All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 11, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:32
December 11, 2014, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And greetings, welcome back.
Great to have you, my friends.
El Rushbow, your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumults, sellouts, cowardice, faux torture, you name it.
I'm here.
Great to have you.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-2882.
And the email address, lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
Man, there's just so much going on.
You would never think that this is the holiday season, or Chris, you would never, back in the summer, you never thought there was a recess, no vacation.
It's just intense.
I mean, everything in the world, every day, just seems to be coming at us.
There's not even a time, a chance to catch your breath if you want to stay up to speed on this stuff.
And I think about people to whom it's not even their job to do this, trying to keep up with this, is just nigh onto impossible.
And if people make a serious effort, it can just seem overwhelming.
And that's why we are here, ladies and gentlemen, to make all of this understandable, to take all of this complexity and make it simple.
Because when you boil all this stuff down, it can be made simple.
Now, I checked the email during the break.
Rush, why do you keep harping on the Democrats and they vote?
I mean, that side lost.
The reason, that's a good question.
Sometimes I go into long-winded explanations, assuming that there's a contextual understanding based on people listening every day.
It's a really great question.
The point that I'm trying to illustrate here by illustrating it, every Democrat in this procedure voted to shut down the government.
My point is, I would love to get through to the Republicans and stop being cowards.
Stop being afraid of what the media is going to say about you.
Forget what happened in 1995.
It's not 1995.
It's 2014 and things are much worse than they were even in 1995.
And it's time this stuff gets stopped and you realize you've been elected to stop it.
And it's time to realize that.
It's time to be confident.
It's time to get a little swagger as you walk around that town and you walk around Capitol Hill.
And it's time to stop blaming your friends.
It's time to stop blaming your buddies.
It's time to start realizing who is causing all of these problems and who it is that has to be stopped.
And it's not conservatives.
It's not Ted Cruz.
It's not Marco Rubio.
It's not Ted Cruz.
It's not me.
It's not Sarah Palin.
It's Democrats, wherever you find them, in Washington or wherever.
That's what we're up against here.
So the Republicans are running.
You've heard it.
The reason I was asked to be on TV last Sunday is because I simply disagreed with the accepted notion that the Republicans will get blamed if there is a government shutdown and therefore we must at all costs avoid it.
Well, at all costs, avoiding it means Obama gets everything he wants.
All because of fear?
It's time to get rid of that.
And my point here is illustrating 212 Democrats voted today to essentially shut down the government.
They would not have been blamed for it.
Had it happened, the Republicans would have ended up being blamed.
And you know how?
Elizabeth Warren has provided a roadmap.
There are controversial, two so-called controversial provisions in this thing.
One about individuals being allowed to donate or campaign or contribute even more, corporate people even more.
That ticks the Democrats off.
And then Some regulations on derivative funds were relaxed, allowing them more leeway and letting that's power for Wall Street.
And Elizabeth Warren's fit to be tied over this, and she was going to blame the Republicans for shutting down the government over those provisions.
Even though she's in the Senate, has nothing to do with what happened in the House.
So the Democrats were prepared to shut down the government, knowing the Republicans are going to get blamed for it.
My point is actually directed here at the Republicans.
Stop worrying about all of these ifs and stop worrying about polls.
You just want a landslide election.
How can that not matter?
How can winning a landslide election be simply erased in their minds by the presence of a poll?
So that's why I'm spending so much time on this, as well as trying to make everybody understand, help everybody to understand what just went down.
It came close, folks.
At one point, it was 213 to 213.
And Boehner found a Republican to switch his vote and change his mind.
We don't know who.
Do we yet?
Who was it?
Snurdley knew it and forgot it, so he's looking it up.
But it was tied at 2.13.
And so Boehner found a Republican to change his vote, and that made it 214 to 212.
And so the rule was defeated.
But every Democrat, not all 212 votes in opposition, but every Democrat voted against the procedural rule.
They voted to shut down the government, and yet the Republicans are worried that people are going to blame them for it.
At any rate, as I said right before the break at the top of the hour, President Obama not pleased with conservative talk show hosts, including Rush Limbaugh, who opposed his executive actions on immigration reform.
During a town hall event in Nashville to discuss immigration reform, Obama admitted that there are many Americans angry about his actions.
He said, obviously, I have been at the receiving end of people really, really angry at me about not just these executive actions, but have been ginned up by some of the conservative talk show hosts that think I'm usurping my authority.
Well, he admitted that there were good people who actually believe in immigration, but were concerned about rewarding somebody who broke American laws and yada, yada, yada.
Anyway, all this, I don't care, is a badge of honor for me.
Now to the, oh, did you hear about this college professor?
This is classic Smith College.
Smith gets that an all-women's college?
Is Smith an all-women's school or not?
I'm confusing it with Wellesley and who Wellesley is.
Smith College President Kathleen McCartney has apologized.
Do you know what she apologized for?
She apologized for saying all lives matter.
She is the president of the prestigious Smith College and she is red-faced and apologetic for telling yeah, I thought it's a women's women's college.
She's red-faced and apologetic for telling students on campus that all lives matter.
Smith is in Massachusetts, by the way, said Northampton, Massachusetts.
Kathleen McCartney wrote the phrase, all lives matter, in the subject line of an email to students at the school, whose alumni include the feminazis Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan, the former First Lady Nancy Reagan, and celebrity chef Juliet Child.
Kathleen McCartney was attempting to show support for students protesting racially charged grand jury decisions in Missouri and in New York.
Protesters, as you know, have adopted several slogans in connection with the cases of the gentle giant and Eric Garner.
And one of the slogans they're running around using and painting and wearing is Black Lives Matter.
So McCartney sends out an email to the student body at Smith, and the subject matter is All Lives Matter.
Which is definitely more inclusive.
Wouldn't you say?
Wouldn't you say that All Lives Matter is much more inclusive than just Black Lives Matter?
But this more inclusive version was seen as an insult and an affront that diminished the focus on Black Lives Matter.
And a bunch of people reacted, angry emails back at the college press.
So she apologized.
She apologized for saying all lives matter.
You remember the, well, quote-unquote, controversy at Columbia Law School earlier this week, where it was learned that the dean was going to grant exemptions, postponements of final exams to any student claiming to be emotionally distraught over the grand jury decision from Ferguson and the grand jury decision Staten Island.
Remember that?
The dean said: if you find yourself emotionally overwhelmed and disturbed to the point that you don't think you can concentrate on an exam, you can delay it and take it later when you are back together.
Now, I went to college for one semester.
The one semester that I attended university happened to be the semester, I'm pretty sure, yeah, it was, when the National Guard shot forth protesting students at Kent State.
And I can tell you that nobody, I mean, a lot of people upset about that, don't we?
But nobody claimed they couldn't take tests.
I don't know if this is unprecedented, but if it's not unprecedented, it hadn't happened very much.
So the question is: why did the dean buckle?
Students are out there.
I can't take the test.
I'm so emotionally distraught.
I'm so wrong out.
Oh, my God.
I'm so, I'm just a mess.
I can't take the test.
I can't concentrate.
Okay, fine.
We'll let you take a delay.
And now, Kathleen McCartney, okay, okay, you don't like all lives matter?
I apologize for saying all lives matter.
These people are afraid, too.
It's not just the Republicans in the House and the Senate that are scared to death.
Everybody's afraid of these lunatic leftists.
The dean at Columbia Law, I would bet you the Dean at Columbia Law and this college president Smith simply acceded to the demands of the angry mob so that the mob wouldn't show up near their offices and do a sit-in or protest or cause some kind of campus unrest.
So it was simply let the mob have what it wants, do what it wants, get said what they want said, so that the mob doesn't get any more mob-like.
So the inmates are running the asylum.
Now, as to this Black Lives Matter, as to this notion that Black Lives Matter, everybody's shaking their heads at me on this.
Hang on, my friends, I'm just being handed a super secret note.
What is this?
Final vote.
Oh, Kerry Bentivolio, Republican Michigan, changed his no vote to yes, so the rule could pass.
There's some Breitbart nudes.
Carrie Bentivolio, he's lame duck.
Also, he's not going to be part of the Congress in January.
Well, so Boehner found a guy that's leaving, retired.
I don't know if he lost or if he's just leaving, but he changed his vote.
So a 213 tie, which would have been a defeat, turned into a 214 to 212 win on the procedural.
Okay, so that's who it was.
Now, as to the Black Lives Matter, of course, they do.
Black lives do matter.
All lives matter.
Well, that's it.
Nobody said they didn't.
Nobody said black lives don't matter.
Who?
Oh, all right, all right, all right.
Margaret Sanger has, yes, and the eugenics.
Yes, yes, you're right.
But what these people think is that the grand jury in St. Louis, in Ferguson, said that black lives don't matter.
And a grand jury in Staten Island said black lives don't matter.
But as to this, black lives don't matter.
What did I see the other day?
Black lives don't matter.
And there's a bunch of protesters running around complaining that people think black lives don't matter.
So they're wearing it in t-shirts.
It's either I can't breathe or black lives don't matter.
Wait, no, no, no, it's it's black lives do matter.
Black lives matter.
It's not black lives don't matter.
That's the claim that black lives, black lives matter.
That's it.
Black lives matter.
I was thinking about that and I said, What did I see?
Black lives matter.
What did I say?
78% of all abortions, New York, black, Hispanic, minority.
Black Lives Matter.
And I saw the abortion.
I'm confused.
Great to have you, Mike.
By the way, folks, I was not going to be here tomorrow, but things have turned around.
I have decided I'm going to be here tomorrow because it's just too important not to be.
I am going to be here tomorrow for you.
So we're going to do Open Line Friday on Thursday today, but we don't have to because we'll do Open Line Friday and Friday, which is the usual procedure.
Now, we had Kathleen McCartney get in deep trouble for sending out an email claiming it all lives matter.
See, that was a put-down.
See, that was insensitive.
That made fun of.
That mocked, that diminished the protest slogan, Black Lives Matter.
And as I say, when you look at the abortion statistics, it kind of is conflicting with the whole point, Black Lives Matter.
But I know that it's risky to go there.
We hear from Campus Reform.
The president of California State University claims that those who are light-skinned have significant unearned privilege.
What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, yet another inept female college president who we pay tons of money to be in charge of your young schools full of mush.
Is this really what you parents want to pay for?
Are you paying to have your children be taught that if they are light-skinned, they have unearned privilege?
The president of California State University, Jane Close Connolly, is her name, says that whites inherently exert distrust and lower expectations of behavior toward those with darker skin.
In an op-ed on December the 5th, the president of California State University, the whole system, claimed that if you are light-skinned, you have significant unearned privilege and routinely think less of those who are different than you.
Her piece was entitled Privilege at the Beach.
She was talking about the Long Beach area where the school is.
She's a white woman herself.
She asserts that light skin color and high income levels attract significant unearned privilege, as though the high income is nothing to do with merit or earned or hard work or any of that.
And she said, those who qualify for such privilege often unknowingly exert distrust and lower expectations of behavior.
You know who does that?
It's liberals, and it's called the bigotry of low expectations.
It is liberals who look at people of color and see incompetence.
It is liberals who look at people of color and have great sympathy and sorrow.
It is liberals who exhibit the soft bigotry of low expectations.
It is liberals who think light-skinned people, or dark-skinned people rather, can't get anywhere on their own without the help of liberals.
It is liberals who don't have much faith in dark-skinned people.
Ergo, that's why liberals devise all the programs to assist dark-skinned people because dark-skinned people can't do it on their own.
The bigots, in this case, are leftists.
But here's this college professor or this president now writing that all light-skinned people hold this view because they have unearned privilege.
They're basically a bunch of braggarts who have high expectations of themselves and assume that people unlike them just can't do anything.
And I'm telling you, there's a name for this.
It's called the soft bigotry of low expectations, and it is almost an exclusive characteristic of liberals.
But anyway, is this what you want to pay a university to teach your kids?
I don't know what it costs to go to California State University in Long Beach.
But this president says that if a non-white person walks into a department store, they may be followed by employees, and their presence is oftentimes acknowledged with suspicion and fear.
I'm telling you, the roots of all of this discord that we experiencing in our culture today, the lion's share of it, I think is coming from the classroom.
Journalism school, political science school, whatever it is, some of the most radical leftist thought is safely ensconced on campus with tenure.
And these young kids, the students, arrive with blank slates or whatever other drivel they've learned in high school.
And they show up and they are just propagandized with all of this literal hate and radicalism, such as all sex is rape, including the sex of marriage, the women's studies program, gay studies.
And they graduate and they come out and they become plagiarists and journalists that make things up to fulfill an agenda.
By the way, folks, it's not just this insane, inept female college president Long Beach who claims if you're light-skinned, you have unearned privilege.
One of the most powerful media figures in this country, Jorge Ramos of I'm looking for the soundbite.
Jorge Ramos is Univision or some such thing.
Where is it?
This is impossible to find this stuff.
Hang on, this is embarrassing.
Anyway, Obama appeared with this guy, and I thought I had, maybe it was him yesterday.
Jorge Ramos is a Univision, and he hit Obama in their interview last night.
Jorge Ramos said that Obama should have done more to address white privilege, in addition to acting sooner on amnesty.
So here's this Univision anchor accusing Obama of not having done enough to address white privilege.
I'm telling you, there's an all-out assault on the very founding of this country.
And it's coming from all quarters.
It's coming from academia.
It's coming from the media.
And it's all being taught, folks.
People are not born in this country.
Well, their parents may.
I mean, I have to allow.
But it's all taught.
The point is.
The nature of being an American is not to be filled with hatred and resentment and anger.
This has to be taught to people.
It has to be inculcated.
It is not the natural state of mind for an American to be angry, distrustful, hateful, bigoted toward his own country.
That has to be taught.
And it is being taught.
And sadly, it's being learned.
And it's been inculcated at some of the highest levels of journalism and politics and the media.
And the Republicans are worried about being blamed for a government shutdown.
Sometimes it drives me literally nuts trying to understand all of this fear.
Anyway, I better get to the phones because if I don't, I won't.
And we're going to start with Sylvia in Clinton Township, New Jersey.
Sylvia, you've been holding for a long time, and I appreciate your patience.
Thank you.
Thank you, Rush.
But I think, you know, the more important all-out assault is these provisions that have been put into this budget bill.
Because just to make this clear, are you really telling your audience that you approve of the largest Wall Street banks being able to draw on federally insured savings accounts of individuals and trading with those on risky derivatives and commodities and all that kind of stuff and taking all the profits and the government under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation backstopping them or insuring those?
No.
And also, even more egregious is that they borrow that money.
I'm not telling my audience I support that because that's not what it does.
It is what it does.
It's not what it does.
Then tell us what it does, right?
I mean, that one is not what it is.
No, they borrow it 0% from the business.
It takes some of the.
I've got plenty of room to lose some accuracy points and still be more right than anybody else out there.
I'm not worried about that.
It's unrisky derivatives here that have that have been targeted.
Anyway, it's not the way you portrayed it as being.
It is the way I was.
If you think Elizabeth Warren is right, if you think Elizabeth Warren is right, then that kind of tells me that you might a little bit off the rails.
Not all the way, but a little bit.
But I have read today some people who do agree with you, Sylvia.
In conservative blogs, I have read that some think that Elizabeth Warren does have a point like you do.
Well, it's true, Rush.
It's appalling.
I mean, and Rush?
Yes, Sylvia.
And the second part of it, you know, it is the most egregious abuse.
It is the abuse by, you know, billionaires on Wall Street.
And then we get it from the millionaires who now, you call it a small adjustment to campaign finance.
There used to be a limit of 32,000, and now that's been raised tenfold to $320,000 for an individual or $640,000 for a couple.
I mean, are we really turning into a plutocracy in this country where we have like Sheldon Adelson putting in hundreds of millions if he wants, and then just, you know, your average millionaire putting in $640,000 a year.
I mean, and for your, what you call the Rivolinda, whatever, a plutocracy is, you know, I don't want to insult anybody, but a government of like the richest among us.
This is insane.
These are the two issues that bother me the most in politics.
It's just banks getting over on us and, you know, the billionaires getting over on us and then millionaires getting over on us.
And you shouldn't just take this and stride.
This is not a victory for the Republican Congress that their first, you know, after this big victory, the budget they put forth, these are the two provisions that they support.
It's so disappointing.
No, it's not the two.
It's this and everything else in it that they support.
You think I support this crazy thing?
Then, Rush, speak out on it.
You know, flesh it out.
I am such an inadequate vessel to try to bring this.
No, you're not.
You're a great vessel, Sylvia.
Well, thank you, you know, but I'm not.
There are people that your listeners would support 100% conservative people like Paul Volcker, who was, you know, Ronald Reagan's Federal Reserve.
Don't forget Frank Carlucci.
People don't know, but Carlucci is in the middle of all of this.
You know it as well as I do.
We need people to say this is really wrong, you know, and to say, don't vote for this.
This is wrong.
Take out those provisions.
We are not a government for billionaires and millionaires.
We're not.
Sylvia, let me play devil's advocate with you here for just a second.
You don't like the raise, the increase 32 grand to 320 grand.
What is your objective?
Honestly, I'm not.
No, no, hang on a minute.
I'm not trying to stir anything up, and I'm not trying to trick you.
I generally want to know what is your objection to people who have wealth spending it in politics.
Because, Rush, I genuinely believe that there is an element of quid pro quo.
And not so much, maybe in the billionaires' realm, and maybe I even agree with some of what Sheldon Adelson says, but of course, there is a quid pro quo.
You give the money because you want them to rule in things that are favorable to you or your interests.
And some interests are bigger than that.
I would never run for office.
I don't want to owe people it.
It's not a quid rush.
You don't have to.
I mean, you have a far larger power base.
The Koch brothers couldn't buy, you know, your three hours.
There's nothing wrong with the Koch brothers.
Don't tell me you're in this corruption.
Don't tell me what's the Republican.
I know the Koch brothers.
They are fine people.
I'm sure that's all fine, Rush.
But I mean, I'm just complimenting you on the power base that you have assembled, et cetera, that you don't, whatever.
Sylvia, I need to know.
Are you an Obama voter or did you vote for Romney in 2012?
I voted for McCain, and I voted for Obama.
Because, frankly, I couldn't.
Well, Sylvia, the reason I asked that, because the things that you are complaining about, Barack Obama has set records doing.
If anybody's in Bedwood Wall Street, if anybody is engaged in crony capitalism or crony socialism, it's Barack Obama and Wall Street and American corporations.
If you think that the Republicans have an exclusive money, Obama has set new records in this kind of arrangement between private sector corporations and the government.
And you voted for the government.
Republicans always say that.
But it is the Republicans who have brought all the legal challenges and all the court cases to the Supreme Court and everywhere else to dismantle any kind of campaign finance regulation.
You just want the Democrats to unilaterally disarm anyone.
Republicans?
So you're a problem here because you're obviously smart.
You are articulate.
You're well-spoken, but you have been propagandized.
You're dangerous because half of what you say is right.
But this incessant—and you know that I am not a de rigueur defender of the Republican Party, certainly not recently.
And that's not what I'm doing with you.
But to lay all of this at the blame of the Republicans when the Republicans basically haven't tried to stop anything from happening in six years for crying.
I mean, the Democrats got unions are spending $500 million per presidential cycle.
The unions.
And where are they getting the money?
How much free media do they get?
This place, the system is polluted enough without trying to say it's all one way.
But I'm glad you called.
I appreciate it.
I kind of like feisty callers like this nowadays.
Sticking with the phones to George in Forest, Virginia.
George, I'm glad you waited.
It's great to have you here.
Hello, sir.
Hello.
Tea Party greetings from Forest, Virginia, Thomas Jefferson's summer home, Popper Forest.
And thank you for having tea with George.
Rush, I'm a founding board member of a Christian group that for the past 30 years has brought hope to the hopeless in some of the world's most difficult areas.
And we're all unpaid board members.
We're businessmen who just want to make the world a better place.
And we usually begin our work with a soccer ball.
You can go into a new area where you're not known.
You throw some soccer balls out into the field.
People come onto the field.
You get a soccer game going.
You get some good conversations going.
And you go from there.
And we've been working with the reconciling the warring tribes in Rwanda, the Hutu and the Tutsi.
And some have called that the miracle of Rwanda.
We're teaching self-sufficiency skills in Uganda, mainly in the ghettos of Kampala and in Gulu, North Uganda.
And President Obama and Nancy Pelosi have just made our work and a lot of other folks' work a lot more difficult by airing what bad people Americans are.
And the good feeling about helping out can and is being diminished.
And they've not just endangered us and our work, they've endangered some of the most marginalized people on earth.
And it just seems to them and the sycophant media that the poorest of the poor are just collateral damage.
It really doesn't matter as long as they can get their digs in against Americans.
Well, you know, you're right on the money.
The poorest of the poor are collateral damage.
You know, one of the biggest leftist objectives, environmentalism, guarantees that poor people around the world stay poor.
It guarantees it.
But before I explain what I mean, some people.
What do you mean by that, Mr. Limbaugh?
I'll explain it in a minute.
Your point is that Dianne Feinstein releasing this so-called report on torture is endangering people all over America.
Americans like you are trying to help people because a high degree of mistrust is created among the people you're trying to help for people like you.
You're American.
You're out there trying to help them.
And now all of a sudden, the American media, the worldwide media, is once again awash with news about how America tortures and mistreats people.
And that puts you at greater risk, you think.
Yeah, a lot of the folks where we work, they're Muslim or they're Christian or they're animus.
They're not – when we go in there, it's not political.
It's not religious.
They want something to eat.
They want a chance in life.
The kids, they want a safe place to sleep tonight and not be captured by Joseph Kony's group and forced into these children's armies.
I don't know if you've read about him.
He may be George Soros.
He may be the most evil man on earth.
And they aren't political.
They just want help.
And you, going into these far corners of the globe trying to help, are now victimized by this torture report.
Now, I totally understand.
I do.
Now, I realize many of you think environmentalism is a lofty, worldwide, worthwhile pursuit.
But what the militant environmentalists demand of everybody is an immediate halt to progress.
Essentially, militant environmentalism associates and blames progress with pollution and therefore climate destruction and therefore whatever else derives from it, such as global warming or the end of this species or that.
So let's take, let's make up a little country in, say, Central America.
Let's call it San Cordoba.
And San Cordoba has pretty healthy deposits of oil.
But San Cordoba is just stuck in abject poverty.
A country has been run by a series of dictators and military juntas over the years.
And the people are enslaved.
There is no standard of living, per se, heavily militarized.
And the leaders of the country are the only ones who make out like bandits, being paid off by people like the UN or what have you.
Then they discover these massive deposits of oil.
The discovery of this oil could revive, could create a brand new economy.
And the first thing that happens, the militant environmentalist community goes in there and stops it, shuts it down on the basis that drilling for oil and then producing it and creating it and shipping it out of San Cordoba to the nearest refinery will cause pollution and destruction and so forth.
And so the country stays poor.
Militant environmentalism requires poverty.
Militant environmentalism sustains poverty.
Militant environmentalism is an attack on economic development and capitalism.
And that's why militant environmentalism is going to guarantee that Africa remains a poor continent.
Because Africa happens to be the little Petri dish, Petri dish, the laboratory for all of this militant environmentalist experimentation.
So it remains unsanitary, unclean.
It's why you have outbreaks, deadly diseases in large parts of Africa, because people are not allowed to use such things as DDT or anything else to control infestation, vermin, what have you.
They're not allowed to experience any economic growth because that equals pollution, and so poor people stay poor.
Destined to always be poor as long as leftist environmentalist wackos rule the day.
Now, as far as this, I've got a whole bunch of sound bites and stack of stuff here about the torture report.
And I want to use the next hour to dig deep and get into this.
We've got some great soundbites from Dick Cheney and other things that need to be said and to put this in its proper perspective.
Anyway, George, I appreciate the call.
Thanks much.
Sit tight, my friends.
We've got much more straight ahead.
Don't go away.
To show you how ridiculous the torture report is getting, I have a story here from the AP.
And it says here that the Senate staffer, which is what the Senate staffer report, Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture casts a new paw over the movie Zero Dark 30 and casts a new paw over the television show 24.
Now you want to talk about trite.
We're talking about movies!
Movies which have scripts and this lopsided, one-sided piece of junk.
The Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture, the AP now says, is calling into question whether or not we could actually believe what we saw in the movie Zero Dark 30 for crying out loud.
▲
Export Selection