All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 1, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:58
October 1, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 podcast.
And folks, it seems like only yesterday that we were being told that it was unlikely there would be an outbreak of Ebola in the United States.
No problem.
We've got everything handled.
You just need to walk out for people with the symptoms.
And you see somebody with the symptoms, you just need to run away.
By the way, I cannot hear the theme song.
If you'd raise it, we should have to play with levels here every day, folks.
We're in Los Angeles.
It's already Wednesday.
It's the it's hump day.
It's the fastest three hours, the fastest week in media.
Great to have you.
Telephone number 800 282-2882.
If you want to be on the program and the email address, L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
We've got more on Ebola coming up.
We got more in everything coming up.
But a couple of senior lawmakers on Capitol Hill today have urged the Secret Service Director, Julia Peterson, to leave her job.
Two Congressmen, because they want her canned.
They want her fired.
If you hear the latest, the Secret Service allowed some convict that was armed to get on an elevator with the President of the United States.
Some of this stuff going on in the White House, we talked about it yesterday, is inexplicable.
There doesn't, I don't care what excuse what we had a former agent call.
He was trying to maintain some respect for the uh for the for the agency or whatever, but things like, well, when the protectees are not in residence, the security level kind of dropped.
Why?
Some of this doesn't make any sense.
It makes me wonder what's really going on in there.
And it it makes me wonder what in the world is taken over.
And you you you fall back on, well, maybe it's political correctness, where nobody guilty of anything.
Everybody is a victim of some oppressor, of some oppression, and therefore they need to be cut some slack.
Uh we need to understand.
I don't know, it's it's crazy.
Have you ever heard, by the way, uh couldn't could you reduce my microphone level here just a tad?
I mean, just a smidge.
Okay, cool.
Has anybody ever heard now?
And I don't mean this to be insulting.
Has anybody ever heard of the comedian Bill Burr, B-U-R-R.
You got Well, I don't know.
I don't know who he is, which is why I'm asking if anybody's I don't.
Look, I'm asking because I don't know.
And I'm wondering, well, this is a pop culture thing, and there are a lot of comedians out there on the internet that you don't run into.
Okay, well, anyway, there is a comedian out there by the name of Bill Burr.
And he thinks You probably say, what's this guy to Secret Service?
Just hang in for just a second here.
The guy thinks that women are ruining the NFL.
He thinks the everything going wrong in the NFL is the result of either women muscling in on it, or men who are afraid of women allowing women to come in and influence the culture of the game and the business.
He said that it's not the violence, it's not the domestic abuse, it's not drug usage.
No, none of that is to blame for what's wrong with the National Football League.
He said it's women who just can't deal with the simplicity of the male mind.
He said, you know what makes women happy?
Nothing.
And that's why they are slowly taking over the NFL.
He says, I've a s I have a simple male brain, and I can just sit and watch football and enjoy it.
And that annoys women that men are so simple that they can just sit on their butts for five hours on a Sunday and watch football.
And they don't like it and either want to get involved in it to change it or get men away from it, or what and that's why they are ruining the NFL.
I don't know who this guy is, but I just ran across it.
And I uh there are people who uh political correctness, you know, what are the origins of it?
Uh we on this program have, of course, jokingly in the past, ladies and gentlemen, discussed the chickification of our culture uh in education and in a new news business.
You've got female news directors, you've got female assignment editors, and of course, the male and female brains are different.
Men and women are different.
That's news to Time Magazine, but there is a difference.
Now we've got a female director of the Secret Service.
And there's stuff going on there.
I'm sorry, folks.
I don't, I don't, I don't, it, it's it nobody has an answer for any of this.
How do people, a thousand security breaches?
Six people have made it over the fence, one of them nearly got to the residence, which is on the second floor, nearly got to the elevator to the residence.
I have been there.
I know how you do it.
It's uh the uh I mean, I I don't know how many people take this seriously.
Now, how many people don't think it's that big a deal?
It is a huge deal that this kind of thing can happen.
Uh it's not supposed to be possible.
And there aren't any answers for it when people have questions, such as members of Congress.
Anyway, what's happened here is that Jason Chaffetz, Republican Utah, and Elijah Cummings, the former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucasians, Democrat Maryland, unconditionally called for Julia Pearson's ouster at the Secret Service.
They are the senior congressmen on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
They notably did not call for her firing or resignation during the hearing yesterday, but they did it afterwards when they changed their mind.
They didn't, they they after they digested what they had heard during the hearing, they got because, you know, this doesn't make any sense.
The answers we got here are crazy.
And even some of the questions were crazy.
What is the culture inside the Secret Service?
What was it?
Culture inside the Secret Service.
What is culture have to do with it?
You know, some institutions and traditions are supposed to be immune from cultural vagaries.
The ebb and flow of what's permissible and tolerant and what isn't.
There's certain things that are etched in stone and don't change, and one of them is protecting the life of the president of the United States.
There's no way that any cultural change, rot or otherwise, can change that mission.
It's mind-boggling to me.
But ladies and gentlemen, well, Chaffetz, Jason Chavez, Utah said uh late yesterday that Pearson should be fired, says it's time that she be fired by the president or that she resign.
Obama doesn't fire people.
Now he allows them to get reassigned, like Van Jones in this country.
He doesn't fire people.
You know something else, though?
Is the president culpable here?
I mean, this goes to the top.
I mean, it's it's his life.
It is his security we're talking about.
It does, it makes me ask what in the world is going on there that and you might, what do you mean by that, Rush?
Well, I'll tell you what I mean.
What's going on in there that might cause people look the other way at things happening?
What might be going on in there?
We've all heard presidents hate the Secret Service.
Not the individuals, but they hate being in the boat.
Michelle Obama has told us she hates living there.
Hillary Clinton didn't like them being around.
Clinton had to sneak out.
Clinton himself had to sneak out.
Remember Gary Aldrich?
He had to sneak out and take a cab before there was Uber to go meet some floozy over in Georgetown.
They all want to get away from the Secret Service.
Nobody wants to be spied on 247.
So what's going on in there that the order might be coming down, look the other way.
What's going on in there?
Secret Service might be told, pay no attention to what you're seeing here.
And the Secret Service is caught between a rock and a hard place.
The president's their boss, but then he's not.
Director is their boss.
But something's not right here.
Something is very, very wrong here.
This is this is not a laughing matter, really.
Because it's it's so far and away different.
I mean, the Secret Service, let me put it this way.
They're not this incompetent, folks.
And if they are, if this, if this is an incompetence that has all of a sudden swept through this agency in the last six, we didn't hear about this when George W. Bush was in there.
We didn't hear about this with any other president.
Well, Clinton, but that kind of gets back to the service being told to look the other way, which makes me wonder.
But this degree of incompetence didn't just happen.
And if it did, that's even worse.
And I just can't believe it has deteriorated to this point.
Elijah Cummings, a congressional black Caucasians, said early today that Pearson should no longer be director.
He said, I have come to the conclusion that my confidence and my trust in this director, Ms. Pearson, has eroded.
He said this in an interview on MSNBC, so nobody heard it, which is why I'm telling you.
And he said, I do not feel comfortable with her in that position.
Now look, ladies and gentlemen, as I've always said, what really separates great comedy from average run-of-the-mill humor is that there is an element of truth that gives the comedy an edge, if you will.
And that line, in fact, the Secret Service is so good at it now, they can no longer distinguish between members of my administration and some nut who jumps the fence, may not be that far off the beaten path.
Secret Service trains hard to actively ignore people with radically different political views.
That's political correctness.
But at any, at any rate here, this is uh I don't to me it's it's inexplicable.
I I don't know how else to um to explain it.
And it raises more questions than there are answers to.
Particularly about what's going on in there.
You know, the only way these kind of things can be missed is if they're being told not to look.
If they're being told not to notice.
And if that's the case, what are they being told not to notice?
Now, the New York Times is not that troubled by this.
Get this.
We're talking about the life, protecting the life of the president of the United States, and the New York Times claims, well, these conservatives, they don't really care.
They're just using this as a way to point out the incompetence of government.
The Republicans are only pretending to be concerned about Obama's safety and the social and secret service labs.
You believe that.
This is like David Koch.
He gives 25 million dollars for a children's wing at a New York hospital, and the nurses protest and demand the hospital give it back because he doesn't really mean it.
He doesn't really want to give the 25 million.
He's just a racist and bigot and homophobe, and he's trying to keep people from knowing that, and he's trying to buy it with 20, and they don't want the money.
And so now our sincerity is being.
You would think, folks, that the biggest defenders of the president themselves, the New York Times on down, would be the first in line to be outraged about this.
And yet here we are making a big deal out of it, and they have to accuse us of just using it as a way to point out the incompetence of government.
Well, hey, what if that is a factor?
What if there is incompetence?
Can that be denied?
I think incompetence runs throughout this administration.
Look at this.
I have it right here, my formerly nicotine-stained fingers from the Daily Caller today, Pentagon official, the president is lying to America about us and about ISIS.
It's written by a guy named Joseph Miller, but Joseph Miller is the pen name.
For those of you in real end, it means he's making this up.
His name, he didn't want to reveal his real name.
Joseph Miller's the pen name for ranking Department of Defenses, a defense official with a background in U.S. special operations and combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan.
He Has worked in strategic planning.
He has written a piece, and to hide his identity, he has created a pen name.
On Sunday, Obama said the intelligence community had underestimated the rise of ISIS, saying in an interview with CBS, quote, our head of the Intel community, Jim Clapper has acknowledged that I think they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria, close quote.
But we know that isn't true, as nearly a dozen administration officials have testified to the threat posed by ISIS publicly over the last year.
To mitigate the fallout, Josh Ernest's office issued a statement stating, quote, a lot of that decision making was predicated on the will of the Iraqi security forces to fight for their country, close quote.
But that's not true either.
In 2010, General Lloyd Austin, then commander U.S. forces in Iraq, directly informed the president that 20,000 troops, over 20,000 troops would be required to maintain the gains made by U.S. forces against Al Qaeda and its affiliates, and to mentor the fledgling Iraqi security forces because he knew they were not ready to go out on their own.
So here's a guy working there who says Obama's lying, he's making it all up.
Everything Obama's saying is a lie.
The military, the Intel people have told Obama exactly what the circumstances are and what circumstances have unfolded are exactly what he was told would happen.
As far back as four years ago.
Obama pulls out of Iraq, got to get out, placade his lunatic fringe base.
He was told by General Lloyd Austin, if you do this, it's going to be a big mistake.
You need to keep over 20,000 forces there to maintain what we've won, i.e.
in the surge, and to make sure these Iraqi security forces ramp up and are able to take care of their own country.
And Obama said screw it and pulled out.
And now he's out there saying nobody ever told him any of this stuff.
And we've got a piece here where an active military guy, Department of Defense, is calling the president out on this.
Saying he's lying when he says nobody knew the Iraq Army wouldn't be able to stand up to ISIS in Al Qaeda.
Quotes General Austin over the over 20,000 troops necessary.
I mean, there's incompetence everywhere.
That's undeniable.
New York Times can get their underwear in a wad over it, being pointed out all they want, but the fact is it's still happening.
Yeah, right.
So Obama's out there to say, hey, Jim Clapper, he'll be the first to tell you that he's screwed up, right?
So now people are saying, Mr. President, why don't you show us the presidential daily briefs where all this was underestimated or not mentioned?
Yeah, they won't do that, but the some are some are suggesting to Josh Ernest, well, hey, look, let us see these presidential daily briefs.
We saw the ones from 9-11, those things are released.
9-11 committee got hold of them, commissioned.
We've seen some, so Mr. President released these things.
New York Times, I'm still back to this.
Secret Service business.
Listen to this passage from the New York Times article, which says those of us concerned about Secret Service lapses don't really care.
President Obama must be touched by all the concern Republicans are showing him these days.
As Congress examines security breaches of the White House, even opposition lawmakers who've spent the last six years fighting his every initiative expressed deep worry for his security.
Yeah, he's the freaking president for crying out loud.
But what is so hard to understand about this?
Why isn't the New York Times, and why aren't all these liberal house organs leading the way on all of this concern?
Instead of impugning us as being phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rock and rollers on this.
Yet it would not be all that surprising if Mr. Obama were a little wary of all the professed sympathy.
Although the target of the legislative scrutiny is the Secret Service and not him, the fur or oversecurity has left the White House on the defensive.
Well, I'm telling you, look, if the Secret Service is told to look the other way, what in the world is going on in there?
You know what would be happening at the New York Times.
If the Republicans in that committee had not expressed any concern about this, they'd be accusing them of that.
They'd be writing, where is the Republican concern for the president's security?
Is it absent because he's black?
You know damn well that's what so the Republicans is a great example of how they can't win no matter what.
They express concern for the president.
They don't mean it.
They don't really mean it.
It's just a way to point out the incompetence of government because they're mean conservatives who hate women and blacks and minorities and people of color.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And if they hadn't expressed any outrage, the New York Times would have ripped them for that.
Because the president's black.
Now, I uh I just got a note from Coco up at uh Rush Limbaugh.com, a webmaster.
Uh Coco was also uh an interpreter at Rush Limbaugh, the television show in a gorilla suit.
And an interesting point, Coco says, hey, the reason the New York Times doesn't think that the Republicans actually care is because they didn't care when Bush was in the Oval Office.
And in fact, when there were books written and movies made about how to assassinate George W. Bush, the New York Times is right in there reviewing them and telling us, yeah, it might be a little out there, but we need to dig deep to understand the artistry involved.
And I had to remember that's exactly right.
And remember, one thing about liberals, they are so arrogant and narcissistic.
They think everybody thinks the way they do.
So for example, they think the Redskins name should be changed.
They think everybody thinks it.
And so they thought Bush assassination.
Well, yeah, that's a little out there, but we should understand the rage people are feeling over this presidency.
There was a movie made in Canada, actual movie about Bush's assassination.
There was a book written about it.
And in both instances, the New York Times, if not promoted it, encouraged people to not reject it out of hand because of the art involved.
Speaking of the New York Times, they are laying off 100 jobs in the newsroom.
100 people in the newsroom are going to be losing their jobs.
And these are editorial positions and journalists' positions.
And you know why?
The New York Times came up with what they thought was an innovative way to make money.
They would start charging users to access the op-ed columns in the New York Times every day.
So they came up with an app.
It was called NYT Opinion.
It was a mobile app dedicated to opinion content.
And they charge people, for example, to read what David Brooks thinks.
They were charging people to read what Maureen Dowd thinks, or Tom Alfriedman.
Paul Krugman.
And quite understandably, nobody wanted to pay for it.
Why in the world would you pay to find out what those nut.
I mean, if you live in Manhattan, you already get the newspaper, you don't need the app.
Typical, the New York Times thinking the rest of the country has people dying to read the opinions of their op-ed columnist, and the app was a flop, and so they're laying off a hundred people.
And this is to, of course, safeguard the newspaper's long-term profitability, you see.
This whole business that this concern for the security, the president is insincere.
That that's really even lowball for these people.
But it's typical.
It's it's it's liberalism and it's extreme liberalism.
That's That's what it's become.
Get get this.
Folks, a Japanese researcher just got this.
This was not an original showbiz stack of stuff today.
A Japanese researcher has taken a look at how temperature fluctuations attributed to climate change affect the sex ratio of infants.
Let me read that to you again.
A Japanese researcher has studied how temperature fluctuations attributed to climate change, not just the daily ebb and flow of the daily high and the daily low.
No, no, no.
No, no, no.
Nothing as simple as that.
This guy is studying how temperature fluctuations attributed to climate change, of which there are none, by the way.
There hasn't been any warming in what?
19 years.
There isn't it.
I don't want to distract myself.
A Japanese researcher has taken a look at how temperature fluctuations attributed to climate change affect the sex ratio of infinite, and he has found male fetuses are more vulnerable to extreme weather events, resulting in an increased female to male ratio.
In other words, global warming, unless we get a handle on it, will wipe out men.
Hot weather makes little boy babies die more in Japan, which means the world is going to be chickafied even sooner unless we do something about global warming.
Now, this is going to be a major problem.
Look at the contradiction here for people on the left.
A fetus.
What's that?
An unviable tissue mass.
A fetus is an illness resulting from pregnancy, which is itself an illness.
A fetus is a non-entity.
It certainly isn't a baby.
It certainly is a human.
It's unviable tissue mass.
Yet global warming, an issue they also feel fervently about, can affect the sexual ratio of these unviable tissue masses.
What is a liberal to do here?
Which wins in this?
The abortion side or the global warming side?
They need both in order to advance the agenda.
But in this case, if they acknowledge the global warming aspect, then they have to acknowledge that the fetus is more than an unviable tissue mass.
And that could present them a problem.
My guess is they will throw this scientist from Japan overboard because they must maintain the belief that a fetus isn't real.
Because abortion is the sacrament of liberalism.
In research published in the uh in the in the well, that's actually there's a magazine, folks.
It's called Fertile and Sterile.
That's the name of the peer-reviewed scientific journal of opinion.
Dr. Mesao Fukuda from the MK Health Institute analyzed monthly temperature data in Japan along with national data on births and fetal deaths.
Between the years of 1968 and 2012, fetal deaths were defined as fetuses spontaneously aborted.
You know what a spontaneous abortion is, by the way.
Yes, you do.
The miscarriage.
That's what says here.
Fetal, I'm reading to you from the journal Fertile and Sterile.
Fetal deaths were defined as fetuses spontaneously aborted, parentheses, miscarried, after 12 weeks of gestation.
The researchers paid particular attention to two specific extreme weather events, an extraordinarily hot summer in 2010 and a distinctly cold winter in 2011.
And here's the result.
During the hot summer, which was the warmest In the country since 1898, there was an increase in the number of fetal deaths in September of that year.
Nine months later, there was a decrease in the ratio of male to female babies born in Japan.
So one year has given us the shocking news that temperature fluctuations due to climate change could eventually, if we don't do anything about it, wipe out male fetuses, which don't exist anyway.
They're simply unviable tissue masses.
But if they do exist, we wipe them out.
No big deal because we need more women than men to make up for all the patriarchy and the brutality and the predatory nature of men for all these years.
It's all gonna even out.
Okay, I checked the email during the break, as I always do, and I knew this is gonna happen.
I got an email from a guy, you're making it up.
The New York Times never ever reviewed books and movies on assassinating Bush and thought it was okay.
You making it up.
That's what you do.
And I'm sick of it, and you need to be called out on it.
All right.
Oh, here you go.
I'm gonna quote to you.
This is a pull quote from a New York Times review of the George W. Bush assassination movie.
It was Canadian.
It's October 27, 2006.
Here's the pull quote from that review.
The death of a president is in the end nearly terribly uh are neither terribly outrageous nor especially heroic.
It's a thought experiment.
Well, yes, you got a movie that depicts the planning and assassination of George W. Bush.
And the New York Times calls it a thought experiment.
Don't condemn it.
It's not outrageous.
It's not really heroic.
Heroic.
Heroic.
As though somebody might have thought it was a no, it's a thought experiment.
So the New York Times is encouraging people not to reject it out of hand to give it a chance, because you need to think about it.
Grab audio soundbite number 22.
I just got this.
I just received the transcript of this.
And all I see here, I haven't had a chance to read it, but I want to hear it.
Apparently, Jimmy Carter was on CNBC today and said he could have beaten Reagan if he was more manly.
Feminists are not going to like this.
He was on with the host Tonya, or I'm sorry, Tanya Breyer.
She said, even your wife Rosalind was encouraging you to take action against Iran back during the hostage crisis.
Was it hard to not take everybody's advice around you, even your wife?
Well, I could have been re-elected if I had taken military action against Iran.
But uh I think if I I could have wiped Iran off the map with the weapons that we had.
But in the process, a lot of innocent people would have been killed, probably including hostages.
And so I stood up against all that advice, and then eventually my prayers were answered, and every hostage came home safe and free.
And so I think I made the right decision in retrospect, but it was not easy at the time.
Yeah, it could have been miss.
See, I could have been manly.
I could have blown him off the map.
See what he.
Yeah, manly.
I could have blown him off the map, and then probably one re-election.
But I wasn't gonna do that.
I would have killed innocent people.
Maybe the hot we're killing innocent people now.
You know, we're killing innocent people.
And we're dropping, did you hear about this?
We had an accident.
We actually it's not funny.
We we actually dropped via parachute.
We we we airdropped a bunch of food and medical supplies to ISIS.
Yes, yes, we're we're feeding the it was an accident.
It went to the wrong place.
We dropped it in the wrong.
It's hey.
These things happen.
Well, that's that's the thing.
I don't know.
When I saw it, it's just reported in the news as an accident, but I wondered.
I actually're dropping.
We're dropping food and medicine, and and Carter's, and then Carter's prayers were answered by Iran said, Yeah, yeah, my prayers are finally answered.
Uh, and every hostage came home safe and free.
The only reason the hostages came home safe and free is because Jimmy Carter lost the election.
And uh Rinaldus Magnus was uh victorious.
Okay, now you're challenging me on this.
Let me here here.
Let me find it real quickly.
Uh yeah, let me let me let me find it.
Here it is.
It's from NBC News, and I know you're doubting me out there.
Iraq pilots mistakenly gave food, ammunition to ISIS militants.
Iraqi military pilots mistakenly gave food, water, and ammo to enemy ISIS militants instead of their own soldiers.
A senior security official, a brigadier general told NBC News.
Now here's the thing.
Given all of the shifting alliances over there, but religious and tribal, can we be sure this was a mistake?
You know, we we assume that that the Iraqis are on our side, but let's what what are we doing here?
We are actually bombing Islamists, and they are Islamists.
Now they're Sunnis and Shiites and they don't exactly get along.
Then how can we be so sure this was a mistake?
Maybe it was just to make amends for a bombing of food silos, because we did that.
We bombed a food silo.
We were we had this earlier in the week.
We bombed food silos in Syria, and we are also taking out civilian targets.
The rules of engagement have changed for one operation.
Wait till you hear that coming up.
And we haven't even gotten to Ebola yet.
What?
No, I don't know if a Secret Service agent was piloting this plane.
It doesn't say anything about that.
You mean the plane that dropped the the ammo and food to Isaac?
No.
Let me read here.
Supplies were supposed to help besieged Iraqi army and soldiers who've been fighting Islamists.
Some pilots, instead of dropping these supplies over the airily Iraqi army, threw it over the area controlled by ISIS, said Hakim Al-Zamili, a lawmaker in the Iraqi.
Nothing here that the pilot was a secret service agent.
Those soldiers were in deadly need of these supplies, but because of the wrong plans of the commanders in the Iraqi army and lack of experience of the Iraqi pilots.
We helped ISIS fighters to kill our so well, these things happen, folks.
Spoils of war.
U.S. has probably been arming ISIS, if only indirectly, since the summer of 2013.
A Brigadier General...
No food stamps.
Now those are debit cards.
That'd be tough to you'd have to wait those down with uh son of you want the debit card.
Yeah, you could do it, I suppose.
Uh what's it?
Uh see.
Brigadier General Iraq's defense ministry declined to be named, confirmed the incident, which occurred on September 19th, said, yep, that's what happened.
Air Force pilots did not have enough experience.
They're all young and they're all new.
These are the people Obama told us were ready to go.
Up to snuff.
Both Al Zamili and the Brigadier General said there would be an investigation to determine the cause of the blunder.
Right.
Let's do a hearing.
Find out what went wrong.
Get an answer to it.
You can't make this stuff up.
You just cannot make it up.
We'll be right back, folks.
Sit tight, don't go away.
I want to thank all of you who are on hold for your patience.
I've been really good this week about getting to phone calls in the first hour.
And today I didn't pull that off.
I intended to, but late breaking stuff continued to just flow into me.
So we're going to get the calls quickly in the second hour.
So as people not to make people have to wait as long or so long.
And we still have the latest Ebola news, and this is this is very bad too, folks.
This is and we were told we have nothing to worry about here.
Remember, we're gonna we're gonna revisit, back to Grooveyard Forgotten Favorite Soundbites.
They'll let you hear and give you the facts on the ground as we know them.
▲
Export Selection