Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
You know me, folks.
I always try to avoid sounding like a know it all, which is very hard to do because I do know it all.
And I always try not to sound that way, because I know it it's not a character trait that people admire.
People resent know-it-alls.
People resent others that are so sure of themselves.
Because you're not supposed to be that sure yourself.
It's so much gray area out there, compounded by feelings that it's really it's considered unreal to be in touch with what you really think.
But I always am.
And I'm telling you, I'm sitting here, why what is this now?
The second or third day in a row, I guess the second, where the drive-bys are obsessed with the White House and its reaction to criticism that it didn't go to the big rally on Sunday in Paris.
We're now into year seven of this regime, and it still amazes me, as your official know-it-all here behind the golden EIB microphone, that people do not know that this regime doesn't care what they think.
And to the extent that the regime responds when the drive-bys get all caught up in something and want a reaction, to the extent the regime responds, it's just to feed the beast.
It's not for anything official or to convey an actual opinion, point of view, policy position, or anything of the sort.
They didn't go because they didn't want to go.
They handled they had who holder was there, they put him on an airplane to get out.
Biden was there, but you wouldn't want to send him anyway.
He might hijack the whole thing and start making fun of the way the Indians run the 7-Elevens.
So you can't have him there.
And Obama's not going to go to this thing because he's not going to be one of 40 or 44 people.
And another reason he's not going to go to this thing, this regime still won't call this Islamist extremism.
They still won't do it.
And people are ringing their heads.
Why?
I wonder why they won't call it Islamist extremist.
I wonder why they won't do that, as though people don't really know why they won't do it.
So we've now got the Daily Soap Opera that is recycling a bunch of themes.
Will they respond?
Will they respond to our criticism?
What will they say?
Will they say it was a mistake?
They already did say it was a mistake.
And that was just to feed the beast.
They don't think they made a mistake.
It was calculated.
They did it on purpose, the decision not to go.
But the regime, as you know, the drive-bys have a lot tied up in the regime.
Uh the media takes a lot of its self-esteem from being like Obama.
And the drive-bys, as all good politically correct people would, would have shown up.
The drive-bys would have shown up to be in solidarity with the suffering.
Uh to join the victimization parade.
They would have shown up and been there.
And they think because they would have, Obama would have, because they and Obama are the same.
But Obama didn't go.
Obama went and didn't go.
And the drive-by's, well, wait a minute.
If he didn't go, why did we want to go?
Well, we think we should have gone.
That means Obama should have gone, so they're gonna stay on it, so the regime has got to play putsy here with this never-ending quest to find out why they didn't go and why they won't call it Islamist extreme.
We're in the seven years of this now.
And the the lack of understanding or the lack of uh reporting that reflects an understanding, maybe that's a better way to say it, because I I don't know how anybody can't figure out who this is by now.
I mean, how does anybody not, especially the drive-by's have been covering a guy?
Of course they haven't been covering their steno pool.
Anyway, how are you folks?
It's great to have you here, Rush Limbaugh behind the I don't know.
I just get frustrated.
You know me, I I I don't suffer fools well, and when I when I find myself either surrounded by purposeful wanton ignorance that is disguised as a as a media narrative.
It just it just kind of frustrates me.
That's all.
And it it do my best here to see the humor in these kinds of things, but to watch this never-ending circle just continue to repeat itself.
As though it is part of a script, and essentially it is an unwritten script anyway.
A telephone number if you want to be on the program's 800-282-2882 and the email address L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
I just I gotta turn something on here.
I forgot.
I have to activate a chat account.
I forgot to do it for the program started because I was so relieved when I heard that Obama's gonna host a summit on countering violent extremism on February 18th.
Did you hear about this?
Yeah.
That's exactly right.
Remember the job summits?
Oh, millions of Americans uh have have left the job market since those job summits.
The job Obama's job summits were jobs killing summits.
And what else would they be?
The people he brought in there to to counter job loss, a bunch of reporters and columns of the New York Times, what do they know about it?
The only thing you know about jobs at the New York Times is do you accept the buyout and get fired or not?
That's the extent of their knowledge about the job market.
Oh, speaking of that, you know, there's a parade of people leaving the politico.
Yeah, well, it's it's a it's a big unknown, but the bunch of reporterettes and infobabes are reporters are leaving the political.
The ladies from Maggie Haberman, who was the resident Clinton expert at the political is going to the New York Times, but she just wanted many of their ten or fifteen, I forget I got the number here in the snack somewhere.
They're just they're leaving, they're going to other things.
Because the new editor, it's like NBC News is a new editor, female.
I didn't whisper that, did I?
And the current employees disagree with the direction that the new uh editor or boss is uh is taking the publication.
Jill, what's it, yeah, Jill uh Jill uh I don't remember her Jill Abramson was it Abrams?
Abrams or Abramson.
All I remember is how she speaks.
Remember that soundbite we had where she really extends the words and have a long eye in them like consign.
Other than that's intellectual speak.
That's how you speak if you're an intellectual.
That's how you convey to people that you're smarter than they are.
You affectate your speech patterns and your breathing pattern, and you make sure you pause after every two or three words.
So you're contemplating deep thought before you utter the next two or three words.
You got it down, Pat.
Anyway, uh to this summit.
Uh the president will host a summit on countering violent extremism on February 18th.
The plan is to bring together social service providers, including education administrators, mental health professionals, and religious leaders with law enforcement agencies to address violent extremism as part of the broader mandate of community safety and crime prevention.
What in the world?
I think people are gonna make the mistake of thinking this has something to do with Islamist expansion it doesn't.
Given this list of participants, education administrators, mental health professionals, religious leaders, law enforcement agency.
This is gonna be about things like Ferguson and New York, Eric.
That's what this is.
Broader mandate of community safety and crime prevention in response to terrorism conducted ruthlessly by Islamofascists, beheadings, bombings, bullets, and Obama is calling in social service providers.
That's the first giveaway.
This has nothing to do with militant Islamism.
This has nothing to do with jihad.
This is all about domestic violence.
This is this is another show.
And after it's over, the way this works is they call the summit, the media gathers, you show the attendees entering the White House, the obligatory pool cameras in the East Room or wherever they do it.
Obama speaks, welcomes them all to the summit.
They break up in groups.
One goes to one corner, another goes to another corner in the room.
Barack Obama assigns them subject matter to study.
The end of the day, five o'clock, they all report back to Obama, and the problems have been solved.
And there's no more extremism.
There's no more violence, because the administration will have dealt with it.
Just like the job summits and any other number of summits that have taken place at the White House.
This sort of thing used to be fun.
Social service providers?
You know, it's too bad that comedy died years ago.
Well, it is.
Chris Rock won't go to college camp I because the students are too busy being offended rather than laughing.
Speaking of that, we mentioned during the program yesterday, Twitter and YouTube accounts for the U.S. military central command were hacked on Monday.
And pro-ISIS messages were posted by the unknown hackers before the accounts were taken down for hours.
CENTCOM said the sites were compromised for a half hour.
These sites reside on commercial non-defense department servers, and both sites have been temporarily taken down while we look into the incident further.
CENTCOM's operational military networks were not compromised, and there was no operational impact to the U.S. Central Command.
So this is just the stuff, I guess, that they put out there for the low information crowd to have some contact with the military, but it really doesn't mean anything.
They post pictures of tanks and missiles and stuff so the low information crowd can know what we're doing.
But no battle plans, strategies, or any actual news is there, so whatever got hacked was essentially cartoon stuff.
The hackers posted tweets in which they claimed to have broken into U.S. military computers and extracted information about service members and their families, the generals and the majors and the sergeant majors and the colonels, their addresses, home addresses, uh wives and spouses and kids' addresses and so forth.
And then they did.
They posted uh spreadsheets that purported to list the names and addresses of top officers and other things.
Now, Twitter said that it does not comment on individual accounts, but that the company was helping the Pentagon resolve an account security issue.
Now, as I said, we mentioned this during the program yesterday, and it's uh it's clear the regime is trying to play this down, understandably so.
I don't care what it is about CENTCOM, something there got hacked from the article.
So this is clearly embarrassing, but not a security threat.
One defense department official said the hack came the same afternoon, President Obama spoke to the Federal Trade Commission about the importance of corporate cybersecur.
I'm sorry.
We're not supposed to laugh anymore.
This is like the Sony hack.
So the minute Obama's out there talking about cybersecurity, some punks are taking out CENTCOM's Twitter account.
Okay.
I don't, you know, I don't understand why the drive-bys are so concerned about that, but they are.
I noticed it yesterday afternoon watching it on TV.
I mean they were really wringing their hands or terribly upset about this.
Uh they thought it was a very serious breach.
And I don't understand why they're so concerned.
I remember when the drive-bys in the media thought it was cute when those hackers at a group called Anonymous hacked the Ferguson Police Department website.
Remember that?
That hacker group Anonymous posted the names and addresses of Ferguson Police Department officers and so forth.
And the drive by's applauded that.
And the New York Times thought that was wonderful.
Oh, that was great.
And remember when the New York Times published addresses of people they thought needed to have some attention paid to them.
And everybody thought that was cool, but now all of a sudden this is a problem.
Oh, by the way, speaking of, have you heard uh what David Cameron has suggested, the Prime Minister of the UK?
Well, now, help me.
Cameron's not the labor party, right?
Or is he?
Right, okay, he's supposed to be a Tory.
A Whig, conservative, so to speak.
Well, as you know, many chat apps, such as WhatsApp, iMessage, uh, I mean, there's all kinds of them out there.
And supposedly, they are all so well encrypted, the NSA can't crack it.
Uh nobody's been able to crack the encryption of the chat programs.
Like if you have uh if you have an iPhone or an iPad, you use messages, iMessage.
Not SMS.
We're not talking about cellular texting.
We're talking about actual message apps like WhatsApp and the others.
David Cameron said that unless the government is given backdoor access to all of these encrypted message services, he's gonna outlaw them.
He says, he said, are we going to allow a means of communication which it simply isn't possible to read?
Meaning governments and law enforcement.
Are we going to allow a means of communication which it simply isn't possible to monitor?
He said this Monday, Cameron Double campaigning.
And again, he talked about WhatsApp, uh, Snapchat, iMessages.
He said, My answer to that question is no, we must not.
He said, These bad guys can get a hold of these programs and they can start chatting all day long, sending photos, messages, text messages, and nobody can uh decrypt it.
I remember years ago, this it has to be way back.
Jim Calstrom was still the head of the New York FBI office.
And he was worried about all this back then.
Um about about computer text messaging, email, all this kind of thing, and the the bureau was was going to make a big push for being able to get search warrants and decryption when necessary, and it was going to be controversial, and it was, but for some reason, these programs they are encrypted on both ends.
You and the person with whom you're chatting.
What you send is encrypted, what they receive, whoever you're talking to, the app has a means of decrypting what is sent, but it's it's strictly from conversation to conversation, and it includes group chats.
Everything back and forth apparently has such great level encryption that law enforcement hadn't found a way in.
And Cameron is telling the manufacturers, like Apple and like the people that own Snapchat and WhatsApp, if you don't give us the decryption key, we're not good, we're just gonna we're gonna make these services illegal.
Now, I don't know if he can do that just with a wave of his wand, but it looks like too many people watching the way Obama operating.
I knew, I knew it was just a little too good to be true yesterday.
What?
What are you expecting me to?
What's the question?
Oh no, they don't.
That's the point.
Snerdly is the rallies ever accomplish a damn thing.
No, except making the people who do them feel better.
Rallies make the people who involve themselves in them think they've done something.
Um it's you've heard people say, I want to, I want to do something in my life, I want to make a difference.
So you go to rally.
And you get together, and you hold hands and you're all unified in purpose, and you're around people that share the same desires and passions, and you do that for a couple three hours when it's over, you've made a difference.
In your mind.
I'm I'm not, I'm not being looked, you know, it's kind of a loaded question for you to ask me out of the blue, because it's obviously this rally didn't accomplish anything other than a show of unity, but it's not, it's not gonna stop ISIS or whoever.
It's not gonna stop Al-Qaeda, that's not the point.
Um but I don't think the people that did the rally organized the rally, which by the way, the White House pledged time.
This rally was put together as early as January 8th.
Um, from what I'm told, anyway, uh that date may not be January 8th, that'd be five days ago in this, well, tight.
Uh but the the the point is uh the rally isn't gonna stop any of the bad guys.
Uh but it is, it might, you know, a show of unity uh and a display of unity and actual engagement in in unity, with everybody showing up, admitting to each other that they are aligned together against these people, can help raise spirits.
It could help maybe inspire sense of purpose later on.
But the rally itself, in terms of is it a deterrent or an action that stopped?
No.
But you ask, you tell me civil rights marches matter.
They they clearly did.
That's right.
The civil rights marches, they the civil rights marches, many of them didn't more than sway public opinion, but i if nothing else than that, that's still an impact.
That's a huge impact is uh changing.
But a lot of people are afraid of the terrorists.
That's well, hang on.
All right, let me give it to you straight.
On the down low.
This rally, this rally is going to have as much effect on ISIS, Al Qaeda in Yemen, whoever on the Islamic extremists, as the hashtag campaign had on Boko Haram.
Save our girls.
And that's essentially your question.
This is mean and what I think is different about this.
Normally it is, and with allowances here, I think you people in the uh audience understand what I mean.
Normally it's the bad guys that take to the streets and start raising hell and demanding justice or what have you.
In this case, this clearly the good guys who don't do things like this.
Good guys got together and stood up and uh and were shouting no more.
Um, this is some people think it was a brave thing to do.
This is not going to change Al Qaeda, it's not going to diminish, it's not going to shame, it's it's not going to have one measurable impact on stopping Islamic jihad, militant Islamist extremism.
Isn't it but a lot of people think it was a courageous thing to do.
There is palpable fear of these people.
And it's everywhere.
And it's including at the that includes it in certain governments, the highest level of governments.
There's some places that will now will not call this what it is simply because they're afraid that that will target them.
There are others who won't call it what it is for other reasons.
We can only speculate, but it's not fear of anything.
I don't think Obama's afraid of them, for example.
Biden, who knows.
But Obama, I don't think he's afraid of uh Islamic extremists at all.
That's not why he will not call it what it is.
I think he, well, you fill in the blank uh yourself on that one.
Here's Ted Cruz talking about this, by the way.
He was um at the Heritage Foundation 2015 conservative policy summit yesterday, Washington.
He delivered the keynote address.
This is a little bit of what he said.
We need allies who will take this on.
I got but I gotta say it is hard to enlist the support of allies.
When America ceases being a good ally.
How sad was it in the streets of Paris?
As forty world leaders walked down the street, absent was the United States of America.
Where was the president?
Where was the vice president?
Where was the Secretary of State?
Where was the Attorney General who'd been there moments before, but chose to get on a plane and fly back home?
Now Cruz's point is one of leadership.
Okay, so then the the these 40 people decided that they were gonna show up.
Even Netanyahu, who was who was asked not to by the president of France O'Long.
Netanyahu showed up.
He put himself at risk.
He said the heck with it.
The United States didn't.
The United States is considered for many reasons to be the leader, and always has been seen as the strength and the power and the leader providing defense and projecting power when necessary against the forces of evil such as this.
And Cruz's point, when we don't show, no matter how I mean, look, no matter how lacking in substance the whole thing is in terms of bringing this to a stop, Cruz's point, I think, is mine too, is it's it's this is a show of unity.
This is allies getting together in a way that you don't see very much.
And the people or the place, the country that's always looked to for leadership, always looked to for strength, decided not to show.
And that's why it's a big deal to a lot of people.
I think people are starting to come to grips.
A lot of people are.
Can I can I take you back to something?
Let me find it right here.
Got it nearly.
Yes.
I want to take you back to a brief mention from the New York Times endorsement of Senator Barack Obama in 2008.
And one of the reasons the Times decided to endorse Obama is because they thought Obama was going to repair America's image in the world.
America's image in the world had been destroyed, as you know, by George W. Bush and his cowboy renegade foreign policy.
And the world supposedly hated us.
The world despised us.
We had descended into nothing but a bunch of torturers, engaging in brutality and inhumane treatment of our friends, the enemy.
And so America was hated and despised, and we needed our image rebuilt on the world stage fast.
And the New York Times, it's October 23rd of 2008, wrote the following, published the following.
Both presidential candidates talk about strengthening alliances in Europe and Asia, including NATO.
Both candidates strongly support Israel.
Both candidates talk about repairing America's image in the world, but it seems clear to us here at the New York Times that Mr. Obama is far more likely to do that.
Not just because the first black president would present a new American face to the world, but because Obama is a citizen of the world.
They actually wrote this crap back in 2008.
They actually said Obama would be preferable as president because he's the only guy because of the color of his skin and because he's a citizen of the world who could rebuild and repair America's image in the world.
The opposite of that is what has happened.
And I dare say, Obama not going and not assigning anybody else to go to this rally.
This endorsement from the Times, remember, this is exactly what all the media thought about Obama.
If you go back to 2008, people don't forget their heroes.
People don't forget those they idolize.
And it takes a lot to talk them out of it.
Takes a lot to get a kid not to think of his hero as a hero.
It takes a lot to get a kid to stop idolizing somebody he has.
It takes a lot.
The idol has to really screw up.
Well, it these people were falling all over themselves.
It wasn't just his ideology.
I mean, it was the whole package.
They really had created this fantasy world where Obama was unlike anything who'd ever lived before, certainly unlike anybody who had ever served as president, and he was a magician.
Magic was going to happen.
That's what they invested in him.
And I think they're all now coming to grips with the fact that he's a paper tiger.
I mean, this guy's phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rocker.
He's not even interested in the things they thought best qualified him to be president.
And I think that's one of the reasons why the drive-bys are so concerned why Obama didn't go.
Why didn't Obama send Holder?
Why didn't he send by they have all of these fantasies invested in this guy?
And one by one, Obama is betraying them.
We've paid the price.
By the way, this um this rally that uh is going to take place in February was originally scheduled for October.
This summit on countering violent extremism, a lot of people think that it's in result or in reaction to what happened in Paris.
It's not.
This thing's been in the books since Ferguson, Missouri.
This thing's been in the books since the whole thing happened in Ferguson and other related so-called offenses by the cops.
The whole reason for this summit on violent extremism, the cops are the targets of this summit on violent extremism.
They are the violent extremists.
This summit in February was originally scheduled for back in October says nothing to do with Charles Hebdou, the French magazine, or anything that's happened in Paris regarding that.
Now, what I was going to say also before this talk of the parade, what is rally that happened, or whether it's effective or not.
Yesterday we had on the program news that Boehner was actually embracing.
Remember this an AP story, and they were livid, and they were trying to humiliate Boehner.
They were trying to embarrass Boehner.
They were accusing Boehner of secretly, privately embracing the Tea Party wing of the House Republican caucus and supporting them in his effort to defund elements of the Department of Homeland Security, which would make Obama's amnesty financially impossible.
And the New York Times, when they found out about this, they were livid.
And so they had this story yesterday that basically was trying to humiliate Boehner and shame him for doing this kind of thing.
And I read the story and I read it out loud here tonight.
I was kind of amazed that this was the one area of the budget that they all agreed to that runs now through the end of September that they left open.
And it is in fact the House Republicans are going to target and withhold funding for certain elements of the Department of Homeland Security, which will make the implementation of Obama's executive amnesty orders a little bit tougher to do.
Well, Boehner, after the AP story has come out, said, no, no, no, no, wait, wait, wait a minute.
Wait, you're misunderstanding what my purpose is here.
Boehner said this is not so much about immigration as it is us asserting ourselves against the president who is engaging in activity outside the Constitution.
What we're actually doing, we're not really focusing on immigration here.
We are simply trying to establish that we are the ones who write the laws.
And my take on that was that the AP story must have had some impact because Baynor walked back the...
Now he didn't, he didn't say we're not going to do this.
He's just changing what he says the express purpose.
So along comes this AP story today.
The number two House Democrat says Congress risks sending the world a message of disunity at a time of terrorist threats if it fails to quickly fund a Department of Homeland Security.
Stemmy Hoyer said some Republicans are trying to use the Department of Homeland Security funding bill as a vehicle to overturn Obama's immigration policies.
He said this is complicating prospects for passage on legislation that has virtually unanimous bipartisan support.
Hoyer was on MSNBC today and said that conservative Republicans just want to have a confrontation with Obama on a lot of things.
That's all they care about.
It's just a confrontation.
Hoyer said that he hopes that Boehner can tame recalcitrant Republican lawmakers.
Now, what a stretch.
The number two House Democrats says Congress risks sending the world a message of disunity in a time of terror threats if it fails to fund the Department of Homeland.
For crying out loud, we're only talking about a few tiny areas of the Department of Homeland Security that would have to do with funding Obama's unconstitutional amnesty.
And Hoyer wants you to think, and everybody else to think that the terrorists around the world are watching.
And when the terrorists see that we're not unified about our president's policies, why it makes us even more ripe for attack.
It's absurd.
And once again, the Democrats continue wittingly or unwittingly to align themselves with people who are traditional America's enemies.
The Republicans are simply trying to adhere to the Constitution and use whatever tools they have at their disposal to see to it the president does, too.
Or if failing that, at least try to illustrate to people how the president is behaving in an illegal manner.
Quick time out, my friends, be back after this.
Do not go anywhere.
And on my heart bleeds to these Democrats who just got shellacked, a land-slide election defeat, and here they are running around bleeding and whining and moaning.
That the House Republicans are sending a message of disunity by attempting to stop the president's wanting unconstitutional executive orders on amnesty.
And Pelosi's out saying the same thing.
Let me ask a simple question.
What was Steny Hoyer's position on funding Bush's surge?
Remember the surge in Iraq?
You think the Democrats displayed any unity whatsoever in the last three years of Bush's term in the war in Iraq?
Hoyer and Pelosi and the Democrats and their media are turning reality on its head.
They're claiming the Republicans are threatening to shut down Department of Homeland Security at this time of increasing peril from terrorism.
When in reality, it is Obama who is threatening to shut down DHS by vetoing the House's bill, which would fund it.
It's the exact opposite.
It's the usual misdirection play that these people run all the time.
This is Obama's doing if if he vetoes this bill.
Obama is going to defund the Department of Homeland Security.
This is why the Republicans left it out in the omnibus budget bill they just agreed to last month.
The Republican bill specifically funds every part of the Department of Homeland Security that's involved in security, including the Secret Service, TSA, the Border Patrol, Customs and ICE, which is a detail of Democrats and the media are refusing to mention.
The Republican bill does not defund any aspect of Homeland Security that deals with terrorism.
The only parts of DHS that get defunded are those that would fund Obama's illegal granting of amnesty to illegal immigrants.
Besides all that, when's the last time these Democrats showed unity with the Republicans on any war that we were engaging in that had to do with a war on terror?
Quickly go to the phones before the hour expires.
This is Robert, somewhere in Pennsylvania.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Rush Megadeths from a long time listener, first-time caller.
I'll get right to my point.
I'm calling you today because I love America.
My parents immigrated to the United States in the early 80s when François Mittel and his uh crony uh on the socialist regime took over in France.
And uh, I'm active duty military now.
I just uh my parents came over because they saw where France was going.
They saw this artificial world that meets all and now hold on, create.
Uh it starts in academia and moves the media and then it infiltrates government.
It infiltrates politically, economically, socially, with political correctness, the welfare state.
And they came to America to get away from that.
They came to America because they saw the land of opportunity free enterprise and the possibility for a better life.
And they did so well for themselves here.
Um, and I was born here, and I was raised here to love America.
And my fear now, Rush, is that we're starting to go down the same road.
And I know it's been said many times, but when you have folks that are unwilling to recognize that this kind of political correctness that we've been embracing for the last 15-20 years that you rail about so much when when folks in the mainstream do not realize.
Well, I tell you, you're right.
Political correctness is killing our culture, and it could end up really, really damaging this country.
Uh and political correct.
I think there's a grain of that going on.
I don't think the regime Is engaging in political correctness.
They are hiding behind political correctness.
I think there's far more going on here.
In the inability or the unwillingness to properly characterize who our enemies are.
And this goes back to almost immediately after 9-11, by the way.
It wasn't long after that.
State Department people wanted to start using the word terrorism.
And it's just built on that.
Look, I got to run here, Robert, but I appreciate the call.
I get your point.
Well made back after this.
Here's a headline from the Washington Free Beacon Muslim leaders to hold Stand with the Prophet rally in Texas.