All Episodes
Previous Next
March 4, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:56
March 4, 2015, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 247 podcast.
Okay, so they had oral arguments.
Supreme Court on King versus Burwell, a subsidy case, Obamacare.
And it comes down to.
I'm not, I'm not kidding you.
The argument, at least as the drive-by's, as the drive-by's assessment the hidden deep meaning in oral arguments yesterday.
Does state mean just state?
And it's all about the state exchanges being the only place you can get a subsidy.
You can't legally get one in a federal exchange.
Federal government not allowed to set up an exchange.
They did anyway when the states didn't.
And so now the argument before the court, well, the state just means state.
Does state mean the entire government apparatus, or does it mean one of the 57?
And uh Anthony Kennedy once again asked the questions that has the left thinking, wow, we might win this.
Okay, John Roberts didn't say a word in oral arguments.
That's usually Justice Thomas.
But we'll get to this in great detail.
I just I just had to share with you the fact, folks, that what appears to be the question of the day after the first day of oral arguments, does state mean state?
At the Supreme Court of the United States, SCOTUS does state mean state.
John Gruber, was that his name?
John Grubia, John Gruber, clearly said that they mandated these uh these subsidies would be only available from the states as a means of pressuring the states to sign up.
Anyway, greetings, great to have you, Rush Limbaugh here at 800-282-2882 and email address, if you want to go that route is 800-282-2882.
I'm sorry, L Rushmore EIB net.com.
Sorry, forgot to turn on the ditto cam.
You just had to remind me.
Okay.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sitting here, and I am genuinely intrigued at what appears to be a firing squad being put together, aimed at Hillary Diane Rodham.
Otherwise known as Hillary Rodham Clinton.
That's her email address at ClintonEmail.com HDR Hillary Diane Rodham.
No mention, no relationship, no mention whatsoever of her husband Bill.
Hillary Diane Rodham 22 at ClintonEmail.com's her email address.
People trying to figure out what does it 22 mean.
At any rate, I it's stunning.
The New York Times, the Associated Press, the New Republic, Politico.
It is unprecedented.
I've never seen it.
The drive-by media, the left wing media, the state-controlled media, is forming a firing squad aimed at Hillary Clinton over this.
Now, one of the things that it could possibly mean, and this goes against the grain of every ounce of conventional wisdom.
But what it could possibly mean is they don't want her to begin with.
They resent her being forced on them.
They resent the idea that the presidency is hers again, just like it was in 2008, just because if she weren't married to a guy named Bill Clinton, it is probably safe to say nobody would have ever heard of her.
Now that may be a mean thing to say, or it may sound like it's a mean thing to say, but as you know, I'm the one who tried to rescue her campaign in 2008.
So before you start throwing darts at me, just recall my efforts on Mrs. Clinton's behalf.
And it may be necessary again, folks, and maybe necessary to save her again.
Because when you've got the New York Times and the AP and Ron Fournier, the national journal, when you've got the new republic, when you've got political aiming at you over this email business, it is clear, it has to abundantly clear that this woman presents a problem to them.
That's just the story already in the drive-by's here today.
Maybe Al Gore would throw his hat back in the ring if Mrs. Clinton bows out.
That is a story, I think it's the political.
Yeah, political magazine.
What if Hillary bows out?
Man.
So let's try to put this in perspective.
What we're looking at here, ladies and gentlemen, is an actual war on a woman.
And this war on a woman is being conducted by the mainstream media, the drive-by media.
And who knows how many Democrats behind the scenes who are providing unsourced opinion, fact, whatever, to back up these news stories.
The left is engaged in a war on a woman.
It ought to be despicable.
It ought to be unacceptable.
First, let's look at a timeline here.
Let's let's let's try to keep in perspective what has happened here.
And going back some years, first they used a young, inexperienced, community organizing, chain-smoking man of color to kick Hillary to the curb in 2008.
In 2008, it was a coronation.
Remember, in 2008, it was going to be hers to lose.
In 2008, it was a Democrat Party paying her back for all she had done, subordinating herself to her husband, subordinating herself to the party in order to maintain her husband and his political viability and to keep him in office.
So 2008 was the payback.
The presidency was to be hers.
And the first chance the Democrat Party powers it be had to get rid of her, they took it in the name of Barack Hussein Oh.
A young, inexperienced, community organizing, chain smoking man of color.
And now just a few short years later, another presidential cycle year later, they are using every major media outlet in America to pile on this feeble, aging woman, known as Hillary Clinton, is nothing sacred to these misogynists?
Have they no sense of decency?
They're going to do it again?
They're going to pile on the woman again, the Democrat Party mounting another war on the same woman again?
I mean, come on, just because Hillary Clinton subverted government laws and government servers while working for the government, exposed herself to blackmail, and was obviously engaging in things that she didn't want anybody to know about or ever to be able to find out about.
What difference does that make?
Just because Hillary Clinton set up her own private computer server in her home, protected by the Secret Service, what difference does it make?
Just because Hillary took what looked to be millions of dollars of bribes from foreign governments for her and her daughters and her husband's foundation, what difference does it make?
Just because Hillary left her ambassador unprotected in Benghazi, left for dead, even if she knew about it four minutes after it started, what difference does it make now?
Just because Hillary lied about a video saying that the video caused the terrorist attack that led to the death of the ambassador, to watch the hapless nobody video maker thrown into jail to take the blame for her lack of back.
What difference that make now?
We're talking 2016, the next Democrat president.
What is any of this matter now?
In the normal ebb and flowing events, none of this would matter.
The media would be trying to sweep all this stuff under the rug.
The media would be telling us none of this stuff matters.
Just because her husband spent countless hours with a Playboy pedophile flying all over the world.
What difference does that make now?
Just because Hillary ruined innocent women's lives to protect her husband who sexually assaulted those women.
What difference does that make now?
Don't Tell me.
My point here, folks, is don't tell me all of this does not factor in to the flood of bad press coming in about Hillary Diane Rodham.
Don't tell me.
See, well, my point is, I don't think this is just about these emails.
I don't think this is just about her private email server and the fact that she was subverting federal law and she's trying to skirt around the Federal Records Act.
I don't think that everybody's up in arms over the fact that Hillary was trying to conduct business, government business in private, and keep forever hidden whatever it was she was doing.
That alone is not enough, in my humble opinion, to warrant what has become another relentless war on a woman.
The drive-by media Democrat Party apparatus piling on this aging woman, presumptive Democrat nominee, again on the verge of her ascension to that throne.
None of this should make any difference.
It's a Clinton that we're talking about.
None of this should matter.
Scandal never attaches itself to Clinton.
Scandal never affects the Clintons.
No negative story, no negative press, no matter what it has been about the Clintons, ever sticks to them.
It never matters.
They overcome it.
And the media usually destroys the people making the allegations.
Now, all of a sudden, the same apparatus that usually turns its aim on Republicans and conservatives, and anybody else taking aim at the Clintons is in fact taking aim at the Clintons.
And joining traditional Clinton foes in the process.
Because folks, none of this should matter.
Hillary is damn near royalty.
And look what the left wing media is doing.
I mean, it is it's amazing no matter where you go.
This is the story today that's occupying their attention.
Well, that in the Supreme Court case, but that's that's not even a close second.
It's in there.
But I it's stunning no matter where you go, there is a full-fledged left wing pilot.
Now, I know some of you might be saying, and I know that there are a lot of cynics in the audience, and this has been something in the past that has been true.
There is the possibility that all of this is orchestrated, all of this pylon, all of this attention, all of this negativism aiming at Hillary with the hope that she survives it so that in later days and later months the media can say, hey, we vetted her.
Hey, we looked at every hey, we didn't look the other way.
This woman survived every onslaught we had.
She survived every investigation that we engaged in.
I know there are cynics in the audience who think that's what's going on.
This is simply the drive-by is at all of the Democrat Party apparatus doing their version of a vet, doing their version of full-fledged candidate investigation, and she'll come out of it in flying colors, looking like a rose with clear sailing the rest of the way.
But something tells me that's not what's going on in this instance.
Something, I mean, this is stories about our Democrat bench and how weak it is.
Don't forget there are a lot of Democrats that want Elizabeth Warren.
Don't forget there are a lot of progressives, a lot of radicals, a lot of lunatics on the left that do not like Mrs. Clinton.
There are even some people in the drive-by media stack of stuff here that hope Al Gore would throw his hat back in the ring.
So it's clear right before our eyes, the media and certain elements of the Democrat Party apparatus are conducting a war on Hillary Clinton, and they are trying to hold her accountable for things that in the past would not have even mattered to a Clinton bill or Hillary.
Brief time out.
We'll come back.
We will continue after this, my friend.
Don't go away.
Sit tight.
Now look at here, New Republic.
Now the new republic is under new management.
The new republic is owned by some Silicon Valley tech gazillionaire.
Memory is sketchy on this.
Don't remember the guy's name.
I think he was one of Zuckerberg's founding partners in Facebook.
He took his money, they either kicked him out or he left on his own.
He's got a gay boyfriend ran for Congress, lost, spent more money in this city, was upstate New York.
But anyway, that's who runs a new Republic, and they got rid of everybody.
The old guard is all gone.
The new republic has been remed, re-imaged, rebuilt, reconstituted, and it is being run now by 20-something millennials.
And there are a couple of writers that are veterans and a little older, but they have come out against Hillary.
Hillary Clinton not ready for prime.
This is something the last time the New Republic was anti-Hillary would have been when Marty Parrott owned it and ran it back in the 90s.
And even then it was sporadic.
Now the New Republic is a non-entity even more, but it's important for one reason.
It's run by millennials.
And keep in mind, the millennials do not know the Clintons the way you and I do.
They were not either old enough, not born, not paying attention in the 90s during all of that stuff that happened back there.
And now they're hearing about a bunch of things for the first time.
They're hearing about Hillary's husband flying all over the world with a pedophile playboy on the pedophile playboys 727 jet.
And the Playboy pedophile had a private island in the Caribbean where the Playboy Pedophile and Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew were all running around with underage women.
Now nothing is linked Clinton to it, but he knows the guy.
They were good buddies.
And these millennials are just hearing this stuff.
They have not grown up with all of this stuff swept under the rug.
They have not grown up with Clinton idolatry.
They've not grown up and become conditioned and experienced to the Clintons getting away with everything because they're the star of the Democrat Party.
They have an entirely different view.
Simply because of their age.
And this story in the New Republic, again, as far as it being a powerful journal of opinion, it isn't anymore.
May well rebound.
Chris Hughes is the guy's name.
And he co-founded uh Facebook with Zuckerberg.
He's 31 years old.
He's married to Sean Eldridge, political director of the uh of the group Freedom to Marry.
And it's an entirely different generation looking and judging.
And you think she sees uh these people see Hillary Clinton the same way people who were active in the 90s and adults in the 90s saw them, it's an entirely different thing.
I there's no way this woman's a slam dunk.
It's generational differences now.
And I think you've got younger people all over the drive-by media as well.
And I think one of the things that uh generations like we're I'm a baby boomer and I'm I'm 64.
Yeah, is that right?
Yes, 60 of 64.
And the the point about this is is you have to be, let me speak about me.
I have to be aware daily that the world is a different place to a lot of people than it is to me, because they're younger and they've not lived through what I've lived through.
They've not seen what I've seen.
They've read about it maybe, they've heard about it, but they weren't nearly as impacted about it and by it.
And as such, it has a whole different meaning to them.
And when you are in the, you know, when you're between 25 and 54, you are in the midst of everything.
You're right in the middle of it.
Because that's the age for the most part of people making things happen.
But as you get older and you get out of that demographic and realize that that demographic is still where the power is.
Exceptions, of course, but uh you realize that people now moving into that 25, let's say 2549, people moving into that 2549 demographic, Have an entirely different worldview, simply and only because of their age.
Now I know history curricula textbooks have gone to great lengths to sing the praises of the Clintons and so forth, but it's still the Clintons are not the rock stars.
The 2554 group that they were to baby boomers.
And so the all these scandals are starting to erupt, and Hillary's pride.
These young millennials, they know this email stuff.
They know what this means.
They know Hillary using a private server versus a government server.
They know the differences, they know why anybody would do it.
And they're doing it to hide.
They're doing it to keep secrets.
Hillary did it.
There's no question she did this to keep secrets.
She did this so that she would not be subject to freedom of information act requests.
She did this so that people would not have automatic access to what she was doing, even as Secretary of State.
It was the Clintons do everything in secret.
Doesn't sit well with this current crop of young people growing up.
Yeah, yeah, that's right.
So let me just look, it's not fair to laugh when you don't know what I'm laughing about.
So let me clue you in here.
During the break, I I found a website that is it it features all of the, well, not all, but a lot of the new apps that are going to run on the uh Apple Watch.
And it's actually like it's a simulator in the sense.
The apps are actually installed on uh uh Vacsimiles of the Apple Watch, and you can tap or click on the uh graphics and make them work.
So whatever the app is gonna do on the Apple Watch, it demos itself in this website.
I think it's AppWatch.com.
I'll find out in just a second.
I don't have that.
I should have had that in front center so I could give it to you, but I'll find it a second.
Anyway, it's it's um it's it's a good little pre-pub website.
It's not related to Apple.
It's just uh an Apple blog that's decided to get a bunch of developers to submit their apps, and they've simulated them as they will run on the watch on this website.
Watchware.com.
And uh this, I think there's something 27 apps.
What is it?
Say it again.
Watchaware.com.
Is that what it is now?
Watch.
Is that is somebody saying yes or no to me?
Yeah, watch watchaware.com.
And I think they've installed 27 apps on these uh icons of the actual watch itself, and you can simulate how the apps will run.
Anyway, I sent the website out to the staff today as a as a public service, and they've all been responding.
There's an app that that it duplicates the sound of a human being expelling gas.
And this is uh this is an app that that barge while you're walking around.
So Brian wrote back, said, Oh, my kid, I'm getting that app from my little boy.
He will love that app.
Dawn sends me a notebook, I can't wait for the maps app.
So I said, wait a minute.
What you're looking forward to a maps app on a screen that's barely one and a half inches, as opposed to a maps app on your phone that's either 4.7 or 5 inches.
And she said, Well, yeah, because I can walk around and it could talk to me and tell me where I'm going when I don't know how to get there.
I thought.
Yeah, so okay, the watch is gonna talk to you and tell you when to turn left and when to turn right, and that's what you're looking forward to.
Yeah, just on your wrist.
You have to take your phone out of your pocket, is that the thing?
I don't know.
It's just it's it's it's a Mars-Venus thing.
I mean, the the maps apps on the iPhone are to die for.
They're excellent.
And here's somebody telling me they can't wait for one on a one-inch screen, and it just made me curious.
What's the attraction?
And the attraction is the watch is going to talk to her and tell her when to make the turns, and that's good for me to know.
It's important to just, it's like I said a moment ago.
I I'm gonna try to verbalize this.
One of the things I do on this program, I've as I've mentioned to you before, the one of the fundamental requirements I have always believed for a program like this to work is empathy, not as distinguished from sympathy, but must have empathy with the audience, have to be able to hear things the way you do and react to them the way you do, or understand how you're going to.
Now you know I have always said throughout my entire life that I couldn't wait to be older.
Because when I was 15, I wanted to be 20.
When I was 20, I wanted to be 25.
25 wanted to be 30, 30 wanted to be 40, and it always has proven out.
Getting older has always been better for me.
Everything about life got better as I got older.
I became free.
I became more independent, became more successful.
Everything that I wanted and envisioned about getting older happened.
Consequently, I never feared it.
Never feared getting older.
So now people ask me, okay, Rush, you're you're over 60 now.
Do you s you wish you were 70 now?
I said, no, it hasn't, it doesn't manifest itself that way now.
It's not that I'm 64, can't wait till I'm 70.
What would that mean?
The way age matters to me now, particularly as it relates to this job and this program, is like I said, and I don't know if this is the right way to say it, but the 2554 demographic is the target demographic for advertisers for us for a reason.
That is what I call the power demographic.
The 2554 demographic is where a lot of things in our culture are happening.
People are on their success tracks.
People are becoming freer and becoming more independent, and they are becoming more successful, and they're making more decisions with more power behind them.
They're becoming less dependent.
They're becoming arguably, I mean, there are exceptions to this, of course, becoming more self-reliant.
And they are attaining in their careers positions of greater influence and power.
And all of those kinds of related things.
And when you are in that demographic, it is safe to assume that everything you're watching, say in the news or if you watch a popular television show or what have you, that everybody else is too.
It's almost like when you're in the 2554 demographic, and those are not hard boundaries.
It might be 2029 to 63, but basically, in that in that window is where it can be said everybody who's doing anything is doing it.
Now, I understand that there are flaws here because there are a lot of successful, powerful people.
65, 70 still working, I understand that.
And I'm not relegating them to irrelevance here.
That's not my point.
My point is that when you become, when you when you when you outgrow that demographic, you are, I'll talk about myself.
Now that I've outgrown the 2554 demographic, I'm no longer confident that the way I see the world is the way everybody else does.
I've gotten old enough now that there are younger people, generationally younger, who have an entirely different view, an entirely different experience.
And it's no fault of anybody.
It's simply a factor of they haven't lived as long as I have.
They haven't seen the things that I have, they haven't experienced the things that I have, and they don't care.
When you're in that demographic, you know you're the center of things.
You know that you're on the focus.
You know that you are in the center of attention.
And this is why, if you must know, I spent so much time studying the tech the tech blogs.
They are all young people.
And I want to do everything I can because I'm ultimately going to try to get to them and persuade them.
I mean, they're young.
Their minds are skulls full of mush.
They don't think so.
They don't know it, but they are.
Mine was when I was their age, not as much as theirs is because I was way advanced.
But nevertheless, still have to find a way to get to it.
The drive-by media is missing this entirely.
They're still reporting on Hillary as though everybody loves Hillary, as though everybody knows Hillary as everybody knew her in the 90s.
They're still covering Hillary Clinton and her presidential prospects, the way everybody looked at Hillary and her presidential prospects in the 90s, as given, as automatic, as unchallengeable as the Clintons are near royalty.
And that is not how people under 35 look at them.
They don't think the Clintons that way at all.
And Drive By Media is missing this because they have arrogance and hubris and are not engaging in the effort, I think, to understand how people born, say in 1983 or 1985 see politics today.
Do you understand?
Let me give you this as a little observation, and we could do this all day long.
The millennials that we are talking about, the young people, isn't the 25 to 35, 40 age group, do you realize none of them, not a one of them, have ever had a chance to vote for a conservative.
Do you wonder why conservatism to them is this obscure way out there kind of odd thing?
They've never been exposed to it.
Because the Republican Party has not been ideological since Reagan.
And they were either pups, infants, babies, too young or not even born during Reagan.
And that was the last conservative president, the last chance Republicans actually had to vote for a genuine conservative.
They have grown up with completely other experiences, influences, attitudes.
And I think it's crucial, rather than be critical of who they are and what they think, understand why that is.
Because it all makes sense.
It's why I have continually harped in this example, anyway, is why I have just spent a lot of time trying to persuade people that ideology is crucial in persuading people.
Because these people that we're talking, the young people, the millennials, they don't know it, but they have grown up immersed in the left-wing ideology.
To them, it's just normal day ebb and flow life.
And Republicans and conservatives over here are really from Mars.
They haven't had presented to them an opposing ideology.
They've got, you know, a bunch of old guys, suits and ties in Congress that want to stop what the Democrats are doing, but there's no ideological opposition to what they've grown up experiencing.
And I think it's missing a huge reason for why things are the way they are.
If the Republican Party is not going to be conservative, if it's not going to present an ideological characterization of itself, if it's going to hide that and try to deny that, which it's doing, then there's nothing that's ever going to stop liberalism.
Republican Party's demonstrating that they have no desire to.
I mean, the current Republican leadership, which is why I continually harp on this notion, that's this necessity that people be trained to spot the ideology of politicians or other political leaders.
If that doesn't happen, then the truths that you and I know about liberalism are going to have a much tougher time being taught to people who have never even looked at life that way.
Now the left knows this.
That's why they don't call themselves ideologues.
Liberalism is not an ideological point of view the way they talk about it.
It's just natural.
It's just what is.
And anything else may as well be from Mars.
Anything else is odd, crude, extreme, discriminatory, or what have you.
That's why ideology is so important.
So when I when I look at this pylon of Hillary Clinton, this wouldn't happen 15 years ago.
This would not happen 10 years ago.
The Clintons are being Hillary's being treated here entirely differently than she is even used to.
This is new ground for everybody.
Now there could be other reasons for this, and I'm sure that there are.
I f I still believe that because of the evolutionary metamorphosis that's occurred here.
I don't think Hillary Clinton is the dominant shoe-in preference of everybody on the left these days.
I just don't believe it.
I think this indicates it.
But the aging drive-bys who have no ability to think that anybody sees the world any differently than they do, are not going to understand why.
Hillary is not the dominant shoe, and because they still think everybody sees the Clintons the way they see them, which is the way everybody saw them back in the 90s.
It just isn't the case.
Look, I'm a little long, I've got to take a brief time out here, sit tight, much more straight ahead, as there always is the EIB network.
You realize we never run out of things to talk about here.
We never ever run out of unique, enterprising, entertaining things to talk about.
You can always rest assured that on the other side of the next commercial break is excitement.
Don't go away.
Okay, I'm sorry for the confusion on the email address, the website address for this Apple Watch site.
It's called WatchAware.
One word, the word watch, then A W A R E, Watchaware.com slash watch dash apps.
But if you just go to watchaware.com, you'll see what I'm talking about.
If you have any interest in this in this watch and wonder what it's gonna do, you can see how some apps are going to appear on it.
That's the purpose of the site.
Now, one thing to know, and I'm not a big watch official.
I got plenty of watches, I like them.
I'm not I'm not bursting into seams over this thing, so don't think that I am compromised here in my in my comments on this thing.
The thing you have to understand about the Apple Watch at first is the apps will not run independently on the watch.
They will actually run on the iPhone and be handed off to the watch using the continuity or handoff technology that Apple introduced in iOS 8 and OS 10.10 Yosemite.
Only later, maybe late this year, will watches feature apps that run by themselves independently on the watch.
This is being done primarily to save battery life, which is gonna have it's gonna be the biggest challenge challenge that they've got with this.
It's a small thing, it's got a small battery in there.
And you don't want to take it off in the middle of the day and not be able to use it because you gotta charge it.
So they they hope to get a full day's use, and one of the ways to make sure the apps are not actually using any of the watch's processing power.
That'll all happen on the phone to begin with.
But if you want to see how these apps look and how they operate, a bunch of developers have sent their apps to this website so they can simulate it all, and you can see how it looks.
And it's uh watchaware.com.
Now, for what I what I mean in this the millennials in this ideology business is very simple.
I I think that that young people today have no more idea that they have grown up surrounded by liberalism than a fish knows it's in water.
You ever ask yourself, does a fish know it's in water?
It can't possibly know.
It's it doesn't know what water is.
A fish doesn't even have any self-awareness.
I saw a story, this is gonna aggravate you.
I saw a story in psychology today earlier this week.
That your dog has no memory.
That your dog, my dog, anybody dog, does not remember what happened yesterday.
And in many cases, may not remember what happened 20 minutes ago.
Now I know what you're doing out there.
My dog does every time I do X, my dog knows it's gonna get fed.
That's not memory, these people claim.
That is conditioning.
And the reason that they say a dog or a cat doesn't have any memory is they have no sense of self.
And if you have no self-awareness, no self-consciousness, you can't possibly have a memory.
So a fish has no idea it's in water, and a young person, I don't think has any idea it's growing up under liberalism that there's something else out there, a competing ideology.
Now, 2554 demographic, somebody says, hey, wait a minute, Russia wrong.
A 2554 demographic is simply that because advertisers know that's where people who have the money to spend is.
That is actually a misnomer.
And I will explain in due course.
Do not go away.
2554 demographic.
Everybody thinks advertisers target it because that's where the money is.
That's not the case with millennials.
There are hell, half of them are living at home.
They don't have any money.
They're still the targets of advertising.
Why is it?
I'll tell you why.
And we'll get to the Supreme Court and all that stuff coming up.
So don't go anywhere, folks.
▲
Export Selection