All Episodes
Previous Next
July 28, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:49
July 28, 2014, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists on across the bountiful fruited plane.
Time for broadcast excellence, L. Rushball behind the golden EIB microphone as we edge closer as we creep up on the anniversary date of August 1st.
It's going to be our 26th, which means we're going to be starting our 27th year.
That is astounding.
Great to have you with us.
My good friends and amigos.
Question, uh telephone number, rather.
You ought to be on the program 800-282-2882, the email address.
Did you happen to see a big exciting news story out there?
Did you happen to see where Obama has finally come out and announced he wants to close the border?
You didn't see that.
And you think I'm making it up, right?
Is it so unbelievable?
I'm not making it up.
Well, let me find it.
Our border, he wants he wants to close our border, but not to people coming in.
He wants to close the border to American corporations going out.
On this on this uh on this tax business, you know, the uh uh there's recent stories of Walgreens is one example, but American corporations are partnering with overseas corporations, and in the process changing the location of corporate headquarters outside the U.S. So as to avoid the highest corporate income tax rate in the world, 35% here in the United States.
And when uh when news of this hit, I mean it's been going on for a while.
When news of it hit, Obama had a patriotic impulse and said it's outrageous that these businesses should be doing this.
They need to come back and they need to be paying taxes here, and he defined patriotism as American corporations staying here and paying the 25 35 percent uh tax rate.
And American corporations haven't listened.
It's happening in greater and greater numbers.
In fact, the names of the companies are often changing as part of these mergers.
The actual structure and actual ownership isn't, it's a paper thing.
I mean, Walgreen didn't sell out, they partnered with.
And then for tax purposes, the name of the corporation changed to whatever the foreign corporation that partnered with Walgreen is.
I don't mean the hype on Walgreen, it's just one of the most recent examples.
So Obama is really ticked off about this.
So he wants to close the border the other way.
That is, he wants to close the border to any U.S. corporation that might want to relocate overseas to avoid paying U.S. corporate taxes, the highest in the world.
So the with the news here is that Obama does believe in borders when it comes to taxes.
Like, I hate to, folks, it's it's like why did they build a Berlin Wall?
Keep people in.
What is it that totalitarian type statists do?
Matthew Continetti, who uh writes for the uh I think the Washington exam, I forget where he has a Pete in the Weekly Standard uh over the weekend.
That's that's dated August 4th.
I found it over the weekend.
Frozen in the Cold War, the roots of Obama's weakness abroad.
And he makes a makes a great case here that Obama is stuck in a cold war mentality because he so despised it.
He so hated it.
And Continenty makes the point that much of this is anti-Raganism with Obama, and that much we know because unlike many in the drive-by media during the 2007 and 2008 campaign period, we researched a number of things of Obama's past.
And he has many times and in many places Written of his disgust with Reagan and his minions.
Uh just hated Reagan, but he admired him.
He wants to emulate Reagan in one way.
He makes it clear in his book that Reagan transformed America, had genuine influence, but he doesn't like the way Reagan did it.
So he wants to do the same thing, but rolled it back.
Now, in Obama's view, coming out of Columbia University, SDS, it's the un it's what what the reason I love the piece, if I may say so, is because it's been one of the themes of this program for the past couple of weeks, how Obama thinks America is the problem in the world.
You see it with the latest manifestations of the uh Middle East problem today with Israel and uh Gaza Hamas, which we'll get to in great detail here in a moment.
Uh but it's the United States that's the problem.
It's the United States nuclear arsenal that's been the problem.
It's the United States military that's the problem.
The United States is the destabilizing agent.
The United States sitting here ordering everybody else around the world around has always been the problem.
So Obama supported the nuclear freeze movement, he supported unilateral nuclear disarmament without any verification on the part of the Soviets.
But Continetti's point is he's stuck in that mentality.
It is what it is what informs him today.
So you take the Obama that came out of Columbia University whenever he did in the 80s, early 90s, whenever it was, and the uh the formative events in his life were the nuclear freeze movement and uh and Reagan expanding nuclear war tip missiles in Europe, which Obama hated.
United States is still the problem.
United States imperialism still the problem.
The United States thinking that it is the solution to all the problems in the world is the problem.
The United States thinking that it has the moral authority to solve problems around the is the problem.
In Obama's view, we've never had that moral authority.
We have never had the right to tell other nations what to do.
And so he is in the process of implementing his own anti-Reagan foreign policy, and you see it everywhere.
He's getting us out of the world.
And whatever the Russians want to do, fine.
And he tells uh Dmitry Medvedev before his re-election bid in 2012, just tell Vlad, cool, chill out.
I'll have much more flexibility after the election.
He was talking about reducing our nuclear stockpile.
Continentity writes, the further you go into Obama's history of the Cold War, the more liberal shibbolets you encounter.
It occurs to you that Obama is not studying anti-communism.
He is engaging in anti-anti-communism, meaning that Obama opposed the people in this country who opposed the Soviet Union.
And there were lots of them, folks.
I'll never forget that era, the 70s and the 80s, particularly the 80s.
And it was a dividing line in this country.
The Democrat Party or the radical wing of the Democrat Party at that time.
Now it's the whole Democrat Party's radical, but radical wing.
There were a lot of Soviet sympathizers in academia, in uh elective office, in the media.
They were everywhere.
And they believed that the Soviet Union had the answer.
They just hadn't gotten there yet.
But it was the answer because it was equality and it was fairness and it was sameness and uh and all that.
And they wanted to sit back and let the Soviet leaders uh have enough time to implement what they believed in.
This was being taught in the schools.
This is uh it was it was not never a majority belief, but it was large.
And there were people, those people who opposed the anti-communists, the William F. Buckleys, the Ronald Reagans, uh, the vast majority of the conservative movement was, I mean, anti-Soviet Union communism was a huge, huge deal.
And if you weren't alive then, you probably I don't know if it's been conveyed to you and if your history studies have have taught you just how big and important thing it was as an identifier, If nothing else, for what the United States believed in.
And it was, I mean, it was tense.
It was extremely partisan.
And it was very frustrating for those of us who were very much opposed and or afraid of Soviet sponsored communism, because they were intent on spreading it.
That's what Nicaragua was all about.
Grenada.
I mean, they were trying to expand as many places as they could.
Cuba, you name it.
And there was a faction in this country that thought it was not a problem.
Thought the problem was the Buckleys of the world, the anti-communists, and that's who Obama was.
He was an anti-anti-communist.
The main subject of his criticism throughout his life is not the communists.
It's the hardliners who fought the communists.
Those are the people that were wrong.
Those were the people who posed the problem in Obama's view.
And it still is the case.
There's several really good pull quotes in this piece.
For example, for example.
You see this single-minded fixation on America throughout Doveish literature.
According to the Doves, America's always active on the international stage, never reactive.
Meaning, according to the dubs, we always assert ourselves, trying to impose ourselves.
We are the aggressors, the destabilizers.
In the Dove community, we never are sitting around minding our own business and reacting to things that we see as threats.
We are causing the threats, in their view.
Imposing freedom.
Right.
America is always the cause of trouble to these people.
Obama's just one of them.
There were many, but the point is, according to Continental, he has not let any of this go.
It's like, take whatever formative event.
In other words, you know, a great way to characterize this, Obama's stuck in the past while everybody thinks he's a child of the future and holds the answer for the future, and he's all kinds of new, and we've never seen it.
He's stuck in the past.
He's stuck in a cold war mentality because he feels at home there, because it's where he came of age, it's where his greatest intellectual pursuits were, and it's where he's most comfortable, blaming America.
And this single-minded fixation on America, you find it throughout dovish literature.
According to the doves, America's always on the international stage, never reactive.
We're always active.
We're causing the problem.
America's always the cause of trouble.
We are never the first responder to aggression and chaos.
We're causing it, in their view.
The threat the Soviet Union posed to international order and individual liberty, they never talk about it.
And they never did, folks.
The Soviet Union was always innocent.
The Soviet Union was never guilty of anything.
We were guilty.
We were forcing them to be who they were.
We were causing this with our aggressive tendencies and our desires to stow to stray outside our borders and tell everybody else how to live.
This is the way Obama saw the world and still does.
That's the key.
And the reason I love this piece is because it is right up my alley of the themes that we have been talking about vis-a-vis, not just uh Israel and Hamas, but Libya and Syria and Ukraine.
It's everywhere, everywhere.
The world, as Madame Aldright said, the world is a mess.
She doesn't know why.
But somehow we are to blame for it.
That's why she's talking about Obama believes the same thing.
The world would not be a mess if we got out of it.
If we just hung in here, and if we just took care of the inequalities and the racism and the bigotry and all the isms that are plaguing us domestically, we just did that, then the world would be fine.
But no, no, no.
We have to go out and tell everybody else how to live, in his view.
The threat the Soviet Union posed to international order, hardly ever mentioned.
Just like, just like, if I may extrapolate, the threat posed by Al-Qaeda is never mentioned.
Instead, we're told that Al-Qaeda is Al-Qaeda because of our policy with Israel.
Al-Qaeda is Al-Qaeda because of poverty.
Al-Qaeda is Al-Qaeda because they're mad at us because things that we've done.
They are never, militant Islam never called on it by these people.
Just like the Soviet Union was never called on who they were.
Obama notes Reagan's invasion of tiny, hapless Grenada, but he ignores the causes of America's intervention.
This is in one of his writings that Matthew Continetti found as an example of Obama and his current mindset.
He still he's still got Grenada on the brain.
It still ticked off about that, which happened in 1982, 83.
Somewhere in the 80s.
Tiny little country, but the Soviets were attempting to establish a beachhead, our hemisphere.
We stopped it.
The left in this country hated Reagan for that.
Tiny well, they never threatened us.
What do we do?
It's just a university island now.
What are we doing?
Obama holds that view.
But he ignored why we intervened.
It was a bloody Marxist coup as engineered by the USSR and Cuba on a Caribbean island.
It was right here in our back door.
That's why it was shut down.
He doesn't say Obama doesn't say that the rise of the People's Revolution Army did not justify war.
He doesn't note that the brief U.S. intervention led to the restoration of a constitutional government.
He dodges that altogether and just beats up America for doing it.
That's the beginning and end.
The why never mentioned, the success of the operation never mentioned, just we were wrong for doing it.
By the same token, something similar happens in his presidential speeches.
Obama often refers to the fall of the Berlin Wall.
What he does not talk about is the building of the wall.
He never talks about who built the wall.
He never talks about why they built it.
He never talked about the cost in lives and misery that building the wall and enforcing it caused.
It's just that the Berlin Wall came.
America does something great, but he never talks about who built it and why.
It's as though the wall just appeared out of thin air.
And only the indomitable human will to freedom, not a 50-year struggle led by the U.S. brought it down.
We had nothing to do with it.
The Native people dominating that era finally wanting to be free brought down the wall.
Reagan had nothing to do with it except when it's time to blame Reagan for something.
Contetti's point is this is who Obama was, and this is who Obama is.
And now Obama is finally ready to enforce our border, but not on people coming in, on U.S. corporations going out.
1983, Barack Obama is at Columbia.
In March of 1983, he published an article, Student Magazine.
The article is entitled Breaking the War Mentality.
The article makes plain Obama's revulsion at what he saw as Cold War militarism and his positive feelings about the nuclear freeze movement.
He hated the Cold War and blamed the United States for it.
We were the destabilizing agent because of our nuclear arsenal.
Now, this article called Breaking the War Mentality was in a student magazine.
Magazine was called Sundial.
This article didn't appear.
Nobody knew about it until 2009.
It was who keeps copies of a student newspaper from 1983 around.
So nobody knew about this during the campaign of 2007, 2008.
And nobody had it to make connections between it and the way Obama was campaigning in 2008.
And it eventually surfaced, was discovered, quote unquote, in 2009, after Obama was safely elected.
In it, he writes, most students at Columbia do not have first-hand knowledge of war.
The most sensitive among us struggle to extrapolate experiences of war from our everyday experience.
It's impossible to know the true cause of war from afar.
Bringing such experience down into our hearts and taking continual tangible steps to prevent war becomes a difficult task.
But he says it isn't impossible.
And he went with far-left student groups like the arms race alternative, students against militarism, students for Democrats Society.
But he was a 60s left-wing radical, regretting that it was the 80s.
And so we and Matthew Continetti's piece in the August 4 issue of the Weekly Standard makes the point that's still who Obama is.
He has not moved forward.
He's stuck 40 years ago or 30.
Quick timeout back.
I just got an email note.
Rush, you ought to make the connection of Obama not letting corporations out of the country into Berlin.
Well, I did make that point.
But I'll do it again.
The point that Continentity makes is that, you know, when the Berlin Wall came down, Obama's all hampy, but he never talked about why it was there.
In his mind, why it was there never mattered.
Just materialized out of thin air.
Well, what was the Berlin Wall for?
It was to keep people in.
Totalitarians build walls and enforce their borders like nobody's business, but to keep people in.
So I opened the program today saying, have you heard that Obama has changed his mind on border enforcement?
He's going to close the border.
Because, no, I haven't heard that.
That's because he's closing the borders to American businesses leaving.
And I made the point, this is what statists do.
They care about the border to keep people in who want out what American businesses are doing.
They're partnering with foreign corporations.
The foreign corporation assumes on paper ownership, enabling the U.S. corporation to escape the 35% tax rate.
Corporate tax rate.
It's happening more and more, and Obama's ticked off about it, and he's demanding they stop and stay here.
And so he obviously has come out against people leaving.
He now wants to enforce the border.
Now I want to talk a little history and connect it to the present.
Vis-a-vis Obama and his nuclear freeze cold war, America was responsible for it all mentality.
The Soviet Union was putting nuclear-tipped warheads all over the Soviet bloc, threatening their neighbors.
That was never opposed by the nuclear freeze movement.
It was never opposed by the American left.
It was when we countered when Reagan wanted to put nuclear missiles in Europe that the nuclear freeze movement went batty.
And once again blamed us.
The Soviet Union was incapable of aggression.
The Soviet Union, the Communists were incapable of doing anything wrong because they were only reacting to us and our aggression in their minds.
In the minds of people like Obama and the left then and today, we were not reactive.
We didn't get up and look at things we believed in, or friends of ours being attacked, or allied nations and defend them.
That isn't what we did.
We got up and decided who we were going to aggress against that day, who we were going to take out, who we were going to hassle.
They looked at the United States as the problem and the destabilizing agent.
And again, Matthew Cotinetti's point is that that's still who Obama is.
And you can see it in every foreign policy story or issue that's there today.
Syria, Iran.
It's not our business.
We in fact may be responsible for all of this.
And so it's our job to get out and have nothing to do with it.
It's their problem, not ours.
And the best thing that can happen in Obama's mind is for us to get out of all these things.
And then the world will not be so destabilized.
This is what people believed in the 70s and 80s, and the left of the day still believes it today.
The point is Obama's stuck in the past.
He's not some forward thinker, some hip cool dude who's way ahead of us.
Obama's stuck in the past in the mud way behind us.
But how does it impact today?
Well.
The Soviet Union introduced a surface to air missile in Europe in 1980 called the Buck.
Or book.
I'm not, I have not heard it pronounced.
It's the BUK.
You've heard of it recently.
I don't know how it's pronounced, but the BUK, the Buck de Buc surface-to-air missile in Europe, first deployed by the Soviet Union in 1980.
Ronald Reagan wanted to counter them by equalizing the threat in order to diminish it.
So we wanted to deploy similar type of nuclear-tipped missiles.
These would have been tactical nukes at various strategic points in Western Europe.
At the time, Obama was alive.
He's a Colombian.
He's livid.
He is writing how he protests.
Nobody cared then.
Nobody knew who Obama was, but he's still writing the student newsletter.
However, his Secretary of State today, John Kerry, who was yet, no, he had served in Vietnam then.
John Kerry was part of this blame America first crowd.
John Kerry and Teddy Kennedy were leading the charge, protesting.
The Reagan deployment of nuclear tip missiles in Western Europe in order to counter the Soviet threat and eliminate it by equalizing it.
John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy, Barack Obama never protested the Soviet surface-to-air missiles, the mobile.
They could move them around.
They were not locked in position.
These were mobile that could drive them around on a little U-Hall type things and launch them for wherever.
That was never protested.
Whatever the Soviet Union did was never protested.
Just like what Hamas does is not protested, but Israel is.
Hamas can do anything.
And it ends up being Israel's fault.
That's the way it was then.
That's the way it is today because that's who Obama is.
Well, this missile, the Soviet buck, book, surface-to-air missile is exactly what brought down the Malaysian airliner.
Same type of missile.
They introduced that missile into Europe in 1980.
It was one of the systems Reagan wanted to counter, but John Kerry Obama, the Democrats, protested Reagan's response.
And so the things.
Now we've got the Soviet Union reconstituting itself.
That's exactly what Vladimir Putin wants to do, and everybody knows it.
Some will admit it and some won't.
And where's Obama on this?
That doesn't matter.
We don't have any business telling them what they should or shouldn't do.
We have no business.
If uh if we get out of there, who knows?
It'd probably be peaceful.
The breakout be more peaceful.
This is this is the way they thought then, and the point is that this is the way Obama thinks today.
And it's once you understand the history of the Freeze movement, and that's really kind of too narrow.
It's just, it was just the anti-American Cold War, the anti-anti-communists.
And Obama was one.
The people who were opposed to those trying to stop the Soviet Union.
It was always America that was the problem.
Soviet Union never was.
Today, it's always Israel that's the problem.
Just happens to be the U.S. ally, right?
It's not Hamas.
Those tunnels that have been discovered.
Well, hell, what would you do if you had this big big unfair dragon next door launching missiles and killing your kids?
What would you do?
This is the way they think.
Hamas is the never ending minority.
They're the constant victim of an evil, mean, unfairly big Israel.
And as such, they really can't commit any crimes because they're too tiny.
It's like minorities can't be racists because they don't have the power to do anything with it.
It's convoluted, perverted kind of thinking that it it takes gullible low information people to fall for.
Do you know that Barack Obama refused to attend the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall back in November 2009?
Does anybody remember that?
He refused to go.
Now they said at the time that Obama didn't go because he didn't want to anger Putin.
And he doesn't want to anger Putin now.
He really believes.
Folks, this sounds sophist.
But I'm telling you, I know these people, like every square inch of my glorious naked body, not just back of my hand.
I know I know them, and they believe.
Just like with Al Qaeda, if we just show them we don't intend them any harm, they'll stop threatening us.
They really believe that.
That's one of the things guiding Obama in his relationship, Putin, but there are worse aspects, not just that one.
The worst aspects are that Putin exists because we do.
The Soviet Union was what it was because of us.
Somebody had to counter us because we were always the aggressor.
Thank you.
In the view of the anti-communist.
This is, by the way, I should point out this is one of the things that bothers me about the modern libertarian movement.
They think the same thing.
Many of them do.
Ron Paul, for example, also believes that much of the world's unrest is caused by us intervening where we have no business.
It's a mess.
Here's Madeline Albright.
This was on Slay the Nation yesterday, Bob Schiefer.
These guys, by the way, Schiefer and these old, these old uh horses from the way back when these old media warriors, everything existed according to a formula of world order.
And remember what they believed.
They believed that the election of the hippist and coolest first African American Democrat president was gonna finally bring about this utopia they had all dreamed of since the days of Camelot.
It had arrived with the election of Obama, and now the world is aflame.
The world is on fire.
There isn't any stability.
Ebola breakouts now are getting out of the native countries in which they're happening.
Two Americans, three Americans have the disease now, and they're gonna spread.
It's every scared to death.
While we've been sending money to fight AIDS and sending money like Bill and Melinda Gates to build mosquito nets and something, all of us here comes Ebola which is spread by fruit bats.
Nobody thought about the fruit bats.
Now, Ebola, no cure for that.
It's deadly.
It's spreading biggest outbreak in sub-Saharan Africa since well ever.
And Bono forgot about it, and Bill and Melinda Gates forgot about it.
And then uh Clinton's forgot about it.
I mean, all these charitable people at poor country of Africa, and literally poor country, Ebola is breaking out while everybody else is building mosquito nets for malaria, and all we'd have to do is discredit Rachel Carson to fix that anyway.
The world is a mess.
It's in flames, and these old warriors don't understand it.
It's supposed to have been fixed by now because everything they believed in was embodied by people who won elections, and all they had to do was show up like Kerry and Obama.
And it's just a mess.
And they it it it don't understand it.
Here's Madeline Albright.
Schaefer said, We have so much going on right now.
It's almost, it's almost like we're Caught up in events and out of control.
There have been really two huge game changers.
And one is Putin's behavior vis-a-vis first Crimea and then now towards Ukraine and a completely different uh kind of behavior by Russia.
And the other is what is happening in the Middle East, a lot of it due to the Arab awakening and also the artificiality of the borders that were established after World War I. This is her foreign policy.
It's exactly what she wanted.
The United States out of it.
This is exactly what they wanted.
This is exactly what was going to happen.
And this business of saying a different kind of behavior from Russia, and this is one of the smartest people ever in Washington.
Madeline Albright, different kind of behavior by Russia.
That's insulting.
Different kind of behavior.
They're behaving exactly as they did when she was Secretary of State in the years before that.
Different kind of behavior.
What is causing the different kind of behavior?
It's real simple.
Her foreign policy, as epitomized by Obama, John Kerry and all the rest of them will be.
Madeline Albright, the world's a mess.
Oh, it's so bad Russia has changed their behavior.
They have not.
That's the whole point.
These people are blind.
Don't forget either, uh, ladies and gentlemen, Madeline Albright was one of the experts in the 2012 campaign, who mocked Romney and made fun of Romney when he said that Russia was our top geopolitical enemy.
Romney made a point of saying keep everybody's eyes on Russia.
That's one of the big problems.
And they were all laughing at him.
And they all mocked him.
And they all said he was out of date.
In fact, Madam Albright said Romney's not up to date, and that's a very dangerous aspect.
That's just an example of his 20th century approach to 21st century issues.
And the truth of the matter is, these people are stuck in the 20th century.
They're stuck.
It's like they're in this cocoon of comfort where the U.S. is to blame.
And if we would just stop being who we are, the world would clean up and be a wonderful lovable place again.
And they just can't leave it.
They're not hip.
They're not cool.
They have not become forward thinkers.
They're not leading anybody on this.
They are stuck.
And so's Hillary.
Hillary is of the this mindset, the Russian recess.
She's stuck.
She's got this same attitude they do.
By the way, grab Sunday 24, Obama today in Washington, the inaugural summit of the Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders.
And during the QA of the inaugural summit of the Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders, someone in the audience said, if somehow Africa unified into a United States of Africa, when you spoke with their new leader, what would be the first two things you'd want to discuss?
So if if there became a U.S. of Africa and Obama had a chance to talk to the president of this hypothetical United States of Africa, the question is, audience member wants to know, what would you tell this new president?
Get this.
The thing that I would emphasize first and foremost is the issue of governance.
Now, sometimes this is an issue that raises some sensitivities.
Because I think people feel like who's the United States to tell us how to govern.
We have different systems, we have different traditions.
What may work for the United States may not work for us.
Oh, and by the way, the United States, we don't see that uh Congress is always, you know, cooperating so well, and your system is not perfect.
I understand all that.
So let's acknowledge all that.
Okay.
So he's telling the inaugural summit of Washington Fellowship for Young African leaders.
That, you know, a lot of people, and they're right, by the way, a lot of people think who's the U.S. to tell us how to govern.
Hell, they can't even get along with our own Congress.
Hell, who's i who and he's trying to tell these people that the first thing you should do is not listen to the United States.
This is exactly who he is.
But the thing is, we don't tell people how to govern.
We stand for the freedom and liberty and liberation of the oppressed all over the world.
We if we impose anything, which we don't, it's freedom.
They don't get it.
I gotta go.
Wish I didn't have to, but I gotta take a break.
Luis Gutierrez has blown the Democrats' cover again, this time on immigration.
Details coming up, and Obama, in a soundbite coming up, explains how polygamy in Kenya empowered women in his father's time.
▲
Export Selection