All Episodes
Previous Next
June 12, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:04
June 12, 2015, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Thank you, and welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Rush, of course, back on Monday.
But in the meantime, of course, this is Friday, and I've got a bunch of wrap-up stuff I want to talk about from this incredible week.
We are watching the screens, by the way, because we are, and you stay with us because we're watching for this incredibly important vote on the trade, Pacific Trade Partnership thing that's coming up in the House of Representatives, where, and this is so curious, so interesting, the Republicans are about to bail out Obama because the Democrats don't support him on this trade agreement because organized labor is totally opposed to it as a result of their NAFTA experience, once burned twice shy, so they're after this thing.
We'll get all the details of that and what the vote means when it comes up.
And we're oh, and following, of course, the court decisions on immigration, on Obamacare, the latest on all of that.
And I am, interestingly enough, not behind a golden microphone.
This is, what is this?
Kind of a pot metal.
I don't know, it's some kind of a microphone here that they provided me in the studio.
And we are coming, you know, the announcer said golden state.
That's a little archaic.
We actually live in a one-party dictatorship here in California.
The once golden state is now a refuge for every kind of nonsense you can imagine in the political system, all of it being touted as fairness and the rest.
And I think we live to summarize it, we live in the third term of Barack Obama.
We are living it.
So I'm going to bring a little bit of that to you today, too, because it involves something that is also true about the trade agreement, that's also true about a couple of things happening in this country, and that is that we're so much, particularly with the media and academia behind them, we're so much into a one-party state mentality.
You know, anybody who isn't into the one-party agenda is somehow on the fringe, somehow marginalized, somehow crazy, a wacko.
So, as Rush put it about the transgender, you know, that's now the new normal.
Everybody else is abnormal.
That's normal.
So, we're going to go through that today, too, because it turns out that there are fissures and cracks.
And, you know, I come from earthquake countries, so we talk this vocabulary.
There are fissures and cracks in the whole Democratic pantheon here, and they are local, they are national, they're state.
We'll talk about all of that.
But let me just say that I thought the best call from last week when Rush was on in the discussion about the transgender, Caitlin Jenner, that the discussion got a phone call from a young man who described himself as a young white man who was coming out on the air on the national program, coming out as an African American.
He had suppressed it for so long, his entire life, he had suppressed the fact that inside, in his core being, he was an African American.
And he was now suddenly had the courage, and he's going to get a courage award for this, the courage to come out and finally be who he is.
And I thought, and Rush, Rush absolutely did the right thing.
I mean, he not only allowed this young man to just bear his soul, but to come out and to be sympathetic to it.
It was just a wonderful moment in radio history.
And I thought in California Parks, we've done, this has happened a long time ago.
You may remember Michael Jackson, who actually was born a young black man and then became a middle-aged white woman.
So it's, you know, there's been a lot of transformations in California that have kind of prefigured, predicted what would happen in the national context.
Because we're always California's always ahead of the curve.
We had more opportunity, you know, back in the 50s and 60s than in the rest of the country.
We had the Beach Boys, we had surfing.
Now we have, you know, Hugo Chavez, basically.
Well, ahead of the, well, you know, Snerdley's objecting to ahead of the curve.
Yes, because we all know that, of course, we are on our way to the blissful utopia of a Hugo Chavez-type economy and a culture.
But I want to get back to this courageous young man who came out because now there's a backlash.
And I'm resisting it.
There's a backlash that's going on in Spokane, Washington.
Rachel Dolezal is the chairperson of the Spokane Police Ombudsman Commission.
She lists herself as a black woman.
She is also a, let's see, on her application, she says she's part white, part African American, Native American, and to other races.
She is a professor, of course, and she is at the Professor of Africana Studies at Eastern Washington University and former instructor at North Idaho College in Courtelaine in African-American culture.
Now, the problem is her parents say, Rachel's white.
She's of Czech-German background.
Parents live in Montana.
They produced a picture of her in high school.
Very fair skin, excuse me, blonde hair, blue eyes.
You see, this is the kind of negative backlash that I just don't like.
If a person is, you know, whatever they are in their core, this culture demands that you come out and be who you are.
When confronted with the fact that she's actually Caucasian, Rachel said she's going to have to have a discussion with her fellow commissioners there at the Police Ombudsman Commission.
And she's going to have to explain that DNA isn't necessarily the final determinant.
It isn't necessarily the final word.
No.
In fact, as we all know, there's a lot of other things going on inside.
And it may be that while the outer DNA, physical plumbing, appearance thing, you know, people used to want to be white.
There was all kinds, you know, in the 20s and 30s, there were all kinds of black people who tried everything they could do to pass for white.
Remember that phrase from the old days?
Pass for white.
Now it seems like it's a reverse trend.
The tide is going the other way.
So I'm trying, ladies and gentlemen, to grapple with the inconsistencies in my own background.
I was born in Compton, California.
Yo.
And yeah.
So, but I'm not quite there yet.
You know what I'm saying?
But I am exploring my own background.
And Rachel, God bless you.
Looking forward to your struggle.
Yeah.
I am from AH, Compton, California.
Anyway, I'm not through with this.
Here's another thing that I think we've got to be sensitive to.
I want to tell you the story here, not only about Rachel, but let's bring in one hand Jason.
One hand Jason is my next honoree in this pantheon of people coming out for who they truly are.
Because we've had transgender, we have transracial, we just talked about.
How about how about transabled?
One hand Jason was a completely formed human being who felt that his arm never felt like it really belonged to his body.
Now stay with me, you think I'm kidding here.
This is a true story from Ottawa, Canada.
It was in the National Post in Ottawa earlier this week.
And one hand Jason practiced for months different ways of cutting off his right arm to save himself from bleeding to death.
He practiced on animal parts.
His job, he said, his goal was to get the job done with no hope of reconstruction or reattachment.
He said, I don't want this arm back.
It doesn't belong to me.
And he cut it off.
And this has caused a firestorm of support.
Alexander Buril is a Quebec-born academic at the University of Ottawa.
In this week's Congress of the Social Sciences and Humanities at the University in Canada, he's going to present a paper on transability, which is, he defines it, the desire, quote, 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.
He says the person could want to become deaf, blind, amputee, paraplegic.
It's really, he says, a very strong desire.
Researchers in Canada are taking this seriously.
They want to know more about it.
One of their experts is Clive Baldwin, Canada Research Chair in Narrative Studies at St. Thomas University in Fredericton.
Fredericton.
Anyway, he has interviewed 37 people worldwide who identify as trans-abled, people who have had accidents, people who have deliberately cut off parts of their body.
Now, Burrell is an interesting guy.
He is a visiting scholar of feminist gender and sexuality studies at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut.
He is disabled and transgender.
Two heroes in one.
Transabled and transgendered.
You just don't get more 21st century than that.
Now, what irritates me about this a little bit is that none of these people from California keep in mind that California is supposed to be ahead of the curve.
My fellow Californians, if you're listening, we are behind on this.
Not one Californian is quoted in this article.
Of course, this is, as we know, the end of the week, and it is Open Line Friday.
Welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh Program.
Roger Hedgecock here from San Diego, California.
A little bit peeved because we're not on the cutting edge here in California on this transabled thing.
We'll talk about that.
The phone number, of course, is 800-282-2882, 800-282-2882.
Lots of calls coming in anyway.
I don't know that I have to give that phone number after all these years.
By the way, one more thing on Canada before we do take some calls.
One more thing on Canada in the New York Times, which, by the way, do you know the New York Times is only still in existence because of a Mexican billionaire, Carlos Slim, right?
And has a couple of other names.
And I don't think they pronounce it Slim in Mexico, but because he's fat, I don't even understand the whole thing.
But anyway, Carlos Slim is a billionaire.
In fact, he is the richest.
You talk about income inequality.
I mean, the average Mexican makes about $800 a month, maybe.
And Carlos Slim makes about $8 billion a year.
So Carlos Slim buys a portion of the New York Times in order to save it from going into bankruptcy, the Salzburger family and so forth.
So now it has become not only a mouthpiece for the left, which it always was in my lifetime, but is now particularly a mouthpiece for those, and we'll get to immigration later in the program, for those who want basically to empty Mexico out into the United States.
So we'll get to that.
But the New York Times published this to get back to Canada and the trans-abled and one-hand Jason and all of that.
Canada has had a truth and reconciliation commission.
Truth and reconciliation.
I mean, the nicest people in the world are Canadians.
What do they have to reconcile about?
The nicest, most polite people in the world are Canadians.
The commission is led by Justice Murray Sinclair, who, despite his name, is a Native American of the Ojibwa tribe.
He's the first Aboriginal judge in the province of Manitoba, Canada.
He says reconciliation means that Canada must apologize, and more than that, do reparations because of an attempt at assimilation, an attempt by Canada from 1883 until the last school closed in 1998 to take the Aboriginal Indian, Inuit, Eskimo, what have you, Indigenous children,
and educate them to be civilized Canadians.
We're going to need one of these reconciliation commissions in the United States in the near future because liberals, since about 1960, have used the government school system, the K-12 system in this country, to force an assimilation to the liberal agenda on our children.
I think this is a wonderful idea: the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
If Republicans were really on top of this, if they really wanted to get the attention of Americans, they would propose a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to investigate the 55 years of indoctrination our children have gone through to de-Americanize them and to turn them into, I don't know, Frenchmen.
I mean, just to take an example, Venezuelans, any country with a socialist mentality.
That is, that is what we must do.
We must have reparations.
We must have a re-Americanization plan because our native culture of freedom, independence, personal responsibility, a free market has been totally trashed in these government schools.
Our culture has been devastated.
I could be the chairman of this commission.
That would be fun stuff.
800-282-2882.
Now, we do want to get, and I'm watching, I don't know, we're not close to this vote, I guess.
We're watching the trade situation.
And the reason I'm watching the trade situation is because, and who knows anything about, I mean, this trade situation for most people is just way over their head.
I mean, what are we talking about?
Well, it's way over Congress's head.
It's 800 pages in 29 chapters, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, that they cannot see.
If they want to see it, they have to go to a secret room on Capitol Hill, sign in, leave there any recording device or cell phones at the door.
They may read in this little room, apparently.
They may read the 800 pages if they're on a relevant committee, not everybody in Congress, just on the relevant committees.
And then they cannot make notes.
They cannot make recordings.
They cannot take a copy.
And they may not disclose to anyone, including another member of Congress, what they've read.
Excuse me, let me raise my hand.
Are we still in a constitutional republic?
Is there any vestige of a constitutional republic left here?
And then, of course, there's the opposition.
No matter what the elites do in a so-called free trade agreement, organized labor in this country is of the opinion, since NAFTA in the last 20-some years, of the opinion that all these free trade agreements simply result in the loss of American jobs and downward pressures on wages for everybody that's left.
Duh, hard to argue with that.
So Democrats are caught in a real pickle because, for whatever reason, and the question is being asked publicly today: why is Obama supporting this?
Why is he supporting this?
That is the question that, I mean, it's reverberating through liberal and progressive circles today because labor has just gone to the mattresses.
You know, this is the moment.
They have taken in California, and I say this because this is what aroused my interest in this whole thing, they have taken our local Congress members, Susan Davis and Scott Peters, two Democrats, and run political ads, I mean, radio and television ads against them, saying you better vote against this TPP.
It's a destroyer of American jobs and so forth and so on.
Scott Peters has been told to his face, because it's in a kind of a marginal district, one by re-election from his first term into a second term by a hair's breadth, that he won't have the labor support he had the last time.
Wow.
On the other side, here's Obama and a whole bunch of multinational corporations.
I mean, Elizabeth Warren's got to be gnashing her teeth, saying this is, we've got to do this.
Now, he has an argument about why we ought to do it.
He has an argument about why the country needs to do it.
Well, we'll get to all of that when we come back.
And your calls too at 800-282-2882.
I'm Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh.
Rush, of course, back on Monday.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Don't go away after this.
Thank you very much, and welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh Program.
Rush again, back on Monday.
Now, I've been counseling a number of people in transition during the break on their transabled issues and the transracial issues.
This is going to, I think this is going to become a new career because obviously there are so many people now who are reverberating, you know, just resonating with this idea that if Rachel there and Spokane and one hand and some of these folks can overcome prejudice against people who just don't think their right arm belongs to them, we've got to be sensitive.
Think that maybe just because they were born German-Czech, Swedish, that their inner self, their inner self, is African American.
By the way, an interesting article just came across.
The transabled thing generated a number of inputs.
Here's one.
And I really am kind of getting ticked now about these Canadians.
They cannot be on a more cutting edge than California.
This is just not allowed.
This is pretty cutting edge.
Where did this come from?
This is the, oh, this was in the New York Daily News.
Headline: A wheelchair can become just a big sex toy.
Toronto to host massive orgy for disabled people.
Billed as sex's final frontier, Toronto, Canada is going to host an accessible orgy for disabled people.
This is in the Toronto Sun.
Let's see, it's going to be in a theater in Toronto.
The night is being labeled Deliciously Disabled.
Only holds $125.
Entrance costs are $20.
The idea came from disability awareness consultant Stella Palakarova, 35.
She says, quote, the naysayers are subconsciously hating the fact that people in wheelchairs are having great sex, better sex than a lot of people are having, she told the sun.
Fellow organizer Andrew Morrison Gerza, more candid, he said, quote, a wheelchair can become just a big sex toy.
Some images cannot be erased from your mind once you have them.
You understand what I'm saying?
It's just, I'm sorry I did that to you, frankly.
800-282-2882.
Let's take a call.
Bob is up next from Temperance, Michigan.
Bob, go ahead.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi, Roger.
It's good to talk with you.
I was calling about the trade deal.
When the Republicans got elected last year, everybody asked, why aren't they doing something?
Why aren't they doing anything about Obamacare or the immigration thing?
And I thought, I'm going to watch and see what they were given.
And I think this is it.
I think this is what they were given to leave his other stuff alone.
What do you mean they were given?
I mean, it was a deal from Obama went to Boehner and whatnot and said, if you, you know, don't do anything about the immigration or about the Obamacare, we'll give you this.
Republicans have always been for free trade.
And, you know, that's how I think he got everyone in line.
Well, and everyone is not in line as of yet.
But yeah, I mean, a lot of people are in line for this thing on the Republican side.
In fact, if this was just a Democrat vote in the House of Representatives, it would have long ago been over because there aren't enough Democrat votes to pass this thing in the House of Representatives.
And among the Republicans, they don't know to this moment, apparently, because they haven't called the vote in the House.
And every time they don't call a vote, that means they don't have the votes.
This is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
How it happened, which is what you're suggesting, is something we can speculate on and have a lot of fun with.
In fact, I've got a couple of other theories, Bob.
Thank you for the call.
And let me move on because there are some things going on behind the scenes that really disturb me sitting here about 17 or so miles from the border with Mexico, the busiest legal border crossing in the world between the metropolitan area of San Diego and the metropolitan area of Tijuana, divided, by the way, by a triple fence, thank you, Duncan Hunter Sr., that actually works.
In fact, it works so well that occasionally in the press in your area, you may see this.
They discover a tunnel, you know, like the tunnels that go from the Sinai into Gaza with the same technology, by the way.
Some of them, electricity, rail lines, air conditioning.
I mean, this isn't just some local marijuana peddler trying to get his bales across.
So, the border.
In that context, I've been watching Marco Rubio and been sympathizing with the way the Carlos Slim Times has been savaging him on the preposterous criminal record of his traffic tickets.
But here is something I think that is actually serious about Marco Rubio.
The Orlando Disney World is a huge employer in Florida.
And the IT workers there, all been, hundreds of them, have been fired by Disney.
And you may have heard this story.
A worker from India has come in on the so-called H-1B visa and been, and to get their severance package, the American workers are forced, coerced into training their Indian replacement, again from India, their Indian replacement to their job, presumably, of course, at a lower wage.
Now, is there anything more outrageous than that?
Think of the job you have.
How would you feel?
What would you think?
See, I did that first if you're a Democrat, second if you're a Republican.
So what would you think if the boss comes and says, well, Roger, you know, you've been great, been here 22 years, hell of a worker.
Anything we asked you to do, you've done.
You've been getting pay raises over the years.
And frankly, it's intolerable that we pay you this much.
So here's, I want to introduce you to Jawapawabawab from Punjab.
And he's a really nice guy.
He's a kid, of course, he's 18.
But he's been an IT guy since he was 11.
So you're going to train him.
And if you don't, you're out on your keester in the Orlando streets, and it's hot and humid out there.
Or here's your severance package of one year's salary if you train him to do your job.
Could there be anything more outrageous than that?
I'm sorry.
I've talked a lot about immigration issues for the last 30 years, and there's all kinds of aspects to it.
I have never come across an issue more revolting than this issue.
H-1B is a designation for a kind of visa to come to the United States and work, which was passed by Congress with the sole narrow purpose of providing American business with the opportunity to hire foreign workers if, and here's the big if, IF in capital letters, there were no Americans qualified to take that job.
Didn't say anything about pay.
It said, are there any Americans qualified to take that job?
And if in some unique circumstance, if in some unique circumstance, somebody from another country is qualified to take that job and you can't find anybody in America, then you can get him a visa and bring him here because we don't want to hobble you in your pursuit of your product or service.
That door opened just this tiny little bit, and American business kicked that door all the way open.
Southern California Edison is a utility here in Southern California.
They did the same thing.
Hundreds of IT workers, basically in their 50s and early 60s, basically white men, fired and forced to train their replacements, not from the unemployed in California.
Maybe there's an argument for that.
I don't know.
But no, no, no.
From foreign countries, mostly from India.
Now, here's the Marco Rubio tie-in.
He is backing a bill that would triple the number of guest workers that could be hired by American business every year.
I'm sorry.
That's the wrong direction.
That doesn't fly.
It's out, frankly, it's outrageous.
Now, there's been a backlash against Disney, and you know the story probably.
There's been a backlash against Disney and the Disney Corporation is trying all kinds of ways to cover themselves and so forth.
But I got to tell you, with this in mind, the fact that we already know that existing law has been perverted, subverted, to crush American workers on behalf of foreign workers in a country run by a president who's constantly harping on the need to preserve the middle class.
How can we possibly trust a document for a further free trade expansion that includes a chapter in the 29 chapters, apparently, according to Jeff Sessions, includes a chapter on immigration that widens the ability to bring in foreign workers?
How is that a good thing?
And John Boehner, how is it that you can possibly, possibly defend it?
Free trade?
Hey, I'm with Art Laffer, good friend of mine.
Free trade as a philosophy in the economics class.
You know, I go to Economics 101.
Totally for it.
And I don't think this agreement has anything to do with free trade.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, in for Rush at 800-282-2882.
Back after this.
Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh, Rush Back on Monday.
ABC News in 2008, exactly, as a matter of fact, it was June of 2008, seven years ago, made the prediction as part of a Earth 2100 special.
And Bob Woodruff was on Good Morning America.
And part of what they found, what they predicted would happen in Earth 2100, they said, well, you don't have to wait till 2100.
On June 8th, they said it this precisely.
Now think about this.
On June 8th, 2015, one carton of milk would cost $12.99.
Well, the average nationally is $3.39.
Gasoline, they said then, would reach over $9 a gallon by June 8th, 2015.
Well, today it's $2.75 average nationally.
But more importantly, they said New York would be underwater because of climate change.
When last we checked with the New York office, they're not.
Hello, New York.
Are you guys underwater?
I don't think so.
No.
Now they're laughing.
They haven't looked out the window.
I don't think they've looked out the window.
We'll take a call.
This is the Rush Limbaugh program.
Roger Hedgecock filling in.
And Robert in Fargo, North Dakota, is next.
Thank you, sir, for taking my call.
I appreciate it.
Thank you for being there.
Straight to the point here.
You're very right to be concerned about this trade agreement here.
I've been following this quite substantially here.
This TPP, when it comes up for a vote, there was a congressman or senator, I can't remember his name, but he went and read this, and he came out of there, and he said he's not going to vote for this because it had all the earmarks of how the European Union was formed.
Meaning, his concern was all the individual countries over there, they lost their individual national sovereignties, and they're now under the authority of a single, you know, the European Union.
So in that sense, you know, the United States could very well lose its national sovereignty if this TPP comes up for a vote.
And it will pass because of the rules that have been flipped upside down on their head there in Congress, where now, instead of having to have a majority of present senators to approve a law or something, now they need a majority to disprove it.
So their hands are tied.
They'll never get those votes.
So when that thing, the DPP, comes up for a vote, it will pass.
And I believe that it's going to be some sort of a North American Pacific type union.
So say goodbye to American sovereignty.
Robert, all great points, and I appreciate the call.
Because let me go through this in some arcane detail because you need to know this.
Every president, I think, except Nixon, since Roosevelt, since World War II, has had some kind of trade authority.
Congress has said, okay, you oughtn't do this.
President says, look, I want to have a free trade agreement with these countries or this country or this group of countries.
Give me the authority to go and negotiate something.
Then I want to bring it back to you, Congress, for an up or down vote.
No amendments.
Just give me an up or down.
If you don't like it, vote no.
If you do like it, vote yes.
But you can't amend the thing once I negotiate with these foreign countries.
In the past, they've been kind of nominal stuff until you get to stuff that everybody agreed on, for instance, free trade with Europe and so forth.
Sounded like a pretty good idea, and it's still a good idea.
But, you know, after World War II, but now we're into NAFTA, say in the 90s.
We had a trade surplus with Mexico before NAFTA.
Now we have a trade deficit.
We had manufacturing in the United States, Ford engines and thousands of other examples, where the plants were moved to Mexico, and then the parts came into the United States and were put into, say, the Ford example, put into Ford vehicles, which were then sold as made in America.
We've had a problem with NAFTA.
It's probably raised the standard of living in Mexico.
We'll get to some of the immigration issues later.
But it has, in effect, increased and accelerated the loss of good jobs here in the United States.
So Obama is saying, hey, you've given every other president, except Nixon, this right to negotiate these kinds of treaties.
The problem is he didn't get that authority up front.
He's been negotiating for six years for this new European Union-style 21-nation Pacific Rim trade agreement, with now over 800 pages having been written, and they now admit they've been written, by lawyers for multinational corporations.
How does your job feel now, after having heard that?
So there is a wonderment on the left, what in the heck is this president doing?
It's kind of interesting.
There's actually an article on that title.
Where did I bury that?
In the Atlantic.
Dated June 11th, headline, why does Obama want this trade deal so badly?
And he can't even answer the question.
He doesn't know.
What in the world is he thinking?
So he's seeking the authority.
This is the vote today.
He's seeking the authority to negotiate a treaty, a trade treaty, that would be an up or down vote in Congress.
Instead of then going out and negotiating, he's already negotiated.
So the problem is some of Congress members have read this thing.
And even though they can't take notes and they can't get copies and they can't really disclose anything they've read, even though they're coming out like Jeff Sessions is and say, well, wait a minute, this thing expands the right of the president to unilaterally act on immigration matters to bring in even more people to displace American jobs.
This thing, this agreement, means that even more jobs will go offshoring?
Now, of course, it's sold by the other side.
No, no, no, no.
It's going to mean that Americans will be more competitive.
Well, how are they going to be more competitive?
Because all their IT guys are from Munjab or Punjab or wherever that is in India?
I mean, come on.
Seriously?
All right, what do you think?
800-282-2882.
Roger Hitchcock in for Rush, back after this.
Roger Hitchcock in for Rush Limbaugh.
Rush back on Monday, of course, after a very well-deserved week off.
And again, let me just set this up, and we're going to take calls after the top of the hour.
Set this up.
The Trade Promotion Authority is what they're, the TPA, is what they're voting on today to give the president the right to bring forward this Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement he's already been negotiating.
And then they're going to also vote on something called the TAA, which is the Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Will you hear the background on this one?
It's the Rush Limbaugh program.
▲
Export Selection