds brilliant and intelligent and worldly and sophisticated.
That's why he couldn't pull that off.
His didn't, for some reason.
Timing of what odd that Piersm.
Oh, oh no, no, no.
No, I don't think, no, no, no, I don't think I had anything to do.
Snarling said, you don't find the timing odd.
So I don't think of my geez.
So Snerdle's in there thinking that because I have been harping on the fact CNN's got no audience and no ratings, and asking myself how they're still around and alive and kicking and so forth.
The whole advertising explanation about how profits from elsewhere time weren't are propping them up.
Then they get rid of Pierce Morgan's, you don't think you had anything to do with it?
No, I don't I I I for some reason somebody wised up, and Larry King's out, he raised his hand.
Hey, hey, I'm still here.
He wants the gig back.
You know what CNN's thinking of doing?
Try this.
A pairing of Anderson Cooper 210 and Kathy Griffin.
Their team on New Year's Eve.
That's what they're thinking of doing to replace Piers Morgan.
Piers Morgan, but let's go back to uh June 26th of 2013.
I think this is this is around the time where CNN announced the return of Crossfire.
The great news is that he's not back on Crossfire.
He's too old and too boring.
That's Piers Morgan talking about me.
Piers Morgan talking about me.
He played a clip of me on the 1990 edition of Crossfire.
I happen to be on it once or twice, I think twice, Max.
Played a clip and then said the great news is that he's not back on Crossfire.
He's too old and and and too boring.
He peers.
Never mind.
It doesn't matter.
Look, the politico has a story on this FCC backing off the idea of having newsroom monitors from the regime.
Right here it is.
They say, look, it was never what all the critics said.
It was just a market study to find out how and if the media is meeting the public's critical information needs on subjects like public health and politics and transportation and the environment and to encourage minority ownership.
Look, I uh I'm gonna keep looking for ways, different ways to make the point.
I mean, it's one thing to say the media is not about reporting news anymore, that they've they just exist for the advancement of the liberal agenda.
And that there's no look at no if you look at any Sunday morning show with that framework in mind, you'll see what I'm talking about.
But there are other ways of explaining this as well.
And I'm going to be exploring those in an attempt to be persuasive.
But you know, you could say some people say they've chosen the narrative.
And they've they've they're all in, folks.
There's there's no, I don't think even any pretense at uh at being the media anymore.
And there's no question that there's still a couple places where they'd get some monitors in there to intimidate people, they would put them.
Let me try it this way.
I'm I'm I'm chomping at the bit here to come up with a way to explain this.
In addition, there's nothing wrong with with with telling you there is no news anymore, that there's nothing that nothing left but the advancement of the agenda.
And that perfectly clear, understand that.
But there's there's something more to you remember when this thing first announced?
Do you remember last week when it was first announced that the regime wanted to put monitors in the newsroom?
The FCC, that's the regime, wanted to put monitors in the newsroom, read the questions to you.
They were going to examine what stories were reported, what stories weren't.
They were going to want to know why.
Certain stories were reported and others weren't, and on and on and on.
And do you remember, made the point?
There was no outrage from the mainstream media.
There was none.
Not only did there was there no outrage, I predicted it.
And if you'll also recall, Snerdley came in and we told me about it, he said, This is it.
This is the last draw.
You're gonna see these people erupt.
And I said, No, you're not.
They are not gonna erupt.
In fact, they are already doing it.
There's already support.
They're not gonna be upset at all.
And I gave him a couple of reasons why.
And here's here's the First Amendment Grants freedom by the use of that very word to the press.
Free speech, free press.
They have given up their freedom is the point.
They have tossed it away.
They've chosen something other than a free press.
They have chosen sides.
In fact, they didn't even have to choose.
It's just who they are.
You would probably be surprised to learn of the marriages that exist between people in the news and people in the media and people in government.
People in media and people in elective office, uh, or at uh various cabinet bureaucracies or wherever.
It's it's it's it's quite an incestuous revolving door.
But the media is not really engaging in a free press.
And even when there's a Republican president, what they're doing is not exercising freedom of the press.
They are in the process of protecting the agenda at that point.
When you've got a Democrat in office, it's advanced the agenda.
And of course, cream and attack the opposition.
When the opposition happens to overpower you and win the presidency, then it becomes time to protect the agenda and trash and destroy the people who are in power.
And that's the only time they will do it.
And it's been that way for quite a while.
And as such, if if the press, the founding fathers were brilliant people, they knew that a free and independent press was crucial to a representative republic remaining free once the media becomes state-run or state controlled.
I mean, the Founding Fathers knew what the various uh levels of intellect and intelligence were among the population paying attention.
They knew how important it was.
And we're reaping the benefit, well, not the benefits, or we're seeing the results here of what happens when a Susan Rice, I guess, is a good example yesterday.
Susan Rice in a normal political world would have been embarrassed and shamed to show up after having previously appeared on five Sunday morning shows and lying repeatedly about Benghazi and the reasons for it and what happened.
But instead, what happened?
She shows up and she's celebrated.
She shows up and she's applauded.
She shows up on these Sunday morning shows and is regaled as a conquering warrior.
Because what really happened was they bring Samantha Rice Susan Rice back, and the media join in an on-air celebration of her survival against the attempts for the opposition to get rid of her or to humiliate her or to diminish her.
She survived, the regime survived, the narrative on Benghazi survived.
Let's bring Susan Rice back, and we'll have an on-air celebration that is disguised as a Sunday morning news show.
And that's what it was.
They've surrendered their freedom.
Just like a lot of people have.
You've heard the old story, people, Benjamin Franklin, I think was the one who warned of it.
You can be very wary of people who will surrender a little of their freedom for a little security here, surrender more freedom for a little security there because after a while you're not going to have any freedom anywhere.
Well, they've surrendered it.
And the reason they've surrendered it is because they have been made to believe that they are ranking members of the elite.
Their assignments happen to be journalists.
Others are assigned to be an elective office.
Others are assigned positions in the bureaucracy.
Others are assigned positions of professor at institutions Of higher learning.
Others are assigned positions of community organizer.
There is no independent media.
Certainly not in Washington.
But I'll give you another example.
Al Gore.
Here we are in the midst of record cold, record ice, North and South Poles, record ice in the Great Lakes.
I just saw a satellite photo of the nearly totally frozen Great Lakes.
I think Lake Michigan, the only one that has a little free-flowing water on the surface.
It's an amazing picture.
So Al Gore goes into Kansas City over the weekend.
And the Kansas City Star does a news story on Gore coming in.
And there's not one syllable of skepticism of Al Gore's message in this report.
Al Gore walked into Kansas City and predicted.
He went to the Crown Center Hotel there.
Big ballroom.
I've been there many times.
He predicted that the Dust Bowl is on the verge of returning.
And the Kansas City Star dutifully reported that the Dust Bowl is going to soon be returning.
The Dust Bowl of the 30s, by the way, which devastated Kansas.
It was a very hot.
And it was a very dry summer.
There's only one problem.
What caused the Dust Bowl 80 years ago?
There weren't any SUVs.
So it couldn't have been CO2 buildup because that wasn't an issue back then.
So what caused the Dust Bowl?
What was man doing 80 years ago that caused the Dust Bowl?
Because whatever it is, we're still doing it.
And Al Gore marched into Kansas City to predict that the Dust Bowl is about to return.
Here's how it begins.
Al Gore has been known for his climate change warning since his 2006 movie, An Inconvenient Truth.
But the former vice president speaking Saturday in Kansas City cited many more recent examples.
How heavy use of fossil fuels is contributing to extreme weather events and trends in his view.
Gore filled a Crown Center ballroom with a 90-minute presentation using photos and videos to illustrate a litany of floods, wildfires, torrential rains, droughts, dust storms, rising sea levels, increasing world temperatures.
To those attending the conference, he noted examples of flooding in locations, both remote and closer to homes, such as Manitou Springs, Colorado.
He cited the possibility of how flooding in Pakistan could destabilize that country, a nuclear power, and the possible effect that continuing drought in California might have on the world's food supply.
Didn't mention the drought in California is man-made, not by global warming, but by water policy.
The drought in a California Central Valley has been caused by not only U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, but state environmental agencies who are diverting water from agriculture to what are said to be endangered species.
And it isn't new.
But as a result, there is a drought.
Not because of global warming, man-made climate change, but rather man-made decisions on the distribution of water.
Anyway, goes on.
I mean the Kansas City Star dutifully reports everything.
There's not one word of skepticism.
There's not any challenge.
There's not even any doubt about it.
And this is what I mean.
And so people in Kansas City not clued in, get up and read Kansas Ca on Sunday, hear about Gore's message, and now sitting there worried, scared to death in the middle of a frozen tundra about the returning Dust Bowl.
They've given up their freedom as a constitutional entity.
And instead have chosen acceptance by the elites as a fellow member of the club.
That's essentially what's happened here.
Got to take a break, folks, back with much more.
The NFL.
Heard about this?
The NFL Wants to penalize the use of the N-word 15 yards when used by the players on the field during the game.
15 yard penalty for use of the N-word in a league populated by 75% African Americans.
75% of the players are African American.
Therefore, 75% statistically of the use of the word would be by black players.
15 yard penalty.
Now there's a bunch of ways of looking at that.
And we will when we get back.
The what?
Oh.
Oh, yeah, I think I can explain that.
Snurdley asking me if I know what this security thing with Apple is.
They sent out a patch for the operating system on the iPhone on the iPad, the iPod touch.
IOS 7.0.6.
They had a they had a security vulnerability, but they haven't yet patched the max side.
But yeah, I know what it is.
Let me get into that in the next hour.
Because it's really fascinating.
If you go back, you remember when Obama at some point 2000, maybe it was after he was inaugurated.
He was hell bent on keeping his Blackberry.
And uh Bush, for example, was not allowed to email or anything because of security problems.
And so he didn't.
He stopped emailing and texting and all that.
Obama insisted and wanted to use an iPhone, and they said, and Obama himself said no, they won't let me use an iPhone because of security problems.
I have to stick with my BlackBerry.
And nobody, well, what's the deal?
I think we now have the answer.
I'll explain it in the next hour.
It's it it is kind of fascinating, actually.
Um you're not as vulnerable as the anti-Apple media wants you to believe, but it is something that you should be aware of and that they should fix.
Anyway, the N-word.
The NFL wants to now police the speech that occurs by players on the field during games.
This is not so much because giant on-field microphones are picking up about all these words, other than Peyton Manning in Omaha.
It's that they want to clean up the game.
They think that there is no excuse for the use of the N-word at any time by anybody during a game or any other time in our society or our culture.
And so they are thinking at the next round of owners' meetings of changing the rules to establish a penalty of 15 yards any time the word is uttered.
So you're watching a game and all of a sudden plays in progress, probably during shortly after the play, yellow flag goes flying.
What the hell was that?
And the first thing is uh up, somebody, somebody used the n-word, and the ref has got to go and explain the flag.
N-word, offense number 65, 15 yards.
And so everybody's gonna know that number 65 use the N-word.
But then what about what about it's only the N-word?
Yeah, it's uh it's only the N-word.
Well, it's probably not going to be challengeable.
Because there are slang iterations of it, is your point, right?
I mean, it's not just that cut and dry.
There's a whole bunch of slang pronunciations of that word by people in the know.
Well, but even if they even if it is reviewable, we're not gonna hear the review.
I mean, there's only video replay, there's no audio reply.
But then stop and think of this.
It's only 15 yards.
Using the N-word is only 15 yards.
I mean, yeah, it is the most number of yards you can be penalized outside of a half the distance of the goal line pass interference, type thing, but only 15 yards?
No loss of down, no being tossed out of the game.
This it's recent that this became an issue.
Ryan Clark, a safety for the Pittsburgh Steelers, revealed in the Pittsburgh papers yesterday that Dan Rooney, the owner of the Steelers, went to the locker room, spoke to Ike Taylor, cornerback number 24.
They have a great relationship.
Rooney said, You tell the guys, I don't want that word.
I don't want the word in the locker room.
I don't want the word in the music you play.
I don't want the word on the field on the game.
You tell the guys, I don't want it.
We are better than that.
We're not gonna have.
And Ryan Clark said there is so much respect for Mr. Rooney.
And that all of the black players on the Steelers know that he's with them, and he loves them, supported Obama, he supports them.
The Steelers are like a family.
There was so profound respect for Mr. Rooney that they all agreed to stop using the N-word.
But then it started trickling back into usage in three days.
It didn't last.
And there were all kinds of people saying, you know, reacting to this, one of the reactions, well, of course, he's the owner of the team.
It's his work environment.
Uh he ought to be able to demand that word not be used as the owner, whether they respect him or not.
He's the owner.
It's his team, it's his business.
If he doesn't want the word used, that's it, bottom line.
But there is this profound respect.
Now, Ryan Clark said, it they we did.
Everybody abided by it, and then it just because it's young guys, it's a culture.
They just, it's it's like any other word to them.
That's not gonna change.
The NFL is holding fast.
We got sound bites coming up on this, but I gotta take a break, folks.
Do not go away.
Sit tight.
The actor who plays the anchor on the HBO show newsroom, but character's name Will McAboy.
I can't, Jeff Daniels.
Jeff Daniels just tweeted, wait a minute, and he's serious.
Wait a minute.
They ban the N-word, but they can still say Redskins?
He's serious.
It's not so out there.
▲
Export Selection