All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 9, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:54
January 9, 2015, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Greetings and welcome back, folks.
Great to have you here, Rush Limboy, your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos, free community college.
Hillary Clinton ticked off at Bill again, if we're supposed to believe that.
And of course, the terrorists are now dead for now.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny, South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Greetings.
Great to have you here.
Here's the phone number.
It's 800.
Two eight, two.
Open line Friday, a uh a great career risk taken by me, the uh largest career risk ever taken by a major media figure turning over the content portion of program to people that have never done this.
They're amateurs in that regard.
That is the callers, lovable amateurs, nevertheless.
The point being, whatever you want to talk about, have at it.
Very few, if any, restrictions, restrictions you wouldn't even know exist.
Again, the number's 800-282-2882.
What?
What incredible past six hours or so?
Two guys.
The two terrorists, the uh the Karachi brothers, or whatever their names are, they're dead now.
The hostages are safe.
But for the last, it I I don't know.
It's it's hard to put this in perspective.
No, no.
It actually is very easy to put it as in put it in perspective, but when you put it in proper perspective, you run the risk of being accused of being insensitive.
You stop and think of what's happened here.
Two people.
Two guys, two terrorists did this.
Not twelve people are dead, there's no question if it's a major, major terror, but look at what two look at how two people brought the world to paralysis.
I mean, that is I'm I'm watching cable news networks here, and they're all doing their wrap-ups now.
And by the way, can you believe that we never once saw the Grim Reaper on Fox all week?
We never once saw her.
Well, I didn't anyway.
I think if they trotted Geraldo out, I missed him.
Heroma generally shows up when there's death at the doorstep.
But I didn't see him.
Anyway, the network's all doing their ramp up here.
And after all the networks went with their British associate, like Fox was televising Sky News.
And CNN, well, whoever they could convince to let them simulcast because they knew nobody would watch them.
But they were all carrying Brit broadcast.
And it was, it it it was being portrayed as I don't know, disastrously bad.
The hostage circumstances uh in the two locations in France were being portrayed as as just the end of the world kind of bad.
Oh my god, oh my god, oh, what a good oh, and then the gun started firing and the bombs started going up.
Oh no, no, no.
When it's all over.
The two terrorists that killed our buddy at uh Charlie Hebdou, the French magazine are dead.
Uh third, the culprit is dead, and his girlfriend or wife or was on the lamb.
But they'll catch up to her.
Now, I just want to share with you the picture, because the picture, that's what television is.
After I got here early, and I've been watching the TV off and on, but it's been intense.
And you know if you've been following it yourself.
It has been intense, the coverage of the hostage taking and the hostage circumstance.
And there have been expert guests and analysts, and everybody has been talking about this event and placing it among the worst ever of its kind.
So emotions have been ratcheted up.
It seemed like there was a general paralysis that had overtaken everybody watching this.
There was fear coming out of every orifice and crevice that you could see, and then it was over.
And I watched a wrap-up.
I think it was Fox, and they had the two people, the Karuchi Karachi brothers and the other two, the accomplices.
But the primary terrorists that killed the people at the magazine.
They had them on the left.
Anyway, a picture of four people.
And in the wrap-up, they said, This is it.
Two people on the left you see, they're now dead.
The hostages are non-injured and they're all alive.
The two people on the right, the far right also dead, the third person there you see, girlfriend on the lamb.
So we had six hours of intense coverage of events following up the murder of uh 11 or 12 at the magazine, and it all ends with a picture of four people and three of them are dead.
And that's when it struck me, that's when it hit me that basically two people.
I'm not downplaying what they did.
And I'm I'm referring to media here, I guess, because it all starts with the media and how they cover these things, and then what impact that has on people.
And when at the end of the event you can put up a graphic showing pictures of four people, three of whom are dead, and that means it's all over for now on this event.
It just for some reason hit me.
All of this since Wednesday, all of this paralysis, all of this attention, all of this.
Oh, the Reuters is reporting for hostages at the Paris market are dead.
Yeah, yeah, that's a second location.
Okay, okay, there it is.
Four hostages at Paris Market are dead.
Well, the last report I saw before the program started where there are no hostages that died.
So I'm I'm happy to have that correction.
At any rate, it just struck me that two guys did this.
Two guys brought everything in the world.
Well, it didn't really, but two guys brought the media and what people in this country think is happening in the world to a screeching halt for two days.
That's power.
That is incredible power that two people could bring everything, the perception of everything to a screeching halt.
Well, of course it's fear, but it's also power.
Now, the reason I say power is because I have I have been literally amazed ever since yesterday, when I probably overdid it, but I couldn't believe the point to the New York Times had two stories yesterday.
One of them was a palpable fear that all of this would create a backlash against Muslims, against militant Islamists.
Well, they are the bad guys.
There deserves to be a backlash against these kinds of they deserve to have died today.
This is exactly what they deserve.
This is how it should happen.
We shouldn't be issuing warrants, we shouldn't be doing indictments, we shouldn't be going to the grand jury, and we shouldn't be looking forward to the day ten years from now we get them in a courtroom and try them.
This is exactly what should happen.
And yet the New York Times is worried that this kind of thing is going to cause a backlash against the people responsible for that.
That was the first.
The second story was that the primary concern all over Europe and in the elite circles of New York and Washington was this could mean a return to power of extremist fringe right wing governments.
And then from that moment yesterday when I learned that through last night into the day, you wouldn't believe every media person, every newspaper, every agency followed the New York Times lead, and Ring of Mitchell, NBC News in Washington, very worried about a backlash against Islamic jihadists.
Very worried that this means a re-emergence of right wing governments in European capitals.
It was just, I don't know.
It was, it was none of this is funny.
But the degree to which all of these people are puppets.
And every one of them had the same Take wringing their hands over the same fear.
And it it it there wasn't a there was didn't seem I could find a single news agency willing to even mention the name Islamic terrorism as part of this story.
Or militant jihad, or militant Islam, or militant Muslim, no mention.
There's abject fear.
And that's why I say these people have an incredible amount of power.
There's fear in the media to call these people what they are.
There's fear in the media to identify who they are.
And what are they afraid of?
Are they afraid personally?
Are these media people afraid personally?
Or is there, as there are most always is, is there a political explanation for this?
Now I know you might be saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, Rush.
Politics in this do not discount the possibility.
I'm going to illustrate something here in a moment via audio sound bites to back up what I'm saying.
But let's let's take a look here.
We had a caller yesterday from New Orleans.
His name was Matt, and he pointed out that the terror attack on the French magazine might be bad PR for the leftist push for political correctness.
And remember, the left lives in the world of buzz and image and perception and PR.
And political correctness.
Here's a magazine that wasn't.
And look what happened to them.
And he was the caller pointed out that this might be bad PR for the left's push everybody to be politically correct.
The killing at magazines makes political correctness look bad.
And he was right.
But I think that you could say that these terror attacks make any number of leftist positions look bad.
For instance, the left is all for ending the war on terrorism.
They think it's counterproductive, they think it's discriminatory, and they think it's profiling.
You start conducting war on terror, then you are besmirching and impugning an entire religion.
And this is something we did not do.
And that's where the political correctness rears its head.
Political correctness leads to paralysis.
Some in the left even claim we're not at war with terrorists, and that if we are, it's our fault because we have caused poverty everywhere in the world.
Our wealth, our standard of living has not come about legitimately.
It's come because we've traveled the world and we have conquered.
And we have oppressed and we've stolen the natural and other resources of other peoples.
And as a result, those people are now in dire poverty and they are poor.
And this leads them to reach out in anger, become terrorists.
This is a leftist theory.
And therefore we shouldn't be at war.
We should understand, as Mrs. Clinton said, we need to take time to empathize with our enemies.
It's called smart power.
But an event like what's happened here, this is a this is bad news for the left and their push for appeasement, right?
You want to appease these guys.
It doesn't work.
This is also bad PR for the left's push for amnesty and their push for open borders.
You might be saying, Rush, come on.
Is everything we're talking France?
But what's the problem in France?
They have an immigration policy that is essentially open borders, and they haven't done any assimilating.
And the same thing in the UK.
And those are things the left believes in very staunchly and are trying to make happen in this country, open borders, no assimilation.
The U.S. needs to be watered down.
The U.S. deserves to be watered down.
It's also bad PR for the left's push for more gun control laws.
This was another laughable thing about yesterday.
The left was worried that we need even stricter gun control laws in France now.
That was one of the big lessons, which is laughable.
The cops are unarmed In Paris.
The cop that was shot begging for his life was unarmed.
All he had is a billy club.
He arrived at the scene on a bicycle.
They're unarmed.
So here you've got strict gun control laws in Paris.
Who's armed?
Bad guys.
And not just armed.
Kalishnikov's AK-47's military-style weapons.
Bad PR for the left that preaches gun control is the answer to everything because it looked like the bad guys.
After demilitarizing, we're hearing that in America now.
We must demilitarize the police.
The police running around looking like a division of the U.S. Army.
Why, that's intimidating to the community.
And we can't have that.
It's causing violence.
It's causing strife.
We've got to demilitarize the police, which means take away some powerful weapons that can overcome bad guys.
Well, France has already done this.
Not only they demilitarize the police, they disarmed the police.
And the left got everything they wanted in gun control in France.
And look what happened.
Bad PR.
Except the media is talking about none of this.
The media is literally paralyzed in fear.
These two guys have scared them to death.
They're literally paralyzed in fear.
And they really believe the way to deal with that fear is to not make enemies of these guys.
Just let them know, hey, we're not going to criticize you.
We're not even going to properly identify you.
Don't come for us.
We love you.
At least we don't hate you.
That's their appeasement.
That's how they choose to deal with this.
But everything the left touts as the answer to problems is on display as a giant failure in Paris.
Political correctness, gun control, demilitarizing or disarming the cops, open borders, amnesty, everything the left believes in on parade.
That's why they're not talking about.
That's why their big concern is a backlash against militant Islamas.
And of course, the rise to power of fringe.
Conservative governments.
By the way here's a quote for you very quickly.
Little pop quiz.
Who said this?
We don't need these fringe guys as much as we did anymore.
Think about that.
Back after this.
No quote.
Lots to do here on Open Line Friday.
Rush Limbaugh.
Determined to be in a good mood, folks.
Determined to be happy.
Determined to do everything I can to enjoy life.
And if that makes some of you think I'm out of touch, so be it.
I've been dealing with that complaint for 27 years.
Yeah, you'll I've over and over again I've heard that.
You're out of touch rush.
You're losing touch with what it's like to really be in a No, and I'm not.
Never have lost touch, never will lose touch.
But it doesn't mean that you can't sit around and have fun now and then.
I mean you'd be mired in misery all the time.
There's so much.
For example, there is.
How about free community college for everybody?
Oh, yeah.
And do you know now that community college?
That's what stirs the drink.
That is America.
Community college.
That's where careers are made.
Community college, the best kept secret in America now.
Obama's going to make it a freebie.
It costs the price tap is about 3435 billion dollars, but it's going to be free.
The professors are not going to work free, and the utilities are not going to provide heat and air conditioning for the buildings on the camp high free, but it's going to be free to you except maybe if you are due a tax refund.
You may not know this yet, but if you traditionally or annually arrange your taxes so that you get a tax refund, it may come to an end this year.
For two reasons.
The New York Times says their funding is short and they may not be able to fully complete every responsibility, and therefore refunds might be late This year.
And then there's a second, folks, I'm not kidding here.
Got it here in a stack of stuff.
Your refund might not ever find its way to you.
It might instead be taken, and we warned everybody of this back during the days when Obamacare was being debated shortly after it was signed.
Many people will lose their tax refunds.
They will essentially be seized by the IRS to cover health care mandated expenses via Obamacare.
Not kidding.
Some of you may never see your tax refund.
IRS has the authority to seize it if you have not followed the law and either paid the fine or bought a policy or what have you.
So in order to make sure that in a whole lot of anger about that, Obama has to do something.
Well, he's going to give you JC no yet.
Junior college, community college, free now.
So we'll have this is just a taste, just a taste of what's on tap today.
Be right back and roll right on right after this.
I want to remind you, some of you might remember this, but I caught a lot of heat back in 2009 and 2010, and maybe even into 2011, when I learned when I learned how the IRS was going to collect fines from people in Obamacare.
You pay a fine if you don't get a cover uh insurance policy.
And it all relates to the individual mandate and the uh and then the business mandate and all this sort of stuff, and and how you're going to be dealt with if you don't sign up, you don't go to an exchange, don't buy a policy from somewhere.
There's a schedule that people will pay fines.
The fines are cheaper than policies for a couple years on purpose.
Doesn't take long, though, that the fines end up being more expensive than the policies.
But they're the fines being cheaper than policy or are designed to get people to pay the fines first if they don't want insurance.
Uh it's a psychological thing.
And I remember telling people the only way the IRS is empowered to collect the money is by seizing money from you via your tax return.
The IRS cannot send you a bill.
Well, theoretically IRS can do anything.
But the way it was set up when Obamacare was first being debated, and we were first learning about it, was that if you were judged by the IRS to be in arrears when it came to the mandates of Obamacare, if you either owed a fine or if you had not spent enough on a policy,
or if you had not done enough to comply with the law, the way the IRS was according to the law, empowered to get your money was to seize your refund.
Now I don't expect too many people remembered this, because it was three, four years ago, and it was during a time when we were being flooded with details about what Obamacare was.
But I remember for those who were paying close attention, but I caught heat because I the moment that I learned this, I suggested that people make changes in their withholding so that they did not get a refund.
If the IRS can only take money from you in the form of a fine for not having Obamacare, or some other failure to comply, if they can only get money by seizing your refund, then don't do a refund.
And you can do that by adjusting your withholding and have less money withheld.
I mean, the reason you have a big refund, nine out of ten times, is because you are allowing too big a deduction from your pay every week or two weeks, however often you get paid.
So the government gets your money, pays you no interest, they hold it for the year, and then you get a refund when you file your taxes that next April, and you think, well, man, look at this.
$1,500 refund.
Look at and you start bragging everybody how you screwed the government.
And how you pull one over on them.
And you did no such thing.
And I I caught grief for suggesting all of this.
I caught a lot of grief.
People telling me you don't understand people's situations, Rush.
People need those refunds.
It's the only time in the year they ever have that much cash on hand at one time.
And the economy needs that money rush because that's how people go out and buy mufflers and refrigerators and big screens and so forth and so on.
All of that I understand.
I understand the allure of having a check for $800,000, $1,215, and $2,000 in one lump.
And I understand how you don't want to get give that up, but you are denying yourself disposable income during the year in order to have that big check.
You would, in effect, you're in an enforced savings plan at zero interest.
And the bank, once a year, gives you the money back at no interest.
And that's the IRS and your tax refund.
And if you have a refund, and if you haven't complied with Obamacare and they find out about it, your refund is where they're going to collect.
And it is being estimated already that a lot of people who are expecting a refund this year are not going to get it for a host of reasons.
And there's going to be a lot of anger about this.
But there's not going to be anything anybody can do because it's the IRS.
All I can do is get mad.
So here comes Obama with free community college.
You see how it works.
Dear leader is offering something in return in exchange for taking your money.
And calling it free.
Now I got a note last night.
I was firmly ensconced.
I'll tell you what I've been doing.
One of my all-time favorite TV shows is The Wire.
It went for five years on HBO from 2002 to 2007.
I may be off by a year or two on the start and end years.
When the wire was originally broadcast, it was broadcast in standard definition at 4x3 resolution.
Four by three screen size.
That's what the standard old-fashioned television, the way they were sized.
And I read last month that HBO had been involved in a project to reissue the wire in high definition, 1080, 1080p at 16 by 9.
And I thought, how could they do that?
And I learned that they filmed it in 35 millimeter.
They filmed it in widescreen.
They filmed it in letterbox, well, 16 by 9, but they aired it in standard definition at 4x3 for the effect, the graininess, the effect, given what the nature of the story was.
But now they decided to reissue it brand new in an HD format when widescreen, which makes it brand new.
And the story I saw was that the original, the creator of the series, David Simon, had not been told that HBO was doing this.
And he got a little worried because he's the artist on this.
He's the writer.
He was charge of the cinematography.
And he said, we framed everything specifically for 4x3.
We framed it.
And now they're going to run it at 16 by 9.
We didn't intend it to be seen at 16 by 9.
So he asked and got permission to participate in the remastering of the wire from 4x3 to 16 by 9.
And that added six months to the project.
And even on his blog, he has he has uh posted short little video clips of showing the four by three a scene in four by three and the new same scene in 16 by 9.
And he's shown both examples, how it improves it and how it harms it.
He says in some parts of the series, 16 by 9 destroys what we were trying to do.
In other places, it makes it really even better.
Well, they finished all of this up, is the point in December, and they announced that on December 26th, on HBO's signature, they're going to run the whole thing, all five seasons, back to back until it finished.
And then on January, well, this past Monday, they were going to make it available at iTunes and Amazon Prime.
And then by next summer, all of this will be out in Blu-ray.
Well, the wire is one of my all-time favorites.
We haven't seen it a while.
So I made a point, I made a reminder by the wire in HD on iTunes Monday, which I did.
And I have been in free moments, which I don't have very many of them watching it.
And I I lose myself.
I I it is so good.
And now watching it a second time.
The first time we watched it, Catherine had some dental pain, and we're up till five in the morning.
She's uh we're sitting in the room, she's recovering from dental surgery and so forth, and we're watching this while she can't sleep.
We're getting tired, and I'm on season two now, and there's some things I don't remember, so it's good I'm rewatching it.
But I have to catch myself.
You know, you get caught up in this layer.
I was scene last night that I just I belly laughed like I haven't laughed in I don't know how long, and I just kept the I kept hitting a 10-second rewind for 20 minutes to watch this one five-second scene in a courtroom in season two.
And I find so Catherine will send me a text message and I'll respond to it almost in wire lingo.
You know, just to be funny, and she doesn't know what I'm doing.
What in the hell is happening to my husband?
I had to explain it to her.
Anyway, during this, I got a note from a friend who had just watched the open to Greta Van Sustran last night on a Fox News channel.
Let me read you the note.
Dear Rush, watching Greta's opener just now.
She has Amy Kellogg, Fox reporterette on from Paris.
And Amy Kellogg says that one of the two Karachi brothers who killed the French magazine people said that he was moved by images of Abu Ghraib.
And my friend sent me this in a state of two states.
He was a state of panic and also a state of exaltation because he listened to program yesterday.
And what we had discussed on the program yesterday, the New York Times, if you'll remember, very, very, very, very worried about a backlash.
A backlash against Islamists.
A backlash against Muslims.
And they were they were worried that being truthful in his story would create a backlash.
We went through all of that.
And we had a caller yesterday talk about, you know, I well, the caller called to agree with me that I'd made the point.
Well, here's the New York Times worried about backlash.
What did they do by publishing the Abu Ghrab pictures?
You know, by creating a backlash, they're out there saying George Bush with Gitmo is a terrorist recruiting tool.
Here's the New York Times publishing pictures of what happened at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where we had made a pyramid out of terrorists in their underwear.
You remember all that?
The New York Times published the pictures to expose the Bush administration to get them in trouble.
New York Times posed the pictures to make the United States look bad, but in effect, they also this guy, one of the brothers that shot up the French magazine.
Hey, yeah, that was a picture of Abu Grabbed it, got me all wanting to get involved in this.
And I had to send my friend a reply, as I think you may be looking at this the wrong way.
And I'll share with you the right way to look at this when we come back.
Okay.
So my buddy sends me this note, says that I'm just watching the opening of Greta's show on Fox and Amy Kellogg reporting from Paris.
And she says that one of Karachi brothers who killed the uh the Charles Ibdu people was, quote, moved by images of Abu Ghrab.
And he'd remembered we'd been talking about it on the program yesterday.
I chided the New York Times.
New York Times, you know, all worried about backlash, but what the hell did they cause?
And here was evidence of it.
They, you know, it wasn't just New York Times.
Every United States media outlet ran and the Democrat Party made campaign ads out of those photos from Abu Ghraib.
And here you here you now had a terrorist, the one of two terrorists that had ripped up that magazine and killed 11 people, claiming that he had become militant because of the photos of Abu Ghraib.
And this guy said, see, Rusty, they make your point.
It's a great.
I said, no, no, no, no.
I hate to tell you, but you're looking at this the wrong way.
You have to look at this.
By the way, if Amy Kellogg of Fox is reporting, it means it's on AP somewhere.
And it's at NBC somewhere.
I mean, it's it's it's it wasn't exclusive to her.
This is not a put down of her, but it had to be everywhere, is my point.
Um BC News.
Uh during his trial, Karachi testified the alleged ringleader, Farid Betyetu, then a 26-year-old preacher and janitor taught him that suicide bombers could die as martyrs.
These guys wanted to die as martyrs today.
Well, but now wait a second now.
Wait a second.
Wait a second.
They wanted to die as martyrs.
No, I've not lost my place on Abu Ghrab.
Just sit tight, folks.
My brain goes in 15,000 different directions at once.
They want to die as martyrs, but France doesn't have the death penalty.
The cops had to shoot them.
But the French don't like the cops shooting guns.
It was a real problem.
And finally the cops shooting the terrorists won the day.
And they theoretically got to go out as martyrs, but it had happened.
They couldn't be captured if if we were going to let them go out the way they wanted to, and it appears that that's what we're going to do.
Anyway, just an interesting side light to the I want to go out as a martyr story.
France didn't have a death penalty, so that meant the cops have got to step up and start the start the journey to 73 virgins.
Anyway, I told my friend, you're looking at this Abu Ghrab story all wrong.
One of these guys that blew up the magazine claims he was inspired or angered or in whatever, motivated to join Jihad because of this.
I said, you wait a couple days after whatever's going on here finishes.
And I'm going to make the same prediction to you right now.
That's what I told him last night.
Okay, we've got an end to this now.
The two terrorists are dead, four hostages dead, but this episode, till the next one happens, is it now at its end.
That means the retrospectives will begin by the time the Sunday shows come around.
And a clear and reasoned look back, with now the smoke having cleared, the dust having cleared, and now the brilliant analysts will be able to tell us what really happened and why what really happened really happened.
And who was behind it?
I'm going to tell you, because this clown said it's almost it's almost like he had a line into the Democrat National Committee.
Because what's going to happen here is the media and the Democrat Party, and Obama, if he chooses to, are going to seize on this terrorist citing Abu Grab photos as an opportunity to blame this event at Charles Ibdu on George W. Bush.
Don't smirk.
You're sitting in there thinking it never happened.
You're sitting in there thinking, no way ain't gonna happen.
Do you really think that there's it's not gonna happen?
Wait till the dust clears and wait till the emotion subsides and wait till these people on the left realize what they got.
They've got a terrorist.
Go back to the original reason they said they published the Abu Ghrab photos to show how horrible the U.S. was and how we were sacrificing and way beneath our values.
And this is why the world hated us.
Okay.
So we now have a terror event which has captured the world and paralyzed the world for two or three days, and one of the terrorists involved said he only did it because of the photos at Abu Ghrab.
You don't think the Democrat Party and the American media are gonna, when they realize it, seize on this and blame it on the war on terror.
You think they're gonna blame this on Al-Qaeda in Yemen?
You think they're gonna blame this on Sheikah Waqi?
You're gonna blame this on militant Islam?
They're gonna blame this on the war on terror.
They're gonna blame this on the war in Iraq.
They're gonna blame this in the war in Afghanistan, they're gonna blame it if it's Abu Ghrab that made the guy do what he did.
Well, who did Abu Ghrab?
George W. Bush.
U.S. military.
Wanna make a bet?
It's not going to be.
I'll tell you what, it's not good.
It's not gonna be people real.
You know what?
The New York Times is responsible for this.
They published those Abu Ghrab pictures.
The New York Times created this backlash.
That's what really happened.
We'd have to publish those pictures.
But the Democrat Party and the media, the opposition to Bush was intent on doing so.
Obama hasn't stopped blaming Bush for the economy or a whole bunch of this.
Why should he?
This is made to order for him.
And my friend last night wrote back and said, You know, I hate that you, I just, you're right.
I wasn't looking at it, I was looking at it as a win.
I said, Well, it could be, but not with our media.
Not with the Democrat Party.
I'll keep a sharp eye.
I'll tell you one thing, it will not be blamed, and may be a factor, and that's all these drone kills that Obama's in charge of.
All these drone strikes.
We'll just have to wait and see on this.
All right.
Just getting warmed up.
▲
Export Selection