All Episodes
Previous Next
April 1, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:39
April 1, 2014, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Earth Shattering.
CNN broke into its coverage of no news on the Malaysian Airliner.
They actually broke into that to report that the CEO of General Motors is going to apologize.
That's big news when a CEO apologizes.
And the CEO's a woman, her name is Barra.
B A R R A. I wonder if she's a member of the UAW, and they own General Motors.
Just a second.
Anyway.
Greetings, my friends, and uh welcome back.
I see Obama is also going to go out and take a victory lap around 4.15 or 4.30 today.
As though he's really accomplished something.
Here he goes, it's 7 million.
7 million.
Why is Obama going to go out at 415 instead of the usual 12 o'clock?
I don't know.
Maybe to eliminate any commentary on the radio about what he says until the next day.
I don't know.
I but I do I he's going to go out there and say, oh man, look what I made happen.
Look what I pull off.
We got there 7 million.
We're right on schedule and everything is going well.
This is exactly what I was.
And of course it's going to be on TV, so people are going to believe it.
I don't know.
Maybe I need to do an historical look back.
Something on when did this country actually become majority stupid?
I'd actually like to know when that happened.
It might help my mental health for the uh rest of the year.
When did this country become majority stupid?
And by that I mean when did they become dumbed down?
I know, I know, I know.
I used to be the guy that refused to agree with that premise.
I know.
But it's gotten to the point, put it on TV, and it's true.
Put it on TV.
Speaking of global warming, I have it right here in a National Journal.
Uh it is a headline.
National Journal.
This is not some kook fringe operation.
It may take, it may take a global vegetarian movement to combat climate change.
It may be impossible to reach the UN's goals without significant changes in global diet, according to a new study.
If we re-byan resnik.
If we really want to cut down on global greenhouse emissions, we're gonna have to do something about cow farts.
That's what it says.
And I am not making this up.
They are now looking into the serious reduction of methane, which is what cow farts are.
It says it right here.
It's in the first line of the story in the National Journal.
It isn't me.
I'm reading from the news.
And they mean this seriously.
This is not a humor piece.
These people are not funny in the drive-by media.
Imagine.
Take any of the old deans of journalism from the old days.
Imagine them.
If we really want to cut down on global greenhouse emissions, we're going to have to do something about cow farts.
That's the conclusion of a study published today in the journal Climatic Change.
If we have any shot of reaching the intergovernmental panel on climate change's goal warming mitigation goals, the world is going to have to start eating a lot less meat.
37% of all human-cause methane emissions come from the worldwide agricultural industry.
Compared with CO2, methane is 21 times more effective at trapping heat in the Earth's atmosphere, according to the United Nations.
While transportation and electricity account for more than half of emissions in the United States, the EPA reports agriculture comprises 8% of all greenhouse gas emissions.
So, I mean, and they're dead serious.
And there's no question, UN says XOX is true.
UN says the only way to save the planet now is by eliminating cattle.
I mean, how do you stop cow farts?
I mean, frankly, the only way to get rid of cow farts is get rid of cows.
It's them or us is the way this is.
This is the next journal.
This is not some kook fringe publication.
No.
No.
No, no other animal farts matter.
That's the point.
Cow farts.
Now the problem is it's cows or cattle.
You know, we get milk from cows, too.
Not just uh this beam.
Yeah.
I guess we're supposed to go to goat milk or uh chick chicken milk.
Uh no cheese.
Any anything that you get from a cow's gotta go.
To save the planet.
If we're if well, if we're gonna be able to implement what the UN says we have to do to save the planet.
Let's go to the audio sound bites because we've got, I mean, this is this is also being ginned up today, folks, in addition to this propaganda with Obamacare.
This is last night actually on Brian Williams.
Uh this is uh I don't think it was his lead, but I mean it it's over the top.
This is what this is this is what you would hear a news anchor say in a movie when the aliens land.
And here he is reporting about a new report on global warming and climate change.
This is the NBC nightly news.
The world has never been spoken to quite this way.
We've never been warned like this before, all of us, about climate change, nor have so many countries agreed quite this much on the clear and present danger it represents.
Here is the takeaway.
Unless the world changes course quickly and dramatically, the fundamental systems that support human civilization are at risk.
Well, it sounds like he bought it all.
I just don't know if he really does.
Maybe he does.
I I I don't know what this is just so much sophistry.
This is beyond description.
It's genuinely pathetic.
Uh this this world has never been spoken to quite this way.
We have never been warned like this before.
All of us about climate change, nor have so many countries agreed quite this much on the clear and present danger it presents.
We've only been hearing this since the 70s.
You know, I I sit here and and I I do ask, is there any way of combating this?
Is there any way of creating an atmosphere where when people hear something like this, they just automatically reject it and laugh at it.
You know, I I actually I shudder when I think people watch this and soak it up and believe it.
It's a scary thought.
But you know, you you know, you know, you know, they do.
They eat this up.
Some people do just because it's on television.
So we now have next in the audio sound bites three certifiable global warming lunatics discussing climate change with Charlie Rose.
This was last night on PBS with Charlie Rose.
He spoke with Princeton University Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs Michael Oppenheimer.
Now, I remember this guy, this Oppenheimer guy.
The first time I saw him was in the summer of 1984.
He was on this week with David Brinkley.
And he said, we've got 20 years.
In 1984.
We have 20 years.
And at the time he said he couldn't conclusively prove, but that we didn't have time to find out if he was wrong.
We had, because the if he was right, the results would be so bad, we just have to get started dealing with this, whether we think we're right or not.
It's so bad.
We don't have time to be wrong.
We don't have time to wait to see if my data are incorrect.
That's the nut of what he said.
That was 1984.
That's is that what is that?
40 years ago?
I'm I'm so lousy at math.
84, 94, 04, thir 30 years ago.
30 years ago.
He said we only had 20 years.
So Charlie Rose, one of these sponges that soaks up all this stuff.
Said, well, uh, Dr. Oppenheimer, even some people who are climate deniers because they're hung up about the man-made as man-made aspect of it, are looking at what's happening in the Arctic and they're saying, yeah, something is going on.
Who are they?
Who in the world who are who are these deniers?
Because what's going on in the Arctic is that there is more ice.
It isn't melting.
This is one of these days I just feel surrounded by genuine idiocy.
I feel surrounded and consumed by it.
I feel trapped.
No matter where I turn, no matter where I look, other than with you guys, I'm seeing rampant lunacy.
Okay, so again the question, even some people who are climate deniers because they're hung up about the man-made aspect of it, are looking at what's happening in the Arctic and they're saying, yeah, something's going on.
What about it, Dr. Oppenheimer?
Every time one of these reports comes out, you convince a few more people who are died in the wool opponents.
But there's going to be a hardcore who are never going to seed on this, and there are complex reasons for that.
With some people, they just like to stand away from the crowd.
With some people it's economic self-interest.
The point is you can't wait for everybody to agree.
You know, the climate change that we're experiencing now is essentially baked in.
That is, we can't do much about what's going to happen over the next 10 or 20 years, no matter what we do on emissions, except try to protect ourselves, try to have better coping and adapting mechanisms.
But if we don't act now in reducing emissions a lot, there's going to be hell to pay for particularly the next generation.
And that's how they've always sold it, folks.
There's nothing we can do about it right now, but for our children and grandchildren, we have to act.
For as long as I've been listening to these people.
Oh, it's baked in.
And nothing we can do about it.
I mean, it's it's it's it's there.
The question is our ultimate survival.
Fifty years from now, 100 years from now, if we don't act, if we don't act, then your children and grandchildren may not know this planet the way you and I do.
If we don't act.
And here he's doing it again.
You know, Charlie, we don't have time to wait for everybody to agree.
Of course we don't have time to wait for everybody to agree because nobody is going to agree with you.
Not everybody, not even close to everybody's going to agree.
These are statists anyway.
They don't care if anybody agrees with them.
We uh can't do much.
We're we're cooked, Charlie.
The next 10 to 20 years, I mean, it's what it is.
And nothing we can do about it.
The disasters that await are the disasters that await.
They're gonna happen, and there's nothing we can do about it.
All we can try to do, Charlie, is protect ourselves.
Try to have better coping mechanisms.
Oh, don't you love the scare language?
Better coping mechanisms.
Adapting mechanisms.
For me, that just means turning up the air conditioning, but it isn't getting warmer, is the point.
I uh look up next is Jeffrey Sachs.
Jeffrey Sachs, director of Columbia University's Earth Institute.
And he then weighed in on what Oppenheimer and Charlie Rose were discussing.
We're on a trajectory, as this report makes clear, that blows the world out of the water.
Maybe a four degree centigrade rise compared to where we are right now by the end of the century.
Every red light is flashing on food supply, on safety, on storms.
This is a disaster, the current trajectory.
When you look at the time that we have to get this right, it's extremely short.
We're just at the end of being able to hold to the level that the world promised itself.
I would say December 2015 is the last chance to keep that two-degree centigrade limit.
If we miss it, it's gone.
Then we're talking about something beyond anything safe.
Then we're talking about horrible damages.
You know, this borders on irresponsible.
When you get right down to it.
Here's this guy at Columbia.
I would say, Charlie, December 15th is the last chance to keep that two centigrade.
What he means is that if if we don't drastically curtail capitalism and freedom, uh and and economic progress, that's because that's what these guys are talking about.
That's the danger.
The danger is productivity.
The danger is progress.
The danger is growing economies.
If we don't stop that, Charlie, if we don't lock in, because what we've already done, we've guaranteed ourselves that by the end of the century we're going to be two degrees centigrade higher.
And if we don't lock that in by rolling back our economy and rolling back some liberty and raising some taxes and taking away some freedom, if we don't do that by December of 2015, Charlie, then we're going to blow past that two degree centigrade limit, and it's going to end up being four degrees, and then we're talking horrible damages.
This is just irresponsible, folks.
This is not even this is I I shudder because this guy, he's uh director of the university, Columbia University Earth.
This guy's a professor.
He's teaching your kids that you're paying 50 grand a year to go to this place.
Just and here finally Michael Mann, he's the old hockey stick guy at Penn State, professor of meteorology and director of Earth System Science, and it was his chance to weigh in.
The Chinese government is actually having a serious discussion about instituting a carbon tax.
They recognize the Chinese government has recognized the degradation, the damages that the emission of carbon is doing, and they recognize that that has to be taken into account in any long-term coherent viable energy strategy.
In that sense, they're way ahead of us because we have a U.S. House of Representatives, which has a science committee that is led by politicians who reject the notion that climate change even exists.
And we can't have a serious discussion about policy as long as we've got a Congress, uh congressional leadership in the House that takes an anti-scientific stance when it comes to issues like climate change.
We've got to move past that.
So we've got to get rid of the Republicans in the House and get more people like the communist Chinese in our government, because they're running rings around us.
Anybody, have you seen a picture of Shanghai or Beijing lately?
You can't see anything.
The smog, the pollution, they're not cutting back.
These countries, the Chicons, India, they're not going to cut back on their economic growth.
And the third world countries want some economic growth.
They're not going to willingly stay poor and riding around on oxen just to keep these pointy heads happy.
What's going on here is that they can't get anybody's attention in every public opinion, Paul, global warming is down at the bottom.
So they're trying to scare people out of their pants.
Because that's all they've got.
The loan tactic that socialists have is to scare you.
And that is what they're trying to do, because they just you're not buying what they're saying.
And as they get more radical and l lunatic like this, I don't know what they expect when you tell people that cow farts?
We have to get rid of cow farts to save the planet?
I mean, nobody is gonna go for that.
I can't well.
Nobody.
But that's that's how just out of control that they have uh gotten.
So there she is, the CEO of General Motors, Mary Barra.
And I don't know how she pronounces it.
Maybe Barra?
It's B-A-R-R-A.
She might pronounce it Bara.
Anyway, she is sitting at the table.
She's testifying on whatever happened with these General Motors cars and the ignition problem that uh what kill people.
And what I want to know is, where is the UAW?
Because they own the company.
Are they sitting at the table next to her?
Are the owners taking any responsibility for these lapses?
Are they dumping it on her?
She hadn't been the CEO that long.
Maybe Henry Nostralitis Waxman will ask about that.
Here is Emile from Tom's River, New Jersey.
Welcome, sir.
Great to have you on the program.
Emil, are you there?
Looks like he says Sayanara, so we're to Kathy in Bedford, Virginia.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
I was just astonished, and I wonder if anybody else is by Kathleen Sabelius' uh admission that her two 30-something year old sons get their news from the comedy channel.
Uh why should they be any different than the other 30-year-olds?
Well, I would just uh I think I know now where they got the model for the pajama boy.
Uh from the from the Comedy Central Channel?
Oh, from Kathleen Sabeli.
Oh, Kathleen's one of her kids.
Yeah, it could well be.
Uh no, the uh college kids, hey, maybe 30s, maybe little, uh, get their news from comedy shows.
Actually, you know what the biggest source of news for I don't know what number, young, I'll say young people.
You know what you know what it is?
You know what the biggest source of news?
And no, it's not Yahoo, and it's got the drive-bys alarmed.
It's Facebook.
It is people reporting what they see on the news on Facebook, and in other people reading what their friends are saying is in the news.
That is become a primary news source for millions and millions and millions of people, is the uh the their friends on Facebook.
And what they're saying about what they saw on the news.
It's secondhand news and what they feel about it.
And that has become a that that's I think that's a bigger source of news now than even uh the Daily Show.
Well, uh it's not just kids.
In fact, kids are leaving Facebook, we're told, because their parents are signing up to it.
And so Facebook isn't cool as they're going other places.
I don't know how much of that's actually true, but that's that's what's uh that's what stated.
Sabutius actually said that her her two 30-something sons are more likely to get their information on funny or die than network TV.
Funny or die is the between two ferns show.
That's where Obama went, and that's what Kathleen Sibelius said, put them over the top.
Obama's appearance on Funny or Die between the turns between the ferns, between two ferns.
That is what that's they were able to track it.
When Obama went on that that internet TV show, that's when sign-up started going through the roof.
And so to back that up, she's bragging about her two 30-something sons more likely to get information from that show than network TV.
Now, which is more reliable?
Network TV or comedy shows.
It's a toss-up.
It uh it really is.
Here's Steve in Westchester County, New York.
Hello, sir.
I'm glad you waited.
Hi.
Good morning, uh good afternoon, Rush.
Yeah.
Uh this this whole thing with the uh these numbers for the enrollment for Obamacare.
Uh I don't believe a bit of it.
Um if you look at what the CBO had to do with correcting all the all the all the so-called accurate numbers as to what this thing was gonna cost, they had to do that time and time again.
So I don't believe these numbers, and uh, what I'd like to hear is um how how much people have already paid, not how many people have registered.
Uh in other words, can they actually fund this thing?
Well, they've actually said they don't know how many people have paid.
Right.
That's what makes this number kind of suspect anyway, because they've been saying all along that they don't know how many are actually signed up or paid.
Well, that's what I that's what ultimately determines whether this thing is going to float or not.
The dollars that's the same.
Well, I'm just gonna you know, uh you have a point there, and I'm just gonna say, if they think that they can pay for this thing with seven million people signing up, they are full of it.
That's why the seven million number you realize that's just grabbed out of the air.
That was just Sibelius say, oh, yeah, we want seven million by March 31st.
It was for for what reason?
Again, if this thing were so loved now and so universally popular, everybody be signed up.
The greatest thing on earth, right?
Obamacare.
Finally, everybody has health insurance.
Finally, everybody's gonna get medical treatment.
Finally, everybody's gonna fair access to five-star health care.
Finally, Obama made it happen.
Well, then why isn't everybody signed up?
Why aren't there lines of people waiting to get in on this great benefit?
Why are they having to to jimmy the numbers and monkey around here to say tout seven million?
That's not enough to pay for it.
And I think she even lied about that.
Oh, yeah, 7 million, we'll be well on our way to breaking even.
Bull.
There's no way.
In a country of 200 plus million, 300 million total counting kids, seven million are gonna pay for this is so it's all this giant lie.
Uh audio sound bites back to a Meghan Kelly uh last night interviewed New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.
She asked him three times to explain his embrace of Obama after Hurricane Sandy.
Three times.
She was relentless in this.
First time she said one thing that appeared to have hurt you as some in the Republican base, is what people unaffectionately refer to as your bear hug of Obama in the wake of Hurricane Sandy.
Some people on the right in particular felt betrayed by that.
They felt that you hurt Romney a week before the election in what appeared to be that time to be a very tight race.
Did you?
No.
And the best source for that information is not me, it's Mitt Romney.
And I've seen him publicly say it over and over again that it had absolutely no effect or role in the race, either subjectively for the way he felt or objectively in terms of what their polls looked like at the time.
So the answer is no.
Secondly, the other thing Mitt Romney said to me at the time was you're doing your job.
Go do your job as best you can.
I've had that job.
Meaning, Governor, you got to fix your state, go fix it.
Do your job.
I've had that job.
You're doing a great thing.
You haven't hurt me at all.
I love you, Chris.
Go I keep doing it.
Okay, so that's one time.
Next question.
Governor Romney was gracious about it, but that doesn't necessarily mean the voters will be, because there are a lot of people out there who felt that you were too effusive in your praise of the man who wanted to hold on to the White House when a lot of Republicans and independents and others didn't want him to.
To those voters who are still holding a grudge against you, what do you say?
First of all, there was not one person with possible exception of Paul Ryan in America who worked harder for Mitt Romney.
I was the first governor to come out and endorse him in the fall of 2011.
I traveled to 26 states for him.
Some people have who you're referring to have a very short memory.
Fortunately, Mitt Romney doesn't, and the fair people don't.
When that crisis hit, I was asked, has the president been responsive?
Has the president been there to help your people?
And my answer was yes.
And Megan, if I had to do it again, I would say exactly the same thing because it was the honest answer.
So she asks again.
She says they didn't want you to have such a smile on your face when you did it.
If anybody saw me smiling during Hurricane Sandy, they weren't looking at the right pictures.
These are the ABCs of me.
You ask me a question, I'm going to give you an honest answer.
Some days it may serve your political purpose, and some days it might not.
But in the end, the comfort you should take from it is I'm not changing as the wind blows.
I say what I think.
And I think that's what people should take cover from those critics.
I think many of them, at least in my interaction, are kind of over that.
Okay, so it's not a big deal anymore.
The uh the arm and arm stroll with Obama and the boardwalk figuratively speaking after Hurricane Sandy, no big deal.
One week before the watch, people have gotten over it, they've forgotten it.
And they're over it.
And she went at him three different times on that.
Have you heard that uh uh Jeb Bush seriously not considering the Republican nomination because of Bridgegate Bridge Gate and this Jeb Bush is thinking of I have just Well I know some of the establishment types are I just have you know you know me I just one little question here just one it's just me.
Why is the era of Reagan over?
But the era of Bush doesn't seem to ever be over.
Georgian Bartow, Florida.
Great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello.
Hello, thank you.
It's an honor to speak to you.
Thank you.
I yes, I wanted you to know my husband and I have been listening to and learning from you since your TV days.
Well, I appreciate that.
We we've learned a lot and we stay right on the cutting edge.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I I wanted to just disagree with you on one thing though, while I have your ear about the comment on your overrated staff.
I have to disagree with that.
I think they're doing an excellent job for you.
Well, there's things that I know that you don't, but I I'll take that under advisement.
I I called to voice my disgust and displeasure with the celebrities I've been seeing lately using their FaceTime to promote Obamacare.
Yeah.
The most recent one was the well, I call her a cutesy cook show chick.
The uh Rachel Ray program where she invited, I guess, Crazy Uncle Joe to come on and help her stir up something and put it in the oven.
Isn't that what she does?
She does she hosts a cooking show?
Yes, she does.
Like on the food network or something?
On the food network, I think that's it, and she has a lot of different products.
She's even branched out into uh pet foods and treats and things.
Well, I'll have you know I'm gonna throw out every frying pan I got that's got her name on it, and my puppies will not eat one more treat from her company.
Wow.
I don't know your frying pans or she has a cook show and she she put in little bits of her personal life from time to time.
The latest thing was her brother lost his job.
She suffers from an immune disorder of some sort, immune uh autoimmune disorder.
And her and and Uncle Joe were talking about her mother and her sister just worrying and fretting and just she came to tears about how worried they were about her brother losing his insurance.
And I must say that worrying about losing your insurance is something to worry about, but she's worth about sixty million dollars.
I would think instead of her just being so happy that they finally got the Obamacare for her brother, she would be embarrassed.
I'm outraged.
I I mean, if I had sixty million dollars, I'd buy my brother some insurance.
How do you know that she's worth sixty million dollars?
Well, uh there was a talk show yesterday that my husband listens to after yours, and one of their analyst uh researchers did some little research and said that.
Well, you know, that's not uncommon.
Sarah Jessica Parker is worth a lot of money, and she kept talking about the need for some of her family to be on welfare.
Yes.
I I you know And she supported high taxes for that.
Oh, she's my husband and I are both retired.
Our our income and our budget have changed drastically.
Yeah.
But we we chose to and still maintain our health insurance at a healthy fee every month, 1444 a month.
And my daughter and her husband cannot afford to buy insurance, even through Obamacare, I don't think.
But they they were dressed and to apply.
And we have for years paid for my grandson's insurance out of our pocket so that he will be covered.
And I hope when Big Brother finds out that they've applied for Obamacare that it doesn't cancel out his insurance.
You know, Georgian, I hear you.
When you when you hear somebody that's got sixty million dollars making this big pitch for everybody to to to pitch in to buy her family's health insurance or whatever it was, I know that's that's profoundly irrelevant.
What's the money for?
What what are you earning this money for?
If if not if not to help your family for crying out loud.
At least your family.
But where's the notion of charity beyond even your family?
Uh I hear you.
I and then they but all the answers to this are all psychological.
She's just she's just trying to service, you know, once being tight with Biden and these guys and be on the team and close close to power.
No, no, no.
She didn't.
You're you're thinking you're thinking of uh of uh Paula Dean.
Right.
I I well, I don't watch Food Networks.
I wouldn't know Rachel Ray.
Oh, I saw her.
I've never I thought she was an actress.
That's all I know.
I don't mean to offend anybody with that.
I'm not trying to, I just didn't know.
Certain elements of pop culture I haven't visited.
Food network's one of them.
Sorry.
I'd rather eat it than watch it.
Well, that's it, folks.
That's it for today.
Busy broadcast day comes to a screeching halt.
Well, for you, I continue working on tomorrow's uh program.
Show prep never stops.
Life is show prep.
We will be back tomorrow and do it all over again, fully revved up.
Look forward to it.
▲
Export Selection