All Episodes
Previous Next
July 22, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:40
July 22, 2015, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Now, Mr. Snerdley just told me, I had not seen this myself.
Uh, Snerdley just told me you saw a video of Lindsey Graham, Senator South Carolina, in a very funny video, destroying his cell phone, obviously because Trump has ruined it.
Now, he wouldn't have to destroy the phone.
He could just get a new SIM card.
But how do you have fun destroying a SIM card in a video?
So he got some golf clubs and a barbecue pit, and he literally destroyed his cell phone, making fun of the fact that Trump has destroyed it by giving out his uh his number.
Anyway, greetings and welcome back, folks.
It's great to have you, Rush Limbaugh having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have right here behind the golden EIB microphone, 800 282-2882, if you want to be on the program.
Here's Dana Bash.
This is last night, Anson Cooper 360, and the uh subject is Trump, Dana Bash reporting on what she had seen in Bluffton, South Carolina.
What struck me about being at the event today, and I've been to many a campaign rally in my time, was that he had them really in the palm of his hand.
And you couldn't necessarily tell the traditional way by watching people stand on their feet and and scream and cheer like a rally.
They were sitting in their seats in this auditorium.
Now, granted it was a retirement community, but they were mesmerized.
You could almost hear a pin drop as they watched what wasn't really a stump speech, it was a one-man show.
They were listening.
Did you hear that?
Yes, they were listening, these old codgers, these old seasoned citizens.
Democrats love seasoned citizens when they just get their social security checks and shut up.
But when they actually get involved, get involved with politics and so forth and start showing up at Republican rallies, and all of a sudden, they become idiots.
Dana Bash, stunned.
My God, they were actually listening.
My God, they were mesmerized.
And it wasn't a political speech.
No, it was a one-man show.
Well, it was a political speech.
But anyway, this just uh I think is another indication of uh of the media.
Not that any of you need it.
I mean, you all know the media as well as I do or anybody else does, but I'm constantly amazed that they are so willing to portray their own arrogance.
I mean, why wouldn't a bunch of people at a Trump rally listen?
What is it about a conservative audience that is shocking when they listen?
What is shocking that they're able to listen?
You see, they if if your assumption going in is that conservatives are rabid just meat eating quasi subhumans.
And then you walk into some place at a rally where you expect that kind of behavior and you see polite attentiveness.
Why it just conflicts with every preconception you have.
And make no mistake, they have that conception of uh conservatives and Republicans and more.
It's even worse.
So anyway, that's what's happening here with uh with with Trump, uh, the latest.
And as I say, I'm I'm sitting here, I pre- I I'm actually behaving as America's anchor man on this.
I'm the one watching it and commenting on it and telling you as it happens, uh, with no prejudice.
Prejudicial comment before or after.
And that is what the drive-bys don't understand.
They think that because I'm not on this bandwagon criticizing Trump that I must be supporting him.
And they just they don't recognize objectivity when they see it, or impartiality, whatever you want to characterize it, they don't recognize it.
Because they aren't objective.
Which we also know.
Now, before we get to the Ted Cruz sound bites, I want to get back to the New York magazine piece.
I actually had this yesterday, and I didn't get to it.
And I will confess, In a in a mad dash effort just to clean up the desk here, I threw it away.
In fact, I threw away everything I didn't use yesterday.
And Snerdley walked in here today.
You won't believe what I found in New York magazine.
I said, Ah, darn it.
I had it.
Here it is.
It's a it's story by a guy, guy's name is Michael some known or some more.
Michael S-O-N-M-O-R-E.
Here's how it begins.
And by the way, here's the headline.
What open marriage taught one man about feminism.
Now this is New York magazine.
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room.
Loretta Lynn is on the stereo.
Can you believe that a writer for New York magazine admitted that he's listening to a hayseed country artist?
Man, guy's brave.
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room.
Loretta Lynn is on the stereo.
My wife is out on a date with a man named Paolo.
Don, did you catch that?
Do I need to read that again?
Let me read it again.
It might have flown right past some people here.
Look at me as I read this to you, folks.
As I write this, this again, this is Michael Sonmore, a male writer New York magazine.
As I write this, my children are asleep in their room.
Loretta Lynn is on the stereo.
And my wife is out on a date with a man named Paolo.
It's her second date this week, her fourth date this month so far.
And if it goes like the others, she'll come home in the middle of the night.
She'll crawl into bed beside me and tell me all about how she and Paolo had sex.
I will not explode with anger, nor will I seethe with resentment.
I'll tell her it's a hot story.
And I'll tell her I'm glad she had fun.
It's hot because she's excited, and I'm glad because I'm a feminist.
Okay, folks, that's just the lead.
That's just the opening paragraph.
Now keep in mind, earlier on in the program today, the ABC New Washington Post poll that we treated you details.
Majority of Americans do not like the cultural direction of the country.
There is not majority support for gay marriage, transgenderism, whatever else is happening out there, it's not supported by a majority, and including many Democrats.
So my wife will crawl into bed beside me.
She'll tell me all about how she and Paolo had sex.
I won't explode with anger or seethe with resentment.
I'll tell her it's a hot story, babe.
And I'm glad she had fun.
It's hot because she's excited, and I'm glad because I'm a feminist.
Now, before my wife started sleeping with other men, I certainly considered myself a feminist.
But I really only understood it in the abstract.
When I quit working to stay home with the kids, I began to understand it on a whole new level.
I'm an economically dependent househusband, coping with the withering drudgery of child rearing.
Now that I understand the reality of that situation, I don't blame women for demanding more for themselves than the life of the housewife.
Is this guy not a throwback?
I mean, this we're recycling.
This is almost like feminism has had no success whatsoever.
If we're back now to feminism exists to get housewives out of the house?
Do you realize how much ground they are admitting they have lost in this battle?
I don't know how old this guy is.
My guess he's relatively young.
I mean, he's not old enough to be a contemporary of, say, a modern era feminist of the late 60s, early 70s.
So we're just recycling ground that the feminazis obviously think they've already won, but this guy hasn't gotten a memo.
Still he writes as a man.
I could if I wanted to.
I could portray what I'm doing as work, and thus claim for myself the prestige men traditionally derive from work.
Whatever I tell someone I say home with the kids, they invariably say, hardest work in the world.
They say this because the only way to account for a man at home with the kids is to say what he's doing is hard work.
But there's a subtext in the compliment that makes it backhanded.
We both know.
We both know no one ever says it to a woman.
Hardest work in the world.
Mothers care, fathers provide care.
The difference is crucial.
Despite my total withdrawal from the economy and the traditional sources of masculine identity, I can still argue that I am a provider.
You know why?
Because I provide care.
In this way, my masculine self-image was stretched but not broken.
Diaperbag notwithstanding, I was still a man.
Capital M. It wasn't until my wife mentioned one night that she'd kissed another man and liked it and wanted to do more than kiss the next time that I realized how my status as a man depended on a single fact that my wife screwed only me.
Okay, let me let do that one again.
That might have just slid right by you.
Yeah, well you thought you were after the delay button, and if I had read it as written, you would have had to hit the delay button.
In this way my masculine self-image was stretched but not broken.
Diaperbag notwithstanding, I'm still a man.
It wasn't until my wife mentioned one night that she had kissed another guy and liked it and wanted to do more than kiss the next time that I realized how my status as a man depended on a single fact that my wife screwed only me.
Do you understand what this guy is saying?
Snerdley, what is this guy saying with that paragraph?
No, he's not saying he's out of his mind.
What he's saying is that he realizes how brutal, patriarch, patriarchal, and how how demeaning it was for his wife when she was only able to screw him.
And it was it was it was his fault bringing that attitude into the marriage.
Now, back to the article.
When people asked how it started, I say this.
Well, we married young.
She'd had sex before me, but only with a handful of people, a handful of times.
She never had a boyfriend, never had a lover.
I was the first guy she ever had the chance to get to know intimately.
By her mid-thirties, having already had our children and entering her sexual prime, she felt keenly her lack of sexual experience.
Happily for me, she was willing to talk about it, willing to ask if I would be open to exploring other options.
So we opened a bottle of wine and started talking and talking and talking.
Now she didn't present all of this as an issue of feminism to me, but after much soul searching about why the idea of my wife having sex with other men bothered me, I came to a few conclusions.
Monogamy meant that I controlled her sexual expression.
And that was not fair that I controlled her sexual expression.
And not to get all women's studies major about it.
Patriarchal oppression essentially boils down to a man's fear that a woman with sexual agency is a woman he can't control.
But not to get all women's studies about it.
Well, he is getting all women's studies about it.
So he controlled her sexual expression, which means he was discriminating again, he was oppressing her because of monogamy.
And that that patriarchal oppression, male Oppression of his wife, because she can only have sex with him.
Men want it that way.
Men want their wives only having sex with them because men fear a woman who will have sex with other men outside of marriage because those women he can't control.
And I don't want to be a man who controls women or my wife.
She he doesn't write that.
I'm adding this in his interpretation.
We aren't afraid of their intellect or their spirit or their ability to bear children.
We're afraid when it comes to sex, they won't choose us.
This petty fear has led us as a culture to place judgments on the entire spectrum of female sexual expression.
If a woman likes sex, she's a slut.
If she only likes sex with her husband or boyfriend, she's boring and lame.
If she doesn't like sex at all, she's frigid and unfeeling.
Every option's a trap.
And we men are responsible.
He didn't say that either, but I know he means it.
When my wife told me she wanted to open our marriage and take other lovers, she wasn't rejecting me.
She was embracing herself.
And when I understood that, I finally became a feminist.
So this guy is admitting.
He's just defined feminism for us.
His wife says, I want to have sex with other men.
And it's not about you.
I want to embrace myself.
I want to explore the full faculty of possibility of my life sexually, and I can't do that if I'm only with you.
And I said, honey, have at it.
And I finally became a feminist.
Is this what feminism is to you?
Is this what you've understood feminism to be?
It isn't, really?
Anyway, folks, that's that's not even half the story.
I've got to take a break here.
Uh we'll be back after this.
So feminism is cheating on your spouse with approval while he stays home and raises the kids.
And you get to come home every night and give him the details.
So, ladies, I would like to hear from you.
How many of you who are married would like this deal?
How many of you who think of yourselves as feminists, or maybe would like to, or maybe even not feminists, how many of you women in the audience who are married, and look, forget actors and and and public figures.
Let's say you you you wherever you live, there are men where you live that you would like to get to know intimately, but you don't because you're married.
How many of you would like to be able to, with your husband saying, fine, have at it, babe?
I'll be here when you get back.
I want to hear all about it.
And that is feminism.
Sarah in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
I'm glad you waited.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, Russ.
Megadiddles from a former school full of mush.
Well, it's great to have you here.
Hello.
Hi, I'm calling because I just wanted to comment about uh the supposed 20% uh moderates and independents that have to be won by either the Democrats or Republicans in order to win the election.
Yes.
And I don't believe that they are truly moderate at all.
I believe that they are very libertarian.
I believe that they have what we all have, the basic human yearning for freedom, and they just want government out of their lives in pretty much every way.
Uh they want to be free to succeed by their own hand or fail by their own hand.
Are you one of them?
Are you a libertarian at heart?
At heart, I am.
I am um actually a Republican delegate here where I live and act have been active within the party, but um I am not happy with where the party has gone by any stretch of the imagination.
And um, you know, I think it's why our founders really warned against um having parties.
Um they didn't want us to be loyal to a party.
They wanted us to be loyal to our freedom and to our constitution.
Uh amen to that.
Now, but I do have to uh politely uh disagree with you slightly about who traditionally the independents slash moderates have been.
I think now I'm gonna get in trouble for this, and I'm not trying to.
I think the the actual percentage of libertarians identified libertarians in the country doesn't get to 20 percent.
I think traditionally the reason why the trick has been played on the Republicans is because the dirty little secret is that moderates are just liberals that don't have the guts to say so.
That's traditionally what they've been.
I mean, why else do independents not like when they hear a Republican criticizing Obama, they'll just run right back to the Democrat Party.
But when the Democrats destroy Bush or criticize, that doesn't bother them.
I've never bought that.
If you are on the hold, I want you to hang in there be tough and be patient, because your time is coming.
Yesterday in Washington on Capitol Hill, there was a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on immigration enforcement and the lack of it.
And the immigration customs enforcement director, that's ICE, Sarah Saudonia, testified during the QA, Senator Ted Cruz, who, by the way, if you are a member to media,
if you are a I know this redundant uh liberal Democrat, if you are a low information troll that lives on Twitter or Facebook, you do not ever want to get into a debate with Ted Cruz.
You will be exposed as an idiot.
See what I mean.
In the year 2013, how many criminal illegal aliens did the Obama administration release?
In 14, it was a little over 30,000.
How many murderers?
In that year, sir, I can't remember the number right now, but I know that we had the statistic that was said earlier, the four-year period from 2010 to 2014, that there were 121 persons who committed uh crimes afterwards.
But I can't provide you this exact number.
How many rapists?
I am not sure right now.
I'd have to pull that number.
How many drunk drivers?
Same answer.
I can certainly break that down for you.
And in fact, I think we're working on that right now.
It's been requested before.
Yesterday.
How many murderers did the Obama administration release?
Now, Senator, I don't know the answer to that question.
Is this not credible?
As an American who follows the law and respects the law, uh, she can't she's not even phased by this.
She can't tell us how many criminals Obama's released yesterday.
She doesn't know how many the day before last year.
He's not asking her how many people have you released from prisoner.
He said, How many murderers have you let go?
Let's see, Senator, I think it's somewhere between 21.
How many rapists?
Uh well, I don't know.
I think it's about she's not even taking the time to say she's offended by this.
She's not even bothering to get work done by it.
Well, I don't know, murderers, I'll look it up for you, Senator.
Rapists, same thing.
Now the number of murderers yesterday.
Come on, Senator.
I don't know the answer to that question.
Frankly, Senator, I don't care.
Don't you get that, Senator?
We don't care how many murderers we've let loose.
That's the attitude she's conveying here.
So Cruz then said this.
I want to note that your testimony here, when I ask you how many criminals ICE released in 2013.
You were off by a factor of three.
You said 30,000.
The correct answer is 104,000.
There were 68,000 criminal illegal aliens that ICE declined to begin deportation proceedings against.
In addition to that, there were 36,000 in deportation proceedings with criminal convictions that the Obama administration released.
And I would note that among those were 193 murderers with homicide convictions, were 426 people with sexual assault convictions, were over 16,000 criminal illegal aliens with drunk driving convictions, released by this administration because this administration refuses to follow the law.
And this exchange then followed.
You asked me, I thought about 2014.
That is 30,558.
And the good news is at least that went down from 2013 when it was 36,007.
But you're omitting the 68,000 criminal illegal aliens that ICE did not begin deportation proceedings against at all.
And you gotta add both of those together.
It's over a hundred thousand.
Yes, sir, that's absolutely right.
Yes, sir.
That's that's you're absolutely right.
We've released over a hundred thousand uh murderers, rapists, purse snatchers, muggers, uh, criminals.
So what's your point, Senator?
Huh?
What's the big deal, Senator?
Is the attitude.
So what I wonder if she'd have gotten upset if he would have said, How many registered Democrats were released among this pool of prisoners?
That that might have ticked her.
She might have got a rise out of that.
Can you tell me, Madam Director, how many registered Democrats were among the 100,000 murderers and rapists that you let go?
Then are you known that not one of these is a registered voter yet.
So when it was all over, in closing, Cruz gave a passionate defense of the rule of law and puts this all squarely where it belongs.
Your opening statement here.
You said after listening to the victim's family that you were so sorry for their losses.
And yet the Obama administration keeps doing it.
When I asked you how many murderers were released yesterday, you don't know.
There is a reason the American people are upset.
If President Obama had the courage of his convictions, he would come and look in the eyes of these men and women who've lost their sons, their daughters, their mothers, their sisters, their brothers, and the administration would stop releasing murderers and rapists.
It is within your power to follow federal law.
And this administration refuses to do so, and that is altogether unacceptable.
It's unbelievable to me that this even needs to be said.
It's also noteworthy to recognize none of this made the drive-by media.
Or very little of it.
An ICE director totally not only unaffected, but not even connected to the reality of what's going on here.
It may as well just be statistics they're talking about, not real live human beings who have convicted of been convicted of horrendous crimes, who are being released to keep doing it.
And he takes it right back to where it belongs, and that is with Obama.
Now, during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on immigration enforcement, the same thing.
Laura Wilkerson, the mother of an 18-year-old murder victim, testified.
Her name is Laura.
This is what she said.
My son's name was Joshua Wilkerson on November 16, 2010.
He was beaten, strangled, tortured until he died.
He was tied up, thrown in a field, and set on fire.
His killer, Hermilo Morales, was brought here illegally by his illegal parents when he was 10 years old.
So he fit the dream kid description.
He was sentenced to life in prison, which means he'll be 30 years before he's up for parole.
He'll be a 49-year-old man who I don't expect to be deported.
And I just hope he doesn't come to live in your city.
She continued.
This was our family's 911 terrorist attack by a foreign invader.
It's going to take another life lost by a senator, a congressman, the president, even another of today's heroes, someone from Hollywood, before someone in a position moves on this.
I thank you to Mr. Trump for getting a message out about the nation in two minutes that for four and a half years solidly, Maria Espinoza at the Remembrance Project and countless families like my own have been trying to say for five to six years.
It feels good to be Heard whether you love him or whether you don't.
I felt heard.
So of all the people that she could thank for doing anything related to what happened to her.
It's Donald Trump.
And people are asking themselves, what is it about Trump?
It's not that hard to figure out.
It just really isn't.
Let's take a timeout.
We'll get back to your phone calls after this.
Sit tight.
Okay, we go back to the phones to Roanoke, Virginia.
This is Steve.
Welcome, sir.
Appreciate your patience.
I'm glad you waited.
Hi.
Thank you.
Russ, I want to address the language that people are using to talk about this Iran deal.
If I understand it correctly, this quote deal meets all of the standard and fundamental requirements of being an international treaty with what?
Five other countries, which then would require the ratification of two-thirds of the Senate, not this foolish rule change up or down vote that could be vetoed by the little community organized.
Yes.
I mean for the for the for the for the most part, you are correct, although there are a couple of minor modifications in this thing that uh ostensibly allow Obama to refer to this as a non-binding executive something or other.
Uh which of course is going to end up as binding because the UN ratifies it.
But no, your your basic point is they this is a treaty under any other normal president.
This would have been conducted as a treaty.
It would have been signed as a treaty, but it ratified with the Senate as a treaty.
If we had somebody paying attention to the Constitution, exactly right, what you're saying.
If I can I put a plug for iDrive real quickly?
Can you put in a plug for iDrive?
Yeah, go for a have at it.
Hey, I want to let everybody know.
If you're not about a year ago, I signed up for iDrive based upon your recommendation.
But I did not take advantage of the opportunity to get all of my devices backed up under one uh account.
TISC, TISCON, first of all, my kids made these videos on their iPad, and guess what?
Last week it was stolen, lost everything.
And I absolutely regret not getting all of my devices backed up.
Especially since it doesn't cost any extra to do that.
That's in fact, that's one of the selling points.
Uh and it's one of the differentiations.
Some of these uh some of these backup outfits, and they're none nearly as good, require a separate account per device.
And it becomes a nightmare.
Uh you can unite every device you have under one account.
Well, I appreciate the plug.
Uh we love iDrive here.
They're awesome.
And they do what they do better than anybody else.
Grab audio soundbite number 29.
Folks, you have to hear this.
This is the White House Press Secretary Josh Ernest at the White House daily briefing today.
And this is, as far as I know, this is the first White House comment on the videos taken of planned parenthood people describing the harvesting of body parts and how to do it without damaging the body parts and then selling them.
This is what Josh Ernest said.
I haven't spoken to the president about the actual videos.
I have read the reports, and I'm confident that he has too, uh, raising significant concerns about the way in which those videos were selectively edited to distort the um not just the words of the individual speaking, but also the position of Planned Parenthood.
So what outrageous Obama is the way the videos were edited, not what happened, but rather that somebody might be criticizing Planned Parenthood.
By the way, the full unedited video is available.
It's been posted if you want to watch it.
So the full unedited video could be seen by anybody who wants it's three hours.
If you want to watch it, it's three hours long.
But selectively edited.
Josh, you ever heard of 60 minutes?
Have you ever heard of ABC?
You ever heard of CBS?
You ever heard of NBC?
There isn't a news organization around that doesn't selectively edit.
Everybody edits.
Usually for time, but in the case of the drive-by media, they're the ones that edit, like Doctor a 911 tape from George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin case, NBC.
Remember that, Josh?
You talk about selective editing in order to make Zimmerman look like something he wasn't.
This is obscene to claim that what the president's alarmed about is selective editing when the entire three-hour tape is viewable.
President's offended that somebody dared embarrass planned parenthood.
Because I'll tell you, you may not remember this.
It was not very long ago.
It was either in a TV ad or at a public appearance.
President Obama actually said, God bless Planned Parenthood.
Sick.
It's just sick.
Here's uh Skyler in Kokomo, Indiana.
Hi, Skyler.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
How are you doing today, sir?
Well, sir.
Thank you very much.
Good.
Um, I was calling and I was listening to you uh talk about the article written about the husband and wife who have the open marriage and him discussing what it's like for her to go out, this, that, and the other.
Yeah.
Um, I gotta tell you, uh, my wife and I have been together for 14 years, and we have an open marriage, and either that story isn't written by somebody that really knows what the lifestyle is like, or it it just can't be real.
Um, as I said, I've been in this lifestyle for many years, uh, been to swing clubs, uh, you know, events like that.
Not one couple I've ever met feels that way.
If anything, um, what a lot of the couples feel, and what my my wife took my soul phone.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, just this guy does not did not say his wife was going behind his back.
He was this guy, he admitted that she's doing it with his permission, and that that's what makes him a feminist.
And if she comes home and they talk about it in bed after she gets home.
That's not the way though it really is in this real lifestyle.
I mean, what it really becomes a matter of very a large amount of openness and honesty that both couples have.
I mean, in so many relationships, one of the big things people lie about is their sex life.
Who they like, they see something else, they think they're good looking, or they're, you know, whatever the case may be.
In these open marriages, um, what you have is a lot of honesty that you don't have uh in the in the regulation because you can do what you want to do.
You're 100% honest with each other, you're not hiding anything.
You know, I my wife and I have run into many times over the years that we get judged by people that, oh, I don't understand how you can do that.
It's just weird, different, messed up, whatever they want to use.
Yet these are the same people that I can't tell you how many times within the city.
I I understand the open lifestyle.
I mean, I've I'm and I understand what you're saying.
I think you're confused.
This guy was not describing something happening clandestinely.
He was being very open about it being open and that he's fully aware of it and supports it.
He doesn't do it.
He didn't say he runs around and prowls it, but his wife does, and he loves it, and he knows it, and she gives him the details.
So I don't know what you heard about this when I was reading it, but it but nothing of it.
Uh well, it was all above the cup.
That's it, folks.
We are sadly out of at a busy broadcast time, but I can't wait for tomorrow.
Because we are on a roll here, and we'll be back eagerly.
Hope to see you same time tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection