All Episodes
Previous Next
June 2, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:56
June 2, 2015, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Okay, I am still, folks, I'm I'm I'm hellbent here.
I got so much to do in our remaining busy broadcast hour, so we're gonna get right straight to it.
Great to have you, 800-282-288-2 if you want to be on the program.
And the email address, L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
First off, a first.
A CNN poll.
More people now blame Obama's policies for the current problems in Iraq than blame George W. Bush.
Just hot off the presses.
CNN poll.
I don't have anything other than the numbers here.
I have no, I don't know if it's CNN orc, uh, CNN whale, CNN Shark.
I have no idea who it did the poll.
Other than CNN.
I don't know who to polster conspirators are, but uh more people now blame Obama's policies for the the current mess in Iraq than blame Bush's policies.
And this comes on the heel of Obama saying that he's done more to put the image of the U.S. back together again and make us loved and respected and adored than at any time in recent memory.
Freaking croc.
Okay, telephone numbers 800-282, 2882 if you want to be on the program.
Do you folks, do you remember?
Um over the course of many years in the past, my expressing grave concern to you over the rise in popularity of social media.
And not because it's a competitor here.
I don't even look at it as that.
My my concern has been for the impact on our culture, the impact in our country.
And I know many of you are going to remember this.
Some of you who have forgotten it will remember it when I mention it to you.
The biggest problem or fear that I had associated with social media was what I saw as this overwhelming quest for fame on the part of people.
And it was leading them to do things, to say things, to engage in things for the express purpose of getting noticed.
Because they so desperately wanted fame.
And it it it it is directly proportionate to the rise in entertainment media.
Entertainment media is known for for something that's, I think, unique in all other media.
Well, maybe sports media has the same thing.
And that is that everybody covered is idolized.
Everybody reported on is idolized.
Actors, actresses, TV stars, musical artists.
And in the sports world, the athletes.
There are exceptions, of course.
Um if they discover an athlete's a Republican or conservative or uh Ray Rice type thing.
But for the most part, in sports and entertainment media, it's total lionization and idolatry.
And it is in the in the mainstream media, it is too for most Democrats, but not always, because the mainstream media is also filled with bunch of things the entertainment media is not.
You may not wholeheartedly agree, but the mainstream media is as critical of Republicans as it is praising of Democrats.
So in the mainstream media, you see criticism.
You see hard-hitting questions, you see disrespect shown in to largely successful people, by the way, conservatives.
Pick your conservative, pick your Republican.
They're they're destroyed.
The attempt is made to destroy them.
In the entertainment media, it doesn't happen.
You could be the biggest reprobate in the world, and you will be celebrated and lionized and put on a pedestal.
And my contention has been that people in social media have they been watching all this entertainment stuff from entertainment tonight to eentertainment network.
You know, some people are able to watch it and keep it separate, but a lot of people watch it and want to be part of it.
And they see the lifestyles portrayed by these shows and oh, wow, man, I want to do that.
So cool.
Because to them it's all red carpets.
It's all parties.
And if they're guys, it's all parties with models.
I mean, if you ask them what they think of Leonardo DiCaprio, I guarantee you the last thing they're gonna think of, hard work.
They're not when they think Leonardo DiCaprio, or when they think take your pick, they're not gonna think work.
They're not gonna think study, they're gonna think party.
And so social media has provided this opportunity for people to try to become famous.
The reality TV came along and started plucking some of these poor souls from what is a well-deserved obscurity and making them famous.
And then they get torn down and ripped to shreds.
And you know who I'm talking about, these poor schlubs that end up on these uh TV shows of family with 19 kids or the octaum or all this stuff, it's just to me it has been coarsening and destructive to our entire culture.
And I think that's where all of this Caitlin Jennings uh uh gender stuff is.
I don't think that you can take the celebrity component out of this in terms of why it's news and in terms of why it's promoted and accepted and all that.
And I know there are many factors involved here, but there is something falling by the wayside while all of this is happening, and let me see if I can find it.
I've got a uh that little piece that I shared with you from a blog earlier today, let me read this to you again.
Because by the way, this goes to exactly what I was saying before the break at the top of the hour, that this quest to redefine normalcy has another component to it, which is to redefine the new weirdos.
And that's us, folks.
Conservatives and Republicans are the new weirdos, the new kooks.
And that is part of the political objective here in normalizing all of this really marginal behavior.
I mean, if if less than one percent of the population is engaging in it, it's marginalized behavior.
It isn't normal, no matter how you define it.
But the quest to make it normal contains with it the objective to make the people who might disapprove of it or the people that don't do it, weirdos and kooks.
And that's where the Republican branding problem resides, because the objective here is to be to portray the old norms and the practitioners of the old norms as the deadbeats, the dry balls, the the sticks in the mud, or worse, the racist, sexist, bigot, homophobes, but they're the weirdos.
And and all of this other behavior, however, you want to describe it, is celebrated now as a new norm, and we need to have a conversation about it.
And the reason we need to have a conversation is to rip and criticize the arbiters of the old norms, which happens to be religion, Christianity, conservatism, republicanism, you name it.
Do not doubt me on this.
And if I'm going by too fast, please go back to my website later today and reread this and study it and understand it because it's exactly what's going on.
I quoted to you earlier a couple of short passages from a blog.
I didn't identify the blog, but I told you it's a conservative Republican blog.
I'm going to quote it again, because it proves the point that I just made to you.
With the momentum from this announcement and affiliation, Caitlin Jenner inadvertently gave the Republican Party something it really, really desperately needs.
Street cred.
Simply put, an understanding sense of humanity.
So here we have a conservative blog celebrating the fact because Caitlin Jenner has identified as a Republican, this is great news for us.
Because this is going to show people that we're human.
And that we've got credibility.
And look at here you have a transgender who feels totally at home in the Republican Party.
And this is written about here as a big plus for us.
Why is this a big plus?
It's a big plus because whoever wrote this is of the belief that all the criticism of us, racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, oddball, weird all, is true.
Or at least it's thought to be true.
So something like this, which is grasping at a straw, if you ask me, but something like this is, ah, now this, this is a great opportunity for us.
And then the next line is this.
If the Republican Party overall was to warm up to these differences, i.e., embrace all of this, gay marriage, homosexuality, gay rights, transgenderism, and wait till you hear what trans able is.
If we were to just, if we'd warm up to all these, and then use them as a broader tool to crush problems and not people.
So the Assumption here from a conservative blog is that the conservative movement, the Republican Party crushes people.
How do we do that?
Well, we obviously discriminate.
And this is remember now, this is not a left-wing blog writing this.
This is a conservative blog writing this, thinking this is all a great thing because it'll allow us to show that we're not mean spirited, or we have a chance to prove it to people.
Well, once again, we're left with having to prove a damn negative, which you can't do.
And here you have somebody accepting the premise that the left has postulated that we are racist, sexist, big and homophobes.
It's just absolute nonsense.
But that's where we are.
No doubt this person's young writing this.
And the last line of this little passage is use them as a broader tool to crush people, or crush problems, not people, problems that really matter, like insurmountable national and student debt, ever increasing national security threats, and domestic encroachments on constitutional liberty, Democrats would not stand a chance.
So the theory here is if we just embrace people like Caitlin Jenner and gay rights and gay marriage.
If we just embrace that, we could wipe the Democrats out because then we can get people's attention and focus them on the real problems debt, student alone, national debt, taxes spending, and all that.
Well, the blog was hot air.
For those of you who want to know, I'm not going to mention the name.
I didn't print the name because I didn't want to get into the name, I don't want to make it about names.
And mere moments ago, Ed Morrissey, who is, I think it's management slash ownership, sent me his latest post, and he sent it to a lot of people.
Uh and he said, I respectfully dissent from my colleagues.
Well, I didn't know what he meant.
So I read it during the top of the hour break.
Goes into this business of uh it's a it's a Canada national post story today about uh transabled.
And when he heard about it, he thought it's a put this is the onion.
He thought this is satire, somebody making a joke about it, and and it's not, and I'll get to that here in just a second.
I want to get to his analysis, because it is so close to uh to mine.
He says we are celebrating the end of natural and objective truth.
And we are turning dysfunction into virtue on the basis of celebrity.
And not only that, but many people suffer from disability without much choice in the matter.
My wife, for one, who lost her eyesight at 24 from diabetic retinopathy.
This turns their challenges into sport or status symbols in a very odd manner, and mainstreaming is not healthy.
And I think he's exactly right.
What is the natural the great loss here is truth, objective truth.
And we're turning dysfunction into virtue.
But it's the celebrity component that provides the basis for it.
The celebrity component which makes it acceptable.
The celebrity component, which not only acceptable, but even admirable.
Because celebrities are the closest thing we've got to royalty in our country.
Oh, if they do it, it's got to be cooled.
And with so many young people wanting to be just like them, it's it's a self-feeding destruction.
Now, what is transabled?
Get ready for this.
From the Canada National Post, when he cut off his right arm with a very sharp power tool.
A man who now calls himself one-hand Jason, let everybody believe it was an accident.
But he had for months tried different ways of cutting and crushing the limb that never quite felt like his own.
Training himself on first aid so he wouldn't bleed to death, even practicing on animal parts sourced from a butcher.
He said, My goal was to get the job done with no hope of reconstruction or reattachment, and I wanted some method that I could actually bring myself to do.
His goal was to become disabled.
People like Jason have been classified as transabled, feeling like imposters in their bodies, their arms and legs in full working order, everything fine, but I don't feel like I should have a left arm.
This is what Morrissey read and thought it was a parody.
Morrissey says, you know, I the last thing I'm going to do is comment on this, as though it's true if I'm not going to be embarrassed.
If somebody's making a big joke here in the midst of all this, I'm going to find out.
He researched it.
It's not a joke.
Transabled are people who are just fine physically and they're perfectly healthy, but they feel disabled and they feel like their left arm to right arm is unnatural and shouldn't have been there, and they shouldn't have been born with it, and they want to get rid of it.
And none of this is made up.
Snerdley is looking at me like he still doesn't believe this.
We define, well, people like Jason have been classified as transabled, feeling like imposters in their bodies, their arms and legs in full working order.
Uh, Alexander Barrel, a Quebec-born academic who is going to present on transibility at this week's Congress of the Social Sciences and Humanities at the University of Ottawa.
So there this is a whole academic presentation.
And the guy doing the presentation says we define transability as the desire or the need for a person identified as able-bodied by other people to transform his or her body to obtain a physical impairment.
The person could want to become deaf.
The person could want to become blind.
The person could want to become an amputee or a paraplegic.
It's a really, really strong desire.
Researchers in Canada are trying to better understand how transabled people think and feel.
Well, folks, does anybody want to seriously make the case that this is normal?
This this obvious, these people need serious help.
But they're not going to get it.
What's going to happen is, well, we must respect their feelings.
They're human beings, and if they don't think they should have a left arm, then we'll facilitate them losing their left arm.
That's what this presenter is going to do.
Most of the transabled are men, about half are in Germany and Switzerland, but uh the doctor here knows of a few in Canada.
Most crave an amputation or paralysis, though he has interviewed one person who wants his penis removed, another wants to be blind, transabled.
And we must not judge, you see.
We must not judge.
And so they and we must not condemn.
But these people need prayer and help.
They don't need assistance in what they want to do.
Where do you draw the line here?
There has to be a limit on this.
What if I decide I want to X?
At some point, somebody's going to stand up and say, we're dealing with people who need some serious help here.
This is not something we need to be celebrating.
We certainly don't need to be promoting it.
We don't need to be encouraging it.
It's not good for them, and we are guilty ourselves if we help them engage in all of this behavior that's going to hurt them or harm them.
I I think this is long gotten out of control, folks.
From the compassion side of things, this is just all of this so-called tolerance, you and I'm telling you to understand it, because it logically makes no sense.
But if you put it in the political context and arena where it lives, you will find the motivation for it.
And even spelling it out, making it as crystal clear as I have, I know some people still are not going to believe it or accept it, meaning this is ultimately a political Agenda aimed at us.
But it is.
And it's been this is not the first.
We've been in this war for years now, and this war is successful.
We are in the process.
Whenever you hear the whole subject of the Republican branding problem, it's exactly what we're talking about.
The we're letting the left choose our candidates.
We're letting left define who we are, both as a as a party and this and attitudinally.
Make no mistake about it.
It is happening out there.
And every one of these people, now the disabled, the transgendered, they become tools.
And further, the left gets to pretend they care about individuals when all they're doing is taking these sad cases of confused people and encouraging a total socialist collectivist government.
Okay, folks, a uh a quick pregunta.
Little Spanish lingo there for question.
What if a woman said that she wanted to marry a dolphin?
She wanted to uh gauge in sexual relations with a dolphin with a flying finger of fate.
And what would you what would you say?
No, no, that's a serious, serious question.
For those of you in the audience, what would you say?
Because our society today is say, well, we must understand her desires.
Uh nothing is uh to be condemned.
Um if that's what she wants, if that's how she feels.
We hey, we've redefined marriage now.
So if I've wanted to always, you know, have two women in my bed every night.
I mean, who's to condemn it?
As long as we love each other and it's nobody's business who I love.
What what what is your reaction?
If we're not gonna if we're gonna allow all of these norms to be evaporated in blown smitharines, at what point kind of like the minimum wage, at what point do you say, okay, no, no, we don't need to raise it that much.
At what point does our society say no, no, no, wait a minute.
Not not really gonna go that far.
Because we haven't gotten there with this this transable business.
We got people actually thinking of enabling this.
Somebody wants to go blind, we're gonna facilitate it.
Some academician in Canada thinks we need to help these people.
If they want to miss their left arm, they don't they feel like they shouldn't have it.
They they they just feel abnormal.
That left arm doesn't feel like theirs, it's somebody at least get rid of it.
We don't have this is at what point do we reach the end of tolerance?
So a woman comes along and says, you know, I I I really uh have sex with dolphin.
Well, it's happened.
It happened more than once, but it happened in the U.K. And I don't remember the exact year, but we talked about it on this program, and we had a lot of fun with it, in fact.
But it was in the 90s sometime.
The woman was dead serious, and she was thought to be ill.
At the time it happened, there wasn't it wasn't that long ago, but there wasn't anybody who wanted to make it happen for her.
There wasn't anybody around to facilitate it, there wasn't anybody around it promoted.
Nobody said we need to have a conversation about this.
How many stories?
Remember the stories they had about these uh this this this uh twisted mind that was having sex with horses out in uh in Oregon.
It wasn't my point, wasn't that long ago that we were condemning this stuff uh and and deciding that the people expressing these desires needed help.
Now look at the direction we're going here.
I'm just trying to point all this out.
Here's uh here's Craig in St. Louis.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
Great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hey, Russ.
Uh wow.
Great to talk to you.
Thank you, sir.
Very much.
The main reason I'm calling is it just to me it's like everything.
The liberals keep throwing out war on women, war on women, because the reality is there's a war on type males everywhere.
Ferguson, um, they're coddled to death.
Type A males, the police.
They're they're shackled, basically.
Um, that was a really lousy choice of words, but umitary.
Uh American sniper, when that comes out, it's trashed.
Why?
Type A mail.
Right.
Um.
Everything.
I hear you.
It's here.
Let me give it an You will not believe this.
This is real, too.
This is in the New York Times.
Craig, let me ask you a question.
Are you sitting down?
Yes.
Okay.
How are you sitting?
On my butt.
Yeah, but like, are you sitting like a man sits or your legs crossed like women sit?
I'm sitting like a man sits.
Okay, well, you could be thrown off the New York subway.
Man spreading is right.
Bad news men with poor sense of boundaries.
The NYPD, this is from the UK Telegraph.
The NYPD has had enough of the way you sit in public transit.
After op-eds in the New York Times, and a popular crowd shaming tumbler campaign, and a series of public service ads from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, manspreading or sitting with your legs too far apart has become a criminal offense.
According to a recent report from the police reform organizing project, at least two men have been arrested and charged on grounds of the manspreading word, quote, presumably because they were taking up more than one seat and therefore inconveniencing other writers.
Rather than simply throwing out the charges, the judge issued an order that only guarantees the men will not suffer further repercussions if they avoid getting arrested again.
It's all part of a numbers-driven crackdown on subway behavior that's uh also seen arrest for breakdancing, walking between the cars, and collective air punch, people putting their feet on the seats.
Nobody's been arrested for playing dubstep on audio, leaking headphones yet, but it's surely only a matter of time.
This is the man sitting like men sit.
It's called it's got a name.
It's called Manspreader.
I know.
I've heard of this.
Manspreading.
And it's now a crime.
You want to talk about war on men?
Who do you think is behind this?
Did you hear what Huckabee said?
Huckabee said he I just I just saw this.
Uh speaking about transgendered people, he was uh it was earlier this year at uh the National Religious Broadcasters Convention in Nashville.
He said he wished he could have said that he was transgendered in high school so he could shower with the girls too.
Now and his point is that there's a lot of people out there just making it up.
They're not really transgendered.
They just want entree to women.
And what better way than to say you are one, that you're an oppressed woman, that you're at a woman trapped in a man's body.
Well, hello, unisex bathrooms.
Look at what we are stretching to accommodate what is clearly way out of the mainstream kind of behavior.
And then along comes Christine Brisbane.
We need to have a conversation about that.
Which I've already told you what that means.
Don't need to repeat it.
Try this.
UK Daily Mail.
Headline, lesbian Virginia Tech student killed her lover after flying into a rage because she wore sweats to their whipped cream and wine date.
Not making this up either.
A former Virginia Tech student has been sentenced to 45 years in prison for the 2014 murder of Another female student who she brutally strangled after the victim wrote that their lesbian fling was no big deal.
It was just an experiment.
Jessica Michelle Ewing 24 gave detailed testimony at her sentencing hearing on Monday of the evening leading up to the murder of 21-year-old biology student Samantha Schresta.
Ewing started the night with high hopes, wearing a dress, bringing along wine and whipped cream, a combination I'm not totally familiar with myself, but don't want to be judgmental here.
Brian, you ever heard of wine and whipped cream?
Dawn, you're into the kinky.
You heard it of wine and whipped cream.
Snerdley is a vegan, so he wouldn't know.
Ewing, well, me too, with Whitpreet, lots of other things, but not wine.
Silk and Swirl, for example, with a cherry stem.
Now that is an art.
But anyway, Ewing started the night.
This is Jessica Michelle Ewing, the murderess.
Ewing started the night with high hopes.
She wore dress.
She brought wine and whipped cream while her lesbian buddy wore sweats and a t-shirt.
It wasn't my intent to kill Jessica Michelle Ewing cried on the witness stand in Christianburg, Virginia on Monday as she described the night that ended in the strangling death of Samantha Schrester.
This happened in 2014.
She told the court that she was disappointed, but that eventually Schrefa put on a dress of her own, and the two downed a bottle of wine after having a whipped cream fight.
And building a fort out of blankets, reports of the Roanoke Times.
But the mood soon soured after Ewing called Schresta a spoiled B.I. itch, at which point Schrefa shocked back that they were just experimenting.
This lesbian thing, and she was just toying with Jessica Ewing.
When Jessica Ewing wasn't toying or experimenting, she says, I loved Samantha.
I couldn't believe she would say that I was some experiment to her.
It hit me where I was hurt the most.
And so Ewing hit back.
Her cause of death would later be deemed a strangulation, though blunt force injuries would also be discovered on the head and body.
I made the most horrible decision to cover it all up to hide it, Ewing said.
I wish I I wish I just called 911, but at that point, it was just too late.
Schretzda's uh Schresta's really weird name, S-H-R-E-S-T-H-A.
Shreth's Schresta.
Their body was discovered stuffed in a sleeping bag in the backseat of her abandoned Mercedes.
In February of 2014.
The judge sentenced Ewing to 80 years for first degree murder and five years for transporting and doing weird things with whipped cream.
Now who's to say this is wrong?
I mean, there's a big insult here.
A lesbian was insulted.
The lesbian thought it was real, but her partner said, I'm just toying with you.
I'm just experimenting.
Well, that's humiliating.
That's degrading.
That's using food.
I mean, that's it's understandable.
Somebody'd be totally outraged over that.
And who's to say that's wrong?
Who's to say anything's wrong, folks?
Come on.
We must be enlightened here.
Brian, have you heard uh anything more from FedEx?
Oh, it's in Memphis.
Finally got out of Burbank.
Well, how timely.
So may yet be delivered.
Blue Cross wants 26% more for individual Obamacare policies.
Blue Cross Blue Shield officials say they plan to increase insurance rates for people under 65 who are enrolled in Obamacare.
And that's just one.
Another story: health insurers seek big premium hikes for Obamacare plans in 2016, because there aren't enough signups, folks.
The groups aren't big enough to get the prices.
The prices weren't going to come down anyway.
Nobody's premium was ever going to be cut by $2,500, like Obama lied.
And quite the contrary, now everything is going up.
And you know, there are going to be people shocked and stuff, because there are a lot of people that bought everything Obama promised about this.
Cheaper coverage, easier access to treatment.
You wait.
It's gonna blow up the time next year comes around.
Here's Tina in New Orleans.
Great to have you on the program.
Tina, hello.
Hey Rog, I wanted to get right to the point.
I am the mom of three millennials, and my son, middle son, went for an interview with a um aide to a politician, and he said he told the aide, you know, forget the American dream anymore.
It's more like the American fantasy to graduate and get a job in something you want to be in and be paid for it.
Wait, wait, wait.
This is the politician told your son this?
No, my son told the aide of the politician.
Oh, your son, the millennial, told the politician.
Oh, the aid of the politician.
And he agreed with them.
He was the chief of staff, but now wait.
Um does your son believe it or was he just being provocative?
No.
He believes it.
His son believes, and he's a millennial, makes America's best days behind us, obviously.
No, no, no.
He's he no.
He blames the uh economy, some of the the uh politicians, and possibly Barack, but not exclusively.
Um, he does not, he just thinks it's a fantasy, not a dream anymore to get the job you want and be paid for it.
You know.
Right.
And you graduate.
Right.
So he thinks the country's best days are behind us.
He thinks there's no more American dreams, the American fantasy.
And your point is that the guy he was interviewing with, a politician's aide, agreed with him.
Exactly.
And so what does that tell you?
Well, I don't have time for you to tell me what I think I know anyway, because that's the point of your call, but I'm simply uh out of time.
Well, if elected officials are confirming American Dreams over, what the hell?
Look at this headline here in the New York Post.
The feminist revolution is eating its own.
Naomi Schaeffer Riley.
Feminist revolution eating its own.
That sounds nasty.
Doesn't it?
▲
Export Selection