All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 27, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:44
August 27, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I don't believe this.
Another professor.
Another professor.
Get this.
By the way, greetings and and welcome back.
Great to have you, folks, Rushland Baugh.
Talent on loan from God.
One professor at the uh the College of Coastal Georgia has banned students from saying bless you in his class.
Now, I forget where the other screw was, but that's right.
Was in Tennessee, I think it was close to West Virginia or Kentucky or something.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Anyway.
A young student sneezed.
And across the room, students said, bless you.
And the teacher blew a gasket.
I will not have godly talk in this classroom.
And the student that said bless you was sent to the principal's office and had to spend the rest of the class in suspension.
Well, this is now at a college.
A professor at the College of Coastal Georgia has banned students from saying bless you in his class.
Campus reform is reporting a Dr. Leon Gardner, the assistant professor of chemistry at the College of Coastal Georgia, pointed out his six rules on behavior on his introductory physics class syllabus.
According to number six, under the behavioral deduction section of the syllabus, students' grades will be lowered for saying bless you.
We're taught that that is polite to say bless you when someone sneezes.
However, if you say this while I'm talking, it is not polite.
It is very rude.
So students, and this is in Brunswick, Georgia, are now banned from saying bless you in class.
Now this guy doesn't say because it's godly, and he won't tolerate godly talk.
Anyway, folks, greetings and welcome back.
It's great to have you.
Rush Linbaugh, the EIB network and the lip.
No, no, no.
I'm not interested in one.
I don't need to wear something that tells me I'm not in shape.
Snerdley just asked me if I was excited about the new Apple, uh the iWatch or I time or whatever they're gonna.
Well, see, here's what happened.
I just read I look, as you know, a big Apple aficionado, and I read everything I can get my hands on about it, and this iWatch is one of the most eagerly anticipated new products from Apple.
There are a lot of companies that have wearables, smart wearables, but none of them have really taken off.
Everybody in the tech world has just been going bonkers over waiting for this what's being called the iWatch.
And there have been so many rumors about problems manufacturing it, delays in the in the supply chain, uh Apple doesn't have enough sapphire for the cover.
Uh the watch is so precise, it's so small, they haven't been able to solve battery life problem.
I mean, everything under the sun has been presented as a rumor to explain why the watch is not gonna happen until next year.
They may announce it this, but it's not gonna be.
I mean, this supply chain, there's not even any leaks of the materials.
So all the experts say there isn't gonna be one.
So now a credible source that does have an in with Apple, at least it's been shown to over the years, has said that they're gonna announce this iWatch with the new phones on September 9th.
So I just happened to mention this to snurly.
And he asked me if I was gonna get one.
I don't know why I don't need to wear something on my wrist that tells me I'm out of shape.
I already know that.
And you okay, whoopee.
It chats with the phone.
But I will tell you this.
I will say this in defense of this thing.
Uh what they have planned for their new health app that's part of iOS 8, and I think what is obviously part of this watch.
If they do it right, they're gonna end up owning this segment.
People who are health conscious and who do want to track by the hour, their vital signs, uh any number of other things would have it connected to their doctor in case there's an emergency.
There could be any number of things here.
The sky is the limit for what they can do here.
They have, well, calorie count's easy.
That's that's nothing.
They're talking about being able to measure blood sugar non-invasively.
They're talking about being able to uh measure blood pressure non non without a I mean it's a there's all kinds of things.
I mean, that's it's all that's why so many people are excited.
Nobody knows what it's gonna be, but the the people they've hired, they've hired leaders from fashion businesses.
And they've hired leaders from the health business.
Uh as exactly they've got a huge team making this thing, so that's why the rumors on it are just through the roof.
And it's a well, I don't know how they're gonna do blood pressure or blood sugar without excuse me, non-invasively.
I don't know how.
But then again, it may be what they're working.
I I don't I just don't know.
This is the thing about about rumors, but this is this is what Apple does.
I think they leak half of these rumors themselves, just to get all of this chat going about it.
And and all this excitement and anticipation build up.
The only thing I'm telling you is that watch for me, take it or leave it.
One of these things, anyway.
Anyway, folks, glad to have you.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882.
Okay, should ESPN suspend itself?
ESPN has evolved into a into a company that habitually suspends its employees.
One of its most recent employees suspended was Max Kellerman.
You know why Max Kellerman got suspended?
Because he admitted on the air that something like 20 years ago, he shoved his wife in the middle of an argument.
And they suspended him for two days for some sort of violation.
And then there was the Stephen A. Smith suspension, because Stephen A. Smith said, well, you know, women might have something to do with the way they get treated by virtual the way they act and dress.
Uh-oh, not tolerable.
He was suspended.
Well, guess what happened?
CS ESPN has this infobabe reporter, and her name is Josina Anderson.
And her assignment recently been to St. Louis Rams.
So they sent her to Earth City, Missouri, which is outside St. Louis, which is the Rams complex, the training complex.
And during a discussion about the first openly gay player in the NFL, Michael Sand, a linebacker for the Rams, a co-anchor back in the studio, Jay Crawford, asked Josina Anderson, how is Michael Sam fitting in with his Rams teammates so far?
Michael Sam is simply just one of the guys.
But another Rams defensive player told me that, quote, Sam is respecting our space and that from his perspective, he seems to think that Michael Sam is waiting to kind of take a shower, as not to make his teammates feel uncomfortable, while Lankford and linebacker Alec Ogletreat told me that they didn't know that specifically and also weren't tracking that.
Okay, so what do we have here?
Let the record show that a well-known liberal media outlet, and make no mistake, ESPN is a liberal media outlet.
Not only reported on a matter of privacy within an NFL team's locker room, they reported on something rumored to occur in the bathroom shower portion of the locker room.
It had nothing to do with Michael Sam making the team.
It had nothing to do with how well or how poorly Michael Sam is playing on the team.
It had nothing to do with how Michael Sam really is getting long.
They had to do a story about Michael Sam and the showers.
And what is this but a liberal media outlet feeding a stereotype?
And what's the stereotype?
Now keep in mind, this is ESPN, liberal media outlet, and that report, the underlying assumption of that report is what, Mr. Snergley.
The underlying subject of this report is gay guys are on the prowl in in the shower.
And because Sam knows that that's what people think, that he's waiting until all the other players are finished, and then he goes into the shower alone so that nobody thinks he's on the prowl.
What else could this report mean?
If not that.
And so the reporterette says, well, you know, uh defensive jackal Kendall Langford says Sam just wanted a guys.
But but another Rams defensive player told me that quote, Sam's respecting our space, and that from his perspective, he seems to think that Sam's waiting to kind of take a shower.
So as not to make his teammates feel uncomfortable.
Well, what what would be uncomfortable?
There has to be an underlying assumption, right?
That the gay guy's on the prowl.
Liberal media outlet doing this.
How can this be?
Why, this is the kind of thing you would happen on Fox News, right?
This is the kind of thing you would expect to happen on the O'Reilly factor, right?
Not ESPN.
But a liberal media outlet doing this.
And then she said, well, Lankford and linebacker Alec Ogletree told me that they didn't know that Sam, they didn't know specifically Sam's waiting to take a shower, and that they weren't tracking it, meaning they weren't paying attention to it.
Well, that's only half a report.
Here is the rest of what she said.
Now, while Langford told me, listen, I have not been in the shower at the same time as Michael Sam, he said that there definitely could be a million reasons as to why that is.
He said he could be doing extra work on the practice field, he could be riding his bike, he could be doing extra cardio.
But overall, Langford said he seems to be adjusting to the life in the NFL and the speed of the game.
So they continued the speculation at the liberal media outlet ESPN as to why Michael Sam might be the last one in the showers.
Normally you get credit in the NFL for being the last guy off the practice field.
But here Michael Sam, liberal media outlet, getting great, great press, great reviews, great coverage, being the last guy in the showers.
And who knows why?
It could be he is the last guy on the field, and he's doing extra cardio work, and he's working hard with the coaches, and he's trying to get better, and that's why.
But they brought it up.
Now, what happened is one of the players, I think a defensive tackle for the Rams, um, there's so Jake Long, Kyle Long, I forget which, I think Howie Longson tweeted ESPN and said, essentially, hey, ESPN, this is over.
Everybody's forgotten about this except you.
So ESPN's apologized.
ESPN has asked for forgiveness.
Uh ESPN said, ESPN regrets the manner in which we presented our report.
Clearly, yesterday we collectively failed to meet the standards that we have set in reporting on lesbian gay, bisexual, and tranny related topics in sports.
Oh no!
They let everybody down.
Ah, this is too much to handle, folks.
They failed to meet their own standards.
It's a sports network.
They failed to meet their own standards that they set in reporting LGBT related topics.
Well, ESPN might want to start by not Treating people according to their sexual preferences.
I mean, like skin color, what's the big deal, right?
I thought there was no big deal here.
Who was it that said they wouldn't draft Sam because they didn't want all the stuff that would come with it?
Oh yeah.
That was Tony Dungey.
And remember what they said about Tony Dungey.
Oh, he risked all the credibility he'd built up.
So here you have ESPN behaving like everybody that works there would tell you the Tea Party thinks and behaves.
And once again, it isn't the Tea Party, and is it the conservatives, and it isn't talk radio, and it's not Fox News that's behaving in a prejudicial manner.
It's the liberal media outlet ESPN, apologizing for being curious about Michael Sands' showering habits.
I was thinking about all those reports.
You know, I remember all those reports that when ESPN was new, all the reports say that Joe Montana's showering habits, you remember those, right?
I mean, they were juicy, folks.
You should.
You know what I can't wait for?
I can't wait for ESPN to report from the locker room at the next women's professional golf tournament.
Can you imagine sending in a reporter in there and asking about the showering habits of some of the female professionals on the LPGA circuit?
That I mean, they've broken new ground here, so we look forward to that.
By the way, I should point out that there are some commentators, media analysts and so forth at the celebrated Washington Post who want this reporterette for ESPN canned.
They want her fired, not just suspended as Josina Anderson.
They want her out of there.
It's vicious out there.
Folks, do you realize how things are turning on the left?
I mean, it's just two or three isolated incidents, but this is one.
And there are two others.
And there's a part of me, and I gotta go both ways on this.
In the first instance, at the Emmy Awards, and both these incidents took place at the Emmy Awards, Billy Crystal, who is perfect, right?
I mean, he's a left-wing comedian.
He's a left-wing movie director, producer, actor, writer.
He's a I mean, he pop culture leftist through and through a Rob Reiner's good buddy.
I mean just Mr. Perfect.
Right.
He was selected to do the moving tribute to Robin Williams at the Emmy Awards on Monday night.
And one of the video clips from Robin Williams during stand-up.
Williams was improvising, which did a lot.
He saw a woman in the audience and asked if he could have her scarf.
It was a pink scarf.
Robin Williams put the scarf on as though he were a Muslim woman.
It looked like a burqa, hijab.
He then began impersonating a Muslim woman in Iran and essentially saying, Help me!
Rescue me!
Get me out of here.
Well, there were some people who didn't like that.
They thought that was racist.
Billy Crystal, racist?
How can that be?
But people ran to Twitter and accused Crystal of being racist and Robin Williams of being racist against Muslims and against Islam, the religion of peace.
And Twitter blew up.
Now, by the way, Twitter blowing up can be defined as six people tweeting.
I mean, we have to keep this in perspective.
But do you realize how much news the media gets from Twitter these days?
Something I only recently ascertained.
You would not I I mean I've I read any news story, and in almost every news story I read, there's some reference to something somebody said on Twitter about it.
Twitter has become source number one for drive-by media people.
Or one of their major sources.
So anyway, six or seven people blew up, and now Twitter was ablaze with allegations that Billy Crystal was racist, and that the late and great and deceased Robin Williams was racist.
And I asked myself, how many times in their careers have they had to face such allegations?
And then how many times in their careers have they told jokes about people who they impugned as racists or sexists or bigots or homophobes or what have you?
And so I had two reactions.
My first reaction was this is outrageous.
Stupid stuff on Twitter.
Look at what's happening here.
So they did a funny little memorial for Robin Williams and a bunch of people sitting out there with nothing better to do than get offended, erupt on Twitter, and everybody reports it.
And then the other side of me said, hmm.
They were just a little Schaden Freud, just a little.
So I asked myself, I wonder how these guys feel.
They're just out there being good liberals.
They were honoring the life of the great Robin Williams.
They were feeling sorry and sad and they were sharing tears and they were highlighting his great career.
And the next thing they know, they're racist pigs.
I wonder how they felt.
I think I think ESPN ought to go off air for two days.
I think they ought to suspend themselves.
I mean, if they're really going to be consistent here, they don't allow their employees to apologize.
They make them apologize.
They kick them off the air for a couple of days a week.
ESPN ought to suspend itself.
Just to be consistent.
Back to the phones.
It's been a while.
Margo in New Hope, Minnesota, 12 years old.
Margo, it's great to have you here.
Hello.
Hi.
Well, hi.
Um, I have a question for you about my science report.
Are CSLs or LEDs really better for the environment than incandescent bulbs?
Okay.
All right.
Okay, you want to know if the compact fluorescent bulbs are actually better for the environment, did you say, than incandescent bulbs?
Yes.
Uh why why are you asking?
What's the uh are are you under pressure to install some compact fluorescent somewhere, or do you have to write a report for somebody?
What's what I have to write a science report on understanding the environment and like what would be better and who does it affect and how much would the differences be.
Okay, hmm.
Do you want to get a good grade on this, or do you want to be right?
I want to get a good rate on it, and I like to get it right.
Well, you can't do both, I'm afraid.
Yes.
It depends on the teacher.
Uh if you have you're 12 years old.
Yes.
Well, you know what?
I'm just gonna talk to you as if you were my daughter and you were 12.
If if you were actually my daughter and asking me this, I'm just gonna explain it to you as I would to her, okay?
Okay.
All right.
If you have a teacher who is caught up in the whole premise of man-made global warming, the odds are that the only reason you've been assigned this is so that you will conclude that compact compact fluorescents are better.
Because there has been a movement for a number of years uh sponsored by environmentalist people that compact fluorescence are more environmentally safe and uh just make more sense for the environment than the old-fashioned invention of Thomas Edison, the incandescent light bulb.
The and like anything else in the environmental movement, it's up for debate and it's it's questionable.
Because the the compact fluorescent bulb Is a genuine hazardous material threat inside each of these bulbs is mercury and mercury is poisonous and it is dangerous.
And if you break, or if anybody, if one of these compact fluorescent bulbs breaks, shatters, like any other light bulb does, in many cases, you have to call professionals to come clean it up and remove it and make sure the mercury is removed and that the mercury doesn't come in contact with any body or any surface where it could be transferred to humans.
It is it's it's being sponsored by by people who think that the compact fluorescents are more efficient and use less energy, and that will save the planet because they will use less coal and less electricity, and therefore our carbon footprint via the emissions of CO2 will be less.
And I think that it is uh propaganda.
I think the people who sell these things have joined with the environmentalist movement to convince everybody that they're better and safer.
They don't put out as much light.
You can't, I don't I'm I don't not sure about this, but I'm fairly confident you can't buy them with the same wattage output or same brightness as incandescence, and that's one of the reasons why is so that they use less uh less energy.
But it's it's you know, there's a uh there's a ban in place on incandescence.
You can't I think it's in place.
Now I think it's illegal actually to is it illegal now to buy them and use them?
Has that you can't find the hundred watt incandescent anymore, is that right?
Yeah, so some those are illegal.
The hundred watt incandescents are illegal.
So it's it's a it's been a it's a federal matter now that these things have been mandated, the compact fluorescents have been mandated people have to have them.
But if you're if you want a good grade here, what what do you think your teacher wants out of this report?
Do you have any idea?
Um, I think she wants the truth of the report and good facts from it.
But my question would be why did they take it away?
Why don't we have the freedom to choose?
And there is the ultimate and brilliant question.
Why do you think they took away the choice?
Well, probably because the government has been asked to fund this and waste money on it when you could go out and buy something like 50 cents and it could be less energy efficient, but instead of like spending $15 for a CFL that is more energy efficient but has poison in it.
Margo, the answer to your question goes way beyond the details of compact fluorescent bulbs versus incandescent.
You have nailed what this is really ultimately all about.
When you ask, why can't I choose which bulb to use?
Why do I have to not use the incandescent?
Why do I have to buy the compact fluorescent?
The ultimate answer, the answer at the end of all questions, is people making these decisions do not want you to have the freedom to choose such things for a lot of reasons.
Among them are they don't think you know enough to make the right decision, the right decision being what they think you should have.
They don't have enough respect for you that people like you will do what's best for them.
They want to be in charge of what's best for you.
They ultimately want people like you turning to them for approval of everything you do or answers to every question you have, because they, and I don't mean to scare You here.
But I'm telling you, if you were if you were my daughter and you were asking me this at home, I would say the same thing to you.
They want to control as much of your life as possible.
It's not just your light bulbs.
If they get their way, they're going to be able to determine what kind of car you'll be allowed to drive or buy.
If they get their way, you might be told, depending on the job you have, where you have to live.
If they get their way, if they really win this, you're going to lose a lot of what you just consider everyday freedoms to choose things.
Look at Mrs. Obama trying to limit what you can eat in school, as an example.
And look at, even now, the kids are revolting against this.
They're already Twitter hashtags about getting Mrs. Obama's menu out of schools and so forth.
But that's the difference in liberals and conservatives.
These people want to do or make you do what they want you to do.
They want you to eat what they want you to eat.
They want you to uh heat your house and air condition your house or whatever the way they want you to, for a whole host of reasons, but it's basically about control and power.
Would like an LED be better than a CFL?
Well, it depends on what for.
Um LEDs are great, but but it depends on what you're gonna use it for.
You're gonna light a room with an LED.
Sure, why not?
Well, you'd need a lot of them.
Um but those are those are uh liquid emitting diodes or some such thing.
But anyway, I as far as your professor is concerned, if you all you have to do in this report is you're on the right track here.
If you focus on uh that you would like to be able to choose, and then spell out the differences in the bulbs and make sure you talk, you look up, find out for yourself on the mercury content of the compact fluorescence and the danger posed by that.
You know, Google that yourself and find that out.
And include that in your report as to why you if you have reservations about the uh the the compact fluorescence, make sure you put that in there.
Because it is it is a big objection.
I mean, you imagine one of your bulbs breaks, and you got to call hazmat team to come clean up your house because of it.
I would not want that.
I've got two dogs and I don't want them to like lick it or anything.
So not as much.
Well, that's that if if you're right, if that happens, you have to act fast and keep pets away from it.
I mean, everything.
You can't touch it.
You have to know what you're doing.
I mean, look at the look at the instructions on cleanup if one of those things breaks.
And you know how often light bulbs break.
Anyway, Margo, I'm really happy you called.
And you really, you nailed, you got to the real important part of all of this, and that is why can't you choose?
And you might even venture to say that no matter what you've read, no matter how much research you've done, you just can't seem to understand how incandescent light bulbs, which have been used for a hundred years, are going to destroy the planet.
You might point out that intellectually, even at age twelve, that doesn't make sense to you.
They've been used for hundreds of years since the day they were invented.
And the world is still here, and everything's fine.
The climate's fine.
What it's absurd.
But then roll the dice, your teacher's not going to give you an F for this.
That's students have it tough these days.
I have no.
Margo, I just looked it up myself.
I know you're still out there.
Twelve-year-old, our last caller.
The EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency, recommends an 11-step process for cleanup of broken compact fluorescence because of the mercury.
11 step process.
All because, Marg, you don't know what's best for you.
Never forget that.
We are out of time, folks.
I really appreciate your being with us here today.
As always is the case, and we'll be back in 21 hours, revved up, ready to go.
I still got stuff from today I didn't get to, so I can already tell you tomorrow's gonna be great.
▲
Export Selection