All Episodes
Previous Next
April 16, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:55
April 16, 2015, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have right here, Rush Limbaugh, the cutting edge of societal evolution.
Great to have you, the telephone number 800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program and the uh email address lrushbo at EIB net.com.
All right, now look, just to close up on this watch business, the Apple Watch.
I literally am being inundated with email from people who who apparently there's some some um people upset out there over this whole launch day thing that's that's got blown up.
They originally announced April 24th, and they're not gonna happen for the vast majority of people in order to watch.
And they opened online, they only allowed online order.
You cannot walk into a store even now.
You will not be able to walk into a store until June to get one of these.
So you have to order them online.
Some people got up at 3 a.m. to be first to order.
And if you were not in the first 10 minutes of that, you may not get your watch until June.
And all this time they were advertising the release date, the launch date of April 24th, which they have now taken down.
And now they just say the watch is coming.
That's fine and dandy.
I mean, I I understand all kinds of manufacturing problems.
Apple is known for manufacturing things that are really hard to build.
They're so in front of everybody, they're so out front everybody technologically, that they manufacture and release things that only at that moment are we able, are they able to actually develop ways to mass produce the technology.
And nobody knows.
I'll tell you this.
Every product, every new iPhone, every new iPad, the tech media has the same stories.
Apple can't make it.
They've either got a problem with the display, or they've got a problem with some aspect that they can't manufacture, and yet everything launches on time.
There may be shortages for a while, but everybody that ends up buying whatever they got loves it.
And it's going to be the same thing with the watch.
I have no doubt, you look at the first iPhone.
The first iPhone was light years ahead of everything out there, but it didn't do much compared to what it can do today.
Now the watch is going to, I think, scale up much faster than the iPhone did because the baseline technology is that much ahead of uh itself where it was in 2007.
Right now, the watch is basically a relay device for the phone, but eventually the watch is going to be a standalone device.
It's going to be able to operate without a phone, and when that happens, look out.
It's going to be dazzling.
I think the biggest problem they've got, since people are asking me, is in the midst of this inability to make the launch date, they're giving watches away to celebrities, and they're giving away the most expensive ones.
And in many cases, they're giving watches away to people who don't even know what they've got, don't know how to use them.
And I don't know.
I I don't I don't know how it's going to affect the Apple core customer.
That he gets up and he reads the paper and there's Carl Lagerfeld just got his watch.
You're not going to get yours till June.
Apple's never done that before.
They have never made a practice out of giving away early copies, early uh advanced units of new products to people long before they were going to be made available to the general public.
They're bending their core customer here.
And I think if you look at that core customer concept with the watch, you might be missing the boat of what they're trying to do.
This is unlike any product they've ever had.
They've never sold anything that costs $10,000, except a Mac Pro.
They've but they've never sold anything mass-marketed that's $10 to 15, in some cases 35 years.
One of these gold watches, you're going to be able to outfit it up to 35 or 40 grand.
The one Carl Rogerfeld gave or got the one they gave to him with this gold band, people are speculating the band itself is 25 grand.
The watch is 10, so there's 35 or 40,000 there.
But they're trying to create a new market.
They're entering the fashion business now, not just the cell phone business Or the tablet business, but they're entering the wearable fashion business when that's a whole new market that they are entering.
So core customer.
I mean, yeah, I can see where you might think they're irritating the core customer by giving away the most expensive ones while nobody else can get one.
All this is eventually going to get ironed out.
Everybody's going to get their watches, and I think everybody's going to love them, and I think at some point the watch is just going to be fantastic.
So I just think they can't make them yet.
They can't mass produce them.
They can't manufacture in the quantity that they've been ordered.
But they were unable to do that with the iPhone 6 and the 6 Plus.
It took three months for supply and demand to equalize.
And in fact, in some cases it hasn't.
In some cases, they still can't make those fast enough.
They're still selling every one of those they make, the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus.
So they just their products, people demand them, they want them.
And in this case, it's something brand new, and it is complex.
It is this one of the most complex, tiny devices that does what it does that anybody's ever made.
And mass bring it to Henry Ford, everybody mistakes what Henry Ford did.
Henry Ford did not invent the car.
What Henry Ford did was invent the assembly line, enabling the mass production of the things.
So Apple, just to use them as an example, they enter into a new product category, such as this watch, which actually isn't a watch, just like the phone's not a phone.
The phone's a miniature computer with a phone app on it.
And this watch is not a watch.
the last thing you're going to use it for is telling time.
It's another tiny miniature computer.
And it is complex as it can be.
It is revolutionary in design and manufacture, and I just got to take some time, I think, to get the mass production apparatus up and running.
And that's what I think is lagged.
I don't think it's any more than that.
There may be some marketing shifts that have taken place for this new retail chief that they hired, but it's eventually going to work out.
I because the product is going to be good.
There was one other thing about this.
Well, maybe it'll come to me.
Let me move on now, ladies and gentlemen, to this New York Times op-ed that I previously touted by the name of Thomas B. Edsall.
Has Obamacare turned voters against sharing the wealth?
Has Obamacare destroyed the whole notion of redistribution of wealth?
The left is very concerned.
That's why there's this op-ed piece in the New York Times by this guy Ed Soler used to write for the Washington Post.
And to sum this up, the liberals are seeing a lot of red flags out there.
They're seeing popular support for Obamacare plummet.
It never has been majority support, by the way.
I don't care what poll you take, and I don't care when you took it.
A majority of Americans has never supported Obamacare as they have understood it to be.
And it's plummeting now, and there's another specific element in polling data that has plummeted, and it is this: the share of Americans who are convinced that health care is a right, That did used to be a majority.
People who thought health care was a right, just like a lawyer was a right if you needed one couldn't afford one.
Well, now they don't.
A majority of Americans do not think healthcare is a right.
The number of people who do is now the minority viewpoint.
And that is red flag city for the left.
When people think something is a right, because they have no idea what rights are, and because they have no idea where they come from, you remember if I make a brief departure here.
Go back to Ted Cruz announcing for the presidency.
He's at Liberty University.
He proudly announces and confirms and affirms that our rights come from God.
And he quotes the preamble of the Declaration of Independence.
And this infobabe, whose written for Yahoo, AP, uh New Republic.
Three or four name publications.
Young woman in her 30s thought Ted Cruz was the biggest idiot on the face of the earth.
Rights come from God.
What about the Constitution?
What about the amendments?
So you think God wrote those?
She was clueless.
She was clueless because she had not been taught.
See, this is one of the major problems with education.
The basic tenets, the foundations, the history of this country and its founding are not taught.
So this woman who is a prominent infobabe at major name publications.
The idea that rights come from God totally escaped her.
No concept of it.
She's perfectly content with the fact that rights come from the president.
Well, the Democrat Party has relied on that.
The rights come from government.
Your rights, what you can do, what we will permit you to do without judging you, comes from government.
That's why they support government.
Liberal government, because there's no judgment.
Do whatever you want to do.
Just vote for us, do whatever you want to do.
When they see, when the left sees that fewer and fewer people think that health care is a right, they get worried.
Because thinking it's a right is the justification for taking money from some people and giving it to others.
If you're an average ordinary American, and you think you have a right to health care, and somebody out there has more money than you do, and you have a right to health care and you don't have it, it's perfectly fine to go take money from that other person, give it to you so that your right can be established and maintained.
And so the left has constructed these scenarios where the average ordinary American people supports taking money from some and giving it to others, if people have a right to it.
So Ed Saul writing this piece is quite interesting.
This shift in public opinion, he writes, is a major victory for the Republican Party.
It is part of a larger trend, a steady decline in support for redistributive government policies.
Emmanuel Sayez, economics professor at Berkeley, and one of the nation's premier experts on inequality.
Now stop and think about.
An economics professor, one of the nation's premier experts on inequality, inequality as an elite, college-level course, inequality.
Inequality is easy.
It's what is co-author of a study that confirms this trend which has been developing for the last decades.
A separate study, the structure of inequality and Americans' attitudes toward redistribution, found that as inequality increases, so does ideological conservatism in the electorate.
Oh.
Oh no.
As inequality increases, ideological conservatism increases.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
That's why they're panicking.
It's supposed to be just the opposite.
You see, when there's inequality out there, liberalism is supposed to prosper.
When there's inequality out there, liberalism is supposed to rise and solve it.
Liberalism redistributes wealth, takes care of the inequality.
But what's happening now, and I'm telling you, they know it, this peace is proof, they know it, they know they're in the minority.
They know they're governing against the will of the people.
They know the country is trending conservative, just like many parts of the westernized world are.
You just don't know it in this country because of the media, and because the Republican Party is the last people to get the message.
But it is in terms of the way people living their lives and all these kinds of things, and they are in panic at the Democrat Party and on the left.
Because as inequality increases, liberalism has always been seen as the answer, the redistribution of wealth.
It's been considered fair to raise taxes or confiscate the wealth of the rich and give it away to the poor.
But now that's not trending in public opinion.
And the erosion of the belief in health care as a government protected right is perhaps the most dramatic reflection of these trends.
In 2006, by a margin of more than two to one, those surveyed by Gallup said that the federal government should guarantee health care coverage for everybody.
By late 2014, eight years later, Gallup found the percentage had fallen to 45%, 69 to 45%, while the percentage of people who said health care is not a federal responsibility doubled.
So in 2008, when Obama just starts on Obamacare, this dovetails exactly with the public opinion data that we had.
52% of the people opposed it then, and it's only gotten worse for the Democrats.
They are known for governing against the will of the people.
The thing about this piece that I think is kind of...
Misleading is they're not real.
I mean, yeah, they're concerned about it.
They they would rather have the American people thinking liberalism is the salvation.
They'd rather have people thinking that taking money from the rich and giving it to everybody else is the answer.
They would rather public opinion support that.
But if it doesn't, it isn't going to stop them.
They're not going to stop being liberals.
They're not going to stop being socialists because public opinion doesn't support them.
They will just continue governing against the will of the people, but it still alarms them.
And what really alarms them, look at what's they elected the guy that was going to lead them to liberal utopia.
They elected the guy that was going to get rid of conservatism forever.
They elected the guy that was going to convince everybody once and for all that liberalism was the one and only answer.
And it's gotten absolutely worse.
And now they're facing this falling public opinion.
Support of liberalism and health care as a right after six and a half years of Obama.
No wonder they are panicking over.
Okay, it's head back to the phones of Bruce in Farmington, New Mexico.
Great to have you, sir.
I'm really glad you waited.
Hello.
Hey, Diddles Rush, thanks a lot.
Um, I know Maha Rushi has thought of this uh theory I'm gonna pose, but I I'm very honored to be the first guest to actually say it.
I think what we are seeing right now is that the powers that be in the smokiest of the smoky back rooms.
There aren't any smoking back rooms in the Democrat Party.
These pansies, they don't smoke, they don't do anything anymore like that.
Well, I take it back.
There might be some weed in there.
You may, you may be okay.
I you're right.
You're right.
Smoke.
I hadn't considered Yeah, yeah, you're right.
Okay, go on.
So they've decided Hillary is not going to be the candidate.
And uh the the evidence that I've got for that is one, there's too many sophomores mistakes happening.
Two, the amount of money they have spent on her campaign already is paltry, and three, the usual suspects that would be papering over it are not, and are actually touting it.
And what they're hoping is that we will expend all of our effort, all of our money, all of our noise, and all of our commercials on her, and then at the very end, the end of the primaries campaign, they're gonna roll somebody out that appears to be a moderate and say, okay, Hillary, yeah, we we tried for you, yeah, we said we'd do it, uh, but you just can't win.
Hey, America, here's our here's our candidate.
And they're hoping we'll have expended all of our shots.
Your your comment on that.
Well, I must I must say, you you credited me for having thought of this before you did, that I just haven't said it, right?
Yeah, well, of course.
When I hadn't, I had not actually thought of this.
Uh you are the first I've ever heard express this.
That essentially the DNC knows that she can't win, and they're letting all this go in so the Republicans shoot their financial wad, and when that's done, they're gonna yank Hillary off stage and hello, Elizabeth Warren or somebody as a moderate, and we will be powerless to stop them because we will be out of money having spent it to defeat Hillary.
There's too many things happening now that just don't make sense.
Yeah, I agree with that, but I don't know that.
I don't believe that the DNC is preparing to throw Hillary overboard and wants her to stay in as long as possible so that the Republicans spend all their money.
There's simply too many Republicans and there's gonna be too much money.
They're not all gonna blow it uh during the primaries.
I I I will agree, I've got these sound bites who've played uh you've heard some of them today.
There is there's a sense of unease out there uh among the drive-bys about this, about the Clinton candidacy.
I don't think it means I'm gonna DNC is getting ready to drop her.
But every day I look at the media and there's at least one or two that are raising questions that normally would have not even mentioned what's going on and it's having badly, or they would have covered it up, tried to blame it on somebody else.
So I I think there's trouble in Paradise.
Uh but I I don't think that any no way that the DNC or anybody else, besides the DNC, if they walked to Hillary and told her that they wanted her to uh get out of the race, it's a DNC that would have things told to them.
Uh so I I just I think there's problems, but I'm not surprised.
I think there were always gonna be problems.
Let me here's something else that's changing.
Grab grab soundbite uh Grab Soundbite number eight.
We have a montage here of Republican and Conservative media tests.
We got Rain's Privus here, we got Senator Graham, we got Dr. Emma, uh David Brooks, Mary Madeline.
And they're they're speaking in ways of Hillary that they really haven't before.
I mean, up till now, Hillary's been invincible.
This is one of the things that's frankly always bothered me.
I read into Republicans scared to death of her.
In 2008, it was the same thing.
And and here we are again, and I've I I run into these scared to death that she can't be beat, she's just invincible, and I have never ever seen that.
Anyway, here's the montage.
And this is to me, you may have heard these guys say things like this in the past.
If they have, I don't remember it, certainly not prominently.
She's about the best person we could possibly hope for.
I think she'd be tough to beat m beatable.
If the Republicans can put up a dynamic candidate, I think she is easily beaten.
Yeah.
I do think the Republican nominee, whoever that happens to be, starts out on a level playing field.
I pray that she's a nominee.
Hillary Clinton will be more than easier to beat.
Mary Madeline there from the household of James Carville.
Uh so it's there there are some definite uh changes taking place in the confidence level of Republicans.
I'll tell you something else.
I made mention yesterday that that Rand Paul uh has successfully turned the tables on abortion.
And I made I made a point of saying that he's the first Republican to come along and actually successfully turn the tables on the Democrats and put them on the defensive and give them put them in a position where they really can't explain their position.
They have no defense for it.
And immediately I get hit with emails thinking I'm endorsing Rand Paul.
I'm not.
He wasn't the first.
My guy did it.
I'm not endorsing anybody here yet, folks.
When I point out Ted Cruz does something great, doesn't mean I'm endorsing him.
Ditto Scott Walker, ditto Rand Paul.
I'm just telling you what's going on, just my perception of things.
And I think this was, it's like yesterday with Rubio.
When Rubio predicted back in 2013 that if a Gang 8 bill failed, that he couldn't see a new Republican in 2016 reversing Obama's executive amnesty.
Now I hadn't seen that prediction.
I hadn't heard Rubio made it, and I hadn't seen anybody else make it.
It was easy to predict that Obama was going to do executive amnesty.
But uh it was just assumed that if he did that the next Republican president would reverse it.
But if Obama does it in uh numbers of six million, ten million, fifteen million, it may not be so easy for the next president to just dramatically cancel that and deport those people, which is what Rubio was saying.
So I had people say, Well, you're endorsing Rubio.
No, no, no, I'm not endorsing anybody yet, as you know.
Anyway, my observation about Rand Paul ended up being talked about last night on Fox.
Megan Kelly had Dana Perino, who, by the way, what happened to it?
She just she got a new book out.
And she sent me a copy of the book.
Uh yeah, go get it real quick, yeah.
You know it's funny what she she sends me the book.
And she signed it, she autographed it.
Here, Brian's bringing the book in now.
Oh, you put it in the bookshelf up there.
Well, I'm glad you know where it is in that bookshelf, because there's a lot of books.
Okay, here it comes.
Show it a camera.
Dana Perino, there it is.
Title of the book, and the good news is Lessons and Advice from the Bright Side.
There she is.
And she had the the the autograph is Rush with Great Admiration, Dana Perino.
And then she had a sticky.
One of those yellow post-it notes stuck in a page toward the rear of the book.
She says, I think you'll enjoy this story.
And what it was was something she admitted to Sean Hannity.
It's a it's in the chapter about dealing with the media.
She was Bush's press secretary after Tony Snow.
She was actually she was the Josh Ernest of the day for a time.
And Hannity was asking her, how do you put up with these people?
They come in that press room and you know they hate you.
They you you you know all they want to do is destroy your president.
How do you do it?
And what she admits is that behind the podium, she's flipping them off the bird.
That's how she she didn't let them ever see it.
But with each question, she's flipping them the bird under the podium.
And she in the book, she gets sort of apologized.
She says, I know you people in the press might be mad at me when you read this, but I'm sorry it's how I had to deal with it.
So she feels a l not really apologizing to them, but she's uh she's saying she hopes that they understand.
And it's her way of writing, yeah, these questions frustrated me.
Yeah, I knew what the media was trying to do to Bush.
Yeah, but I had to behave in a certain way, so I'm flipping them off where they can't see it.
So underneath the podium.
Anyway, she's on Megan Kelly last, and they're talking about what I said about Rand Paul, and this is uh this is how uh Meghan Kelly began the whole thing.
Last night I spoke with DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz about her fight with Senator Rand Paul and how that has produced what Rush Limbaugh today called a victory for Republicans, unlike any he has ever seen.
Rand Paul has done something that no other Republican has done.
He has turned the abortion issue around on the Democrats.
Megan Kelly then turned to Dana Perino And asked her opinion on this.
You know, Rush was saying, and I heard you saying earlier on the five that that was a significant moment.
Why?
It's a change.
So what Rand Paul basically did is say, I'm going to take your typical question for a Republican that you never asked the Democrats.
But he was saying is why doesn't anyone ever ask the Democrats where they stand on late term abortion in particular?
And on that question, I think Debbie Rosserman Schultz answers to you were very telling.
Right.
And Megan Kelly then replied.
I was confused as to why she wouldn't just I mean, third trimester, but they will see no ground.
Why not?
That's an easy thing, even if you are pro-choice.
80 plus percent of the American people say not in the third trimester, because that's a baby.
That is a baby.
Let me answer this then.
It's not a baby until the Democrat woman decides it's a baby.
There is no 80%.
There is no third tri it's abortion is valid whenever the woman wants it.
That's Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz's view.
Now, one thing they're right about on this show.
The j just like public opinion is really shifted on this whole notion of health care being a right, and the whole idea of Obamacare never has a majority.
Abortion in this country is dramatically shifting.
It has always been, despite what people would tell you.
Abortion has really always been a pretty much 50-50 issue.
There have been moments where it's been 60 40, but it has never been what the left would like you to believe 100 to zero or 80 to 20 in favor of pro-choice.
It's never been.
And now, particularly among millennials, the whole idea of abortion any time, anywhere, is losing ground rapidly.
And that's what the uh uh mention here of this 80 percent, and Meghan Kelly mentioned, even if you're pro-choice, eighty plus percent of the American people say no abortion third trimester because that's a baby.
That's a baby.
People have decided that in the third trimester life has begun.
Not here to debate whether to right or wrong, just telling you that 80 percent of the American people think so.
That's a shift.
This puts the Democrats in a very small minority.
But just as I said earlier, it's not going to change their attitude.
Uh, Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz is never going to concede the point.
And she didn't.
And and Megan and Perino here are discussing why won't she?
I mean, for crying out loud, 80%.
No, no, no.
This is abortion is the sacrament of liberalism.
And it as such is it is sacred.
It may sound sick, but it is sacred, and no matter it is a dividing line issue, it is.
They it's it's there will never, ever, ever, as far as radicals like Debbie Schultz or anybody else running that party, never, ever will there be any official compromise.
If there were that lunatic fringe Democrat base would turn their attentions on the traitors in the Democrat Party.
This is perhaps the most important defining issue.
And isn't it curious?
It's a social issue.
Perhaps the most defining, the most important, the most crucial, you must agree with this, or you're not a real Democrat position, is there is no baby at any time until the woman decides to give birth.
No such thing as third trimester baby.
The abortion remains the sacrament.
And any time it happens, it's fine and dandy, because they fear if they give ground on this that other things are going to begin to crumble that make up the the issue coalition of the Democrat Party.
Got to take a brief time out, we'll be back.
Don't go away.
You know, there's actually more to this piece than Thomas B. Edsall in the New York Times has Obamacare turned voters against sharing the wealth as uh turned them against redistribution.
I I need to spend a little bit more time on this because there's a couple of things that he gets into I didn't touch on.
And it's it's uh it's really cool, kind of fascinating in a sense.
So sit tight for that.
Open line Friday tomorrow as well.
So you can start thinking now, the kind of questions or comments you'll have tomorrow.
Even when a place stump the host, give it a shot.
▲
Export Selection