Rush Limbaugh Program - October 13, 2014, Monday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 13, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program

25:13

October 13, 2014, Monday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Fastest three hours in media, here we are at the last hour of the busy broadcast day today, Rush Limbaugh and the EIB network.
	Happy to have you here where we meet and surpass all audience expectations every day.
	Happy to have you here.
	Telephone numbers 800-282-2882, the email address LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
	Last Thursday afternoon in Boston.
	At the Wind Technology Testing Center, the Wind Technology Testing Center.
	The Secretary of State, John Kerry, spoke about climate change and said this.
	If we're wrong about this future, what's the worst that could happen to us for making these choices?
	The worst that could happen to us is we create a whole lot of new jobs.
	We kick our economies into gear.
	We have healthier people, healthier children, because we have cleaner air.
	We live up to our environmental responsibility.
	We become truly energy independent.
	And our security is stronger and greater and sustainable as a result.
	That's the worst that happens to us.
	What happens if they're wrong?
	If they're wrong, catastrophe.
	Life as you know it on Earth ends.
	I don't know.
	This is so asinine.
	It is genuinely stupid.
	It is, it really is.
	This is the kind of argument that people losing arguments make.
	Well, you know what?
	I mean, if you guys win, it's the end of life on Earth as we know it.
	How absurd.
	The worst that can happen if we're wrong, he says, if you're wrong, we are not energy independent.
	If you guys are wrong, we're left with trying to get airplanes on the ground with windmills.
	If you guys are wrong, if you guys are right, taxes are going to skyrocket.
	Individual wealth is going to plummet.
	Liberty and freedom go by the wayside.
	If John Kerry and his pals win, we're going to have a world government headquartered at the United Nations with the United States subservient to it.
	If the global warming, because the global warming crowd is simply a bunch of displaced communists when the Soviet Union fell apart, the Berlin Wall fell, and so the climate movement became their new home.
	The climate, climate change, global warming became the vehicle for the advancement of communist theory as opposed to a nation state, the Soviet Union.
	And that's really all that's changed.
	And if those people end up winning, the loss is individual liberty, economic freedom, economic independence, independence, period.
	What you lose is your ability to do what you want when you want.
	The government's in there dictating practically everything you can do and not do and what you can do it with.
	You're going to be paying taxes through the nose.
	This business is about energy independent.
	Do you know it has just, it was just announced over the weekend that the United States, we are now energy independent from Saudi Arabia.
	Now, nobody's telling you this because it doesn't fit the agenda.
	But because of fracking, the United States now has a larger oil supply than Saudi Arabia.
	That's energy independence.
	The fracking movement, which the left absolutely hates because they hate oil, the fracking movement has produced more oil and has and produced it.
	It has shown that we have the ability to go get the reserves that we have in this country in an economical way.
	We now have greater reserves in Saudi Arabia.
	Do you realize the importance of that?
	You realize, I mean, that to me is profound.
	After all these years of believing Saudi Arabia is the only place on the world that has enough oil that everybody in the world can have and need, turns out we have enough to supply ourselves.
	So we don't need to be importing anywhere.
	We will for obvious reasons.
	And by the way, where fracking is taking place, there are economic booms taking place as well with unemployment below 4%, rising wages, productivity is through the wazoo.
	You're just not hearing about it because it doesn't fit the Obama agenda.
	It doesn't fit the climate change agenda.
	And much of Obama's donor base is people made up of people that hate fracking, hate oil, hate fossil fuels,
	and want the government to give them all kinds of money to invest in things like the Wind Testing Institute and solar farms and all of these unproven technologies that are not even close to replacing the energy created via the use of fossil fuels.
	There isn't a substitute.
	We're not even close to having one.
	All of this is so patently absurd.
	But here as an example, one of the most powerful people in this country right now is out there saying, life as you know it on earth ends if the climate skeptics are wrong.
	Meaning, if there's global warming and we don't have a bunch of policies to deal with it, then life on earth as we know it ends.
	Because it's going to get so hot, it's going to become a sweatbox and we're all going to just broil.
	It's panic city for these people when they start making arguments like that.
	The Washington Post's election lab, the statistical model designed to predict outcomes of the various races on the ballot this fall, is currently showing Republicans with a 95% chance of winning the Senate.
	This is in Chris Saliz's piece of October the 10th.
	Now, while most political handicappers suggest Republicans do have an edge in the battle for the Senate, few of those handicappers would say it is as heavily tilted toward the Republicans as the Washington Post's election lab.
	And even other statistical models kept by 538 and the New York Times project far more caution about the likely outcome in 25 days' time.
	So Saliza says he reached out to John Sides, Ben Hyton, and Eric McGee, who put together the model behind the Washington Post election lab.
	He wanted some answers, and he published their conversation, edited only for grammar, below.
	Now, last week on this program, and by the way, their election lab is based purely on polls.
	That's all anybody's got to go on in these things.
	I mean, if you're going to start talking legitimate projections of the number of seats, you can't just pick it out of thin air.
	You have to have some baseline.
	And they're using polling data for it.
	And I remember last week, I had to make a painful admission.
	I remember all during the 2012 campaign, I was expressing doubt about all of those polls that showed Obama winning by anywhere from four to eight points.
	Because I said, what about the 2010 turnout?
	Nobody was talking about the 2010 elections, the midterms.
	They were all talking about 2008.
	I said, what's 2008 got to do with 2012?
	And I thought a real scam was in the process.
	And plus, we won the independence biggest, and that's been the recipe in the past.
	He who wins the independence wins everything.
	And we did that, and we still lost.
	Well, we ended up losing because 4 million Republicans didn't vote.
	They stayed home.
	But looking at the polling data, I just didn't believe it.
	I didn't believe it because I thought they were purposely using an incorrect sample, that they were ignoring the turnout in 2010.
	Now, as it turns out, the pollsters all said a midterm turnout is in no way similar to a presidential year turnout.
	It's impossible for it to be.
	And even when they said that, I said, so, how can you simply ignore what happened in 2010?
	You had people showing up in droves to vote against Democrats.
	Why aren't those same people going to show up now, two years later?
	And the answer I got was, well, they might, but the people that didn't show up in 2010 that would have voted Democrat didn't show up because they didn't care as much, but they do care during presidential years.
	So the Democrat turnout's going to be higher.
	And that's what we're banking.
	It turned out they were right.
	Turned out their predictions of Obama winning with four to eight points were pretty much right on the money.
	I mean, there were some variations, but they were right.
	And they were also right when they predicted why, when they said that most of the people in the country still blame Bush for the economy.
	I couldn't believe that.
	I refuse to believe that there were still that many uninformed, low-informed, or stupid people.
	But then I saw the exit polls, the first wave on that dreadful November night, and I said, my gosh, they're right.
	People are still blaming Bush for the economy.
	And then the devastating one, Obama won by 81 to 19, cares about people like me.
	I didn't need to see the returns.
	I just kind of knew what was going to happen, and it was right.
	And it was kind of puzzling.
	So now the point is that here we are now, two years later, and we're back to a midterm.
	And the turnout that's being looked at in these polls is indeed 2010, not the presidential turnout of 2012.
	And the polling data all shows a rocking Republican win.
	Even the Washington Post election lab.
	And they are saying, in this story, you have to believe in the polls.
	You have to trust the polls explicitly.
	That's what our lab says to do.
	And in getting our calculation that Republicans have a 95% chance of winning the Senate, we are putting explicit trust in the polls that we take and in others.
	So they claim that they're just being honest and true.
	They're not comparing presidential turnout to midterm turnout.
	They're comparing midterm to midterm, 2010 to 2014.
	And it is a big variance.
	They got it at 95%, Nate Silver at 538.
	The blog has it at 58%.
	The New York Times has it at 66% chance for the Republicans winning the Senate.
	Now, they're not happy at the Washington Post about what their election lab is telling them.
	But they admit right here, yep, it comes from the same basic decision to trust the polls explicitly.
	So this whole notion that the Republicans win big is based entirely on these people believing in the polls.
	Yet here we have from thehill.com a headline, Democrats, colon, don't trust the polls.
	Democrats have a new message in the 2014 race for the Senate.
	Don't trust the polls.
	The party is stoking skepticism in the final stretch of the midterm campaign, providing a mirror image of conservative complaints in 2012 about skewed polls in the presidential race between Obama and Romney.
	And folks, I have to tell you, this is right on the money.
	Honesty is honesty, and these guys are right.
	The Democrats are saying the same thing I said.
	And I was wrong about that.
	I thought there's no way that you can discount the 2010 turnout in the 2012 election.
	But they said, not only is there a way, you have to, because they're not at all related.
	And yeah, it still stunk.
	The economy was still bad.
	Nothing has improved.
	And here it's even worse now.
	And so the Democrats are now running around telling people, don't believe what the Washington Post poll is saying.
	Don't believe what the Nate Silver's poll.
	Don't believe those polls.
	Don't believe the polls are wrong.
	And they're doing it for the same reason.
	You know, Dick Morris was doing it in 2012.
	Dick Morris on Fox every night.
	Those polls are wrong.
	They're not factoring the 2010 midterm.
	And later he was asked, Dick, you were wrong here by eight or nine.
	What would happen?
	He said, I was just trying to keep people in the race.
	I was just trying to keep Republican voters fired up.
	And that's what Democrats are doing here by telling their people, just don't listen to Nate Silver this year.
	Don't listen to the Washington Post election lab.
	Those polls are skewed.
	Those polls are wrong.
	You don't believe it.
	They're using it as a means of keeping people fired up.
	I know it's contradictory because I am also the guy that points out the news media takes these polls to make news or to reflect news rather than make it.
	But we'll see.
	There's still some conflicting polling data nationwide, generic ballot versus individual states, where Democrats still hold an edge when it would seem in common sense that there's no way that could happen.
	But it looks like all of the mainstream polling units are beginning to show an increasing likelihood the Republicans win and take control of the Senate.
	And I have to admit, even despite all this, that makes me a little nervous.
	Take a quick time out.
	Be back after this.
	Don't as promise we hit back to the phones now and we're going to go to Tampa.
	David, thank you for waiting.
	I really appreciate it.
	Great to have you on the program.
	Hello.
	Yeah, no problem, Rush.
	I really appreciate it.
	I wanted to give you a sincere thank you from myself and my family.
	We have an 11-year-old autistic son with Asperger's.
	And up until now, the only thing that we could get him to read would be like science fiction, anything with dragons, spaceships, aliens, anything like that.
	So I tried introducing him to Rush Revere with Liberty the Talking Morse.
	I figured that time traveling would appeal to him.
	And sure enough, it did.
	He read the book in four days.
	And it's not only given him something, a new topic to read about, but it's given him and I something to talk about because I'm not a science fiction person.
	So now we can connect.
	And I just wanted to give you that sincere thank you that I don't think you realize how many people like this pumped up.
	Well, I certainly kind of made me speechless here.
	I mean, you have your son is Asperger's, and what else did you say?
	Right.
	Well, it's a form of autism called Asperger's.
	Oh, autism.
	And has now all of a sudden started liking history because of the Rush Revere adventure series?
	That's just that blows me.
	Yeah, it was, you know, we tried so many different things.
	We've given him so many different books to read.
	And unless, like I said, unless it had a dragon in it or it had something, you know, complete science fiction, completely unbelievable, he just wasn't interested in it.
	And it was such a relief.
	I decided, you know, after hearing so many people talk about how great the book was, I decided to pick up The Brave Pilgrims just out of curiosity just to see how he would do with it.
	And I gave it to him and I told him what it was about.
	And four days later, he was done with it and he's ready for the next.
	It was mind-blowing to me because we actually sat down for the first time and had an in-depth conversation about history.
	No kidding.
	Yes.
	And when you try and talk to him about anything else, I mean, I don't know how familiar you are with the Asperger's, but it's a very, everything is very literal.
	So it was wonderful.
	I've never met anybody with it, but I've seen it portrayed a lot of times.
	And if the portrayal I've seen is accurate, then I have an understanding.
	What you say, how you just described it is the way I've seen it portrayed.
	A big bang theory or something like that.
	That's what everybody can relate to.
	But it really is.
	He is a brilliant son.
	Well, did you?
	Were you able to get him the second book, Rush Revere and the First Patriots?
	No, I have not gotten him the second book.
	He just finished the first one.
	Oh, well.
	So I'm going to finish the second, and I'm going to get him the third.
	Well, how about I do that?
	How about I will send you both?
	I don't have any of the new one yet because we just announced it for pre-order.
	But I would be honored to send you the second book and the I'll send you the CDs, the audio versions of both.
	But the great thing is you're able to talk to him about American history now where you were never able to do that.
	That is that.
	And that's what's so great is because we look for ways to connect with our children.
	And, you know, sometimes when you have learning disabilities like that, it is to find ways to connect.
	So we're talking about liberty travel traveling.
	How honored I am to be part of that.
	Don't hang up.
	Don't hang up because when we finish.
	I want to hang up.
	And like I said, it is a sincere thank you that you get from our entire family.
	Well, that's why I'm kind of speechless because the, you know, there's a, as I've said before, there's a mission here, and that is to get the truth of the founding of the country because we love it.
	And we want everybody to.
	I love this country.
	I wish everybody did.
	I hope everybody will at some point.
	And the story doesn't need to be embellished.
	And there's no reason to feel guilty.
	There's no reason to feel anything but amazement and gratitude for the founding of this country.
	And there's a mission to try to connect with people and get that message across who wouldn't ordinarily listen to a radio program like this because they're ages 10 to 13.
	And to hear that your son, who has Asperger's, has been able to get into it is can't tell you how meaningful that is to all of us who work on these books.
	So hang on here, David, so we can get this stuff out to you as quickly as we can.
	Thank you very much.
	I ran out of time with our caller David in Tampa, but I wanted to tell him, and I'll take the occasion to remind all of you too.
	There are two new places on the web where fans of the Rush Revere Adventure Series can go to interact with other fans.
	One is a brand new website.
	Rush Revere has his own address now, rushrevere.com.
	And it's a great website featuring interactivity.
	We've got emails and photos that people have sent in and videos.
	There's a great, great, great video trailer for the upcoming book, Rush Revere and the American Revolution, which comes out on October 28th.
	And then we've really ramped up the Facebook page, Facebook/slash Rush Revere.
	And we're going to build that up.
	The horse Liberty is demanding that we give him as many likes as we can get, which we've said, hey, it's on you, bud.
	You get your own likes.
	So we're giving him every opportunity to get his likes, people spreading the word about him on Facebook.
	And it's all to offer a little bit more on an ongoing basis to people that read these books and like them, particularly the kids, the primary audience.
	So the Facebook page is www.facebook slash Rush Revere and RushRevere.com.
	And the new book, Rush Revere, and the American Revolution, now available for free order.
	But that is amazing.
	I've not seen the Big Bang Theory.
	The Asperger's that I have seen portrayed, there was a British series called A Politician's Wife on the BBC.
	And it starred David Tennant, interestingly, who's now in Grace Point, and he was one of the Doctor Who's.
	And Emily Watson.
	It was fascinating.
	I wish this series had made it to American TV.
	It was only eight episodes.
	But it was about a guy in the House of Commons who threw his weight behind something and lost, had to resign.
	And his wife becomes a huge political star, and he plots to bring her down along with a guy he thinks she's having an affair with.
	They have an Asperger's son.
	They have an Asperger's syndrome son.
	And if that's an accurate portrayal, then I know what this guy's son is like.
	And I've seen it in, I think, a couple of other TV shows, but I've never seen the Big Bang Theory.
	No offense to the Big Bang theory.
	But I know enough to know that if this is the first time David, the father, has been able to connect with his son over something that's not science fiction, that that's big.
	And that's why I wanted to make sure I mentioned the Rush Revere website and the Rush Revere Facebook page, because who knows?
	His son might get something out of those if he's really into the series.
	You never know.
	Here's Dimitri in Burlington, Konaka, Kentucky.
	Hi, Dimitri.
	Glad you waited.
	Great to have you on the program, sir.
	Hey, Rush.
	It's great to talk to you again.
	Thank you, sir.
	You talked about how the real change starts with a change in culture, and that is so spot on.
	That's why we got the books for the girls.
	I wanted to, just as a quick joke that I learned growing up in the Soviet Union that Reagan would have been proud of, is, you know, a poor American sees a rich American driving in his Cadillac, and he looks at him and he says, I'm going to get a better job, and I'm going to get one too.
	And a poor Russian sees a rich Russian driving by in his Volga, and he looks at him and says, I'm going to put a potato in his tailpipe, and he won't have one either.
	And it's a huge contrast between the mentality here and there.
	And it didn't happen by accident.
	It happened.
	Wait a minute.
	Wait a minute.
	We're closer to the Russian model that you just described.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	And I told you last time I was afraid of where things were going here, and you're starting to see that.
	But that's why we need books like yours, because they show the kids what was the country, what kind of principles were the country really founded on.
	Those people worked hard.
	They sacrificed everything.
	They took enormous risks, something we're not willing to do anymore with all our safety nets and everything.
	But the most important thing, in addition, all of that's true, but it was the objective: individual liberty, personal responsibility, self-determination.
	The government was subordinate to the individual.
	That's what they were struggling and giving their lives and their sacred honor to establish.
	And did.
	And that's the...
	Look, I wish I had more time.
	I'm just up against it, but I really thank you so much for your kind words.
	Thanks, everybody.
	I apologize for getting the phone call so late today, but there was a lot on the plate, a lot on the agenda.
	And I'll make it up to you tomorrow.
	Promise.

▲