All Episodes
Previous Next
May 8, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:45
May 8, 2015, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back.
Great to have your Rush Lidboy here on the cutting edge.
Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
It's Friday.
Let's hit it.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Open line Friday, final big exciting broadcast hour of the week.
Where it is the callers.
When we get to them, get to choose what it is that we talk about.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program 800 282882 in the email address, L Rushpo at EIBNet.com.
Okay, now I'm looking for something here.
Ah man, I just had it here and now I can't find it, and I don't know what to do except to tell you about it on the air and maybe seek some help here.
I've got an audio soundbite here from somebody who claims Hillary gets away with what she gets away with because the Republicans never push back.
And I just thought I had it here, some woman, and I can't find it.
Um I had it right here, and I've gone through this two or three times now.
I cannot find it.
So now I'm beginning to question.
Maybe I didn't see it in the audio sound bites, maybe it's uh something else.
Oh, wait!
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Uh thought I had it, but I don't.
Anyway, I shall find it.
I'll I'll keep looking for it in the um.
I didn't see Peggy Noonan's column.
What's Peggy Noon is?
I'm just told this.
How do Bill and Hillary get away with it?
You know, I'll tell you how Bill and Hillary get away with it.
It's very simple.
It's 14 and 50, that's why I can't find 14 and 15.
I've got everything but 14 and 15.
Okay, so I don't have 14.
I've obviously put them aside somewhere, and now you don't know where I put them.
Oh well.
Um, why do Bill and Hillary get away with it?
I'll tell you why they get away with it.
Because nobody cares if you cheat.
Liberals and Democrats doesn't matter, especially if they're beating conservatives.
They're entitled to do anything.
They can cheat, they can stack the deck, they can have the media unfairly in their corner.
It doesn't matter.
And that's I think that's another uh, you know, it it it it conservatives will not be allowed to cheat and win.
And it may be painting with a a bit of a a broad a broad stroke.
Uh but nevertheless.
See, is it uh okay here I found it.
I've let me get this off my chest, otherwise I'm gonna be distracted trying to find this thing that was right in front of my face.
It's the sm it's this morning on Fox.
Grab number nine.
Audio soundbite number eight.
Eight and nine.
I'll just tell you what I said number eight here.
Brian Kilmead is speaking with the uh uh vice president of communications for a PR firm, FP1 Strategies about this whole situation with Tom Brady and the impact of the Ted Wells report.
And they played a soundbite of me, and then Killmead asked a question.
Why is Tom Brady held to a higher standard than Hillary Clinton?
Do we have it wrong?
And here's the soundbite.
This is this is what they played for the guest who answered the question is number eight, and it was a point that I made yesterday on the program.
If Bill Clinton can get away with blaming their accountant at the Clinton Crime Family Foundation, if the Clintons can get away with it scot-free, then why can't Brady get away with blaming the bull boys?
And I think I made that in the third hour yesterday.
But it's a valid question.
You know, Clinton's running around saying, hey, I just work here, bud.
I don't know.
I mean, I uh just work here.
Uh and well, the accountants made a mistake.
Accountants just made a mistake.
And nobody gets irritated, nobody gets agitated by it.
And it is true.
And I had a caller even bring this up, and I said the reason sports is much more personal.
Now you Bring the Patriots into your home whenever you watch them on Sunday, and if they cheat, if they don't, you mean you you're it's you're personally, you give it a lot of your passion.
These political figures are distant.
You don't know them personally.
And you don't think that you ever will.
You never get that really close to them.
So it's really difficult for them to let you down.
But here is what Ashley Pratt said.
She is, and this is a really bang up good answer.
Again, she's vice president of communications for FP1 strategies, and and Brian Kilmead said, Why are they holding Brady to a higher standard than Hillary Clinton?
Am I wrong in saying Tom Brady's having a harder time than Hillary Clinton?
I've been born and raised a Patriots fan, and I am so glad we won that Super Bowl.
But number two, I am a hardcore Republicans.
What we see with Hillary Clinton is the idea that she and her family have been able to cover up so many things, and it's okay, and we don't keep pressure on her to say you should address this.
Tom Brady came out and did a press conference.
He at least came out and addressed it.
Okay, so they bring on a Patriots fan and a self-described hardcore Republican.
And the point she makes, the reason Hillary gets away with it is because Republicans let her get away with it.
That's the bottom line.
There isn't any pushback.
The Republicans let the Clintons get away with it.
Now, there may be a reason.
The Republicans tried to hold Bill to account with the whole impeachment thing in the 90s that blew up in their face and they are forever afraid.
I think that was a formative experience, as was the government shutdown in 1995.
And the Republicans have been convinced that any criticism or any attempt at accountability of Democrats will backfire on them.
But she's got a good point.
That's one of the reasons the Clintons get away is there's no push, but Democrats aren't going to hold them accountable.
Just like Patriots fans are not going to hold Brady accountable.
You wouldn't expect them to.
What did Peggy Noonan say since you mentioned Peggy Noonan's column?
Did you read it?
Comparing them to Bonnie and Clyde?
Well, Bonnie and Clyde did get away with it ultimately.
Bonnie and Clyde got gunned down, didn't they?
Does Peggy think that Bill and Hillary are not going to make it?
Bonnie and Clyde.
Well, if you don't remember that much, then why did you bring it up?
Every well here now stop and think of this.
Okay, what does this mean?
The Clintons are engaged in chicanery and bribery and selling influence, and everybody knows it, and instead of holding to account, everybody's running around asking how they get away with it.
I mean, back to my favorite analogy.
How does Colonel Sanders get away with killing so many chickens?
At some point, how does when are people going to stop asking how do they get away with it and start holding them accountable?
Now I want to go back to the Bob Costus sound bite for just one moment.
If I can find it, I've got it.
Yeah, I know, but I don't know where number six is anymore.
I put it top, bottom of the stack.
There has to be a better way.
As technologically advanced as I am to still be working with.
I have three sound bites for 25 sound bites, I've got uh eight pages here.
To help you people understand what I'm okay, here it is.
Play it again.
This is Costus answering Lester Holt's question, is this a big deal, or are we making too big a deal about it?
The sort of thing which some view as gamesmanship has been going on for a long time, but it is a rule.
How important is that rule?
Is it as egregious as other forms of cheating?
Did it have the kind of impact on performance that steroid use or other forms of cheating would have?
I don't think so.
In light of the year that the NFL has had and all the attacks on its integrity, and the attacks on the commissioner Roger Goodell for being in some cases too soft.
I think if they go soft on the glamour boy of the league, Tom Brady, and on the Super Bowl champions, they'll be hell to pay.
Now the the question I have about it may be it may be too fine a point or too esoteric.
But Did the NFL really have a bad year, or is it just conventional wisdom to say the NFL had a bad year?
Is Roger Goodell really hated by the fans of the NFL, or is it just conventional wisdom to think so and to say so?
Are the fans really upset about how Goodell handed out punishment for various transgressions?
Or are we just told the fans?
When I look at all of the trappings and the indications, the NFL appears as successful as ever been to me.
Sale of licensed merchandise, television audience size, they're continuing to set records.
Everything the NFL does, even in the off season is more popular than sports in the middle of their seasons.
The NFL draft is a bigger deal than the major league baseball playoffs.
So where is it that the NFL is in dire straits here?
Now, if you're in the media and it is part of your agenda that Goodell's in trouble, if it is your agenda and if it's if it's your narrative, our favorite word, that Goodell is hated and despised because you might hate and despise Goodell.
And then you assume if you do, everybody does.
And if it's your narrative that the NFL has been grossly unfair and inadequate in handing out punishment here and there, Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson and other people get a slap on the wrist.
I think it's all rooted in one thing.
And it is the Ray Rice situation of what happened when Rice got two games, and then everybody saw the video where he slugged his wife and okay, all right, we saw it.
All right, now we'll make it the season, or whatever.
That one incident has now clouded everything that happened in the NFL this season or last season, and as is being reported on as a disaster of a season.
You can find problems with anything.
You can find fault with the NFL here and there.
You know, some of the narratives that we get in these questions, and in Costus' question here, I mean, the punishment of Brady is directly, in his opinion, related to the rotten year the league had and Goodell had, and Goodell in the league had a rotten year because Goodell wasn't strict enough.
So when Goodell was told he had gone too easy on Ray Rice, then he lowered the boom.
And now, if he doesn't lower the boom on the biggest guy in the game, on a Super Bowl champions, don't ignore the racial component here, folks.
Then there's going to be hell to pay.
Now that's how the media is looking at this.
You know, I don't care what media story you read, whenever you see a media story speculating on Brady missing four games, six games of the whole season, it's that narrative in that reporter's mind.
So what happens if the league says, you know what?
We don't have any evidence of anything here.
We don't have any real evidence that Brady let the air out of the footballs.
We don't have any real evidence that Brady ordered it.
We have no basis to suspend him.
Will there be hell to pay?
You know how many people right now think Brady isn't going to get anything?
That the league won't dare suspend the biggest player in the game, particularly for opening night, never gonna happen.
If you want to see that happen, you're whistling Dixie, it isn't gonna happen.
Believe a number of people that think that.
But the media would have us believe that the way the league is looking at this is not whether the circumstances warrant severe punishment suspension, but what are they gonna think of us if we don't do this?
And what will they think of us if we do that?
And if the league is looking at it that way, then that's quite a disservice to the player who's in the crosshairs.
The punishment better have something to do with what the player did or didn't do rather than what the media thinks the PR outcomes are going to be, or is it going to be bigger trouble.
All right, I read the Peggy Noonan piece.
Let me let me sum up the Peggy Noonan.
The headline is how the Clintons get away with it.
The Clintons are protected from charges of corruption by their reputation for corruption.
That's the headline and subhead.
And basically what Peggy Noonan's doing in her piece, the Wall Street Journal, she is complaining about the lack of outrage.
And here's a summation.
If the book is true, the Peter Schweitzer book, if the book is true, if it's half true, it is a dirty story.
It would be good if the public, a Democrat Party, and the Washington political class would register some horror or at least dismay.
Now I understand that.
And I don't want to come off as as mean here, but Peggy.
I don't want to make this personal.
But how many years, Peggy, did you write about how smart and wonderful and brilliant Obama is?
Where was the outrage over what Obama's been doing all these years?
You may not want to put it up there with corruption like the Clintons have been doing, but for crying out loud, the guy's behaving against the law extra constitutionally.
He is not doing one thing he promised he was going to do agenda-wise.
He's ripping his country apart, dividing it on racial lines.
And for the first four years, there wasn't anybody that would complain or have any outrage about what Obama was doing.
Obamacare alone, immigration, you name it.
So it's kind of convenient to come along now and say, where's the outrage about the Clintons?
But there are a lot of us have been wondering where's the outrage at the whole Democrat Party from the Washington establishment for the past six or seven years.
You know, from the well, man, he's got the great crease in his slacks.
Oh, he's smart and well spoken.
This guy's gonna be such a great friend.
The total abandonment of and ignoring of complete knowledge that Obama was an extremist leftist and what that meant for the country and for his agenda was totally ignored.
And I know it's under the guise of, well, you know, we we gotta give him his honeymoon period.
We can't write about what we think he's gonna do.
We have to wiggle, he does it and then write.
Okay, fine.
Where's there's still no outrage over what Obama has done and what he's doing.
And it ranks right up there with whatever the Clintons are messing around in, as far as I'm concerned, are all in the same mix.
Anyway, to the phones.
Don Wichita, great to have you.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Great to speak with you, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
You know, Rush, uh, Tom Brady's openly said in the past that he likes those footballs.
Deflated to the lowest legal level.
And he doesn't do that.
Uh patriot equipment people do that for him.
Ultimately, the league's responsible for checking those footballs.
They they handle the footballs throughout the entire game.
However, I believe in this case, Tom Brady deserves punishment.
Should have to spend three seasons.
Three seasons playing for my Kansas City Chiefs.
No.
You you you mean you would want Brady to have to play behind the offensive line of the Chiefs.
We'll take it to the league, Rashley.
Well, but if Brady can take his offensive line with him to the Chiefs, that's not really gonna be that much punishment.
This this this You had me going there for a minute, Don.
I have to admit, you you you had me going.
I thought we were gonna get some some real hard-hitting uh demands for justice from you.
And maybe we did.
Punish Brady by sending him to the Chiefs.
Jerry in Park Ridge, Illinois.
You're next on open line Friday.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
Hey.
First time I've ever gotten through.
You are a lifer.
That's uh I am.
I appreciate that.
Thank you much.
Oh that was a blast.
Uh at the end of the day.
Well, I'm not even following around a long time.
But uh, I told your screener.
Uh we were talking about the five point four percent amount today, and then the market counts two hundred.
And I don't know how the administration can even put that number out with a straight state.
Our unemployment is actually 5.4% that's 93 million people out of the workforce.
You wonder why and how anybody they can do they can do it because they know they're not going to get any pushback from their media buddies, and they know that most people don't even know what the labor force participation rate is, and they know that most reporters aren't even going to mention that.
Uh and this number that they're now 223,000 jobs added in April, no, that's going to be revised down.
You wait, the next jobs report next month, a month from now, they'll revise that number to probably under 150,000, just like last month's has been revised down.
But your overall point is uh is right on the money, but it's all part of the illusion and the mirage.
And I get I can again, where's the outrage over this?
Where has it been?
Why doesn't the Republican Party push back on some of this stuff for the last six years?
We're back.
It's open line Friday, Rush Limbaugh.
Great to have you here.
I know not a lot of people care about the uh the UK elections.
There's really only one thing you need to know about it, and that is that the polling data in the UK is just as flawed, both pre-election polling and exit polling, as it is uh in this country prior to the election yesterday.
If you're watching cable news at all, you had to see a story about this.
They might not have spent a lot of time on it, but it was about how the conservative, and he's not really a conservative, uh, but he is compared to most of the liberals in the UK, David Cameron, he was gonna get shellacked.
It was over.
He was gonna get snookered.
It's done with.
This is a rotten guy.
He's been in there way too long, and it's about time labor won.
And all the pre-election polling had that as the outcome.
And lo and behold, here's the AP.
Conservatives look to be winners in surprise.
UK election result.
Just exactly what happens here.
You can have a midterm election that the Republicans win big, and the media writes about it as a shock and a surprise.
The pre-election polls never ever, or very seldom, uh, get it right.
And even the exit polls told the incorrect story.
In fact, there's even this.
The politico today, the British press has lost it.
This is the election during which the British press lost it.
There has been no balance in the papers.
The coverage has been unremittingly hostile to Ed Miliban, the radical left labor challenger, with national newspapers backing the left center conservative incumbent David Cameron over radical left labor by a ratio of five to one.
Veteran U.S. campaign manager David Axelrod finds the politicization of the print media in the UK one of the most salient differences with the U.S. Axelrod said, I have worked in aggressive media environments before, but I have never seen anything this partisan.
Yeah, and that's because for the first time in his career, the press was not in his back pocket.
The UK press has lost it because they weren't all in for the radical left Elizabeth Warren type candidate.
And the press in the UK, I tell you, there is a lot of news that the UK press publishes and broadcasts that happens in the United States that the U.S. media does not report on it all.
I can't tell you the number of times we find things in the UK Daily Mail that the American drive-by media never touches.
Uh I I don't I mean I just I just find it amusing that when things don't go the media's way in the UK, then the media's lost it.
The media is in the tank for the wrong guy.
And to have David Axelrod complaining that he's never seen this kind of partisan media environment just means that he has not ever been around when the media is not in his back pocket.
I wonder how it felt.
We had a caller about the jobs numbers, and wondering how in the world anybody administration can publicize these with a straight face.
The answer to that is obvious.
But here are the numbers.
223,000 new jobs.
Yay, 5.4% unemployment rate.
Yay!
Seven year low.
Unstated, 93 million Americans not working.
The U.S. labor force participation rate is at its lowest since 197.
More people capable of working and not working in this country than since 1977.
93 million, folks.
That renders this unemployment number 5.4% utterly irrelevant and useless.
Because that 93 million are not counted.
It is assumed they've given up booking.
And if you're not looking for work, you're not counted as unemployed.
Therefore, you're not in the unemployment rate.
So we have an unemployment rate of 5.4% by virtue of the fact it doesn't count the 93 million not working.
But that's not all.
I'm just going to read to you, MAP.
The report includes signs of sluggishness.
Yes.
March's weak job gain was revised sharply down to just 85,000 from 126,000.
What this means is, last month in March, when the numbers came out in April for March, everybody was saying, 126,000 new jobs.
Well, it's not the best, but we'll take it.
We're on the upswing.
Well, today we get this new number of 223,000 in April, but it wasn't really that good in March.
We had to move that 126,000 down to 85,000.
And this 223,000 is going to be revised down one month from today.
The news media reporting this 223,000 breathlessly.
They may as well just wait for one month for the revision.
Let's go to CNN.
I mentioned earlier that they were ecstatic and confused at the same time.
First, Carol Costello and Christine Romans celebrating a roaring economy.
We do start this hour with breaking news on the economy.
A major sigh of relief on Wall Street today, as we learned just moments ago that 223,000 jobs were added last month.
Christine Romans is following the numbers, as always, so tell us what it means.
A sigh of relief on Wall Street and a sigh of relief on Main Street, Carol.
That trend here is what's important here, that you're creating jobs again and again.
The unemployment rate here falling to the lowest in seven years, 5.4%.
That's, again, what's important here, that the trend has been going down, down, down.
You know, it has not.
They have tried to get us to believe that there is a trend upward in hiring, but a month or two always come along to interrupt it.
It's the trend, Carol.
It's the trend.
There is no upward trend here.
Now, here they are trying to explain to each other the labor force participation rate.
This is the percentage of the American population considered in the labor market.
This number is still too low.
This number is the lowest it's been in decades.
Tell me that number again.
You say that 65% of the population today, less than 65%, are not working.
No, this is 65% of the population less than that in the in the mid-60s are considered part of the labor market.
You want to see that number much, much bigger.
And today it is.
Today it's right down here in the mid-60s the way it was way back in the 70s.
This number is still too low.
This number needs to be higher.
You're going to be hearing this a lot over the next months as we go through this 2016 presidential election.
The number is 93 million.
You guys are skirting around here with what the percentage of the labor force is, and it's meaningless to anybody.
Yeah, it's 65%, but it needs to be much higher than that.
65% not working is what it means.
Well, it means 65% of the labor force is working.
And that translates to 93 million not.
The number is 93 million.
We're not creating jobs.
Anything less than 250,000 jobs a month is not even keeping up with population growth.
We're not creating jobs.
The economy is not growing.
I say frustratedly, month after month after month.
It's open line Friday, Rush Limbaugh meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
This David in Reading, Pennsylvania.
Great to have you.
Hello, sir.
Hey, Russ, it's a pleasure to speak to you today.
I um I appreciate uh the revealing insight you give into a lot of the things happening in our nation today.
Well, I appreciate your saying that, sir.
I really do.
Thank you very much.
I'd like to throw out two quick points and then get to my question if you would indulge me.
Yeah.
Oh, how I wish all eight, ten or twelve Republicans running for president would answer every question they're asked over the next five days with the answer.
Please ask the Hinton, the Clintons, to release the salary list of all persons drawing one from the Clinton Foundation.
Boy, what heads pop to see Chelsea's 995 a year.
Who is drawing over 500,000 a year from that thing would probably be astonishing.
Yeah, I'll tell you something.
You know, in in all fairness, uh I was early on an advocate of these Republican nominees hitting Hillary constantly rather than each other.
And they've done that.
Not so much lately, but early on they were, and it's one of the reasons why there is so much uh focus on Mrs. Clinton and her foundation and her husband, the Peter Schweitzer book is big too.
But the Republicans, they're not doing it as often as you have suggested there, but they're hitting it.
I appreciate that response.
My second point is I I wish when the Narchi Democrats were telling us that scientists say human activity is the cause of global warming.
Why, just one person in the room would ask them what they think ended the last ice age.
I don't think it was SUVs.
I think there was one on all of them.
You're making an error here.
You are assuming that global warming is about science and global warming.
And it isn't.
I mean, there's even somebody somebody left the cat out of the bag the other day.
I don't have it in front of me.
But somebody involved with the United Nations intergovernmental panel on climate change admitted the whole thing is a ruse to empower a new world order, a global government, the whole thing's a ruse.
The scientists want you to take them on science.
They would love because they're making it up.
They're making up this data, they're making up the tree right ice rings and all of this stuff.
You go at this with logic.
Well, wait a minute.
How did the last ice age end?
How did the last ice age start?
I mean, if it's global warming now and man's causing it, what caused the heat up 500,000 years ago.
This has to be attacked ideologically.
If people are going to be convinced about this, it's going to have to be political and ideological, in which these people advocating climate change are defeated.
Because that is the playing field on which it's occurring.
The idea that science is behind this is a smoke screen and a distraction.
It it works with young people to convince them.
But it's it's it's all a gimmick, and they need to be exposed for who they are, and they're not scientists.
They are politicized leftists, hiding behind science.
Thank you very much, my friends, of being with us during this uh whole week.
Uh open line Friday.
I apologize for the brief intervals where things seemed unorganized because they were.
But uh that's my bad, and I have to come up with a new system to keep track of basically a hundred pieces of paper every day.
In the meantime, I hope you have a great weekend.
▲
Export Selection