All Episodes
Previous Next
July 21, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
July 21, 2014, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome back, folks.
Great to have you.
Rush Lindbaugh here at Cutting Edge of Societal Evolution.
This is the most listened-to radio talk show in America.
It's been that way for what?
Well, not 26.
In fact, we're about to wrap up 26 years.
You realize that?
Like, in 10 days, we're going to be starting our 27th year.
Is that right?
Yeah.
That's right.
Well, whenever we hit number one, we have yet to relinquish it.
I mean, maybe a couple years, what have you.
Anyway, great, great, great to be back with you, folks.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882.
Now, we had the call from Robbie proving, in a way, my point that we live now in a world that has somehow been given over to moral equivalence.
And why is everybody criticizing our wonderful president?
It's only an hour after thing happened, and we don't know anything, and president's out there.
Robbie, the president, in that flubbed first attempt at sincerity, said Russian invaders did it.
He, in his thing last Friday, he said that we knew who did it.
So we didn't need to send NCIS over or the FBI.
But the thing is, he got a mulligan today because he was not able to fake the sincerity on Friday.
Remember during the 2004 presidential campaign, CBS did an interview with Kerry, John Kerry, served in Vietnam, by the way.
That was so bad, CBS gave him a do-over, and the tape of the reporter leaked out.
Senator Kerry, you want to give that another go?
He's so flubbed up an answer.
Forget what it was about.
So Obama got a mulligan today.
But I just want to show you how things have changed.
We have here about 30 seconds of Ronald Reagan.
And much like this event, back in 1983, over the Kamchatka Peninsula, I'll never forget it, there was a Korean Airlines flight, 007, shot down by the Russians.
They claimed that it invaded their airspace.
It was a civilian airliner.
And what made it somewhat fascinating was that the president or the head honcho of the John Birch Society was on board.
You remember that?
Forget his name.
I forget his name.
It was Larry something.
He was a congressman from Georgia.
And he was a prominent Bircher.
And he was among the dead.
And so the conspiracy theorists, the Birchers, thought that the Russians, the Soviets, shot it down because the guy was right and he was hot on the trail of the global conspiracy and the new world order.
And Larry McDonald was his name.
It's exactly right.
And so that fed into it, that it couldn't have been invasion of airspace.
It had to be done on purpose because a member of the Birch Society was on board getting close to proving the New World Order global conspiracy as authored by David Rockefeller, Zubigny Abrzhinsky.
And hell all of them.
But there was no rhyme to reason for it.
A couple Russian MiGs were scrambled and shot it down.
And Ronald Reagan went on television to speak about the shooting down of Flight 007 by the Soviet Union.
And this is enough.
This is 30 seconds.
Let you hear how, well, was there real president?
It's just a different time.
America was America.
America had moral authority.
America had a standing in the world.
Everybody looked to us.
When something like this happened, the world turned to the United States for answers, for a reaction, for a response.
We didn't demand it.
We didn't send a memo out saying, okay, everybody pay attention to us.
Okay, everybody ask us.
Okay, it just happened.
We were the moral leaders of the world because of our system.
Because of our decency, because of our goodness, because of our devotion to individual liberty, human freedom, our opposition to places like the Soviet Union and communist China.
We, the United States back then, we were what everybody in the world wanted to be.
All the citizens of the world wanted to be.
And whether we liked it or not, the world turned to us for answers, for inspiration, for explanation, for guidance, for reason.
And here is such an American president, Ronald Reagan, September 6th, 1983.
We know it will be hard to make a nation that rules its own people through force to cease using force against the rest of the world.
But we must try.
This is not a role we sought.
We preach no manifest destiny.
But like Americans who began this country and brought forth this last best hope of mankind, history has asked much of the Americans of our own time.
Much we have already given.
Much more we must be prepared to give.
He went on to talk about the responsibility the United States had.
This was a Korean airliner.
Now, yeah, they were an ally, but they're a tiny ally.
He was half a world away where this happened.
There was an American on board.
But the world looked to us for answers.
The world wanted us to tell it the truth of what happened because they didn't trust the Soviet Union to tell them the truth.
They didn't trust any of the allies of the Soviet Union, the Eastern Bloc, to tell us the truth of what happened.
The world looked to us.
And Ronald Reagan answered the call.
Now, we know it'll be hard to make a nation that rules its own people through force to cease using force against the rest of the world, but we must try.
Not a role we sought, meaning we're not aggressors.
We don't run around thumping our chests and bragging about how we're the end-all to everything.
We just were by virtue of our existence.
That's what we preach no manifest destiny means.
We do not believe that we are singularly better than anybody else.
That's not why we are and who we are, do what we do.
But like Americans who began this country and brought forth this last best hope of mankind, history has asked much of the Americans of our own time because we had a duty.
We had been given much.
We secured much for ourselves.
But as a result of our existence, we had a duty to spread it, to stand for it, and to defend it around.
This is gone now, totally.
This attitude, this belief in America simply does not exist, Especially in today's Democrat Party, and especially in today's regime, the White House at the State Department.
So you just heard Reagan, let's listen to Obama from Friday.
Forget number six.
Let's listen to Obama on Friday.
Audio soundbite number seven, just in comparison.
Here's what must happen now.
This was a global tragedy.
An Asian airliner was destroyed in European skies, filled with citizens from many countries.
So there has to be a credible international investigation into what happened.
The U.N. Security Council has endorsed this investigation, and we will hold all its members, including Russia, to their word.
The United States stands ready to provide any assistance that is necessary.
And I got to now go to my cheeseburger and fries fundraiser and one other fundraiser.
And it's great to be in Delaware.
The difference is stark, and it's evolved here from this notion of we are who we are with a confident acknowledgement of our existence to now not so subtle apology for our existence.
Can't deny that, folks.
Mr. Obama apologizes or gets close to it many, many times, has in the past, continues to portray a similar attitude.
And we stand ready to provide any assistance.
Nothing here.
There was nothing today in the mulligan.
There was no condemnation, really, of the act.
There was just we investigate.
We'll get to the bottom of it and make sure the UN gets to the bottom of this.
Member nations.
We'll hold them to it and we'll help out however we can.
Let's go back to May 21st, 2010 on my program where I, your host, foretold all of this.
We were told during the campaign, 2008, Barack Obama would be the first post-racial, post-partisan president of the United States.
Let me tell you what he is.
Barack Obama is the first post-American president of the United States.
Got to take a quick timeout.
We'll do it.
Be back right after this, my friends.
Do not go away.
Folks, we got a major uh-oh just crossed the news and sports wires.
Uh-oh.
As in, oh, oh, really?
And it's coming up in mere moments as I tease you.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, absolutely.
Here's Mrs. Clinton.
Last Thursday night to Charlie Rose who said, Ms. Clinton, what does the United States do if there's clear indication, clear evidence, that it was Russian separatists, perhaps using weapons from Russia?
And Obama had already said that it was.
But Charlie was asking Hillary, well, what do we do if there's clear evidence that it was the Russians and a Russian weapon shot done by the United States?
I think the United States has been very clear in both its criticism of Russia and Putin, its support for Poroshenko and the new Ukrainian government.
Europeans have to be the ones to take the lead on this.
It was a flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur over European territory.
There should be outrage in European capitals.
All right, there you have it.
That's this regime.
It's former Secretary of State.
Europe should take the lead on this.
Flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Limpur.
European territory.
I'll be outrageous European capitals.
Well, it's none of our business.
Here's Reagan again, September 6, 1983.
We know it will be hard to make a nation that rules its own people through force to cease using force against the rest of the world.
But we must try.
This is not a role we sought.
We preach no manifest destiny.
But like Americans who began this country and brought forth this last best hope of mankind, history has asked much of the Americans of our own time.
Much we have already given.
Much more we must be prepared to give.
There wasn't, it would have never had occurred.
It would have never occurred to Ronald Reagan to slough this off.
Well, you know what?
This happened over the Kamchatka Peninsula, and it was a Korean jet.
Let them handle it.
They ought to be flipping mad over this.
It would not have occurred to Reagan.
It wouldn't have occurred to any American back then to have that attitude about this.
9-11, now it's just, well, I know.
Rush, it's a changing world.
That it is.
That it is.
And change, and look at it.
I'm vowed in my life I'm never going to become a fuddy duddy.
But I guarantee you, not all change is good.
This is, we are not headed positive direction change.
CBS News, Pittsburgh.
This is the uh-oh.
I have it right here: Pittsburgh.cbslocal.com.
Report.
Former Pittsburgh Steeler defensive coordinator, NFL head coach, and NBC analyst Tony Dungy is making headlines after reportedly saying that he would not have drafted Michael Sam because he is gay.
Dungy told a Tampa Bay Times he would not have taken Michael Sam.
Not because I don't believe Michael Sam should have a chance to play.
I just wouldn't want to deal with all of it.
Michael Sam, a former Missouri linebacker, SEC player of the year, and openly gay, drafted in the seventh round of the NFL draft by the St. Louis Lams.
Dungy told a paper, it's not going to be totally smooth.
Things are going to happen.
Things are getting ready to happen right now, if this is true.
I mean, it says the word report is in here after reportedly saying, and it said Dungy told a Tampa Bay Times he wouldn't have taken Sam.
Not because I don't believe he should have a chance to play.
I just wouldn't want to deal with all, meaning that I mean, the Rams are not a football team this season.
They are a social experiment.
And that's what he means.
Well, I don't want to put words in his mouth.
They're just going to be a constant, the media presence is going to be there, no matter what decision the coaching man, the coaching staff makes about Sam, whether he plays or not, whether he gets cut or not, it's all going to be held up through the prism of, is it because he's gay?
If he gets cut, which I don't think he can be I frankly, just I don't think anything's in writing, but I don't think he can be.
Let's say he is, Do you imagine?
I mean, sports writers are dumber and more liberal than their news counterparts.
And they're going to be out there, and they're going to be.
The story is going to be from, was he cut because he's gay?
Was he drafted because he's gay just so the goodwill could accrue to the league?
And now they're saying he can't play.
They knew he couldn't play.
Should he have never been drafted in the first place?
It was all a publicity stunt.
That'll be one angle.
Another angle will be related to: okay, maybe he can't play.
Maybe he's good at spending.
Maybe he can't start.
But why cut him?
Why can't they make the statement of keeping the first openly gay player?
It's just not going to end.
And there's no right move that the league or the lambs can make.
It's like when there was a dearth of African-American head coaches, and then that was ameliorated somewhat with a number of them being hired.
Well, you get hired to get fired in the NFL.
So many African-American coaches after being hired were then fired.
And there was not a cacophony of charges of discrimination against black coaches after they were fired because the teams go, hey, hey, hey, hey, what do you mean discriminate?
We hired the guy.
And that pretty much held sway that ruled the roost.
But now, if Michael Sam gets cut, and they say the Rams, look, I don't even want to get into this, and I'm going to have nothing to do with it.
But if he gets cut, they better have a lot of tape.
He better play in all four preseason games.
They better have the evidence that he's cut because he just can't make it.
If that's the case, I'm not saying I don't know what is going to happen, but what Dungy is referring to as these eagle eyes are going to be on this.
And this is no longer about a football team in the NFL.
It's a social experiment.
And he's just saying if the report is accurate, he wouldn't want to deal with the distraction of it all as a coach.
Not that he doesn't think Sam should get an opportunity.
Now, Tony Dungy, speaking of moral authority, Tony Dungy has it.
Tony Dungy is in the NFL today.
He's the go-to guy for the right answer to every controversial question.
He has earned that.
Everybody wants to know what Tony.
It's, you know, what would Jesus do?
What would Dungy do?
What does Dungy think?
He's achieved that lofty perch in the NFL.
That's why this story is going to uh-oh.
Okay, attention, those of you who listen to this program who happen to report what happens on this pro when I say something about Apple, iPhone, iPad, iOS.
If you report it to a really great blog called MacDailyNews.com, you need to tell them that I was wrong.
My favorite feature has been put back in iOS 8 in the new beta.
It's been, I'm like a, I'm like a kid on Christmas morning.
My favorite feature has been put back.
And I didn't think it would be.
I just don't know why.
It's one of the things I became pessimistic about it, but it's back.
Hopefully it stays.
But I must say that I was wrong about, by the way, the Mac Data News Blue, I never did specify exactly what was taken out and what is now put back in because there's a non-disclosure agreement that you must sign if you participate in the beta program.
I did not specify what was taken out, and I've never explained it to you.
A, because I know you don't care.
I'm one of five people who does, or do.
But I just wanted to correct the record.
I was wrong.
They did put it back in, and I think it's even been improved.
And for those of you curious, try entering a calendar event an hour or two ahead.
What do you just fake it?
Make it up at a lunch event, two hours, find a restaurant, put the address in there, and then see if it shows up in the next destination section of the notification center, the today section.
See if it's there.
You'll see what I mean.
That's it.
Enough inside baseball.
Here's Mike in Wilmington, North Carolina.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Good afternoon, Roger.
Pleasure to speak with you again.
Have you found Raganosha, Missouri yet?
Have I found... Raganosha.
Have I found Missouri yet?
Braggadocia, Missouri.
Down near Hayfield.
Have you located that town yet?
I'm totally lost.
I've never heard of Braggadocia, Missouri.
Yeah, well, it's just south of the Cape.
We spoke before, and, you know, I figured you might have went in, looked it up, and tried to find it.
Anyway, I'd love to speak with you, but I've got a little message for Robbie, our friend Robbie.
Hey, Robbie, NCIS, are you serious?
Pray tell, what information do you expect the NCIS to obtain?
But Mike, see, that's the point.
It's a TV show.
That's reality now.
Well, he's a good old boy, so we have to assume he was referring to the NCSP.
But let's go ahead and do him a favor.
Robbie, pick up your 12-gauge and pump a couple rounds through your TV set because you are stupid.
There used to be hosts that would have responded that way to Robbie.
I have never been a host who would have responded.
I mean, I've never, I mean, that's cruel, Mike.
Hey, Robbie, why don't you grab your 12 gauge and pump a couple of rounds through your TV set because I, as host, would never say that to a caller.
That's why I say I'm the politest host out there.
What Robbie's point was was that, hey, why should we jump thinking?
Why we got an Obama's chili here?
We don't know what happened.
He didn't cause it.
And see, his question really brings to the forefront a serious, I hesitate to use the word problem because it's overdone.
It just, it really reflects a major change in the American people's own attitude about their own country from what it once was and used to be versus what it is now.
And it's not good.
And it all started.
Well, it's hard to say when it started, but the attack on the whole concept of American exceptionalism is a reflection of it.
This idea that, folks, I'll tell you the root here is that everybody's the same and everybody's equal and nobody's better than anybody else.
Wherever that started, and it's maybe started in grade school, junior high, the public school system 30 years ago, the idea that somebody's better, remember outcome-based education?
If you thought two plus two was five, that was okay.
It was okay.
We were not going to humiliate you and tell you the truth so you could learn from it.
We're going to wait for you to figure out on your own, and we're going to penalize people who were fast learners and slow them down because it wasn't fair that some people were smarter than others, and it wasn't fair that they learned faster than others.
So we're going to slow them to this whole notion that there isn't anything significant in achieving anything.
It's typified by Elizabeth Warren and Obama running around to every CEO, you didn't build it.
To every entrepreneur who's built a business, you didn't do that.
You could have done that without the business, without the government, without citizens and taxes.
You didn't do that.
This all-out assault on achievement, on excellence, on improving, on getting better, on being the best.
I mean, look at how many schools have gotten rid of valedictorian salutary because it isn't fair.
Not everybody can be.
So we're not going to just, we're not going to single out one person and give them an award for being the best in the school.
It's not fair.
This has been going on for years, and now it's become an attitude about the country.
I'm telling you, there's no good here.
No matter how deeply you want to take this, this all-out assault.
Let me put it a different way.
This blitzkrieg on sameness and equality, particularly when it comes to equality of outcome, that everybody must be the same.
And when there are disparities and differences, we got to punish the people at the top.
The people who earn more, we're going to take more.
The people who achieve more, we're going to take more from them.
The people who do better in school, we're going to redistribute the grades.
There is not, there's a guilt associated with achieving.
There's a guilt associated with the success.
There's an attempt been made to make people feel guilty about achieving and to make other people feel comfortable with not achieving.
And the whole notion of liberal redistributionism is to make everybody the same and everybody equal.
In that case, it's all fair and everything.
Well, back when the Korean airliner went down, it wasn't, Reagan's point was, it was not manifest destiny.
It was not us telling the world we're better than you and we have all the answers and we're the ones that are going to tell you what for and we're the ones that are going to tell you what's right and what's wrong.
It just accrued to us.
It just accrued to America because it was the truth.
America achieved that status in the world as a force for good is why Reagan referred to this country as the last best hope of mankind, the last best hope of freedom.
We were.
We still are, but we do not have leaders who see the country that way.
To them, freedom is, I don't know, they take it for granted or it's much ado about nothing.
Remember, these are people that think the Constitution is backwards.
These are people who think the Constitution doesn't give the government enough power.
And the reason they want more power is to deal with all of these inequities and all the unfairness out there.
So that's the real problem with Robbie's attitude, in my mind, not that it was an NCIS over there, Naval Criminal Investigative Service, if you wonder what it is.
You know, send Mark Harmon and his crew over there to find out what happened.
NCIS, FBI, whatever.
We didn't send the FBI over to Benghazi for how long for crying out loud.
Two weeks or more before, maybe even longer than that.
The point that I'm trying to make here is that it isn't good.
A lot of people think that it's erudited, it's compassionate, it's understanding to think of us as no better than anybody else.
It was never a question of being better than anybody else.
I'm talking about as a country, it was never a question that we're better people.
It's that we had the best system for people to prosper, to develop, to blossom.
This is the country where people came to be the best, to realize their dreams.
We don't have people leading the country today who see it that way.
People leading the country today, they lip service to that stuff.
They try to make you think they believe it, but they don't.
They think this is the opposite.
Everybody who succeeds has done it either as a result of a crime or on the back of somebody else or some sort of unfair advantage, and it needs to be equalized.
They don't look, for example, at underachievers as maybe people are not tried as hard.
They don't see it as people maybe haven't taken life as seriously as others.
They don't look at people who don't achieve as much as others as maybe not trying or expending effort.
And consequently, they don't look at the success stories and see all the hard work and ingenuity and application and grit and determination, ambition.
They don't see that.
They see unfair, unequal, inequitable results that come from a system, i.e., the United States, which is constituted unfairly and with discrimination and bigotry and bias built in.
And they think the successful people are the people who've mastered the bias and the bigotry and the discrimination, figured out how to game the system.
And they are here to protect the victims of all these successful people.
And there are far more failures than there are successful people.
So it's a bigger voting bloc.
That's what's so hideous about this.
This bunch plays to the lowest common denominator of our population.
They need a permanent underclass.
What do you think the attraction is for poor, uneducated, unskilled young people from all over the world coming here illegally?
There's value to the Democrat Party in those people.
What is that value?
Voters.
Subservient, dependent voters.
You know, folks.
I was reading a column by Kyle Smith in the New York Post over the weekend about the millennials and young people today and how the vast majority of them are conservative Republicans, but they're going to vote Liberal Democrat for two reasons.
Let me find.
Let me take a break.
I'm due to take a break here anyway.
I'll find that.
Michelle Obama tells kids folks in Congress want to make their food unhealthy.
So here you have the first lady who's hell-bent on getting her preferred menu in every public school and the kids are rejecting it.
The kids don't like it.
Nobody wants it.
So she's not reacting kind of, oh, well, you don't reject these people because they're only out for you, only trying to help you.
They're only interested in your own good, and you're incapable of that yourself.
So what does she do?
People in Congress want you to eat unhealthy food.
Now, that is utterly preposterous.
It's outrageous.
It is a lie.
And yet, the news media is out there spreading the word and promulgating this and promoting the idea that, by the way, folks in Congress equals Republicans.
So we've gone from in the mid-90s Republicans wanting to starve your kids.
Now Republicans want to poison your kids with unhealthy food.
It's all about these massively powerful people taking unfair advantage of the need to make everything equal.
And they look at the country in the same way.
Brief timeout.
We'll be back after this.
Your guiding light in times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos.
An excellent role model for the youths of America.
And anyone else needing guidance?
Back to the phones.
This is Chuck in Johnson City, Tennessee.
Great to have you on the program, Chuck.
Hi.
How are you doing today, sir?
Pretty well, sir.
Thank you very much.
All right.
I just wanted to make a comment and ask a question, and then I'll hang up and see what you got to say about it.
Well, no, no, you don't necessarily do that.
I mean, I appreciate that you do think people want to hear what I have to say about it, but I don't mind talking to you about it.
I wouldn't have even known about any of this unless your buddy Bethlehem Lynn had mentioned it the other day.
But he was talking about a treaty that we had with Ukraine in 94 when they gave up their nukes.
Let me, okay, exactly right.
We had a treaty, and this goes back to Clinton.
Yes, sir.
We had a treaty.
We urged the Ukrainians, we demanded that they disarm.
And in return, we promised to defend them should Russia or Putin or a neighboring enemy attack them.
That has been renewed through Bush 43 and Obama.
And now it's as though it doesn't exist.
Didn't the Russians actually sign that treaty as well?
Probably did, yes.
It was non-aligned nations got together with the paradigm.
And yes.
Well, with that being said, I think this administration's at least indirectly responsible to some extent for that airliner being shot down because they shouldn't have been able, they shouldn't have been over there shooting me to begin with.
And I haven't heard anyone mention anything about any treaty.
I never want to make the mistake of denying proper responsibility.
I mean, the people who shut it down, shut it down, and they did it.
And whether there was a treaty or not, they did it.
The point about the treaty, and I remember when I first discovered it and made mention of the news on this program, it was back this spring when this whole thing began.
And until I was reminded of it, I did not know that it existed.
And the point is exactly what we're talking about today.
We had pledged with a number of other nations in exchange for the Ukrainians disarming because we believed that, of course, countries with weapons is a bad thing.
We get rid of their weapons, and that would make them docile.
They would not be aggressors, and they'd focus on their domestic circumstances improvement.
And in exchange, we offered, as the big guy on the block, to defend them.
Time came, we weren't there.
It's part and parcel of the theme that has developed on the program.
Now, whether or not that led these people thinking they could shoot the plane down with impunity, I think these Russian terrorists would do something like that anyway and run the risk of a response.
But the fact that they're pretty sure there isn't going to be one doesn't help.
I grant you that.
March 5th, that we talked about this at length.
You can look it up at rushlimbaugh.com.
President Clinton, President Obama promised to protect disarmed Ukraine.
Rushlimbaugh.com, March 5th of this year.
Sit tight, my good friends.
▲
Export Selection