All Episodes
Previous Next
March 30, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
32:02
March 30, 2015, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Say hey, what it is.
Great to have you back, folks, Rushland Boy.
Doing what I was born to do, right here behind the golden EIB microphone, and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, a network named after the performance capabilities of the host.
The telephone number if you want to be on the program's 800-282-2882 and the email address, Lrushbo at EIBNet.com.
Some loose change news items over there.
But by the way, just a reminder, this this business in Arizona today here, or in Indiana, this is exactly what happens on this program.
Exactly what I have tried to explain to people what we do here.
Get up every day, minding our own bit.
We don't have even time to advance an agenda.
We're too busy defending ourselves.
Every day we get up.
Every day we see somebody or something that we deeply believe, or hold dear or believe in under assault, and it necessitates a defense.
And that's what this business with Indiana is today.
It's a total misrepresentation, misinformation, disinformation campaign designed to totally screw with people's emotions.
Not telling the truth about what's going on, not give them any kind of historical context, all for the express purpose of not just advancing the Democrat Party agenda, but destroying the opposition agenda is conservatism, Republican Party, what have you.
Somebody's got to stand up and defend it, and that's what we do here.
And I say this in reaction to the charge that I simply get up every day and decide who I next want to attack.
We don't attack here.
Well, I mean, we do now and then, but the vast majority of time is spent like it is here today.
The drive-by's in a Democrat start lying about something, and somebody has to tell people the truth.
In the process, defend traditions and institutions that we all hold dear, and that's exactly it's a great example of it.
Try this.
The Washington Examiner headline says it all.
United States signed agreement with Mexico to teach immigrants to unionize.
The federal government has signed agreements with three foreign countries, Meiko, Ecuador, and the Philippines, to establish outreach programs to teach immigrants their rights to engage in labor organizing when they emigrate to the United States.
The agreements do not distinguish between those who entered legally or illegally.
They're part of a broader effort by the National Labor Relations Board to get immigrants involved in union activism.
Well, here you have crony socialism, I guess, at its finest.
But this is what you get when unions buy the presidency.
This is exactly what you get when union money buys the presidency.
You would think it'd be just the example these people are not coming here to join unions.
They're coming, we're told anyway, that they are coming here to be the best they can be.
They're coming here to exercise freedom and liberty, which is being denied them in their home countries.
They're coming here to branch out and to blossom.
And instead, the federal government says, no, no, no, no, we can't have any of that.
We're going to teach these people how to unionize.
We're going to teach them how to join a union.
We're going to teach them how to think like a union member does.
We're going to teach them how to vote like a union member does, and we're going to get them conditioned to paying dues to the Democrat Party.
That's what the federal government's doing.
Mexico, Ecuador, and the Philippines.
Ted Cruz was on uh, I guess the state that's well, no, he wasn't on it.
A bunch of a bunch of media outlets are are trying to hit Ted Cruz on the fact that he has no experience.
It's amazing.
The day that he announced, a week ago today, I pointed out similarities between Obama and Ted Cruz.
Uh in and all the things that were said not to matter than about Obama.
We mean he didn't have experience.
Of course he did.
He'd given a great speech, Harvard Law, all these great things.
And here comes Ted Cruz, who actually has more experience than Obama does, and they're now hitting him with a lack of experience, and some are even saying on our side, some conservative uh media types are even saying, hey, look, we don't want to repeat this.
Look what we did when we elected a guy with no experience the first time, as though Obama is who he is because of lack of experience.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Obama's not who he is because of lack of experience.
Obama's who he is because of who he is.
Lack of experience.
Are we to believe that if Obama had been a governor?
If Obama had been a senator for a full term, if Obama had been dog catcher or something, that he wouldn't be doing what he's doing.
That he'd be okay, that he'd be a good president.
Is that what we're to believe?
That only his lack of experience is making him this bumbling idiot tearing the country apart.
So they're saying that Ted Cruz, they're trying to throw it back on.
Okay, you said this about Obama, we're gonna say it about you.
We're gonna say about your guy.
Well, Cruz is pushing back on this inexperienced business.
He's unlike Barack Obama, I was not a community organizer before I was elected to the Senate.
I spent five and a half years as a solicitor general of Texas.
I supervised and led every appeal for the state of Texas in a 4,000-person agency with over 700 lawyers.
Over the course of five and a half years over and over again, Texas led the nation defending conservative principles and winning.
I like this.
I like, you know, we we've got some people here.
Rubio is one.
Uh Ted Cruz uh is uh is another.
Scott Walker, these people do not cower.
They do not coward, they don't wilt under the criticism of the left.
Unlike so many in the Republican Party.
How about Mrs. Clinton?
You know there's some stories now starting to pop up.
It isn't now just me pointing out that Mrs. Clinton is who she is because of who she married.
And it isn't just me pointing out that Mrs. Clinton is owed the presidency because of how she kept Bill in office.
Now, I'm not mentioning in these stories, but there are more and more of these stories popping up of Hillary's loyalty to the party and her loyalty to Bill and how that is the reason she's being rewarded with presumptive nominee status.
That's what guided her in 2008, and that's what's supposedly behind her candidacy in 2016.
But more and more people are starting to pop up and point this out.
And I love it.
Doesn't matter that nobody is mentioning what I said at first.
I don't care about that.
The fact is this is starting to gain momentum.
And here's something else gaining momentum.
It has now been learned that Mrs. Clinton totally wiped her email server.
After telling us she couldn't wait for the State Department to make her emails public, after telling everybody she wanted people to see her emails.
We have now come to find out that she deleted every email she did not turn over.
She totally erased the server.
Hell Nixon only erased 18 minutes.
Hillary erased literally everything.
And I'm starting to see comparisons to Richard Nixon.
Hillary Clinton being compared to Richard Nixon and Nixon looking better.
Not a lot of places, but in some places.
This is an AP story, and I wonder why we're only hearing about this now, but at least we're hearing about it.
Hillary Rodham Clinton wiped her email server clean, permanently deleting all emails from it, said the Republican chairman of a House Committee investigating Benghazi.
Now we were told for weeks that Hillary's staff would go through these emails again and again and again.
And and why was this information released by Hillary's attorney late on a Friday night, which is the day you do document dumps?
These are always rhetorical questions.
This is the Clinton way.
But it's Trey Gowdy who's saying the former Secretary of State has failed to produce a single new document in recent weeks.
And has refused to relinquish her server to a third party for an independent review as Gowdy, acting on behalf of Congress has uh has requested.
Other than that, she has complied completely.
You know, being a Yale law school graduate, even Mrs. Clinton should realize that this was the wanton destruction of evidence and government records, and therefore highly illegal.
This is why you're not supposed to have your own server.
You're not supposed to be able to do this.
Ever since Nixon and the 18 minutes, you're never supposed to be able to do this.
Clinton's attorney, David Kendall said it'd be pointless for Clinton to turn over her server even if legally authorized, since nothing's on it anymore.
Got ya.
She wiped it clean.
That's the only way you can delete your emails, by the way, is to own the server.
Immigrants filling the void as residents flee New Jersey by the tens of thousands.
Working people who pay the great majority of taxes apparently are the ones leaving New Jersey, but New Jersey isn't losing population.
You want to know why?
Because immigrants are moving in to fill the void.
Young people are decamping and leaving the state.
High taxes, real estate prices, no jobs, you name it.
But immigrants are flooding the state, filling the void so that the population figures are not decreasing.
Now, now this does not seem to me to be a recipe for success.
And this is this is a story, by the way, at New Jersey.com.
What is New Jersey.com?
What's the paper?
The uh New Jersey.
The Bergen.
Oh, yeah.
That's right, the Bergen record.
Anyway, they try to make the point here that it's different.
Young people uh different now.
Umillennials.
Millennials are different.
You know, they uh they're not getting married, they're not driving cars, they're uh they're not living in houses, they're finding communes and parents' homes and little little bitty uh apartments and so forth.
And they're trying to make the case that the the current young generation of millennials is different than uh previous generations at their age.
And I don't know how true that is.
I I kind of doubt that.
But anyway, that's not the point.
The point is that people are leaving New Jersey in droves and they're being replaced with the illegal immigrants.
Okay, New York Times today.
This is David Sanger and Michael Gordon.
With a negotiating deadline just two days away, Iranian officials yesterday backed away from a critical element of a proposed nuclear agreement, saying they are no longer willing to ship their atomic fuel out of the country, i.e., as in enriched uranium.
For months, Iran tentatively agreed that it would send a large portion of its stockpile of uranium to Russia, where it would not be accessible for use in any future weapons program.
But yesterday, Iran's deputy foreign minister made a surprise comment to Iranian reporters, ruling out an agreement that involved giving up this stockpile that Iran has spent years and years and billions of dollars to amass.
The export of stocks of enriched uranium is not in our program, and we do not intend sending them abroad, said the official Abbas Araki.
Told the Iranian media, according to the French news agency, there's no question of sending the stocks abroad.
Well, everybody thought you were going to.
Obama thought you were going to, the idiot John, I'm sorry, the Secretary of State John Kerry thought you were going to.
The American negotiating team, the United Nations all thought that you were going to keep the agreement.
This is what happens.
The Iranians are stringing people.
The news that's come out about this whole thing over the course of the weekend has just been breathtaking.
A close media aid, the Hassan Rouani, the Iranian president, has sought political asylum in Switzerland after traveling to Lausanne to cover the nuclear talks between Iran and the West.
Amir Hossein Motaji, who managed PR for Rouani during the 2013 election campaign was said by Iranian news agencies to have quit his job at the Iran Student Correspondents Association.
He then appeared on an opposition TV channel based in London to say that he no longer saw any sense in his profession as a journalist because he can only write what he was told.
Hey, that sounds like just like in America.
Let me nutshell this for you.
An editor of the Iran Student Correspondents Association has defected to Switzerland.
He managed the PR of the supposedly moderate Iranian president, Hassan Rouani, during his 2013 supposed campaign.
He was sent to Switzerland to cover the nuclear talks, but he said he couldn't do his job as a journalist because he was told what to write in his articles.
And he also said, and this is what made the this is the actual lead to the story.
Are you listening?
He said, quote, the U.S. negotiating team are mainly there to speak on Iran's behalf with other members of the five plus one countries and convince them of a deal.
Which sounds like it sounds like the truth to me, folks.
That's this defe.
This guy who has defected from Iran because as a journalist he was being told what to write.
He didn't feel safe.
He thought he was being lied to.
He couldn't practice journalism, quote unquote, like he wanted to.
He said over the weekend, this was one of the big uh stories over the weekend, the U.S. negotiating team, led by John Kerry, are mainly there to speak on Iran's behalf with other members of the five plus one countries and convince them of a deal.
Translation.
The U.S. team is working with the Iranians to convince France and other five plus one countries to go along with the deal.
The United States team is not negotiating with the five plus one countries and representing them.
This defector says the U.S. has assumed and taken the role of advancing the Iranian position at the five plus one talks.
And a lot of people were they were shocked that such a thing could be admitted to.
I don't know how many people are really surprised by it.
Look, folks, it isn't a surprise that Obama is literally doing his best to revive Iran and to cement them as the regional power in the Middle East.
I don't think there's any doubt about that.
I think, as I said, the top of the program, the administration is thinking, well, I've got to take a break.
I'm sorry, be right back.
Don't quote him.
As I was saying at the top of the program, I mentioned that there's a Washington Post story, by the way.
This is not some cockyed uh obscure source.
Uh Jackson Deal, Washington Post is re is reporting that uh the regime, the Obama regime, is getting ready to back a United Nations Security Council resolution that would quote mandate the solution to the questions Israelis and Palestinians have been unable to agree upon for decades, such as the future of Jerusalem.
So the Middle East peace process, this never-ending career type existence that's been going on for decades with no resolution.
Obama is, according to the Washington Post, months away from selling Israel out and just going to the UN and getting a Security Council resolution that mandates a two-state solution and the future of Jerusalem.
And my point at the top of the program, anybody that would do something like that has to be motivated by hate.
In this case, for Israel and an ally.
Make no mistake, taking this route would not be taken to protect or to enforce the rights of Israelis here.
Obama would do this because Netanyahu will not agree with Obama, what Obama wants.
And Obama now doubly insulted, not only will Netanyahu not cave, Netanyahu came and showed him up with that joint speech to Congress.
So it's get even time.
You don't show up narcissists like that.
You don't publicly humiliate them like that.
So this is okay, all right.
Fine.
Is that what you want to do?
Well, I'll just go to the UN.
I'll get a Security Council where you people are hated.
Obama knows that anti-Semitism's home is the United Nations.
Make no mistake about that.
The modern day home of anti-Semitism, anti-Israeli anti-Semitism is the UN.
So you go there and you get your UN resolution mandating a solution to the so-called peace process, and you you write, you commit to paper, the future makeup of uh Jerusalem, and you enforce it.
That none of that would be done on Israel's behalf, believe me.
And I'm just saying that to do something like that, there has to be huge emotions.
I mean, there's got to be real anger to do something like that bordering on hate.
And no, I'm not going to take that back.
I'm I'll tell you, folks, I'm something I'm sick and tired of this idea that all the hate in the world is absent, the Democrats are the left, that the left do not hate.
That's just utter BS.
They're obsessed with hate more than any other group I can think of.
Okay, yeah, so the negotiation deadlines tomorrow.
So here's this is what the Iranians always do.
At the last minute they change terms of the deal or announced that they're not going to abide by something already agreed to, in this case, the disposition of their enriched uranium.
They even objected to a deal that would dilute it.
And they could still take possession of it or keep.
They rejected that.
Then the Russians and Putin said, hey, we'll take it.
To which, I mean, that's like giving Colonel Sanders your chickens.
So that didn't fly because the Iranians aren't going to what the Iranians do then, okay, so this causes another delay when everybody thought they were so close.
Oh my gosh, we're so close.
For the first time ever we can have a deal, we got it.
The Iranians back out.
But they're so close that the Americans in the West hang in there.
They extend the deadline, which was supposed to be hard and fast, all the while the Iranians keep progressing toward the development of a nuclear weapon, while we wring our hands over being so close to a deal.
We were so close.
And we devise a way to get back to that so close point.
And this is what they always do.
And I it the the I think France and some of the other countries involved here are starting to acknowledge the game.
Whereas John Kerry and the American delegation doesn't care.
They want Iran, they want a deal, just like Obama wanted health care.
He didn't care what it was.
He didn't care, good, bad, indifferent, he well, he knew.
But it in the in the terms of the actual details, he doesn't care.
He didn't care.
All he wants, Obama got health care.
Obama got Iran nuclear deal.
Obama this legacy, Obama, greatest president ever.
Obama did everything no president was ever able to do.
That's what he wants.
And then if anybody comes along and tries to unravel it or unwind it, there's going to be hell to pay when that happens.
And it's it's all a disaster.
And we're pulling ourselves out of the Middle East in terms of any real influence in peacekeeping or the maintenance of uh traditional American values there, and it's now said to be good.
Yeah, that's good, Rush.
That's good.
You know what?
Let these people just fight it out.
What do we do and be in world cop anyway?
We got no business to be a world cop.
If the Iranians want to go to war with the Saudis over uh Yemen and the Iraqis want to get, go ahead, Rush, let it happen.
Why should it be any of our business?
Now when we depended on Middle Eastern oil more than we do, it could have been a reason why we were more engaged.
But I fear that the reason the reason why this thinking that, hey, it's okay we're not involved, is precisely because there are more and more people beginning to think that we are not a good guy, that that our presence doesn't mean anything, that America stands for nothing uh good, that America isn't the solution to world's problems, that we are only the problem, which is clearly what uh Obama and his team believe.
So that's why all this stuff I'll give you here look at this.
This is a story from uh from the Hill.com Arab League to create collective military force.
The Arab League on Sunday decided it would build a joint military force featuring combat units from each of its twenty-two member nations.
Gee, what could go wrong with that?
This is, I think, good example what happens when the USA pulls out.
We pull out or pull back, somebody's gonna move in to fill the vacuum, fill fill the void.
And if it's the bad guys moving in to fill the void, where are we left?
Whether you like it or not, as the world's lone superpower, we have interests all over the world.
Everything that happens in the world could be said to be of interest to the United States in large part because, as the lone superpower, we are also the biggest target.
If you have a president who thinks we deserve to be the biggest target because we've behaved as bad guys for all these years, and you can understand all the animosity towards us, because of people like Bush and Cheney and Halliburton and whatever else, the Iraq war.
Well, then you're gonna be of the belief that whatever suffering or harm comes to the uh United States or its interests, well, we deserve it because look at how we treated them in the past is the Kakamami thinking that guides current foreign policy.
Never ends.
It just never ends.
Okay, Ron in uh Enon Valley, Pennsylvania.
Welcome, sir.
I'm glad you waited.
Great to have you with us here.
Thank you.
Uh, you know, I I it's sort of the Indiana deal, it sort of pales in comparison to what's going on in the Middle East and Hillary and everything else.
But I think there are some very important issues here nonetheless, and m mainly that I think that this whole thing has been focused in the wrong direction.
It's this law is not meant to penalize the gays or any other minority.
This is just another attempt by these minorities to restrict our rights, the majority's rights.
And unfortunately, we've been over backwards.
Every time they do it, w we somehow we make laws that say that because it's a bias crime, it it's it's more penalty.
You know, you are so right about this.
And it's terrible because, you know, they beat up words, they call us racists, they call us sexists, they call us homophobes, they call us all these names.
And we're not we don't hate anybody.
You know, it's they who basically are trying to make people behave in ways that are untenable to them.
Our constitution is supposed to protect us from people like that.
And it bothers them, it really bothers me that we keep focusing on them and their rights.
And that's because that's exactly right, and that's why I went a great dissertation earlier in the program.
You as a member of a majority are an automatic oppressor.
You cannot be oppressed as a member of a majority.
You cannot be discriminated against because you're in the majority.
The minority doesn't have the power to do any of that to you.
That's the ongoing field.
We don't stand up for it.
You know, we don't exert our rights, don't we?
No, because they guilt you.
They guilt you into acquiescence on every issue.
You end up bending over backwards to placate them to show them you don't hate them.
And it never gets you anywhere, right?
We should never prove something like that.
How can you prove that you don't hate them?
Because they're the ones that are out there saying, oh, poor me, poor me.
No, no, no.
How about our society in general?
There's unintended consequences to all of these kind of actions.
I I look back, for example, to like it's say, for example, the crash of the the airplane uh that just happened.
Um that's basically because of HIPAA laws.
Now these HIPAA laws they started in the United States, but now they're global.
Why did they start?
They started because gays didn't want AIDS to be portrayed as a communicable disease.
They said, Oh, we've got to protect these people's identities and and their rights to the to their histories and to their medical records.
We Before that, we didn't have it.
Well, what's happened since then?
What's happened since then is, of course, you've got a lot of people who really don't belong in cockpits or frankly driving buses or trains, or a lot of other things.
And they're out there because these guys wanted to protect their rights.
They didn't want this disease to be identified with them.
Well, look, I know what you're saying, but it's not just, it's not you're right that it's it's it's tied to uh way back to the 80s, gays and aids, but it's not just that anymore.
If this guy, the pilot you're talking about, if if what let me another cause of it is uh such things as the American with Disabilities Act.
If somebody has some sort of disability, even knowing about it is considered to be discrimination.
So we can't say negative things, we can't do negative things to people based on a disability.
It's not their fault.
So we need at least he tried to help people by getting them from point A to point D by flying them.
It's not just it's not just behavior, and it's not just things that you're not supposed to do.
They've taken over words.
They said you can't use this word or that one.
Why not?
This is this is a free thing.
We're supposed to be protected.
Our rights to be individuals and defensive freely.
No, you're you're right.
But see, the problem is, the problem is that you as a majority are an oppressor.
You don't have any rights.
You are the one that needs to be gotten even with, and people like you.
Because this is almost like a reverse affirmative action.
It's it's it's uh, and it's they justify it by by saying this is what they have been subjected to for all of their lives, and now it's your turn to find out what it's like, and that is justified.
But you're you're you're absolutely right in all this.
You bend over backwards, you acquiesce, you go out of your way to disprove their allegation that you hate or that you're a bigot, and it never gets you anything because it's not real.
It's just an allegation.
It's meant to categorize you.
They don't really think that.
They don't care if it's true or not.
They want other people, and they want you more importantly, believing that you are, that they think you are, and acting defensive and subservient as a result.
It's designed to get you to shut up, sit down, and stop objecting.
And it doesn't sound like with you it's working too much.
Now, no, folks, do not doubt me on this.
I I don't intend this as uh as as throwaway commentary.
As a member of a majority, I don't care if it's if it's a numerical or racial or political, if if you're in a majority, Christian, if you're white, if you're uh male, you know, whatever.
The way things are structured now, you are incapable of being bullied.
As a member of a majority, you can't be bullied.
You also cannot be discriminated against because you're the powerful.
All you can do is discriminate, but nobody can discriminate against you.
You can bully, but you can't be bullied.
You're the majority.
But if somebody comes along and does bully you, then that's great because you deserve it.
Because you've been bullying everybody else.
This is how the Democrats act when they lose.
When they win, minorities become irrelevant.
Such as the Republican Party when it loses, it becomes irrelevant.
There are no such things as minority rights.
When the Democrats lose, all of a sudden the minority has to run the Senate in order for things to be fair.
Majority rule does not count when they lose.
Only when they win.
But when it comes to all these other social things that we're talking about, you're guilty simply because you're in a majority.
You are a lifetime oppressor.
You have been a member of an oppressive majority since the days of the founding of the country, and that justifies all the bullying against you.
And all the hassles that you get and all the harassment that you get.
And despite all the allegations, you hate, you this, you're that, when you go out of your way to prove that you're not, it doesn't matter.
You just show them you're weak and they can have their way with you.
It's the way it works.
A barn burner of a kickoff to the broadcast week here today on the EIB Network.
Thank you so much for being with us today, my friends.
As always, be patient, because in 21 short hours, we're right back here, revved and ready to go again.
▲
Export Selection