All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 31, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:16
December 31, 2014, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It is Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh on this lovely New Year's Eve.
Thank you very much for joining me.
The call-in number here is 800-282-2882.
You can also send me messages via Facebook and Twitter, facebook.com slash BuckSexton and at BuckSexton on Twitter.
Please follow me on those platforms if you don't already.
It would be much, much obliged.
I had a birthday recently, and all I want for my birthday is for you to follow me on Twitter and Facebook.
So there you go.
That's too shameless, isn't it?
You guys are.
I will have you know I'm the big 3-3 now.
That's right.
Three decades of accumulated wisdom here at the microphone today.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So there's that.
Before we move on to our next topic, I just want to say, because this is, I am seeing on social media, on the social media platforms, people are getting kind of getting fired up with me about the whole Cuba thing.
Just someone explain to me if it's so great and if they're giving free health care and it's just our fault, why do you have over a million people that were willing to come here, flee the country?
So many were willing to literally try to make it across on rafts to flee this place because it's so great.
And no one going the other way somehow.
Shockingly enough, shockingly enough.
I think it's also true.
I get people who say, well, oh, I haven't been to Cuba.
Well, no, because of the policy.
I have not been.
But have you been to North Korea?
Because I'm going to go with you can tell me it's not a nice, fun place, even if you haven't been there.
Just putting that out there.
It doesn't have to be experiential.
Tyranny doesn't have to be something that you visited in every instance around the world if you understand the commonplace factors between them.
And what's the difference between North Korea and Cuba in terms of the regimes?
Well, I don't know, the weather.
I mean, there's a lot of similarities, my friends.
A cult of personality, a Stalinist police state.
There's a lot of things that are similar.
But I said I would move on from Cuba, and so I'm going to move on from Cuba now.
But just I, yeah, well, I guess the one thing is if you want to sort of have the closest thing to a real life back to the future experience and you want to go roll around in some 57 Chevies and stuff, you can go to Cuba and check it out.
And I don't know what else to say other than I just wish, I just wish that people would look at this with clear eyes.
Full hearts, can't lose.
Okay, we're moving out of police stuff.
That was a random Friday Night Lights reference because that's an awesome show, and I know you gentlemen agree, even if you haven't seen it.
So we have the police situation.
Now, this is going to get kind of this.
Now we're about to get serious again because this is a serious issue.
We'll make fun of Obama and Clinton and some other stuff later on in the show.
I'll get back to that.
But I think we might have now, it might be right to say that we've come or we're coming full circle now in this country on policing.
What I mean is we've gone from crime to broken windows policy back to something along the lines of allowing broken windows and crime.
We've gone into a full 360 here on our policing, or at least we're at the cusp of it.
We haven't done it yet, but it seems that that's what a lot of the recent conversation on policing across the country has been really about.
As you know, broken windows as a theory is that if you allow broken windows, if you allow minor things, vandalism, minor crimes, it creates an environment that is conducive to more serious crimes.
And if you want to prevent rape, burglary, murder, you have to actually enforce graffiti, public urination, whatever else it may be.
And for full disclosure, I know this has already been announced.
I spent some time working for the NYPD, so I come and also have law enforcement in my family.
So I come at this from that perspective, and I'm open about it and honest about it.
But I also, generally speaking, do not trust and do not particularly like the government.
So I try to balance these things out.
But also a very important point, by the way, and this is true from the NYPD perspective as well.
This notion that it's just the enforcement of broken windows theory, just the enforcement of those laws, that's not the only essential benefit if you're looking to have dramatically reduced crime rates.
It's not just, well, we stop people from minor street crime and it doesn't get more major.
When you enforce minor street crimes, you also come into contact more often as police with the people that have recently or might already have outstanding warrants for, for example, the major crimes.
So you create more contact between law enforcement and law breakers because no shock here.
Somebody who is willing to engage in the more petty street crimes, who will jump turnstiles.
That was one of the big examples they used to always use in New York City.
Somebody who jumps a turnstile might also be wanted for robbing a liquor store a week before.
And if you stop them and you run their ID and you look at who they are when they jump the turnstile, you might get somebody that's wanted for more serious stuff.
So that's another part of it that doesn't usually get as much attention, but it's also essential.
But you see, we have really two simultaneous conversations happening in this country right now.
And I think it's very dangerous to conflate them, and people want to conflate them.
The idea of over-criminalization, over-policing, and then just the anti-cop rhetoric, the anti-cop incitement and really hatred that's going on.
And I think it's important to try to keep those two things as distinct categories of discussion because that's how I see them.
Let me say, on the first point, before I move into the recent, we've had more assaults on police, more ambushes on police.
We had a lunatic try to mow down some police officers with his car after posting online that this is what he's going to do.
But I'm getting a little ahead of myself.
And I know I get a fair amount of heat from, particularly from libertarians, because I think I'm not tough enough on the cops.
And I think I'm very tough on the laws and on the policies.
But I think that asking those who wear the shield and carry a gun and try to defend all the rest of us to be responsible for making the distinctions between, well, this law I'm going to enforce, this law, I'm not.
We need to work at the legislative level and actually try to have it clear that you're not going to face lengthy jail time or even any jail time for certain offenses.
And that will affect, I think, the way police treat these issues.
There are other problems as well with policing in this country right now that I'll just air these out before I get into how much I really despise the anti-cop movement because I do.
And I actually, I don't respect people that call for dead cops.
I don't respect people that say that all cops are racist.
I don't respect people that use this for their own very narrow political and quite honestly power purposes.
That's not okay.
But on the rational discussion of police side of things, where we could actually, I think, start to make some improvements is the usage of police as essentially another taxing agency.
This is a sort of unspoken and dirty secret.
I guess it's not really a secret.
It's out in the open, but people don't talk about it enough across the country, is looking at law enforcement officers as though they're essentially an extension of the IRS.
What I mean by this is they're supposed to write tickets.
In fact, sometimes they have ticket quotas.
You know, here in New York, where we've seen sort of the, this has now become The main hub of the anti-police stuff, right?
This is where a lot of, because of de Blasio and Warren Wilhelm, Kaiser Wilhelm, as I call him, because he changed his name from Warren Wilhelm to Bill de Blasio in the last 10 years or so, which is kind of a weird move.
Kaiser, the Kaiser does not want the police force to walk out and do a stoppage of the work.
Well, that's what's happened.
They've decided to actually stop enforcing certain kinds of laws, and they're not writing as many summonses.
Now, here's the problem with that.
There is a difference between I'm not going to write somebody up for, let's say, public intoxication or something more minor.
I mean, like, who hasn't, you know, who hasn't had a couple too many brews and gone for a little walk and maybe stumbled around?
Who hasn't?
I mean, I think some things maybe you should get awarded.
And cops do that.
I know a lot of law enforcement officers call me now.
Look, I give warnings.
And, you know, if you're, if I, they can tell if you're a good guy, if you're respectful or not.
Look, some of them are totally hardliners on everything, and they'll, you know, lock you up for having a glass of wine on your front porch if you're underage.
But I'm just saying, the usage of police as a taxing agency is something that happens in small towns.
There are a lot of small towns that will use traffic, different traffic violations as essentially the way they make up budget shortfalls.
They're just writing, they're trying to write as many tickets as they can.
That's how you're like, officer, I was going 58 and a 55, and they're like, that's right, 58 and a 50, 58 and a 55.
I'm going to have to write you up.
You're like, you've got to be kidding me.
I know usually it has to be more than five miles an hour, but nonetheless, sometimes they'll be really tough on it because they have a quota.
And that shouldn't be the case.
The police shouldn't be acting like an addendum to the IRS.
And in New York, when they're not writing as many summonses, for example, for traffic stuff, I got to tell you, the efficiency with which New York City writes parking tickets is actually the only counterargument I know to government can't function efficiently.
It is unbelievable.
You leave your car, you go into a store, you buy a Gatorade, you walk back out, you got a $70 ticket or a $65 ticket on your windshield.
It's like nothing you've ever seen in your life because it's revenue-based.
And I know people, in the Garner case, for example, I've pointed out, you're arresting somebody for loose cigarettes.
I mean, you're going to make that arrest.
We're decriminalizing marijuana, but we're arresting for loose cigarettes.
But then again, this is the policy stuff.
This is the laws.
This is people in the legislature who want to look tough, and they want to make sure that anyone out there who gets sort of hysterical about the looming threats of cigarettes, Lucy's, or selling some weed or whatever, that they think that these politicians are tough on crime.
So they don't have the courage, the integrity to actually say, you know, we should be looking at these things somewhat differently than how we are.
So these are the places where I think we can have, and I think it is happening too, but I just, it has to, this is a separate discussion from the stuff going on now with the police in terms of the marches, the riots, the Ferguson stuff.
You know, in Ferguson, you had a jury that wouldn't even go forward, a grand jury that wouldn't even go forward with charges because you've got a straightforward self-defense case.
Now, it's not even self-defense.
I mean, officer self-defense.
Now you actually have movements across the country where people are protesting and angry when it's even more clear that this was what they call a justifiable shooting.
So that'll actually happen too.
You have people say, well, we don't believe the cops.
The cops are lying.
There was actually a movement afoot in Ferguson right, it was outside of Ferguson.
It's in the St. Louis area, where an individual pulled a cop, I mean, pulled a gun on a cop and was about to fire, and the cops fired at him first.
And there was a moment where they were going to protest that.
How do you adjust that law?
The cops can't use lethal force when they're about to get shot law, and that's not going to happen.
So I think it's problematic because there are well-intentioned classical liberals, people who actually believe in liberty.
There are well-intentioned libertarians and conservatives who want to have a discussion about the 4,500-plus federal criminal laws in this country.
And I also think, by the way, the fact that we don't spend enough time talking about federal overreach and the federal agencies is very instructive.
And here's why.
You see, progressives don't like local cops because they think local cops oppress minorities.
That's the narrative.
But federal, and I don't just mean the FBI, I mean federal agencies writ large, you know, fish and game as SWAT teams now, you know, Bureau of Indian Affairs as SWAT teams.
Everybody's got to have a SWAT team now, you know, in case they want to go into Gibson Qatar and seize your illegal wood.
Because apparently there is such a thing, illegal wood, you know.
And even federal, there are federal agencies now that will enforce laws that even the prosecutors are like, well, I'm not really sure what this means, but yeah, let's go for it.
Did you stumble onto an Indian reservation looking for arrowheads?
Well, that's a federal crime.
You didn't know?
Oh, sorry.
Stinks for you.
But you see, federal regulatory agencies and federal law enforcement agencies are viewed by our centralized and centralizing government, an increasingly authoritarian government that has been in the hands of a very progressive president and, of course, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party for years now.
They view it as a tool of policy that they like.
They like centralized power.
They like federal agencies, whether it's the EPA, Walter Peck, and others like him going around and telling you what you can and cannot do.
And as long as they can control at the national level policy, they can implement it everywhere across the board.
But no one's talking about federal overreach in this.
No one talks about federal agencies and what they're doing, really.
And I think that that's the bigger threat.
If you're talking about tyranny, that's the bigger threat.
But we shouldn't use cops rewriting all these tickets.
We shouldn't use cops as a means of raising revenue for towns and localities and all the rest of it.
That creates problems, and I think that's an issue.
But when we come back, I want to tell you about the other side of this, which is what I've talked to you here before when I was with you on Christmas Eve, which is this anti-cop movement.
And this is really pernicious.
It's dangerous.
And I'm sorry to tell you, it's only going to get worse because not enough people are speaking out about what the end game is here.
800-282-2882.
If you have any thoughts on any of this, especially if you're either a law enforcement officer or somebody who has some poignant thoughts on law enforcement officers, which I'm sure many of you do, please do call in.
The lines here are open at BuckSexton on Twitter, facebook.com slash Buck Sexton.
If you want to send me messages, I'll be right back.
Buck Sexton here, Infra Rush Limbaugh.
I've got some more thoughts for you on the discussion about police and policing, and then I'll be taking your calls.
I would love to hear from you, 800-282-2882, or you can send me messages, facebook.com slash BuckSexton or at BuckSexton on Twitter.
You can also download my podcast at theblaze.com slash Buck Sexton.
There you go.
All right.
So I talked a little bit about where I think there could be legitimate reform and where people have irritations with law enforcement.
And I don't put that on the individual officers.
Look, I know how it is.
I've been in the room when they've been involved in an investigation, for example, of something very serious like terrorism.
And it's like, well, we don't have it.
So is there something else we can get here?
And I get very uncomfortable with that very quickly.
I don't think anybody should be looking for.
We should never be looking for criminality in the sense that we're almost conjuring it up as law enforcement officers.
You never want that.
Well, we've spent all this overtime looking into this issue.
Maybe we need to get...
No.
If someone's...
If someone's innocent, in a perfect world is not where every crime is punished.
I mean, a perfect world is where we don't have to arrest anyone for any crimes, right?
So I don't think we want to be racking up numbers just because we have a quota, whether it's for major or minor crimes.
We should go after what we have to.
Now, with all that said, the stuff that's happening now across the country with LEO as law enforcement officers being targeted is completely deplorable and disgusting and is the end result of really years of denigration from the administration at this point.
And also, the left, the sort of agitators of the left, it was Occupy Wall Street.
Now it's essentially Occupy 2.0 as anti-police as opposed to anti-Wall Street.
And they're causing real problems.
We had another anti-cop maniac going after police in the Philadelphia area.
This was on Fox News.
I just saw this last night.
He had posted on Facebook that he was, these guys always tell that they're going to, they say they're going to do this stuff before they do it, which seems obviously incredibly idiotic, but I guess they're already lunatics.
So he posted online video, I should say, not on Facebook, that he was going to kill police and FBI agents.
And then he used his car to try to run down some officers.
Now that he's under arrest.
Actually, no, I'm sorry.
I believe they fired on him.
Yes, they killed him.
The police officers fired on him and killed him.
Five officers fired at the man.
No officers were injured, but he basically gunned it with his vehicle, and they opened fire with their guns.
Now, that's not the only time this has happened.
And we've seen now the LAPD had its first incident where there was an anti-cop ambush.
Somebody shot at a patrol car with a rifle.
And we, of course, had the assassinations of two officers here in New York City very recently, which has led to a lot of problems, not just in terms of the way the police, you know, not just in terms of the threat level against police, but also with the mayor here in New York and across the country.
So, by the way, I wanted to tell you a little bit about what's going on in Seattle and some of their policing problems as well.
This is a nationwide issue.
This is affecting cities across the country, and it's in different ways, I think, even affecting smaller localities.
But I'm running out of time here before we go into the break.
800-282-2882.
More on this cop stuff, anti-cop stuff in just a couple minutes.
Indeed, Buck Sexton here with you in for Rush Limbaugh today on New Year's Eve.
Very appreciative of your time.
You can call in at 800-282-2882.
Also, for more on me, go to theblaze.com/slash Buck Sexton.
I work for the Blaze.
I am the Blaze National Security Editor.
Let's take some calls.
We have Tyler in Baltimore.
Tyler, this is the Rush Limbaugh Show.
You're speaking to Buck.
Hey, how's it going?
How are you doing?
Good, sir.
How are you?
I'm good.
I was just calling in.
I was listening on the radio on my lunch break.
I noticed that you're throwing around the word anti-cop a lot.
And now, I do believe that there's people out there that are just running around.
I mean, I don't think throwing it around implies that I'm using it without any basis.
When you have protesters marching and saying, what do we want, dead cops?
I think we can call that anti-cop.
I don't think that's a significant thing.
Well, yeah, you can call that anti-cop, but there's also video footage that shows that that was actually an edited term that they threw in there.
I'm not sure exactly what.
Well, that's interesting, too, because I happen to be at one of actually, I was at several of the marches and heard them talking about how cops are racist murderers.
So unless I'm also crazy and can't hear properly, they are anti-cop.
But go ahead with your, with whatever point you want to say.
Here's the problem.
The problem is, there are so many people that are just fed up with there being pretty zero to slim, zero accountability as far as cops go, that you're going to have people that are going to act crazy.
And you're going to have people that are going to get fed up and they're just going to take things into their own hands.
You know, as far as that guy goes that pulled a gun out, I'm not sure if he pulled a gun or not.
You know, footage is kind of either way.
I know, you know, there are crooked cops out there, but as far as people pulling guns, killing, trying to kill cops, yes.
That's an anti-cop movement.
But as far as everything else goes, I'm not sure if you've heard of the movement called Cop Lock.
Yeah, they videotape cops and they say, you know, when cops are being aggressive or whatever, I'm familiar with them.
So what are you saying?
I'm an avid member of Cop Lock.
I'm on the Facebook page all the time.
It's just not surprising.
Go ahead.
You can easily go online right now and probably look at about 400 people getting their butts kicked by police officers for seemingly no reason.
And the issue is, is that these films are made and people see it, and even the people that employ the cops see it.
And the thin blue line is so strong that these cops, nothing's done to them.
I mean, for instance, Darren Wilson, I'm not going to beat a horse, but Darren Wilson, who killed a black man two days after he was violating someone's civil rights on their front porch for filming them.
He threatened to take someone to jail for filming them.
Now, if this guy...
It seems to me, Tyler, that the suggestion here is that because cops make mistakes and there are bad cops and there are cops who do bad things, we should somehow view that as being the overwhelming reality of police enforcement in America when the numbers just show us that that's completely false.
that you have millions and millions of interactions between police and citizens of this country all the time.
Shootings are actually quite rare, all things considered.
I think the total number of law enforcement involved shootings in 2014 or maybe 2013, I can't remember which year it was they had the complete numbers.
Well, this year just ended, was between 200 and 300.
And that's in a country of 320 million people.
So you're telling me this like this is some systemic and widespread pandemic.
And I think that's a misrepresentation of the way the vast majority of law enforcement officers act in and data.
And by the way, your point about accountability, are there cops who probably get away with doing stuff they shouldn't, of course?
But this is true of anyone in any profession you can name or think of.
And I know for a fact, because I worked for the NYPD for a while, that their cops get in trouble because they don't change the address on their driver's license in time.
I mean, internal affairs bureaus can go after cops for any number of stuff and do.
Most cops live in constant fear of false accusations of brutality or false accusations of civil rights violations, because even if there's actually no merit whatsoever, and it's obvious from the beginning, IAB, whatever the department is anywhere in the country, has to investigate, has to go through the entire process.
And that's incredibly stressful and obviously very unfair for the officers that have to go through it.
I don't know why you think there's no accountability.
I mean, what is there to suggest that?
You seem to think that Officer Darren Wilson, because he was crotchety with somebody who was filming him the day before.
And look, law enforcement officers are getting used to the new technologies that are.
Tyler, thank you for calling in.
Law enforcement officers are getting crotchety with people because of being filmed and what they're doing.
I mean, you know, this is something that they're just getting used to.
Now, now they're going to start carrying around cameras on their bodies.
By the way, what's going to be fascinating about that is as this becomes more widespread, you're going to have people that are angry because their shenanigans are now on tape, and they're going to be very embarrassed by the way that they're acting in arrests.
If you think the Nick Nulty mugshot was interesting, just wait till you see some of the video stuff that's going to make its way out there when we have cameras on cops across the country.
Let's take Greg in Wyoming.
Greg, this is the Rush Limbaugh Show.
You're speaking to Buck.
How are you doing today, Buck?
Good, sir.
How are you?
Wonderful.
Hey, I'm a current law enforcement officer, you know, 20-year career, and I've watched a lot of things change.
And I keep hearing the word accountability thrown around by people.
And to me, the accountability begins at the level of the citizen.
And what I've noticed is we're no longer citizens, you know, because citizens have responsibility and accountability.
We're consumers.
Consumers don't.
They just consume things.
They don't teach government classes anymore.
The ones that they do, the history is skewed, and I've noticed that as that...
How does that affect your role as a law enforcement officer?
Well, what it does is that philosophy takes itself down to the street to where I've watched the breakdown of the family.
I've watched people essentially just be irresponsible because they can be irresponsible when no one is teaching them otherwise.
Now, the same holds true for law enforcement officers because there are bad cops.
I'm thankful and I'm fortunate that the guys that trained me, one of the premises that they taught me was conduct every investigation to prove that person innocent because our system is based on innocence before guilt.
If you can't prove them innocent, you've already proven them guilty.
Well, I would love for that to be ⁇ I've heard from so many prosecutors, particularly federal prosecutors who are friends of mine, either current or former federal prosecutors, for example, that the political pressure to get convictions is very high and that sometimes they feel like their hands are tied by the statutes and by the office they're working in.
And it's quite the opposite, in fact.
And the way they do it is the count of countless counts.
Essentially, they stack so many federal charges into something, for example, that even if you think you're completely innocent of wrongdoing, better to plead guilty to something more minor and walk away without spending 5, 10, 15 years in jail than to actually go and fight it.
And by the way, go bankrupt in the process.
Fighting any federal charge, for example, and I'm sure fighting a lot of criminal charges even at the local level is incredibly expensive.
Yeah, absolutely.
I mean, I've also worked on the other side of the court insofar as being an OFL and he probation and parole officer.
And, you know, I've supervised caseloads of multi-generationally addicted individuals.
At one time, I had a grandmother, a mother, and a daughter that were all on my caseload for methamphetamine use.
And every single one of them, and I'm not faulting them, and I take pride in the fact that those three are now productive members of society.
But at the time, every single one of them was on some sort of government assistance of one way, shape, or form or another.
Right, so you think this is a bigger problem of the society and the dependency and the sort of me, me, me, I don't have to be responsible.
And that then translates into the way people act and then also animosity towards cops because they're doing stuff they shouldn't be doing and then they are getting upset at the police.
Greg, thank you for calling in from Wyoming.
I appreciate hearing from you.
We'll take one more before we go into the break.
Let's hear from Frank in Tucson.
Frank, this is the Rush Limbaugh Show.
You're speaking to Buck Sexton.
Yeah, hi, Buck.
You know, all this trouble started in Ferguson, and nobody's mentioned the reason it started is because Michael Brown's accomplice lied and said that Mike had his hands up, hands up, don't shoot, hands up, don't shoot.
And so they're going around doing that in protest.
He never did that.
And so his accomplice is going to have blood on his hands.
Look what he's caused.
And I don't know why he hasn't had charges against him for lying to the police and false evidence and so forth.
Well, one thing that I always find fascinating in some of these cases is the reluctance with which prosecutors and law enforcement will go after obvious cases of false accusation or lying to the police.
I think the best example of this that comes to mind for me is in the Duke La Crosse case, which was obviously, as we know, a total fabrication.
And the woman who fabricated those charges, I believe a year later, went on to stab someone to death.
It may have been worthwhile, I would think, for, well, I guess they couldn't count on the prosecutor because he's disgraced, Naifong.
But it may have been worthwhile for somebody to step in and say, you know, to malign a group of young men and possibly ruin their lives and cause them to go through very expensive legal fees to avoid ruining their lives.
That's not okay.
That is, in fact, illegal.
And the lies that were told, well, the problem is, of course, people say, oh, they're not lies.
Look, the most compelling witnesses, as we all know from the grand jury, because they released the information in the Ferguson grand jury, the most compelling witnesses were African Americans who said that he didn't put his hands up and he was charging the officer.
Okay, well, what are we supposed to make of that?
Why would they lie?
What do they have to gain?
In fact, as we know, some of them have been threatened and feel like they're in some form of personal jeopardy as a result of doing their civic duty and telling the truth.
So thank you for calling in, Frank.
I just, you know, the lies, this, in many ways, and I know others have pointed this out, this has been sort of the year that the leftist lie has taken on a whole new meaning.
It's gone to a whole new level.
You don't just have the exposing of these lies, whether it's Mike Brown, the gentle giant, and then, of course, the tape came out of him, strong-arm robbery just minutes before.
The hands up, don't shoot.
Say what you will about the exchange.
I mean, there's more evidence to believe that he didn't do that than there is that he did.
At least that's what the grand jury thought.
And then you have the UVA rape hoax from what we can see right now.
I mean, the story is completely made up and falling apart.
There was also the case of the writer Dunham writing about Oberlin and that.
Some people are still saying that that wasn't a hoax.
But what's interesting is that there's been Sony may have been an inside job.
I think we've gotten past that now, haven't we?
Or do people still think this?
No?
Huh?
Well, it is still - I guess that's still bouncing around.
Look, the thing about that is I can't really analyze that beyond what I think is likely because, I mean, I haven't seen the data.
I don't know that much about computers, and the FBI seems very certain that this is North Korea.
Why a hacking collective would take up North Korea's cause for no reason, I think, is quite strange.
But there's been an abandonment of truth that has happened here, meaning that it's not just that sometimes they're a little loose with the facts.
They don't even care if it's true.
It doesn't even matter if it's true.
It's all about raising awareness or some other sort of collective grievance activity.
You know, oh, we're just going to, yeah, this is a big lie, but we're raising awareness about the issue.
And that now is an excuse for saying things that are flatly untrue.
So we're seeing this with the law enforcement cases, and we're seeing it elsewhere as well.
And I just think that it's, I feel like it's kind of the year that the left jumped the shark.
By the way, apparently, Jump the Shark actually comes from a happy, I didn't really know this, comes from a happy days episode where the Fonz, yeah, the happy days a little before time.
Apparently, the Fonz, I guess, was like water skiing or something, and he had to, and he actually, they had him jump a shark.
Like on, that was the thing, and that's where Jump the Shark comes from.
Anyway, the progressive left jumped the shark this year.
Hey, Fonzie.
All right, 800-282-2882.
Buck Sexton in for Rush Limbaugh.
More in just a minute.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush today on the EIB.
Thank you for staying with me.
800-282-2882.
So how is this playing out now?
I've been talking a bit about the New York side of things and the feud there between the mayor, who's the head of the police force, really.
The police commissioner works for the mayor, and the mayor is the Toppas Hall thing.
Bill de Blasio, former Clinton campaign director in 2000, when she was running for Senate.
And as we call him Warren Wilhelm, because that's actually his name.
Octoen, Warren, how have you been?
I haven't seen you in a while.
You look lovely today.
He's got a big problem now with the cops because they've turned their backs on him at some of the services for these slain officers.
But in classic Warren Wilhelm fashion, he's on the one hand saying he sort of wants to get together and talk to them and everything else.
But now it's come out that he also is telling his political allies to smear the cops in the press.
So while he's saying on the one hand, let's all be, let's talk this out, guys.
Let's talk this out.
He's also then getting on a cell phone or having his aides go on their cell phones and say, you know, make sure that you light these guys up in the press, that you smear them for everything that's going on there.
Because that's how Warren does things.
He's very dishonest.
He's a naughty boy, Warren.
I don't like him.
But the NYPD is upset about this, but they're not the only police department that's having its share of problems right now.
I think it's astonishing when you look at what's happening, for example, in Seattle.
The Wall Street Journal had a pretty good piece on this, where you have the chief of police, O'Toole.
It's a lady.
It's a lady chief.
And she has come out and said that, for example, because officers are so hesitant now to actually take on an arrest unless they absolutely have to.
And they're also hesitant to make arrests in defense of their persons, meaning that when there are protests and rocks or bottles are thrown at them, like, oh, I guess we shouldn't arrest them because people are going to videotape this we're going to look bad.
She recently had to say two officers in the aftermath of some protests/slash riots there, quote, if you get agitators who threaten the police or the public, you have to arrest them.
That's actually what we've, that's where we're going now.
That's where we've headed to.
We're reaching a place where police commissioners are like, hey, if they're throwing rocks or bottles at you or if they're threatening public safety, you have to arrest them.
I don't care if it looks bad on video.
You are going to have to wrestle them to the ground.
And that's never a pretty thing, by the way.
I think this idea that police arrests, that there's a way to do it where there's some special ninja chokehold.
Hi-ya.
And somebody can just, you press, or like a Vulcan, you know, like the Vulcan grip where you make the guy pass out or, you know.
Yeah, exactly.
No, sometimes it's going to require a little bit of a thump to the, well, a bit of a beatdown, sir, indeed.
And it's not something that we celebrate, but unfortunately, that's part of what law enforcement does.
I mean, there is force behind all this.
Otherwise, the whole system breaks down.
But in Seattle, the chief of police is reminding people.
It's like, guys, hey, you are allowed to make arrests.
It is okay.
You don't have to just be like, oh, I totally understand your grievance.
And you're just raising awareness.
Like, if you throw a bottle at my face, like, I should just take that because I'm a law enforcement officer.
I don't, I should understand.
I should make some effort here to understand you.
Let's all be friends.
Meanwhile, they're screaming, you know, we're going to kill the pigs.
It's like, whoa, whoa, hey, settle down.
Settle down.
Got a little too crazy here.
But this is now.
We're now going to make, we're essentially, I think, on the cusp or on the edge of a broad social experiment in this country, which is in at least some major cities, and it could have ripple effects beyond them.
They're going to change the way policing is.
I also love this idea, by the way, like with Kaiser Wilhelm.
He's going to retrain the officers.
We're going to have someone marching in formation, very tight formation.
They're going to know exactly when to kick the right leg, when to kick the left leg, retrain the officers.
How is that going to make this?
What does that even mean?
Do you tell them to be nice to people?
Don't choke someone when you don't have to?
What are they going to say?
I mean, they're already trained, and you would assume they're aware of all these sorts of things.
Oh, I got to go.
I get too fired up here.
800-282-2882.
We'll do a little more cop stuff, and then we'll move to, oh, what, 2015?
What you can expect in 2015, maybe.
We'll get into that in a few minutes.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush.
Back in a minute.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush.
In the next hour, we'll finish up our cop talk, and then we'll get into some of the latest on North Korea.
They expect more hacking, perhaps, because the interview has been seen by lots of folks.
Talk a little bit about Obamacare, what's to expect in 2015.
That and more.
Coming right up.
▲
Export Selection