All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 6, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:56
February 6, 2015, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi folks and welcome back.
Great to have you here as always.
You are tuned to the most listen to Radio Talk Show in America.
You are tuned to the most talked-about radio talk show in America and the most talked-about host in America.
It's Open Line Friday, a special edition of Open Line Friday, where you, the callers, are being invited to call and make it up.
Lie about anything, whatever you and try to sell it.
See if you can do it too.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
That's right, folks.
Make it up.
Tell us.
I don't know.
Last time you saw insufferable suffering.
Or anything.
Just make it up.
See if you can sell the lie.
Right.
Tell us how you were the brains behind the EIB network.
Anyway, great to have you here.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882 in the email address L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
Mr. Snerdley reminded me of something.
You know, I did a troop visit to Afghanistan in 2005.
It was February 2005.
And one of the three or four of the uh plane trips that we took from sight to sight inside Afghanistan was on a C-130 that was under the command of the Texas Air National Guard.
A great, great crew.
And the day we were to leave Kandahar and go to Bagram Air Force Base, we're completing our round robin and from Bagram, we're going to head back to uh to Kabul.
And this is near the end of the week.
And I had I had all kinds of uh stuff on the plane to pass out at the base in in Bagram.
Yeah, you know, EIB Club Gitmo shirts and stuff.
And within minutes of takeoff, within minutes after taking off from Kandahar, we had engine trouble on the right side.
There are four engines on a C-130 Hercules.
We had engine trouble.
We had to circle back.
And we didn't know when we didn't lose the engine, but it was something was wrong with it, and we would have.
And the pilots said that it's too risky.
So let's set sit back down at Candahar.
So we had to come up with things to do in Kandahar.
Kandahar's right in the middle of Warlord country.
We had had dinner the night before with some some local allies of us, but there were some warlords on the on the fringes as well.
It was it was dangerous stuff.
Although everywhere we went, um ample security.
And by the way, we were protected by the uh what's that the black um the independent contractor group that the Democrats had.
Blackwater, yeah, the Blackwater guys were our security, and man did they make you feel safe.
These were no nonsense guys.
They were driving the SUVs, and you talk about corkscrewing.
Anyway, Snerdley said, can you imagine what would happen to you?
If you would have come back and talked about some makeup some heroic tale about how the pilot had a heart attack, and you having never flown an airplane had to take second seat in that airplane and bring it down, and you lost the engine and it was touch and go, and you may not have made it.
Can you make if you would have come back and embellished that story at all for your own benefit?
Can you imagine what they would be doing to you in the news if they ever found out about it?
And I I had to nod my head in acknowledgment.
Mr. Snerdley had a had a great point.
But I look.
Well, they'd be circling the wagons and I'd be on the wagon, true.
But but here's the difference.
And I'm not looking for any gold stars.
Please don't misunderstand me.
It never occurred to me.
A, it would never occur to me, it didn't happen.
Number one, but number two, even if I were so inclined, there were witnesses who would know I was making it up.
Witnesses who these guys all loved me.
This Texas Air Guard crew, I didn't run into any, I mean, I ran a bunch of Democrats in the enlisted troops when I did troop appearances and so forth.
They were nice, they were cool.
But I mean, these guys, I I I would have destroyed them if I'd have made up stories and so forth about my heroism during this trip.
It would never occur to me to do that.
That's another thing about this that just is kind of.
Those of us who know Brian Williams, this this comes as a complete and total shock.
Now, apparently it's not a shock to those who know him well inside NBC.
Anyway, folks, uh, there are other things going on as well, and I uh assured you at the top of the program that we would talk about them.
Do you will not, you probably won't remember that I predicted this at least seven years ago.
And I think probably much longer than that.
It's a story from uh the websites watchdog.org, and the headline, Obama's budget targets your retirement accounts.
I can't recall the number of times that I have mentioned casually, forcefully, predicted directly over the course of the years that as this government continued to expand and spend money it didn't have and print money it needed, that at some point it was going to have to go get money.
It can't just rely on fake money that's printed.
I mean, they're gonna have to go, they're gonna target money.
And I warned everybody, they're gonna come after your pensions, and they're gonna come after your your retirement accounts because that's real money there, and it's yours and it's there.
And I knew this because the uh reverend docs, way back in the late 80s, suggested that this was a great source of wealth for the government because people that had huge retirement accounts really didn't need them.
They were already rich.
So it didn't take an act of brilliance to see this coming.
But it looks like it has arrived now.
And it's in the it's in the Obama budget.
This is not the 529 scam that he's running or wanted to run.
Says here, you should be concerned about Obama's plans to raise taxes, even if you are not one of his main targets, because your retirement could be at stake.
Earlier this week, the president finally revealed his budget proposal.
He wants to increase spending, increase the deficit, increase taxes, all while promising to simplify the tax code.
Simplify is an odd way of putting it, considering that his proposals would actually make the tax code even more complex.
Most Americans might not be too concerned about his plans to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations, but they might be concerned about his proposals to change the tax treatment of retirement accounts.
Politico made light of a provision known as the Mitt Romney loophole, but politico failed to mention the other ways the president wants to change the tax treatment of retirement savings.
Wealthy Americans will not be the only investors affected by these proposals.
Market Watch went through Obama's budget and they found that there are more than a dozen provisions in the Obama budget that target retirement accounts.
They're not all bad, but the proposal to change the rules on Roth IRAs would hit middle class savers the hardest under the Obama plan.
Employees would no longer be allowed to convert traditional retirement accounts to Roth IRAs.
Further, Obama wants to impose required minimum distributions on Roth IRAs, which according to Market Watch is the most egregious proposal.
Unlike traditional IRAs, contributions are made to Roth IRAs after taxes, but then they aren't taxed again on earnings that accumulate over the years.
Currently, people can withdraw as much or as little from these Roth IRAs as they like any time after the age of 59 and a half.
So predictions notwithstanding, this is in Obama's budget.
Look what they wanted to do in the 529.
These are your education savings accounts.
He wanted to take the money.
He wanted, he wanted to retroactively tax you on the money that you had been permitted to deposit into the 529 account tax-free.
And it's not whether this is going to pass is another thing.
I mean, it's Obama's budget and the Republicans run the show.
But folks, there are many people, an increasing number of people who don't simply rely on the fact it's a different party.
That's evidence enough alone to stop Obama.
This is some of this stuff that, like Obamacare, we're learning, and executive amnesty on illegal immigration.
The Republicans agree with the president on.
But the bottom line is he's out there talking about tax increases on rich.
And not talking about tax cuts for you.
Remember now, you are supposed to be happy.
You're supposed to think you somehow are going to prosper.
You are somehow going to benefit when the rich pay some more taxes.
That's called, somehow that's called limiting the income gap or reducing the income gap.
But I don't know how that works.
I don't know how somebody I don't know paying more taxes is going to make me have more disposable income.
I don't follow the math on that.
I don't see how that works.
Well, that's right, Mr. Lebeau, but you're going to be given more government programs like what government program?
I don't have any government programs now, but what how's a government program put money in my back pocket?
It doesn't.
And if it's a government program, I've got to behave in a certain way in order to qualify for it.
And I've got to I have to, my income has to be in a certain category before I qualify for it.
There's no it's silly to think that tax increases on rich people somehow make the middle class more prosperous, but that's what Obama's selling.
Anyway, while while saying all that, he's making a beeline for your retirement accounts.
And he wants to tax the money that you have placed in those accounts tax-free.
And when it comes to the Roth IRAs, he wants to change the rules in the middle of the game and eliminate the flexibility you have in withdrawing money and depositing money, all independent of taxes, as was the original promise.
Pope Pope uh Pope Pope Pope Francis.
Yes, Pope Francis has decried the inhuman conditions facing migrants crossing the U.S. Mexico border.
Pope Francis has encouraged communities not to judge people by stereotypes, but instead to welcome migrants and work to end discrimination.
Pope Francis made the appeal in a letter to a Jesuit priest who helps organize Catholic teenagers in Nogales, Arizona to support the Kino Border Initiative, which advocates a more humane solution to migration.
Pope Francis has made migration one of the priorities of his pontificate and will likely raise the issue when he visits the U.S. in September.
On Thursday, U.S. officials confirmed that he would address Congress this coming September 24th, the first Pope to do so.
So look at that.
It's perfectly fine to have the Pope speak to Congress to agitate for amnesty.
But it's not okay to have Netanyahu speak to Congress to warn the U.S. about Obama's plans to surrender to Iran.
So now we get it.
Now we understand.
By the way, will the Pope make a similar speech to the Mexican Congress?
You know, Mexico has far stricter immigration laws than we do.
This is the AP, by the way, and they are just ecstatic.
They can't contain themselves.
They're so happy reporting here that the Pope is blasting the inhumane American immigration policy.
The president and his use of the Crusades at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday.
You have some sound bites on this and some thoughts as well.
A brief timeout now, open line fray.
Your phone calls are coming up too, my friends.
So hang in there, be tough.
Back before you know it here.
Okay, here's that NBC ad.
I told you that we had it.
We're gonna go out there and get it.
We got it.
We found it.
And we have made it available.
This is an ad.
It's the voice of actor Michael Douglas that NBC ran in the fall of 2000, I think it's 14.
What's the October 15, 2014?
I hope you remember my little dissertation on liberalism and the news media and suffering and how they parley that because listen to the way NBC recorded a promo for Brian Williams.
Some battle scars are worn on the inside.
Worn by things you've seen you can never forget.
Experiences that move you, inspire you.
Change you.
And for anyone who's been there.
It doesn't heart me.
It makes you more human.
And it goes on to talk about how Brian Williams has seen things he can never forget.
That's a little tagline.
Brian Williams has seen things he can never forget.
And by the way, those things he saw are still there.
Hasn't solved a damn one of them.
He's seen all that suffering.
Somehow that makes him better narrative reader.
He's seen the suffering.
Oh, he's so imp Oh my God.
I knew when I saw that suffering, I had to go into journalism.
I had to.
When I saw that suffering, I had to go to journalism because I had to, I had to, I had to learn who to blame for it.
I found out in journalism school it was a Republican's vault.
And whoever the Republican president was at the time, that's who's responsible for because they're racist and they're sexists, they're bigots, and they don't care.
And so suffering is such a golden opportunity for a journalist because it gives them an opportunity to advance their own agenda, blaming Republicans for it.
And somehow seeing suffering, it's the easiest, most gutless choice you can make.
Look at that stuff.
Oh my God.
Oh my God.
And that alone qualifies you to read the news.
You don't have to solve it.
You don't even have to meet the sufferer.
You don't have to do a damn thing about it.
You just have to see it.
And then tell people how damn bad it was.
You have to ask people how the hell can suffering like this happen in this great country?
Oh my God, what are we doing?
And that qualifies you for the anchor chair.
Meanwhile, whoever's suffering out there still is.
And that's why I say liberalism is the most gutless and easy choice you can make.
And Brian Williams is even because he found a way to suffer when he didn't even see any.
He made up the suffering.
In his case, his own.
Okay.
A couple of quick questions here, folks.
Who uses religion to justify the subjugation of women today?
Who uses religion to justify the stoning of women?
Who uses religion to justify lashes as a form of punishment?
Who uses religion to justify killing gays?
Who uses religion to justify the mass extinction of Jews?
Who uses religion as justification for beheading people?
Who?
It's open line Friday, and time to hit the phones.
Well, get back.
We we have taken a call today.
We have.
So it's not as though we're just now starting.
We've done pretty good.
And it's Peter in Seattle.
Peter, great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Thank you for waiting.
Rush, it's an honor to speak with you.
Nothing could be more uh fascinating than talking to the man who is the source of all true knowledge.
I appreciate that.
I really do, sir.
Humble, thank you.
I just wanted to point out relative to the Brian Williams incident.
They were claiming that someone should have fact-checked him in the government.
They had a few things to do.
Brian Williams claimed that he was his story occurred on March 24th.
On March 23rd, 2003, Jessica Lynch and five fellow American soldiers were captured in Nazaria in Iraq and taken prisoner.
It's amazing.
You go from being captured in Iraq to being nominated for attorney general.
That is amazing.
I'm just I'm just kidding.
It's a different lynch.
That's interesting.
So one one day later, an entirely much bigger story than Brian Williams being shot down out of the sky happens.
Right.
And you had a 19-year-old private first class who had the honor and the decency to say that the heroic acts which some were attributing to her did not occur.
And you have a network anchor who takes credit for things that never occurred.
It's very instructive, too, to look at how NBC News previously handled a deceptive reporter.
Jason Blair of the New York Times was interviewed by Katie Kurick on Dateline in a story called The Question of Trust.
Get your screen captures now before they pull it down.
And she asked the reporter, Mr. Blair.
Some people might claim hey, this guy is completely amoral.
He has no integrity, has no character, has no sense of the difference between right and wrong.
He does not deserve to profit from what he did and the deceitful lies he told.
So if you want to know what an NBC news anchor at that time thought of the type of misinformation and false information put forward.
Well, wait a minute.
That was Katie Couric saying that to Jason Blair.
Yes, she said that to Jason.
No, I'm just looking at it right here on Dateline NBC's website.
She just says, well, the first thing I'd say is that I'm not sure exactly what I'm supposed to do to show my reworse, remorse other than say I'm remorseful.
And the second thing is that in America collectively, we believe in giving people chances that they come clean.
Right, right.
Justification.
But to think that a network anchor can get away with it and a reporter for the New York Times can't under the exact same standard would be very ironic.
Well, wait, wait.
This is a different, it's a different time.
We don't know that they would fire Jason Blair today.
And I'm dead serious about that.
We don't know the Times would get rid of Jason Blair.
And the Washington Post had a couple of them, too.
A woman named uh Janet something or other.
One the pull it's on a totally made up family of suffering, by the way.
Uh, or a suffering family.
Totally made up story, won the pull it through.
Um, it's it's it's interesting what is happening to the American left, Peter, as as they are more and more being caught in the falsehoods of their existence.
It's fascinating to listen to the way they justify what they did.
They never apologize.
They only have explanations or excuses or reasons.
And one of the most common goes like this.
And I'll I'll use Brian Williams just as an example.
He has not done, he has not used the example I'm going to give, but you'll recognize it.
Okay, let's say that in many cases it's found by others.
The guilty party doesn't admit or own up to the quote unquote mistake like Brian did.
So when it's discovered, well, it has been it what was that was a um the rape story at UVA.
You know, Rolling Stone was totally made up.
Rolling Stone refused to pull the story.
So Brian Williams not being let go by NBC is not news.
It's not surprising if you know how the left is operating today.
The way Rolling Stone and the reporter on that totally bogus rape story explained it away.
And if you didn't hear this, I'm not making this up.
And I'm not exaggerating it.
This is what they offered as the excuse.
Well, maybe it didn't happen there.
But we know it happens.
We know there is a culture of rape on American college campuses today, and all we were doing was raising everybody's consciousness to it.
Okay, so maybe it didn't happen, as we said at the University of Virginia, but it's happening.
And all we were doing was calling attention to it.
The fact that it didn't happen here is incidental to the seriousness of the problem.
So it's a variation of another famed tactic used by the left.
When there is no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of a Republican or conservative, they say that doesn't matter.
The nature of the evidence is irrelevant.
It's the seriousness of the charge that matters.
That is how the left justified witnesses in the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings that were totally making things up about him.
Well, well, that does it.
The nature of the evidence not so important here.
It's the seriousness of the charge.
And when I first heard that one was shortly, I don't know, it was a couple years after George H. W. Bush was elected president.
And some professor at Columbia University appropriately named Gary Sick wrote a full-length book on how Bush had flown to Paris on an SR-71 to meet with officials from Iran during the presidential campaign of 1980.
And had arranged, they struck a deal with the Iranians to hold those hostages until after the election so that Jimmy Carter, the Cumbent president, would not benefit from a hostage release.
And nobody had ever heard this before.
There was no evidence of it.
It just came out of clear blue, but because it was asserted in a book by an intellectual from Columbia.
Why?
Who knows?
It might be true.
I'll never forget Thomas Foley, who was then the Speaker of the House, determined that they needed to investigate this.
Even though there was no evidence.
Even though nobody had produced a scintilla of evidence that George Bush had ever flown on an SR-71 anywhere, much less Paris.
No evidence he'd ever met with anybody in Iran.
No evidence he'd ever had a deal with the Iranians.
Tom Foley said, the seriousness of this charge requires us to investigate.
And their investigation produced a bunch of other liars.
Now it ended up going nowhere.
Its point was to never go anywhere.
Its point was to discredit Bush while in office and have low information lugheads question Bush's honesty and integrity.
And this is what the left does.
Well, yeah, the rape might not have happened there, but we know that men are raping sorority sisters all over this country.
And you need to know about it.
And we did a great job here of raising everybody's awareness.
But wait, you made it up.
It didn't happen.
No, we didn't make it up.
It happens.
It didn't happen here.
You're right.
I had bad intel.
Didn't happen there.
But we know it happens.
That's how they excuse themselves.
That's why I think that if NBC is really serious about saving Williams, I'm telling you, don't be surprised.
If over the weekend or sometime in the near future, we start seeing leaked stories about how some anchor or reporter at some other network has done the same thing.
Maybe a couple or three reporters have done the same thing.
The point will be, see, it's not that strange.
It's not that unique.
And then we'll come, and by the way, it had a purpose.
It had an objective, and that was to raise everybody's consciousness to the seriousness of war.
Yeah, Brian might not have been shot out of the sky, but other people were, and Brian was able to help people understand the horrors of it.
And that's how that that folks, that's how they do it now.
And you're left scratching your head.
You guys made it up, and then the Yeah, yeah, yeah.
But we did it for a larger purpose.
We did it to cover the news.
We did it to raise consciousness so that people understand how terrible and bad war is.
Because while Brian might not have been shot down, American soldiers were, and Brian knows how bad it is.
That's what qualifies him to do the news.
This is the twisting and the convoluted pretzeling that these people engage in order to excuse themselves.
And they end up creating fantasy lands and alternative universes in which they end up believing these lies they tell, and that because it's pot pathological.
And then the that that's why I call them narrative readers.
I mean, you don't know what's being told in the news every night that's true, half true, not true at all.
It's just a they're making a total mess of everything.
Anyway, I appreciate the call.
Uh Peter thanks El Mucho, little Spanish lingo there.
Back after this, my friends, with much more.
Don't go away.
Open line Friday, and we stick with the telephones.
Scott in Hampton, Georgia.
I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the EIB network.
I love.
I wanted to make you aware, if you're not already, about an impending environmental disaster.
It involves the oceans, and it's being caused by the tendency of the higher end restaurants to use real sea salt on their tables of seasoning and is taking too much salt out of the oceans.
And it's um the result, of course, is going to be a decreased salinity of the oceans.
Uh which is going to affect the sea life.
I am I haven't heard very much about this.
Well, I'm I'm glad you called about this, actually, because I was just asking my chef the other day, who uses sea salt, by the way, you should know.
My chef uses sea salt, and I asked him, What's the big deal with this?
I mean, how is this any different than the other salt?
Well, I mean, why why are we taking this stuff out of the sea?
Why I mean I didn't think we could eat that kind of sea.
Well, what's the big deal?
And she said, you know, all it is, it's just marketing.
It's just to make the rich think they're getting something special.
And it's it's it's not ground as fine as Morton's table salt is.
Uh it's just a game.
She said, you know, I I just do it because it actually takes less of it since it's not bigger chunks of it and so forth.
Uh, but I had not heard of any uh threat to the environment over this.
Well, well, there was a study uh done by a professor Pablo Salazar, a big uh uh expert out at Berkeley, and he's been uh testing the salinity of the Pacific now for the last fifteen years, and he's detected a decrease in the uh amount of salt in the water.
And uh he's he's bringing it to the attention, I think, of the uh of the EPA, although I haven't heard that they've taken any action on it yet.
But there's also another component of this.
It's uh there's a racial component, because as you probably know, uh the s the salt in the sea uh contributes to the buoyancy of it, and as we all know, black people tend to be less buoyant than uh than white folks, and it's gonna result in their own.
Is is this are you just throwing that in, or is that something that Professor Salazar Oh no, no, no, that's just my own uh as a s as a student of uh not a very serious student of physics, but I did know back in high school I learned that salt contributes to it makes the it makes you float more more.
Well, it does.
I mean, if you have you ever been, have you ever swam in the dead sea?
Oh no, sir, I've never had an opportunity to do that.
Well, if they ever run out of salt in the Pacific Ocean of Professor Salazar, don't worry about the worry the Dead Sea is evaporating a little ra rapidly because it doesn't get replenished as much with rain.
But the Dead Sea, you you cannot you cannot stay underwater the Dead Sea.
There is so much salt in the Dead Sea, it is so buoyant.
You are absolutely right.
But do you know that I think when I was in Israel, somebody told me, I want to remember this right.
Somebody told me that uh a cup of if you if you swallowed a cup of water from the Dead Sea, you could die because the salt content is so concentrated.
That's why it's the Dead Sea.
My goodness, I didn't know that.
Yeah.
But next, if you if you ever go over there, since you're interested in sea salt and The environmental damage caused by uh the wanton mining of the stuff from the Pacific.
You might be interested in checking that out.
I will.
I appreciate that.
I hadn't thought of that.
But but for the people that are that can't afford a trip to uh to the Dead Sea to swim, it's gonna um it's just gonna affect their their ability to enjoy the um I know that if if if Professor Salazar and you happen to be right that buoyancy is threatened because of the mining of sea salt, it could be that not just African America but any number of people could drown uh not having the right buoyancy if they don't swim in the right salt body water.
But but not only that, it's gonna affect the uh, as we all know that the uh the very lowest part of the food chain is the algae that grows in the oceans.
And if if this the decrease in the salinity is begins to hurt the algae, it's going to affect our entire food chain.
And then uh those those wealthy people that are enjoying the sea salt may not be able to have lobsters to put it on.
That's an interesting thought.
Interesting.
Well, anyway, I just wanted to bring you uh make you aware It would also affect caviar, you know, if you take the salt taste out of caviar, the rich would really be not happy about that.
This is an interesting point.
Pablo Salazar, you say, at the University of Berkeley.
Okay, sea salt.
I look, folks, I don't know if you who ever heard of this stuff before.
Sea salt?
It is a marketing trick.
It has to be.
And now we've found out that there may actually be some environmental depletion uh occurring as a result of this.
It's see, it usually ends up being there's he do something to benefit the rich or to sell them something, and the earth suffers.
That's how it works.
Scott, I um I appreciate the call.
Thank you much.
Uh, not enough time to be fair with another caller.
We have a nine-year-old named Emily on the phone, and there's just not enough time to talk to her right now.
But she has she's read my first two books, and I'm I'm she looks like she might be not in panic, but she's a little concerned because of uh something she didn't find in the third book that she found in the first two.
So we will be talking to her as well.
Critics are pouncing after Obama has talked the crusades and slavery at the national prayer breakfast.
Uh and we got some sound bites.
There was a guest on Fox News this morning by the name of Bishop E. W. Jackson.
He was on Fox and Friends actually this morning.
Just livid over what Obama said at the National Prayer Breakfast.
So that and much more coming up, just a brief time out here.
Sit tight, my friends.
There's much more right around the corner.
Something else that's been found in the internal revenue tax code.
Amnesty bonuses.
I'm not making this up.
Illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants who will eventually be granted amnesty will have access, they will receive the earned income tax credit.
Illegal immigrants who get amnesty will have a tax cut.
Earned income tax credit.
▲
Export Selection