All Episodes
Previous Next
April 30, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:10
April 30, 2015, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And greetings, welcome back.
Your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos, never-ending riots, you name it, Rush Limboy, your guiding light even for the good times at 800 282-2882, email address, Lrushbow at EIB net.com.
Now I want to I want to say some things here about Freddie Gray, but I you run a risk in doing so.
Some people might interpret as attacking the victim, and I want to assure everybody it's not the case.
And I want to remind everybody what I do here.
I'm a harmless, lovable little fuzzball.
I do not have an attack mentality.
I'm not even offering this in any kind of a defensive posture.
I just want people to understand what happens here.
I go through the day every day and I consume news.
It's one of my hobbies, it's my habit, and it's also my job.
Therefore, it doesn't seem like work.
And that's the best thing that a job can be, actually, when it doesn't seem like work.
When you love it, it never will be work.
But I care about a lot of things deeply.
Passionately, deeply, profoundly, and I am very sure of what I know.
I am very confident.
What I think is right is right.
I'm not a person that runs around with ambivalence just to avoid offending people, and I don't soft peddle what I think needs to be said so as not to offend people.
I just think what I think, and I'm very confident of it, and I don't mind if it sounds that I'm sure of myself.
But at the same time, I do not collect all of this news and do all of this show prep for the express purpose of coming here and attacking things or attacking people.
And nor do any of us on the right.
We're too busy in defense, which is essentially what I do in...
In the in the course of all of this show prep, I see things that I believe in under assault.
I see traditions, institutions, people, issues, principles, ideas under constant assault by the left and the Democrat Party.
And because I'm confident and just certain they're wrong, I use the opportunity I have in this radio program to come here every day and correct it.
So there are no attacks here.
What goes on on this program is a defense of the things I hold dear which are under constant assault.
Now I want to go back, might have been yesterday, the dames run it run together, when Mrs. Clinton uh gave her most recent speech when she spoke out about what's going on in Baltimore.
And it was one of the most reserved, well, laid-back, uh less energetic speeches that she's ever given, and people are commenting on that.
But one of the points that Mrs. Clinton made, both directly and indirectly, was that this country has a lot of innocent African Americans in jail simply because they're African Americans, and this has got to stop.
And I've been hearing this my whole life.
I've been hearing it from the civil rights community.
I've been hearing it from people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, you name it, but not just them.
Leftist politicians, Democrat Party politicians, they all run around and make this claim.
They they cite these percentages that show African American incarceration rates so much dramatically higher than whites, and they automatically conclude that it's solely because of racism.
And for that to be, what they what they are implying is that most of the African Americans in jail are innocent.
They never say that.
They don't dare say that.
What they hope to convey is the idea that this country's majority is so racist and so bigoted that it's just putting black people, black men in jail because it can, whether they're guilty or not.
That's what they're trying to create.
That thought, that attitude, that reality, and of course it's not true.
It's a totally bogus charge.
Now, I'm not suggesting law enforcement's never wrong.
It is, of course.
There are people now and then who have been falsely convicted, wrongly convicted, wrongly imprisoned.
When we find out about it, they we we try to correct it as fast as we can, but it is not the norm.
It is not standard operating procedure to convict the innocent.
In many of these cases, it's juries that have done it, of peers and so forth.
So my point here is that Mrs. Clinton carried this theme again yesterday, where this, and she's strictly pandering to the African American vote and the minority community vote all over this country by winking and nodding at them and letting them know that she agrees that there's all kinds of unjust imprisonment of innocent African Americans.
And it's gotta stop.
And by God, when she's president, it is gonna stop.
Fact is, we've elected Democrat president, Democrat president, Democrat mayor, Democrat state's attorney, and it hasn't changed, has it?
The complaint, like everything else in the civil rights community, is 50 years old.
It never changes.
The complaint never changes.
No matter what the facts are, in prison, and even if they did change, just like this uh argument that women only make 73 cents for every dollar men make.
That isn't true anymore.
Except in a few places, like in Barack Obama's executive office and Hillary Clinton's Senate office.
It was true.
And in a number of these places, they don't even pay their interns.
I don't want to get sidetracked, but that's an example.
They harp on this 73 cents for every dollar men make as though it's just been discovered last year, and we're still working on changing it.
That's 30 years old.
And that never changes.
So Mrs. Clinton goes out yesterday and gives this speech, which is being lauded, and it was nothing more than a wink and a nod to the African American community.
Now, in that it's in that light and within that framework that I want to give you some details about Freddie Gray.
Because the impression they want you to believe, just like it was the case with the gentle giant, they want you to think that was an innocent, totally innocent, young man who happened to be African American, and for that reason alone was a target.
And on this particular day, it got out of hand and the cops killed the guy.
And Mrs. Clinton comes up and gives her speech.
She doesn't, she doesn't say that in so many words, but she lets the people who believe it wrongly.
She leads them to believe that she agrees with them without ever saying it.
That's the wink and a nod.
But the question is, how can Hillary and Obama, he says the same stuff, and the rest of the radical left complain about people being over incarcerated with people like Freddie Gray walking around free?
There's an example of somebody if he would have been in jail, he might be alive today, is the sad reality.
But if there's anybody that should have, based on his record, been incarcerated, it is Freddie Gray, and he's not.
He wasn't.
He sold heroin.
He was a junkie, he was a he was a drug dealer.
There was nothing redeeming about this poor guy.
He had been arrested more than 20 times.
I ask myself, whatever happened at three strikes, then you're out.
No, I've not forgotten about Madam Secretary.
Just hang tough.
That's why we're three hours here.
Now there's a Washington Post article from last Friday that says that uh uh Freddie Gray's mother was disabled and addicted to heroin she couldn't read.
And given the numbers that we know in the Freddie Gray neighborhood, 60% dropout rate, 50% eighth grade reading level, over 50% don't have a job.
What's the likelihood that Freddie couldn't read very well?
His mother couldn't.
Freddie was four grades behind in reading, according to the family, who were seeking a cash settlement for lead paint poisoning.
They got $18,000.
Lead paint poisoning.
That's the court case that some people mistook as his spinal injury.
Freddie Gray had two cases pending when he died.
In one, he was charged with a felony for selling heroin.
The police witnessed hand-to-hand exchanges and found drugs in a small potato chip bag hidden in a drain pipe.
And then last year, poor Freddie faced a charge that could have put him away for several years, but the prosecutors agreed not to pursue the case in exchange for Freddie serving a hundred hours of community served.
They didn't want to put him in jail.
You might be shouting, yeah, Rush, because there's no room.
We've put so many African Americans in jail that there's no room.
It's just part of the narrative of all of this.
We only know of Freddie Gray's record since he was of age, since 18.
He died at age 24.
We don't know what he was involved in before he was 18.
This rap sheet of his is for six years.
Now, I'm not saying any of this to attack it, poor guy Freddie Gray.
As I say, the purpose of this is to offer a little perspective, just and it's necessary because we know how they lied and created a false narrative about the gentle giant in Ferguson.
And we know the damage that false is still doing because of the irresponsibility and the abject lying of many in the civil rights community.
How many African American citizens still to this day believe that the gentle giant put his hands up, tried to surrender, and got shot in the back.
It didn't happen.
And yet it is still portrayed that way.
And the same thing with Eric Garner in New York with the young man that was supposedly chokeholded to death.
He wasn't chokeholder to death.
He died of a heart attack in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.
What was this guy doing?
He was selling individual illegal cigarettes.
Individual illegal cigarettes.
That was his job.
Because cigarettes are so expensive in New York because of the taxes.
So we have a circumstance here.
Now the mayor, we had all this to it where the mayor purposely gave protesters room to roam, told the cops to stand back.
We've got eyewitness accounts, ear witness accounts to people who've heard the mayor tell the cops and other authorities to stand back, stand down.
We have the mayor's comment that unfortunately that order led to people who wanted to destroy having the space to do it, but they still didn't move in to stop those people either.
Then they cancel a throw a baseball game yesterday with no fans in it, no fans allowed.
It just all of this is just mind-boggling.
And in the midst of all of it, we hear the president of the United States go on television and blame Republicans for improperly funding inner cities.
So once again, folks, what's happening here on this program by telling you the truth about Freddie Gray is nothing more than an effort to get the truth out to you.
In an onslaught of lies and misstatements and false narratives put forth by the joint drive-by media.
It's simply an effort to defend the institutions and traditions that promote citizenship, peace, tranquility, greatness, you name it.
All of them are under assault, or a great number of them are.
And we, the left makes heroes out of people who do not deserve to be heroes, then they are not heroic.
And when a genuine hero on the left emerges, that person is then set upon if that person as the mother happened to engage in activity to stop her kid from rioting.
The left is now attacking her For child abuse, beating her child in public.
And now we've got the report on Freddie Gray.
The Washington Post story today said that a prisoner in the police van said that it looked like he was trying to injure himself.
Obviously, if that's true, so it can be blamed on the cops.
Whatever has been learned is not going to be released as promised on Friday, because it's obvious that the people running this show in Baltimore and in Washington want to milk as much of this incident as they can for the furtherance of their own political agenda.
Okay, got to take a brief time and I've got to get the phone calls.
People have been waiting for an hour here, but no, I've not forgotten there's a the episode of Madam's secretary on Sunday night.
I still don't believe they did it.
But I'll tell you why they did.
I know why.
I still don't believe they did it.
The subject matter and the conclusion of this episode.
I'm kind of surprised it hasn't gotten any discussion in the entertainment media.
And then I do want to revisit this uh idea that I've grossly exaggerated the percentage of the gay population in this country.
I mistakenly said it's five or six percent, and it's maybe two.
Tops.
But now think about that for a second.
And if you don't realize where I'm going, you don't have to.
I will lead you there when we get back and continue.
Oh yes, yes, that too.
There's there's a huge politico story today.
Clinton Foundation and campaign tail spin.
It's about a handful of deep pocketed donors reconsidering their gifts to the uh Clinton Foundation.
I I thought this was going to happen too.
You don't mind my mentioning it.
It was late last week, or it could have been early this week.
But look, it's obvious to anybody.
You don't give.
This foundation's got two billion dollars in it, folks.
Two billion dollars for Bill Hillary and Chelsea, three individuals.
And I know former president, former Secretary of State, but you've got legitimate charitable foundations don't have anywhere near that kind of money in them.
Two billion dollars.
They don't have two billion dollars in that foundation because people like them.
They don't have two billion dollars in that foundation because they hope they get invited to the next Clinton trip to Africa.
They got two billion dollars, they're people donating because they expect the Clintons to at some point be back in positions of power and be able to return that investment, pay back without the Clintons being in power.
And if the Clintons continue to be humiliated, and if the bloom goes off the road, the people that made all these donations are gonna want their money back out of there.
And that's what the political story is about.
Now, the media and everybody would love you to believe that the Clintons, particularly Bill, are so popular, he is the biggest stud in the Democrat Party.
What does that tell you?
Just so popular, so charismatic, so loved that people just throw money at him and throw women at him and throw anything in the world.
He's such a good guy.
Man, he's one of the greatest guys.
They want you to believe that.
Don't believe it when it comes to people giving tens of millions of dollars to their foundation.
They are giving that money because they expect something back.
And if the Clintons are not gonna be in position to give it back, or if the Clintons become so tainted in the process that the donors end up getting dirty as well, if they're not already, then that's gonna cause them to want to tell you the politico has this huge long story about this today.
But before returning with all that, let me start on the phones, at least to Chicago.
This is uh this Israel.
I'm glad that you waited.
I appreciate that.
Hello.
Not a problem.
Megadetto's from Chicago, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
Um I I back in 91, um I was living in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, and I was living in midst uh Crown Heights riots.
Yes.
And I remember David Dinkins was quoted as saying, let them vent or let them uh vent their anger.
I can't remember exactly what the words were, but um it was uh I believe that that's what um resulted in his um loss of the election, uh the next mayoral election afterwards.
Yeah, that was uh was the name of the there was a victim in these Yankel Rosenblum?
Rosenbaum.
Rosenbaum, that's what Yankee Rosenbaum.
Um I have I have a vague memory.
I rem I remember the Crown Heights riots.
My my memory is vague on the way General Dinkins dealt with it.
Um, I believe that he he held down the police as well.
He didn't he didn't send the police in I I I think the riot started on a Monday, and I think by Wednesday night he had sent in police.
Yeah, yeah, that's right.
That's that I remember that, but I don't remember what he said.
Did he is did was he accused of saying something similar to what the Baltimore mayor has been accused of saying is go ahead, let them riot, let them just kill themselves, tear themselves apart over the.
I think it was I think it was let them vent their anger.
That that was what I remember.
Let them vent their anger.
Then.
And when I heard the Baltimore mayor, you know, allegedly say this today, I thought to myself, you know, that I wouldn't want to point that out to you that Dinkins said the same thing.
Well, it is similar.
Uh it it in the in the Baltimore case, though, what the mayor is quoted as saying, let them loot.
It's only property.
And there's some eyewitnesses, ear witnesses to that.
Now that's that's a little bit worse than let them loot and let them get it out of their system.
Let them riot and let them vent their rage.
Uh neither is admirable.
Don't misunderstand.
Anyway, thanks, Israel.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Yeah, the Crown Heights riots.
General David Dinkins, at that time, the mayor for life, was accused of uh of saying let them vent the Crown Heights riot.
Dinkins, by the way, has said that his um epitaph will read that he screwed up Crown Heights.
Now, I remember both uh General Denkins and Governor Cuomo blamed the police for most of the problems, at least indirectly.
But a report ordered by Cuomo claimed General Dinkins never told the cops to let the rioters vent their rage.
That's officially.
But Dinkins is out saying that's what he said it was a big mistake.
Uh and in in this case, uh damage was done, people were injured, and nobody did anything to stop it.
And the same thing here.
And look at you can you can learn a lesson from this.
When you let the inmates run the asylum, you're going to end up with an asylum.
And here in Baltimore, the same thing.
And it's I'll tell you what feeds this beast is that the protesters and then the violent protesters and rioters have legitimacy.
For all of these age-old discriminations and mistreatments and so forth, they are aggrieved victims, and as such, they are justified in destroying other.
It happened in Ferguson.
Nobody is standing up to stop this stuff, at least when it's when it first starts.
And I'm telling you, the left has this philosophy, and it's convoluted, and it it's it's the way they raise their kids, it's everything.
And that is authority compounds problems.
You have the police and their presence, it's just gonna make the rioters angrier.
This is their belief.
Conversely, if you pull the cops out, you you stand them down, and you may even, if you can make them invisible, then the protesters are going to be even nicer.
And they're gonna be less damaging.
There can be less violence and less property damage if the because the cops are the guilty agent.
The cops are the provocateurs.
Just their presence is what causes all of this.
That's what the left believes.
You can carry it over to the U.S. military and foreign policy.
The exact opposite of what they believe happens to be true.
When you stand down, when you're the uh authority figure of a signal mayor or a governor, and you order the law enforcement agents to stand down, you may as well be sending the signal that you can be had.
You are you are transmitting weakness.
When bad behavior is not punished, when bad behavior is essentially ignored And thus rewarded, it's going to continue.
And this is just, I think, one of many areas where the left is 180 degrees out of phase in human nature.
But again, when you get to the end, the left likes this kind of chaos.
As I say, Obama and his buds are milking Baltimore for as much as they can squeeze out of this.
Just like they did Ferguson, which they're still milking.
Now, Madam Secretary, let me I've teased this enough, and I didn't mean to tease it at all.
Madam Secretary is a fictional show, fictitious show, stars Ta Leone as Secretary of State.
I jokingly say that she's portraying Hillary Clinton.
I don't know what the purpose of the program is.
I thought at one point when the first uh show was first announced that it was an effort by virtue of a TV.
You know how many people cite TV shows in movies when they want to tell you things that really happen.
Oh, yeah, I saw it in a movie.
Yeah, did you see this?
And it ends up being real.
So you do a TV show and you have a strong female character, big strong Secretary of State, you might be trying to subliminally connect with the audience in a way to suggest that Mrs. Clinton's brilliant Secretary of State making a great president.
That might have been the purpose, I don't know.
Anyway, I watch it now and then because I find it entertaining and it's good.
Sunday night's episode was fascinating.
In Sunday night's episode, the President of the United States was welcoming to Washington, the president of Iran, and they were going to sign a treaty in which Iran was promising to not go nuke.
At the same time that this ceremony was to happen, Iran was going to stone to death a militant gay individual who was being stoned to death simply because he was gay.
And the Secretary of State, Taylor, was being blasted by friends of hers in the gay community who were going to protest the signing of the treaty with Iran because of the stoning of the gay man in, which is an execution on the same day.
She was being lobbied, implored to do everything she could to see to it the president didn't sign this to not go through with this because of the way Iran treats homosexuals.
And she tried as best she could.
She asked the Iranians to please move the day of the stoning so that it wouldn't take place on the day of the signing ceremony on the nuke deal.
And this just enraged the gay lobby on this show even more.
You telling me that it's okay if they stone our fellow homosexual just on a different day.
How dare you?
Do you know what happens during a stoning?
And then they detailed it.
And she gets very guilty and starts feeling very, very troubled by this and wishing she could undermine the signing ceremony, but she can't.
She's Secretary of State.
She takes steps, she does everything she can to try to get this not to happen, but it doesn't happen.
And they go ahead and they sign the deal.
This is the part of the show that just done it.
They signed the deal.
But if you watch this show, if you're a low information voter and you happen to be watching this show Sunday night, there is no way you can conclude that there's anything good about Iran, and that there is no way we should be signing an Iranian nuke deal.
And I'm watching this in total shock and dismay.
I'm expecting just the opposite.
But no, if you're a low information viewer and you watch this episode Sunday night, there is no way you could conclude that what Obama's doing is good if you have the mental powers to put two and two together.
The Iranians were portrayed for what they really are.
That we couldn't trust Whatever they sign, that whatever they sign doesn't mean anything, that we can't trust them.
Why are we doing it?
The State Department wanted no part of this, but the president was going to do it for his legacy for whatever.
But the key was the reason, the real reason it shouldn't have happened in this show was because the Iranians were stoning to death a gay man on the same day.
And what the real takeaway for this is in a battle of left wing interest groups on this program, the gay lobby won.
Because on this episode, the real reason Iran looked bad is not because they're going to do nukes, and not because they're dishonest, but because they were they stoned to death a gay individual.
That was why we shouldn't have done the Iran deal.
Not because of nukes, not because we can't trust them.
So I'm imagining this program being written, and I'm imagining the competing forces in the writer's room putting this episode together.
Because I first can't believe that the episode even ran.
This this episode, if if again, if you have any modicum of intelligence watching it, and you're aware that we are engaged in a nuclear negotiation with Iran, there's no way, if you know that, there's no way that you would support Obama going forth if that show made an impression on you.
You would hate the Iranians.
You wouldn't trust them, you wouldn't trust the President Dealy Wood and you'd think you're being lied to by the media about all of it.
And it was that powerful an episode.
The end of that episode, it was clear to anybody watching that any deal with Iran is a huge mistake on a whole number of levels.
But the worst aspect was that they murder gay people.
So the gay lobby is extremely the militant, the political extreme gay lobby, very, very powerful in Hollywood.
And it's why I've also made mention of the fact that I vastly overestimated the percentage of the population in this country that's gay.
I said yesterday it was five or six percent.
And it turns out that it's barely two percent.
This is Gallup, by the way.
And furthermore, there's this.
According to a recent Gallup survey, the total U.S. adult population, 243 million adults, less than one percent of the total U.S. adult population are part of a same-sex couple.8%,
approximately two million adults at the top, the outside, the biggest possible number, two million are part of a same-sex couple out of 243 million Americans.
Now, let me ask you a question before I go to the break.
Let's take two numbers.
The overall gay population, 2%, and by the way, not all of them are militant, and not all of them are leftists.
Not all of them are political.
The gay population is like any other group.
They got people who don't care about politics, they got people that don't want to be known, seen, any of that.
They have people that just don't want to live and let live, they don't, they're not part of any activists, just like every other group you would take of any population, there's a cross-section of people in it.
It's often thought that the entire gay population is militant and leftist and rich and active, and it's not the case.
So the numbers are even smaller.
Population, 2%, the percentage of U.S. adults that are part of a same-sex couple is less than 1%.
And again, not all of those are political activists involved in Democrat Party and Washington politics to affect change.
And yet, this is my question for you.
How let's just round the number up and let's use one.
How can one percent of the population accomplish what it is accomplishing?
How can that happen?
One percent, rounding it up of the population is part of a same-sex couple, not all of them want to get married, it's even smaller.
The percentage of adults who want to give same-sex couples that want to get married one half of one percent, and yet look at what they are accomplishing.
How are they doing it?
How can one percent of the population cause what is happening now?
How can one percent of the population end up ruining and destroying an innocent little family in Indiana that owns a pizza shop?
Or close down a bakery in Oregon, or Colorado, or a flower shop in San Diego, or you name it.
How can less than one percent of the population succeed in getting the whole concept of redefining marriage all the way to the Supreme Court?
How can less than one percent of the population do that?
You think about that, take a break and be back after this.
Don't go away.
Looky what I have here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers, our old buddy Tavis Smiley, who has his own uh radio talk show on uh PBS.
He has an anti-poverty initiative with Cornell West.
And I have praised these guys' efforts.
I think they actually have tried to do some things that improve the situation.
Um I don't know how much success they've had, but but nevertheless, I have singled them out here, just so you know who they are.
Tavis Smiley has an essay in Time magazine where he says that protests and riots and uprisings could become the new normal in America because of racism and poverty.
Racism, ongoing, never-ending racism, ongoing, never ending poverty will possibly lead to ongoing riots and uprisings, and they could become the new norm.
I'm just summarizing the piece.
I haven't read you any details of it yet.
And under the headline of Milking It for All It's Worth, the Reverend Sharpton has spoken up, spoken up.
Al Sharpton has met with the Baltimore mayor.
And the PJ Tettler website says that the mayor of Baltimore and Reverend Sharpton are planning a two-day march from Baltimore to Washington, D.C. Sharpton is quoted as saying, it's concerning to me that a deadline the police themselves had set and announced.
They have now conveniently changed.
Therefore, I decided to go to Baltimore to meet with local leaders and to schedule a two-day march in May from Baltimore to Washington.
He said the march will bring the case of Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, Walter Scott, Eric Harris, to the new attorney general, Loretta Lynch, who in her new role that Sharpton says we all supported, must look and intervene in these cases.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
Notice the name gentle giant is not here in the list of names that the Reverend Sharpton cites.
We're going to bring the case of Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, Walter Scott, Eric Harris, these are some unresolved cases of police brutality and violence against African Americans.
We're going to march from Charms City all the way to Washington over two days, and we're going to take these cases to Loretta Lynch, and we're going to demand, since we supported her becoming a new attorney general, that she get involved and do some justice for us.
And Obama will be there welcoming them to town.
I'm sure the White House will be advising these two on how to get this done.
Well, I say I'm sure I better be a little bit more guarded.
I should somebody probably say that I suspect that there will be guidance and assistance offered from the office of the president to both the Baltimore Mayor and Reverend Sharpton on how to make this two-day march in May as effective as it can be, and what that would be defined as.
How do you define as effective as it could be?
Then you couple that with Tavis Smiley and Time magazine.
Protests and riots could become the new normal.
Yes.
Yes, yes, yes.
Welcome to the New America, folks.
Hope and change.
Yeah, after the seven years, six and a half years after the first African American president's inaugurated.
We have all this rage and anger and promises of a new normal.
How's that happen, huh?
Man, I don't know where the time is going.
All I know is it's racing by.
We only have one hour left.
We make the most of every busy broadcast moment on this program, and we will continue to do so.
▲
Export Selection