All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 9, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:08
December 9, 2014, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And welcome back, folks.
Greetings to you.
Rushland Bought talent.
So much.
Talent.
More than I need.
I wish I could share some of it.
That doesn't work that way.
On loan from God.
Final busy broadcast hour of the day.
I am your highly trained broadcast specialist.
So good.
It seems like anybody could do it.
800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program and the email address lrushbow at eibnet.com.
Now, this, I meant to talk about this, and I got sidetracked on all of the lies that are being permeating mainstream pop culture, such as the Lena Dunham book and the Rolling Stone story on rape and this kind of thing.
And I really, what got me off on that, or got me on that, was this story here.
I had a caller who wanted to know, well, he had a, I forget the exact question, but I know my answer, and I was going to incorporate this story in it.
So here it is.
It's from Breitbart.
Internal regime documents show that the regime is considering allowing terrorists, transnational criminals, and anyone else who wants to enter or stay inside the United States to not even answer if they've ever been connected with a crime.
Now stop and digest that for a second.
Breitbart has come across some leaked documents from the administration which indicate that the Obama regime is considering letting terrorists, international criminals, transnational criminals, and anybody else who wants to enter or stay in America to not even have to answer questions if they've been connected with a crime.
The internal Obama regime documents obtained by Breitbart News through a Department of Homeland Security source, which means that there's somebody in there that is literally outraged by this, which is kind of healthy to note that there is at least somebody in Homeland Security who came across this and simply can't believe it and has decided to leak it to Breitbart.
The documents include a draft application for illegal immigrants seeking to stay in the country and future prospective immigrants seeking to enter the country, legal and illegal, in other words, it's covered.
And on the draft application, applicants for T non-immigrant status or U for non-immigrant status are not required to answer a series of key questions about their background.
T non-immigrant visas are for people who are petitioning the U.S. to be considered a victim of a severe form of trafficking in person.
By the way, this is a technique practically everybody showing up at the border or anybody showing up asking for asylum of any kind is basically claiming that they are being trafficked, that they're victims of human trafficking in their nation, native countries.
That is what the T non-immigrant visa is.
The U non-immigrant visa is for people seeking to be considered a victim of criminal activity.
And part of the president's executive immigration action is to expand both of these kinds of visas.
Now, as we have seen during the recent flood of illegal aliens across the border, illegal aliens are already being coached to claim that they're the victims of sex trafficking or domestic abuse or some other criminal activity.
So those are the kinds of visas that they will all be applying for anyway.
So we're really opening the floodgates here to criminals.
Now, this is obviously going to create a question.
Why?
Why would we do this?
I mean, it's bad enough that we're, in effect, erasing the border.
That's bad enough.
But why are we openly, knowingly looking the other way when acknowledged criminals want to come into the country?
Why are we looking the other way and say, come on in?
Well, they can't discriminate against people is part of it, but there's a much, much larger reason for this.
And folks, it's ideological.
This is one of those things that if I could, if I could, if I could just, there are things in life that I, for example, say, my gosh, if I could just convince a majority of people to believe this, to accept this, that we'd be over a big hump.
Now, one of the explanations, and I'm not kidding you on this, people like Barack Obama and sadly, so many Democrats today who believe in the inherent flaws of this country since the days of our founding.
And those flaws all have to do with discrimination against minorities and people of color.
And they believe that it is endemic, that it is systemic, and that it was purposeful.
That this country was founded by a bunch of rich white professionals for themselves and their descendants.
And these people knew that other people were needed, but they were never ever going to be in positions to attain real power or real success.
They're always going to be second-class citizens.
People like Obama, and he's not alone, really believe that this country still has a huge price to pay for all of this discrimination and all of this unfairness.
And they will look at it.
If you object to this, they will say, well, isn't the mafia in this country because we looked the other way in the 1920s?
I didn't see anybody complaining about all the crime from Europe that we let in the country.
So who's to say that we can discriminate against modern-day criminals?
We let them in before.
And there are honestly people who will say that as though we did it purposely.
But I dare say we never had an official immigration program.
If you are a member of the Sicilian mob, come on in.
But that's what Obama's doing.
Obama's telegraphing.
He's sending out engraved invitations for all intents and purposes.
But the criminals from Europe immigrating is just one example.
It's something much larger than that going on here.
And it is rooted in the fact that the country must be transformed.
The reason it must be transformed is because it's illegitimate.
It's flawed.
It is immoral.
It's unjust to the majority of people who live here.
And it's time to pay a price.
And if if a number of, say, radical Mexican immigrants were to stand up and say, who were you to keep us out?
California was us.
Texas was ours.
You took it.
What right do you have to keep it?
We want it back.
And if we have to come here and move here to repatriate it, we're going to do it.
And Obama would agree with that.
Not publicly.
I mean, you'll never hear him say this in a speech.
That's the point.
In a speech, he'll be understanding in the comment.
He would never tell you in public.
He agrees with that kind of thinking.
But for all intents and purposes, he does.
There are people in this country who really, really don't like America and really, really think that it's a rotten place because of our past and the way we were founded.
And by God, this is how we have to pay the price.
We have owed people for 200 plus years.
And there's also a little bit of, who do you think you are?
Why do you think you have an inherent right to not have to live among criminals when everybody in the world has to?
What makes you special, Mr. and Mrs. America?
You say you don't want people like this in your neighborhood.
Well, what gives you the right to say that?
What gives you the right to discriminate that way?
You realize most people in the world don't have a choice in who they live next to?
What gives you the right to think you should?
What makes you better than anybody else?
What makes you special?
I'm telling you, it's never going to be admitted to by these people, but I'm telling you, I know them.
I know this is how many of them think.
I'm not talking about people like David Rodham Gergen or Bob Beckle or some of these people on TV, although there may be a vein of it.
I'm talking about the genuine radicals that Obama has put in the administration.
Obama himself, people like Eric Holder, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrah, you name it.
They're all over the place.
Most of them names you don't even know.
But they're working in Homeland Security and they're working at TSA and they're working at IRS and they're working at Department of Justice and they've all got chips on their shoulder.
This, on the face of it, this doesn't make any sense.
If you value quality of life, if you value the things that make America American, there's no way you would extend an invitation to known criminals of varying type, extend an invitation, and then knowingly look the other way while welcoming them to the country.
There is also one other aspect to it, and that is this drummed up notion that they're being coached to say that they are victims of human trafficking in their native countries and they want to escape.
The reason they're being coached to say that, because that's a play on the abundant and overwhelming compassion the American people have.
And the theory is, well, we can't turn away.
Oh my God, somebody shows up and wants, is it to be safe from the evils going on in their own country?
And who are we to say no?
I've told the story, I don't know how many times, in a raging debate in dinner, at dinner in Palm Springs, with a world-renowned media guy, whose name I'm not going to mention because it wouldn't serve any point, but you know who it is.
Got into a big debate with my friend who was the host of the dinner.
And this guy basically said, look, if somebody wants to come to my country to better their life, hell, I'm not going to be the one to say they can't come.
So there's that aspect to it.
Well, they're just trying to improve themselves.
My God, and this is where they come.
Why can't we live?
I'm like, no, we've got more than we need, and this country is so wonderful.
We treat people that way.
And my host said to this guy, well, what if one of these guys just illegally walks into your backyard and says he wants to date your daughter?
Come on, big guests.
That would never happen.
Well, it's going to happen to somebody, Mr. Media person.
But the example was not a specific example, but simply an attempt to find the guy's limits.
Again, at what point will anybody say, no, we shouldn't let those people in?
Or on what basis can they be persuaded?
That's all the question was.
It was an attempt to find out how far this guy would go.
And it was really, his opinion was really deeply rooted in guilt.
He had guilt that he was born in America, that he was prosperous and successful.
And he just felt it was mean to tell a poor person trying to get here that they had no right to come.
And that if they had to get here illegally, that was fine with him because they were trying to improve their lives.
And since he's got such a great life, who is he to tell somebody else they can't have one?
So the regime plays on all of these different emotions to get this stuff done.
In the meantime, what's going to happen?
Well, by definition, mainstream culture society is going to end up being corrupted.
And all of this is happening at the very moment where we're being told we have too many criminals in jail.
There's way too many people incarcerated, primarily people of color.
It's unjust and it's unfair and it's not the way to solve our problems.
And so the impetus to imprison lawbreakers, that's being attacked now as part of the unjustness and unfairness and discriminatory nature of this country.
That's an all-out assault from within.
And it's sponsored by people who think, they really, really do, think that this country needs to find out what it's like for most everybody else to live on this planet.
And furthermore, the reason we need to find out is because most of the squalor and most of the poverty can be rooted right back, traced right back to us.
Because we've conquered the world and we've stolen what we've needed from this little country or that little country.
We've the CIA to kill their leaders and take over.
And we steal oil and natural gas.
We do all these horrible rotten things.
It's about time.
It's about time we find out what the rest of the world lives like.
Kid you not.
It's clear that the Democrat Party doesn't have a whole lot of people today who think the U.S. is the good guys.
Listen to Diane Feinstein today, read her torture report, and you'd have a tough time concluding that she thinks we're the good guys.
So this is just, it's unbelievable to me.
It's unbelievable.
Internal administration documents show that the Obama administration's considering allowing terrorists, transnational criminals, and anyone else who wants to enter or stay in the U.S. to not even answer if they have ever been connected with a crime.
I got to take a break as you chew on that.
We'll be right back and continue in a moment.
Back to the phones we go.
This is, let's see, Ruth in Portland, Oregon.
Welcome, Ruth.
Glad you waited.
Great to have you on the show.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
I'm so glad you took my call.
Thank you very much.
First, I want to say dittos from my mother, who's a longtime listener.
She turned 90.
She raised 13 kids and she survived criminal corruption in Multnomah County Providence Court.
So shout out to Madeline.
Thank you.
I think that this is going to backfire them doing this, releasing this.
Americans are sick of listening to how terrible we are to these people that are beheading Americans.
How's it going to backfire?
Just by the Americans are just sick of it.
They're going to see more and more of this administration as trying to stir up sympathy for the terrorists who are chopping off our heads and chopping off children's heads.
And there's actually people, I work out in the public, and people are just, they're rising up anger.
I know.
What are they going to do?
And then to say that sleep deprivation and insurer is torture.
Okay, let's talk to the Americans that are trying to figure out how to pay their bills and ask us how much sleep deprivation we've had.
And as far as insurer, I give that to my mom on doctor's orders for good nutrition.
You want to torture them?
Give them Michelle's Lunch Program food.
Well, that happens to be true.
These terrorists at Guidmodou eat better than school kids eating the Michelle Obama menu.
But look, now wait a minute.
Ruth, hang on.
You see, the American people are fed up.
They've had it.
What are they going to do?
They voted.
Didn't change anything.
What are they going to do, Ruth, after they get mad?
How's it going to backfire?
How is this going to backfire on Dianne Feinstein?
How's it going to backfire on the Democrats?
How's it going to backfire on McCain, who stood up and basically endorsed most of it?
How's it going to backfire on anybody?
Well, you know what I'd like to see is I actually like to see Americans just lighten up Washington, D.C., their senators and everybody else, and just tell them they're fed up with it.
And just tell them we're going to do it.
They've been doing that for 10 years.
I don't think it's going to help.
Let's get rid of them.
Completely.
We just did.
That's a brick wall.
We just did.
We just got rid of more Democrats in two elections than we got rid of in 50 years.
We're not done, though.
You know, there needs to be accountability.
Let's light up the switchboards at the media outlets.
You know, let's ask them how to do it.
You know what, Ruth?
I love Ruth's optimism.
All you got to do is express your anger, and magic happens.
It works for the left.
It doesn't work for us.
Ruth, I'm going to tell you what.
I want you to conduct a little test here.
But you talk about lighting up the switchboards of the media.
Let's pick a network.
Call them up.
Complain about something.
Complain about the coverage of something.
I don't care what it is.
And if they talk to you, which they won't, but if they do, they will thank you and tell you, yes, ma'am, yes, ma'am, three bags full.
You're an idiot because you don't know enough to know how we do what we do here.
And we don't do what we do for you anyway.
If you don't like it, don't watch it, and it'll hang up on you.
And you do that, you repeat it, you call it, and then after, if you're really colorful enough, they'll end up talking about you in the break room, in the newsroom, at the network, and they'll start making fun of this lady that called us from Portland.
Do you believe we really care what they think about what's going on in Portland?
And this woman tells me that we're lying and we're biased, and they'll just laugh at you and make fun of you because they don't do the news for you, Ruth.
They do the news for the approval of other journalists and Obama.
Do you see Ann Compton, we've got the, do you hear what Ann Compton said?
You didn't?
She said that Obama routinely, after going off record, goes on just obscenity-laced tirades at the media.
Now, that's interesting.
She only reports this after retiring.
I'll find the soundbite here, I think.
Okay, we've got Ann Compton.
We finished this.
We'll head back to audio soundbite number four in order.
We still have some Jonathan Gruber soundbites that, yeah, it might be worth it for the fun of it.
But here's Ann Compton.
This was Sunday night on C-SPAN's Q ⁇ A, Brian Lamb interviewing the former ABC News White House correspondent Ann Compton.
And Brian Lamb said, now, how many other presidents were that aware of what they said to you?
And how many just didn't pay attention at all and you had no personal reaction from them?
Now, I don't know what that's about.
I don't know if she's got a book.
He's asking her something specific.
It's got to be more than, okay, the White House correspondent.
How were you aware the president was listening?
It's got to be more than that.
Doesn't matter.
Her answer, forget the context, stands alone.
I have seen in the last year Barack Obama really angry twice.
Both were off the record times.
One profanity-laced, where he thought the press was making too much of scandals that he didn't think were scandals.
Another where he took us to task for not understanding the limits he has with foreign policy and the way he's dealing with the Middle East and Iraq and Afghanistan.
And I don't find him apologetic, but I find him willing to stand up to the press and look them in the eye, even though it was off the record, and just give us hell.
Let's see, the key is off the record.
But hey, Ann, where was this when you were still working at ABC?
And is this not remarkable?
President DeMan has to go off the record and lambaste you people with obscenity after obscenity after obscenity.
It says something about the guy.
I'm not sure what.
But I'll tell you, the thing that what I don't get, if I'm Barack Obama, literally now, if I'm Barack Obama, I love the media.
My God, they're the biggest idiots on earth.
I can do no wrong.
This guy must be one heck of a narcissist.
If this guy thinks that he's getting unfair media coverage, then that tells us a lot about him, not the media.
There has never in my lifetime, well, I take it back.
LBJ, JFK, John Kennedy, the media, that relationship.
That was love at first sight and forever.
But this is a close second.
Other than with JFK, I was nine, 10 years old with JFK, so I'm not really, my memories are not mature.
Do they push back on him?
You're wondering if when he goes off on him like this, if they push back?
I don't think so because she points out that he never apologizes.
But no, they don't push back.
I'm sure they feel upbraided like my parent.
I'm sure they walk out worried that he's mad at them.
That's the nature of the press relationship with Obama.
Oh my God, is dad mad at us?
Is his dictator mad at us?
You're in a media and a dictator gets mad at you.
You don't want that.
But I just, How many Republicans do you think would pay for the coverage Obama gets?
How many Republicans would pay the press money for the kind of sycophantic anal poisoning kind of suck-up coverage that he gets?
And for him to run around mad at him, I'm sorry, that just doesn't compute.
When do they when has the press done anything but his bidding in the Middle East?
It's always Israel's fault, no matter what, which is exactly what he wants.
Well, oh, indecisive about Syria.
Oh, yeah.
Well, in that case, Obama kind of embarrassed them because they wanted him to act tough, and he did, and then he backed off and he left them out to dry, the red line business.
So, yeah, that might be one example.
But I think back to our old Nick Robertson, CNN.
My gosh, this is just so great.
Remember Tahriri Square when the regime decided that Mubarak had to go?
And we're going to get rid of Mubarak and we're going to install our buds at the Muslim Brotherhood, moderate bunch of terrorists in charge of Egypt.
And Obama is announcing this or that and commenting on this and that.
Obama over here is trying to credit his campaign for inspiring the protests of Egyptians in Tahriri Square.
So right on schedule, CNN sends old Nick Robertson over there to interview protesters in Tahriri Square.
And he starts asking them, hey, Mohammed, what do you think of President Obama and his expressed desire that you have jobs and that you get what you want and that you and all three people that Nick Robertson talked to essentially said, Obama, we don't know what Obama's Obama's not doing it for us.
Obama's not speaking up for us.
We can't count on Obama.
We don't know what Obama's going to say from day to day.
We don't know what he means.
It's not even about Obama.
And after each one of them said that, Nick Robertson looked to the camera at CNN and said, and there you have it, more overwhelming support for President Barack Obama right here in Tahriri Square.
It was the most incredible thing.
I just loved it.
They sent him over there because everybody wanted to create the impression it was his one-in-a-lifetime campaign that was inspiring uprisings for freedom and decency and goodness all over the world.
I mean, as long as I live, I will never, ever get that kind of sycophantic, butt-kissing press coverage that Obama gets multiple times a day.
And no Republican will either.
And yet he's cussing them out.
Who's next?
Dan in Monroe, Georgia.
You're next.
Glad you called, Dan, and welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Thank you, Rush.
It's an honor to talk to you.
Thank you.
As recently as 25 years ago, lying was a death knell.
And going way back, it was handy your career.
You maybe had to change schools for your kids.
You didn't get a job in that field again.
Lying was it.
You know, the man's word is always good, blah, blah, blah.
No, no, wait, wait.
I want to get examples of what you're talking about.
25 years ago, lying was a death knell, and it could have been the end of your career.
What kind of people did you?
There was a few incidents with reporters when they all were found out and they were terminated.
I don't know if they ever didn't get their job back where they were.
Oh, but a teacher.
Okay, so you're talking about I remember like the Stephen Glasses and the Janice Watser faces when they did plagiarism or totally made it up, their papers fired them.
And that was it for you.
And if you did it in your workplace, if you lied about the bond and then your report came out or your audit, everybody connected was gone.
Everybody in show business, if you were caught plagiarizing just something, or if you said, I made this up on my own, good jokes.
People used to get on there.
Now it's everywhere.
Everyone is lying.
They're lying to us.
They know we know they're lying.
They have coaches to help them lie.
All of the news is like Comedy Central without the laughs.
Everything is a lie.
It's overpowering.
Comedy Central doesn't have any laughs either.
Well, or Saturday Night Live.
That was my other option with Saturday Night Live.
But the point is, we know they're not telling us all the truth.
And I mean, back in the day, the government, okay, they didn't tell you everything.
But boy, what they told you was as close to the truth as they could get.
Well, yeah.
As they could get.
They just left it out.
But what I'm saying is, ever since, I don't know, maybe there was a president who just lied and smiled.
They do everything but wink at you when they're telling you this.
You know, Gruber's, you know, Gruber's been in contact with him.
He won't say it.
They won't say it.
Oh, you know, he was in the White House.
Gruber is going to get away with it.
There's no question.
Gruber is going to get away with it.
I know what you're talking about.
I can't think of any.
I think I mentioned one yesterday or the day before, one of these examples in the past and how it's vastly different today.
There's no stigma to lying or making things up in journalism today like there used to be.
There's no stigma to, oh, I was talking about victimology.
That's what it was.
In the old days, people would openly say, I'm not playing the victim.
It was embarrassing.
You were scorned if you whined and moaned and complained to be a victim of something.
And the reaction used to gut it up.
Buck up, man.
Don't play the victim.
And people get it just as being on unemployment compensation or welfare not too long ago was not something you bragged about.
You didn't want people to know there was a stigma to it.
Now, being a victim is to be heroic.
Being a victim is a ticket.
Victim opens doors.
It's almost as though there is valor.
It's almost as though there is valor attached to being a bigot, a victim, because you've been victimized by the true enemies in this country.
Anyway, Dan, I appreciate the call.
Thanks very much.
Screw the Gruber soundbites.
You don't need to hear any more of these things.
It just more of Gruber.
Yes, I'm worthless.
Yes, I'm not worthy.
Yes, you're much smarter than I am.
I'll stick it in my teeth.
Didn't mean anything by it.
I'll spank myself.
Sorry.
All the trouble I caused.
Obamacare is great, and I didn't lie about it.
And the American people are brilliant.
Whoop-do-doo.
Here's Seth in Nashville.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
It's an honor and a pleasure to talk to you.
I've actually listened to you probably since I was four or five in the car with my mom.
That's great.
I really do appreciate that.
I wanted to just comment on you've been making a point all day about how liberalism and just honestly a lot of the low-information voters just don't perceive or understand the real world, whether it's the police shootings or this terror, or the torture thing that's going on now.
It's just incredible to me how they don't understand.
They accuse us of participating in torture, as you pointed out multiple times, hijacking the language.
What we do could barely be considered torture, especially they want to say, oh, we wrong the world and we need to explain ourselves to the world.
Look at other techniques that we don't use because of what they do.
Whether you want to look at the Soviets' use of sentry deprivation, some of the terror cells have been found to use extremity burning, where you burn an extremity and then poke prod at it, burn again.
It's just amazing that all waterboarding is, is a fear tactic.
It's a scaled-up version of what we do with good cop bad cop.
Bad cop comes in, he's mad, he's angry.
Good cop comes in, you want to play nice.
Yeah, but see, the way they would react to you, oh, okay, Seth, so we're no better than the Soviets.
You want to use the Soviets and their gulags.
Well, that's about what we were doing at Guantanamo Bay.
And Dick Durbin said so.
But they would come at you and say, this is our point.
We aren't the Soviets, and that's not who we are.
And just because they do it doesn't mean we should do it, or just doesn't mean that we shouldn't feel really good about ourselves because we don't get close to what they do.
But that's not what this is about.
It's about the ongoing criticism of America.
It really is no more complicated than that.
That's it, my friends.
We are out of busy broadcast time for today's excursion into broadcast excellence.
But be back here eagerly and revved and ready to go tomorrow, same time, same station.
▲
Export Selection