All Episodes
Previous Next
April 7, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:46
April 7, 2014, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, welcome back, my friends.
It's great to have you.
Rush Libor EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
Ten years ago, maybe not even that long ago, six years ago, the polling data on gay marriage was, you could hardly find a significant percentage of people who were for it.
Now, five, six years later, the polling data has done an amazing reversal.
Something like, if I remember this right, and I don't have this in front of me, some voluminous stuff I read over the weekend.
I think 60% of the country now favor gay marriage.
Now, do you think, just ask a question, as an open-ended question.
What are you laughing at in there, Brian?
You've got to tell me what you're laughing at.
What did I, because what you, if I said something funny, you got to tell me what it is so that I'm clued.
Oh, James said something funny.
Okay.
Do you I just want you to think about has there really been a 50 to 60 percent shift in active support for gay marriage?
Well, I'm just asking, but people are saying it.
I'm not challenging the polling data.
Don't misunderstand.
I don't, I'm not challenging the data.
I'm accepting the data 60% support gay marriage.
And in 10 years, it's gone from zero to 60%.
I'm accepting the polling data.
Well, I can draw you an analogy, I think, in perhaps answering this.
How many people voted for Barack Obama because they really supported what he intended to do versus how many people were afraid not to?
I think what's happening here, fascism equals intimidation, and the intimidation is working.
You know as well as I do that people are scared to death to tell you what they really think.
The left has politicized everything, everything, to the point that people are afraid to go against what they know to be political correctness, which is nothing more than liberal fascism, nothing more than censorship or what have you.
They're afraid to speak up against it.
They see what happens to people who speak up against it.
They see Brendan Ickex is the latest example.
They see what happens to Dan Cathy.
We had a woman call here.
I didn't want to tell a pollster I didn't like Obama.
No way.
I don't want to get involved in any controversy.
Most people don't.
I don't think that most people really believe that David Koch is filled with hatred or that I am or anybody else, but they're afraid to say they don't believe it.
And the low information, there's some people that do.
They've been successful with the low information crowd creating this notion.
But there's just a whole lot of bullying going on out there.
In the midst of an anti-bullying movement, the real bullies are claiming victim status.
They are the ones being bullied while they do the bullying and they shut everybody up.
Or most people.
Back to this woman at Mozilla.
Name is Mitchell Baker.
The reason why she calls herself Mitchell, I don't know.
Her first name is Winifred.
Name is Winifred Mitchell Baker.
And she's from Berkeley.
She's been schooled and all the problem.
Women's studies and bigotry studies and all that.
She comes right out of that.
This paragraph here.
Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech.
Equality is necessary for meaningful speech.
This is absurd.
Speech, free speech doesn't get balanced.
That's why it's called free speech.
The First Amendment to the Constitution codified for the first time in human history the notion of free speech.
Meaning a government couldn't shut you up for saying the wrong thing.
Although, guess what's happening?
The Tea Party is saying the wrong thing.
The government sticks the IRS on you under the guise that you're just filled with hatred and bigotry.
And you've got to be shut up for the public good.
Free speech doesn't get balanced.
Political speech, the first speech being considered the First Amendment, was wide open.
Nobody could, you couldn't stop any of it.
Not according to the Constitution, not according to the founders.
It doesn't get balanced.
Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech.
Equality is necessary for meaningful.
That is just lunacy.
That's absurd.
That's gobbledygook.
It's absolutely meaningless.
You cannot balance free speech.
You can't say you're free speech if.
Free speech, but free speech only if.
You can't do that and have free speech.
And goes on to talk about how diverse you are and how open you are, which they do later in their statement, and how you've listened and how you've engaged and how you've been guided by the community.
Yep.
Guided by the community, Ike is found guilty.
He gave $1,000 to traditional marriage.
Oh, no, he didn't.
He gave $1,000 to hatred, they say.
He gave $1,000 to bigotry.
Now, what happened to Brendan Eich and Dan Caffey and any number of people I could name?
These are people that engage in tolerance left and right in their businesses, in their companies.
Fat lot of good it does them.
And that's the next thing.
That's the real kind of frustrating thing.
People who engage in acts of tolerance doesn't do any good.
Bill Koch, David Koch, donate all this money.
Doesn't count, doesn't count, because they don't really mean it.
Their intentions are evil and mean-spirited and filled with hatred, and they know it.
They're just trying to cover it up.
I've had emails.
I forget how the number in front of me, how many millions we've raised from leukemia.
I can't say the number of emails I get every year.
You're just doing this to try to cover the fact that you hate people.
You can't fool us.
You don't really mean to be doing this.
You don't really care.
You're just doing this because you know people are on to you.
Well, those things come in.
They go in one ear and out the other.
Fact of the matter is, for all 25 years, I've been thinking, nobody's going to believe this crap.
And maybe they don't, but they're certainly intimidated by it.
A lot of people are.
But this is the result of everything being politicized.
The left has assigned to themselves the right or the privilege of determining everybody else's motivations and everybody else's intentions.
Theirs are good and everybody else's are bad.
And because their intentions are good, you cannot judge their results.
And because Obama's a good guy and a likable guy, he didn't really mean to do what he's doing.
No, he's trying.
He didn't mean this.
He didn't mean to screw up health care, despite the fact that he did and is and does.
He didn't mean to.
So his approval numbers plummet, not because people are mad at him, they're losing faith in the country.
And that's the real sad result here.
The thing about Obama is he's the leader of this bunch, folks.
Barack Obama is the guy enabling all of this.
Barack Obama makes Brendan Icke being fascisted out of a job possible.
It's Barack Obama who's running the never-ending campaign against these powerful, mean-spirited forces trying to undermine his good intentions and his good works.
He's the first president in my lifetime who's actually said of his opponents, they don't care about you.
They don't have any good intentions.
It's Barack Obama who last week went out to a group on the campaign trail and said he couldn't understand why Republicans don't want people to have health insurance.
Smiling and laughing.
I don't know why.
I don't know why folks want to take health insurance away from people.
I really don't know.
Nobody does.
The only person actually causing people to lose their health insurance is Barack Obama.
By virtue of his own work, by virtue of his own policies.
And anybody who opposes him, anybody who opposes, for example, Obamacare, they just want to take health care from people.
He always prays, how about anybody a good idea?
But there aren't any good ideas outside of his.
He categorizes the Republican opposition as mean-spirited, cruel, want to take everything away from you.
They want to take away your Social Security.
They want to take away your health care.
They want to cut your footstamps.
They want to take away your benefits.
His entire presidency is built on slandering the opposition, not debating it, not working together with people, not being bipartisan, which he claims he wants to be.
No, no, it's spent defaming.
And this creates an open highway for his supporters to do the same.
They bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.
They put one of ours in the hospital.
We'll put one of theirs in the morning.
Chicago Way.
He says this stuff as a president, folks.
He says this stuff.
Republican budget last called a stink burger.
Paul Ram is a stink burger.
But never, never does anybody associate ill will or bad intentions or mean-spiritedness or hatred, which he has in abundance to Barack Obama.
He has it in abundance.
He's got the biggest chip on his shoulder any man served in this office.
He's got more anger welling up in him every day.
Anger over this country and its past.
And his lack of speed and success in totally transforming it.
He thought he'd be way ahead of where he is now.
And of course, the media is right in there, folks, enabling all of this by echoing it and parroting it by creating what my friend Andy McCarthy referred to as the DC soap opera every day.
And the D.C. soap opera needs villains.
Every soap opera needs a villain.
And hello, G.O.P. Hello, Fox News.
Hello, Conservative Talk Radio.
That's who it is.
Just the way they exist.
In fact, they don't even have to listen to this program to know that it's filled with hatred and bigotry.
They have a website that will tell them every day, which does its best to lie about everything in so-called conservative media.
But Barack Obama makes all this stuff possible.
Good intentions, defining everybody else's intentions, and making sure that everybody or as many people as possible believe that any opponent to Obama just is either racist or filled with hatred.
Now, some of this may not be news to you, and it's not news to me either.
But the Mozilla thing for me, what happened to Brent and I kind of focused what really is going on here in terms of the fascism and the power in the minds of voters, people outside politics, the power of intentions, good intentions, and how that inoculates you.
It's been staring me in the face for 25 years.
It's taken me way too long to put this together.
I'm kind of embarrassed it's taken me this long.
As I said, the reason is I didn't think it'd be this successful.
No way.
I remember when Media Matters first opened up for business, and they started with a front page of me and the 25 most outrageous things I'd said about feminism.
They were hilarious.
I looked at this and I thanked them.
I said, this is some of the greatest comedy material.
No way were people going to think that they did.
That's where I missed it.
They believe this, these mischaracterizations, these lies, these.
So take a break.
We'll come back.
I want to get to your phone calls because people have been lined up and there's other stuff in the news that will dovetail with this.
Some of it's independent as well.
And we got the audio soundbite roster.
So we were just getting warmed up, folks.
I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen.
One more addendum before we get to the phones.
I meant to mention this.
The website that got everybody at Mozilla scared to death was something called OKCupid.
OKCupid is part of the match.com apparatus.
And OKCupid, they put people together, tried to pass themselves off as a gay matchmaking service, and they announced that they were going to boycott Mozilla and Firefox if Brendan Ike stayed.
So Brendan Ike's gone.
It has now been learned that the head honcho of OKCupid is a guy by the name of Sam Yeagan.
He started a company called E-Donkey.
It was a peer-to-peer site dedicated to stealing apps and programs.
It's a pirate site.
But this guy personally gave money to Utah Republican Chris Cannon.
Served in Congress from 2000, what is it?
2000.
He left Congress in 2009.
He was voted against every gay marriage, gay this initiative that came up.
And this guy at OKCupid supported him.
The guy at OKCUPID funded, according to the left, anti-gay bigotry.
Funded anti-gay hatred.
Chris Cannon.
I remember this guy.
He was in 1997 to 2009, Utah, strongly opposed same-sex marriage.
He even supported a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a man-woman-only thing.
And the guy that ran OKCupid gave money to him.
The guy that ran OKCupid suggested a boycott of Mozilla.
It was a publicity stunt.
The OKCupid guys were not into the, they were not down for the struggle.
They're not into the cause.
It was a pure publicity stunt, and it worked.
And it got a guy canned.
It got a guy forced out.
So actually, a guy who has supported anti-gay bigotry and hatred in the form of donations to a Republican congressman from Utah.
And by the way, I'm being euphemistic, of course.
Chris Cannon simply opposed gay marriage.
That equals now hatred and bigotry.
You must understand that.
It doesn't mean love of tradition.
It doesn't mean that you have a religious belief.
It doesn't mean you believe in man and woman and reproduction and nuclear family, and that's how you keep us.
It doesn't mean you believe any of that.
No, no.
If you believe in same-sex marriage, you believe in hatred and bigotry.
That's what they mean now.
So by their own definition, this guy funded anti-gay bigotry by donating to Chris Cannon.
And he's the guy who said, we're so offended by this Ike guy that we're boycotting Firefox and Mozilla.
And when that happened, then this Mitchell, what's her name, oh, no, no, please don't boycott us.
We'll get rid of Brendan.
We'll do whatever.
We'll write some meaningless pap here about equality being necessary for meaningful speeches.
They got punked by a PR stunt.
None of it matters, of course, because the left is happy with the scalp of Brendan Ike.
The whole thing, Okay, CupidMatch.com trying to pass themselves off as gay relationship matchmaking site boycotting when this Jagan guy or Jaegar, whatever his Sam was funding a Republican who very much pros same-sex marriage.
Be right back now.
Snirdly wants to know what was one of the things that I thought was funny when Media Matters rolled out their website and their front page had 25 hateful things spouted by me about feminism.
One of them was, I love the women's movement, especially when walking behind it.
They put that, that was hatred, folks.
That equaled hatred of women.
That was sexism and it was bigotry and it was hatred.
I said it in a television debate when I was in Sacramento.
The liberal mayor of Davis, California was wringing his hands over women.
I said, you got me wrong.
I love the women's movement, especially when walking behind it.
And his mouth fell open and the crew started laughing.
And that hatred, bigotry.
That just, that just, it's just, ew, it's too ugly.
It was that kind of stuff that they had on their website that I had said.
Now, one other thing.
Yeah, okay.
There are starting to be reviews of my children's books.
And without in the left-ring, the drive-by media.
And they're all, every one of them refers to the irony of me writing a children's book as a bigot and somebody that hates women and hates this and hates that.
And of course, so some reviews saying, Limbaugh obviously doing this to cover the fact that, I mean, that's exactly my point.
They somehow know what my intentions are.
They somehow know what my motivations are.
And they tell everybody.
And then every aspect of my entire life's work is intended as a cover up who I really am.
And that's how they disqualify it for themselves.
That's how they, I don't have to read these books.
I know what they're going to say.
And I know even if they're good, it's simply an attempt to fool everybody.
Limbaugh trying to recapture an image of a good guy when he's not.
This is the kind of stuff that they're writing.
About the children's books.
Not a political word in them.
He's only doing it because he knows.
And I got an email.
Rush, did you see that of the Prop 8 voters where they found Brendan Ike, his $1,000, 60% of Intel employees gave money to Prop 8, standing for traditional marriage?
60%.
I know it won.
That's the thing.
People have forgotten.
It won 52 to 47.
Yes, the majority of people in California were hatred.
That's the exact, you're exactly right.
That majority was filled with people who were either misguided by or filled with hatred and bigotry.
And they found a judge to agree.
But the point is, like in the case of Apple, 4% of Apple employees donated to Prop 8.
Intel was the only company where a majority of employees donated to Prop 8 traditional marriage.
No, that's, well, yes, they will.
The point.
So I got an email rush.
How come these guys haven't targeted anybody at Intel?
They obviously know who they are because the the records were released, made public.
You know who donated.
If one of these employees at Intel is ever named or is ever up for ceo, that's when they will go into gear.
That's when the gay mafia will arise and come up with whatever it takes to kill the guy or the woman's chances.
And maybe not just CEO, maybe somebody up for CFO.
I guarantee you this.
They've got the list of donors.
They know who worked where at that time.
And if one of those names pops up years from now as CEO anywhere, that's when they'll go into gear and take them out.
And they'll be supported and donated to bigotry and hatred of Prop 8 in 2008.
And the end result of this is that fewer and fewer people will go public if it means giving money or saying anything.
They'll just shut up.
One of the objectives of fascism is to intimidate your opponents into just giving up.
Just shutting up.
Just stop opposing us.
And that's Obama's modus operandi.
There's no one a level playing field.
They don't want anybody else on it.
They want to eliminate the opposition.
Okay, phone time.
Promised you.
Here we go.
Rich Newton, Connecticut.
Newtown, great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, I really do appreciate your call, giving the few the opportunity to speak to the million.
Well, I'm glad you waited.
I appreciate your patience.
I got to also give you a huge pat on the back, too.
I'm not sure, you know, feeding on it.
It doesn't come in one flavor, you know, that everybody wants a piece.
What you're doing is really a courageous thing for truth, simply being truthful.
And it's quite a burden that you have to carry to do that.
I really appreciate it.
But the point I wanted to make, Rush, was that, you know, the problem that's going on in this country right now is broken hearts.
And these people, you know, this dysfunctional families that's making these young people, everyone starts off with youth.
And if they don't have a father who's showing them how to do life, they want to cling to anything.
And they really do trust Obama, period.
They trust him.
And let me tell you, they'd re-elect them.
I know it.
I live and work with these people.
They really would re-elect Obama right now.
They don't care about the Constitution.
They don't care about how many people died for them to have the right to do anything that's going on around them.
It's every man for himself existence that they live right now.
And it really is a sad thing if people looked at it from this point of view.
The people who have had POPs, God bless them, had, like you've shared so much of your life, your personal life with us, Rush, not everybody had POPs in their life.
I did have a strong moral father in my life, but that's where we learned how we don't have to be afraid.
And then where do we learn our morals from?
We learn from the church.
There's a whole other thing that young people and people in general want to stay away from because that's the place where people are going to get judged.
There's no judging these people.
It's like a personal attack.
People have not been taught to take risk.
They have not been taught to learn how to get along on their own.
They're scared to death, Rush, and they trust Obama.
You know, it's not happening by accident.
It's called Obamacare.
It's not called the Fordable Health Bill.
Shoot, Health Act.
I'm saying that.
I know.
It's called the Obama phone.
It's called Obama stamps.
Trust him.
Well, there's, look, That argument that he made is irrefutable when applied to certain people.
He's basically saying that the breakup of the traditional family, he's focused on the lack of father because they're the ones that vomit us mostly.
And the government comes right in and assumes the role of father.
And it doesn't just affect young boys.
Eric, single women likewise end up looking at government as provider, protector, you name it.
And none of the rest matters.
You're exactly right.
Constitution, hell with that.
Free speech, I don't care.
Where is my phone?
I don't care where are my food stamps or whatever.
I mean, you've got to eat and you've got to live.
And I don't care about the Fourth Amendment and searches.
care.
Where am I going to get my whatever?
So I know that's also by design, by the way.
The breakup of the family.
You can trace it.
You can trace this.
You can trace it right back to 1964 and the great society in Lyndon Johnson.
You can trace it.
You can trace the bust up of the family.
You can trace the dissolution of black families.
You can trace the rampant increase in poverty.
You can trace the amount of money that has been transferred to deal with these inequalities and inequities.
And you will see that all of this charity, quote unquote, has just given rise to the need for more of it.
Hadn't solved anything.
Eric, I appreciate the call.
We will be back.
Don't go away.
All right, we're going to send out a Safari push notification.
Monologue in the first hour is up at rushlimbaugh.com.
I love that push notification.
People that miss the program and not watch it at a computer, then I get a Safari push notification telling them what they missed.
And I go right to it.
Here is Eric.
Whoa.
I thought it was the last guy.
Or that I had calling him the wrong name.
Rich was the last guy that was calling him the wrong name.
Eric in Columbus, North Carolina.
Is that right?
Yes, sir.
That's right.
Well, welcome to Program, sir.
Hello.
Thank you.
Thank you.
My point is really a distillation of a lot of things I've learned from you over 20 plus years of listening.
And that is that I think one of the reasons that we are accused of hatred by progressives is because as conservatives, we think and we move from truth to ethics, whereas progressives move from their values to ethics.
And just a quick example using the same-sex marriage thing is that as conservatives, we believe based on truth that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
So our ethics reveal that.
Well, wait, wait.
You want me to be devil's ad with you or let you go?
Why don't you go ahead and finish, and then I'll come back to it.
Okay, sure.
So on the other hand, progressives move from their values to ethics.
So they value things like compassion and tolerance and open-mindedness.
No, they don't.
Well, they think they do.
They don't value any of that.
They demand it or else.
They demand you tolerate them.
They demand you love them.
They demand you accept them.
They demand all that.
They don't have to do any of that for you.
And if you don't love them, if you don't accept them, then you hate.
Right.
That's how it works.
Yeah.
See, I would say I think that's another difference between conservatives and progressives as well.
But what you're saying there is that we strive for consistency, logical and philosophical consistency.
That matters to us.
Whereas for a progressive, all that matters is that they're just consistent in their political actions.
So it doesn't matter that philosophically they're inconsistent with their value of compassion.
All that matters is that they're practically consistent with their openness to people they consider on the fringe and their hatred towards people that disagree with them.
Well, I understand what you're saying.
And for the most part, you're right.
But some people might be scratching their heads trying to understand the fine print difference that you're making here.
But your first thing you said that they've forgotten it.
Move from that.
My bad, my bad.
That's why I want to interrupt you because I don't want to forget what you were saying.
But I didn't want you to forget what you were saying either.
I don't think they care about consistency.
I don't think that they live in an alternative universe that's not reality rooted.
They it's almost as though they know that they're outside norms.
And so the effort is to redefine norms.
You mentioned that they do X, which is why they assign hatred to us.
They really believe it's not just something they're assigning to us, hatred and bigotry.
They really believe the motivations and intentions they assign to us.
Because in that way, they lift themselves.
Yes.
They are the classic examples of making themselves feel better by diminishing and demonizing everybody else.
Right.
Yes, and I've certainly been a victim of that.
I work in higher education, so I've certainly been on the receiving end of the accusations as well as being vilified by them.
But one of the things I've seen is where they're going to begin with this, whether they're consistent with it or not, this principle of compassion, and end up with a view that agrees with same-sex marriage because I have a different conclusion on same-sex marriage.
Therefore, they're assuming I reason the same way and that I must not start with compassion, but I must start with something else, namely hatred.
So I think that's one of the reasons, at least in my experience with them, and again, kind of putting together everything I've learned from you, that they find it so easy and justifiable to accuse us of hatred because they began with compassion and end up with same-sex marriage.
Well, you're right.
I'll just speak for myself.
As far as I'm concerned, doing this radio program, there's nothing in it for me to be wrong about anything.
There's nothing in it for me to lie.
I gain nothing.
I do not want to build an audience on such what? Values.
I don't want to build an audience that lies.
I don't want to build an audience on being wrong.
Who wants to be wrong?
Every effort we make here is to be right.
Now, that alone is threatening.
Particularly when we find it.
Particularly when we arrive at it.
There is no right in their world if it isn't what or who they are.
And so the quest, they're not interested in being right.
They're not.
They just assume that that's not something they have to battle.
Well, Snirdly wants to know if I think that they're going too far, that there's some bad press about the Mozilla thing.
I've thought over the past 25 years they've gone too far a bunch of times, and they haven't ended up actually doing that.
There are some leftists who are really uncomfortable with what happened here and how.
Andrew Sullivan didn't want to be part of it.
There are a number of them that are really, because they realize with the barest change in the wind direction, all this could be turned around on them.
You start allowing fascism, you know, someday Republicans are going to win elections.
You start allowing fascism, it can come back on you.
And a lot of people are realizing, well, we don't want to go down this road, but it isn't very many.
I'll tell you where I think there is going to be a backlash, and it will be invisible.
I think what's going to happen is what is likely to happen, what might happen, I don't know, but it's possible, is that some people are going to, some people hire others.
That's the small business people, other multiple-sized corporations, companies.
You know what?
We don't want a whole lot of gay people, and they're just going to cause trouble like this.
And there's going to be a silent reaction.
I don't want this kind of trouble.
I've got a business to run here.
I can't hire people to turn my business over to a social cause.
Nobody will ever know.
It won't ever be an announced policy.
But there is always a backlash to things unacceptable to a majority of people.
Even among those who are too intimidated to express said backlash, they find a way.
Young people losing trust in the country, losing faith in the country.
That is happening.
And it's a shame.
▲
Export Selection