All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 27, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:28
August 27, 2015, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And it's a new poll out there.
There's all kinds of new polls out there, ladies and gentlemen.
A new uh Quinnipiact poll.
You know what the word most commonly associated with Hillary Clinton is?
Liar.
Not kidding.
The second most closely associated word, Hillary Clinton is dishonest.
And the third most commonly associated word with Mrs. Clinton is untrustworthy.
And she is the Democrats' leading nominee.
And Joe Biden is getting out.
He doesn't know if he's got enough emotional fuel in the tank.
He just doesn't know if he's got it.
On the on the Republican side, there's big news with Trump.
Trump has told Republican brass that he will forego a third party run.
And that could that that could be a game changer.
Well, I don't know, inside the RNC gonna be a game changer, but that has been one of the primary roadblocks that several in, and there are many.
Now don't miss I don't want to overemphasize this.
But one of the uh one of the early hooks that Trump opponents had to latch on to.
Hey, the guy won't even take a pledge not to run third party.
How the heck could you support that guy?
Well, he's taking that hook away from them.
And so now they've got a glom on to other reasons to say that they're not interested in uh Trump.
Meanwhile, he has hit 40%.
This is a gravis or gravis, not sure they pronounce it, marketing tool, uh marketing poll, frontrunner Trump at 40%.
First time a candidate has reached above the 30% mark.
This outfit does um uh Gravis Marketing does political polls via robocalls.
Um maybe only Trump supporters are enthusiastic enough to actually respond to them.
It's not one of these scientific polls, but it is a new number that nobody else has hit, and it fits with the uh with the Trump momentum.
Anyway, folks, great to have you.
Great to be back here.
Oh, what is this?
This is is this I can't believe it's Thursday.
You know, it's amazing how fast a week goes by when you take the first two days of it off.
It's stunning.
This is already Thursday.
Holy smokes.
It's great to be with you, folks.
The telephone number is 800 eight two eight eight two.
If you want to be on the program, the email address.com.
Okay, so we're gonna get back to the political news in just a second, but we have learned a lot more since we completed the program yesterday about the details behind the scenes that led to the shooting near Roanoke, Virginia, yesterday.
And I have um I've learned a lot more about the shooter and his relationship with people he worked with and people he worked for throughout his career.
Uh Bryce Williams, uh stage name.
And it it turns out let me go at this uh let me go at this from the standpoint of my experience in the business of broadcasting.
And I want to take you back to the early 1970s.
I left home at age 20 in uh 1971 for my first job away from home.
It was to Pittsburgh.
It's actually a suburban station in McKeesport.
And I was there for a year and a half, and I got a job actually in the city of Pittsburgh, KQV, which was at the time owned by ABC.
And it was at about that time that the federal government and the FCC began minority hiring requirements on all broadcasters.
Federal regulations govern broadcasting.
Broadcasting, you've got to pass certain tests or did every five years in order to have your license to broadcast renewed by the government on the basis that the airwaves you were using were public.
And so they were regulated by the 1934 Communications Act.
And we had the modern era of feminism that had just been born in the late 60s, the the glorious Steinem Betty Fredan version that has screwed everything up now.
And I'd give you an example of, I mean, we can give you examples left and right.
This the story we didn't get to yesterday about the heroics on the train in France.
You know what happened in France?
Everybody on that train ran for the hills except some American men.
And what you had in the rescue effort on that train was American maleness.
You had American what used to be universal worldwide manliness, masculinity on display.
Heroics were performed, people were saved, the situation was diffused while people ran for the tall grass.
The people that ran for the tall grass are the people that have been indoctrinated with political correctness, men who are shamed into not being men, men who have been hinpecked or whatever into denying their maleness and masculinity on the basis that it is predatory.
And this is the chicken of the country and in some parts of the world that has taken place with the rise of feminism.
And that's just a brief aside to illustrate that which I'm speaking about here.
The way this manifested itself at radio and TV stations all across the country was, mandates went out from the federal government to owners of broadcast properties that they had to begin hiring on the basis of quota and not merit.
And what happened in the early stages of this, and what I think it continues to this day, by the evidence of what we saw yesterday in Virginia.
I think this is the one of the end-of-the-road results of this kind of government overreach.
Mandatory minority hiring.
Merit was thrown out in many cases.
I saw my point is here, I saw many qualified men who had been in broadcasting for years and climbing the career ladder in broadcasting the way you did, lose their jobs.
Just get fired for no reason other.
The federal government was mandating that certain number or percentage of on-air jobs be held by women and uh African Americans and what have you.
And it was new.
And because it was new, ownership and management was particularly afraid and therefore particularly energetic to be seen following the new federal guidelines, which were actually mandates.
As such, and you can argue about this, I'm I'm not raising this to argue about the merits of this.
I'm raising this to try to give you a timeline to explain some actions that took place yesterday.
So you end up having qualified people summarily fired simply just to make room for what were required by government to be minority hires.
They had to, it was an early uh way of looking at diversity demands, if you will.
This is not to wring hands over qualified people being fired.
I'm not doing it, I'm just telling you that the history of this goes back to the 1970s, the early 70s, perhaps even prior to that, but I think that's when it was.
I came close to being one of those let go.
I saw at the time Pittsburgh was um, and it may still be top 15 market was a big, big radio market.
And programmers, and by the way, everybody in radio who was around back then is nodding their head in agreement with me when I talk.
They know exactly what I am talking about.
There are so many frustrated people that ran radio stations then and still today.
They try to have the best staff they can with the budget that they've got, and then they had to comply with all these government-mandated hiring rules, and they ended up having to put people with no experience whatsoever into jobs, positions that required experience.
They were unable.
And I'm talking about on-air.
That's that's where these jobs were seen.
These mandatory hiring rules could have been uh demanded for the entire staff of a radio or TV station, but they manifested themselves in on-air positions because those were the ones that were seen.
So that's where the compliance could easily be seen.
And I mean, I don't blame the people that got hired.
I don't blame the people that were not qualified.
That's not a rant on them.
It is simply.
What ended up happening is that a lot of people who had no business being in this business got hired.
And once they were hired, you couldn't fire them for any reason.
In many cases, you had to either hold on to them or you had to promote them.
And as time went on, it became a little easier to get rid of them if they were not any good, but you had to replace them with uh you you you had to keep your percentages in order to satisfy satisfy the government, license renewal time and any other time as well.
So this this kind of compliance has been going on since the 1970s, and it has led to a lot of people who are not qualified in this business, and once they're there, you cannot get rid of them.
Well, you can you can, but you have to replace them with similar characteristic replacements.
And we're not talking about merit here.
Now, at this time's a little different because now 30, 40, 50 years have gone by, and there are plenty of qualified minorities now.
Back then, and for 10, 15 years afterwards, we were not talking about qualified at all.
That was the whole point, is why it was such a friction laid policy.
It just it caused animosity like you can't believe.
Now, the murderer in Virginia had been fired from numerous other TV stations, yet he would have never been hired to begin with had he not been a minority.
And you and the re I I say that simply because looking at his work career, the guy never did make it anywhere.
He was he was just and in addition to that, all of this created, and it still does to this day, a victim mentality.
And I've always thought that quotas and affirmative action were ultimately insulting to the supposed beneficiaries.
They still they were stigmatized.
If it was known by people that they got the job, not because of any particular talent or any particular skill, but because of their gender or their skin color, they were stigmatized.
Just as kids who had an inn with the owner or the general who got hired, who had no business being there, they were stigmatized as well.
Anybody who was not qualified who got hired based on something other than merit, stigmatized.
And I think the combination of the stigma and the victim status creates a beneath the surface seething that efferves, and in some people it boils over and blows up.
This Bryce Williams guy, Vester, whatever his name.
That's right, Vester Flanagan was hired repeatedly to meet these EEO and affirmative action goals.
And he was fired repeatedly.
Most likely his incompetence got him fired.
But it was also attitude related.
When he was fired so many times for these reasons, he couldn't deal with it.
And he uh he went postal.
Now let's not he he he just he lost it.
He he we went he went mental health on everybody while deep in this stigmatized victimhood.
And this is what happens when employment performance standards are lowered or disregarded for the sake of giving people something that everybody knows they're not competent to do.
I listened to uh people who have hired this guy and worked with him at various stations talk about him.
And it was clear that he had no affection.
They had no affection for him and vice versa.
And it was never a pleasant experience for anybody.
And he had to be let go at practically every job.
However, we're forced by the government to do all this anyway to meet employment goals and objectives for diversity and all kinds of things.
And particularly if your business is regulated by the government, you have to do this post-haste.
You cannot play around with it.
They hold your future, the government does, in the palm of your hands.
I think this incident that happened in Virginia, which is multifaceted, but it really isn't that complicated.
If you're going to be honest with yourself, and if everybody looking at this wants to be honest with themselves, What happened here is not really that complicated.
The people are, this particular guy.
It is a perfect example of what happens every day because of employment requirements that have nothing to do with competence or talent, merit, success, building on success.
The difference most people don't die.
People don't die most of the time, thank goodness.
The employer just has to swallow the results of their incompetence and grin and bear it and hope everything turns out all the way.
The thing about this is it's really a cruel thing to do, people, to stigmatize them this way.
It's a cruel thing.
It's looked at, no, no, Mr. Limbaugh's not cruel, it's an opportunity.
Yeah, you can I can I can see the argument that it's an opportunity giving somebody a chance to do something, but when people who are qualified who've been working their whole lives at a particular in a particular business or field and had to work their way up and climb when they are just summarily dispatched for somebody that has never done it before, or has been repeatedly fired, but now is hired to meet some federal requirement.
I guarantee you, there's friction and there's a stigma.
And this is the ultimate insult to the supposed beneficiaries of all of this supposed decency and goodness.
All these marvelous good intentions trying to help the downtrodden, it ends up in many cases doing the exact opposite.
It's cruel to be forced to hire people who can't do the job.
It is cruel to be pushed into a job that you can't do, surrounded by people who can do it.
And then if you come to the job already thinking you're a victim and already thinking you're stigmatized and as as unqualified, I'm telling you it isn't a healthy circumstance.
That's why I think the crutch of being a victim is what they all fall back on.
It's a way of blaming everybody else.
It's a way of blaming co-workers.
It's a way of blaming the boss.
It's a way of blaming the management.
And what we have here, folks, are victims of liberalism.
Once again.
But we're not supposed to look at it this way.
We're supposed to see only the good intentions behind these policies.
Got to take a break, be back after this with much more.
Don't go.
Okay, so after all of that, which by the way is indisputable.
Now it's different now.
There are, don't I don't want to be mis there there are qualified minorities now.
They're all over the place.
They've been in the business a while.
They have uh begun to climb the ladder, they've exhibited talent, all that.
That's fine.
But this guy wasn't.
It's obvious he wasn't, and he kept making the rounds and he kept, he was all ticked off that he didn't get the job that he was supposed to get PTSD because he couldn't get the job he wanted.
He was relying on victimhood.
The world was against him.
He was one of these people always looking For trouble.
He always, he was, he'd walk around the office waiting for somebody to say anything that he could interpret as racist, to give him an excuse for failure.
To give him an excuse for not making it.
And then that would, he'd think he'd heard something, and then he would tell himself he heard it, and then it would just magnify in his mind to the point that he exploded.
And it was known.
I mean, everybody that worked with the guy knew he wasn't right.
It was it's just, I don't know.
I I I watch, I watch the father of the reporter on TV today.
I just I can't put myself in these people's shoes like that.
It's so needless.
But despite despite all of this, you know, Ben Shapiro has a great, great take on this at Breitbart.
The headline of his piece, black gay reporter murders straight white journalists, media blame the gun.
Democrats blame the gun.
Oh yeah, I mean, I've I have an angry minority plus angry homosexual to the mix now.
Yeah, we've been told that we are to recognize certain things when homosexual bias exists.
We're supposed to not notice those things when the situation is reversed.
Now we have to blame the gun.
Now we have to blame gun control.
Now we need more gun laws.
Now we're gonna blame PTSD.
So I say the media's conflicted here over where to really place the final blame.
So they choose the gun.
That's the safe way to go.
Now this Vester Flanagan guy, he also said that the Charleston shooting is what got him, that was the that was the final straw.
So he went out and bought a gun a couple days later.
Bought the gun legally, by the way.
And he went out, got the gun, and now who hyped the Charleston incident?
You know what you what was noteworthy about the Charleston shooting to you?
I'm gonna tell you what it was noteworthy to me about.
You know what I couldn't believe about that?
You know the one thing that stood out about the Charleston shooting to me.
I've never seen it before or since the unilateral, immediate forgiveness of the shooter by the families of those victims that were shot in that church.
I could not, I was I was so moved by that.
I commented on it at the time.
They were deeply Christian, and they did not, none of the people inside that church and their families, not one of them, sought to turn that event into some political circus.
They tried to tamp it down.
They offered forgiveness for the shooter.
They did it in the Christian way.
People not Christian will not understand it, will not make any sense to them.
And you could tell when it happened that reaction, I mean, you should have seen if you remember this, many of the drive-by could not believe it.
And their guests on the nighttime cables, I couldn't do anything, forgive.
I've never heard anything like that.
They don't understand Christianity.
They did.
That's that was part of that was part of them making peace with the whole thing.
That was giving it all to God, putting trust in God.
That's what they chose to do as their means of coping, dealing with it.
So who hyped it?
Who could who had the drive-by media hyped that thing?
They would not let it go.
The race hustlers hyped that incident.
And we had to pull down the Confederate flag.
We had to have this whole dog and pony show.
The Confederate flag caused all this.
Meanwhile, the families of the victims couldn't be found.
They were privately dealing with this, their grief and their religious way.
But the drive-by media, the media itself, I mean, they whipped up the racist angle to the Charleston shooting to the point this guy admitted that What happened there is what set him off.
He might not have heard because so little was made of it.
The families of the victims immediately offering forgiveness.
And even to an extent and understanding.
Now, according to the UK mirror, we get more journalism truth.
But what happens in this country than we do in our own media, according to the UK meet mirror.
Vester Flanagan's apartments full of gay porn and cat feces, unwashed sex toys.
Clearly, we have somebody here that was unbalanced.
Sad, sad case situation.
And I dare say, I'm not speculating, but reading between the lines that people at work with the guy knew it.
Nothing they could do about it.
Any attempt to help him by suggesting that he seek some kind of uh therapy or help for a mental disease.
Can you imagine what he would have done with that?
He'd have run off and talked about discrimination and bias and whatever.
So everybody's hands were tied.
Again, because of the stigma, and because of the victim status, and because of the federal government's power over these properties by virtue of their being regulated.
But he saw the media raising hell and the Confederate flag being pulled down, and so he wants in on some of that action.
Got him all revved up and ready to go.
Here's uh here's Russ in Cincinnati as we we have some people want to weigh in on this on the phone, so we'll uh we'll do that and get into the latest political news in due course.
Russ, I'm glad you called.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello, sir.
Thank you.
Glad to be here.
You bet.
A long time listener.
I uh I I was smiling to myself as you as he recounted some of the statements about um the journalists and the career and journalism and the people that you have seen and run into because it was the same for me.
I was I was very fortunate.
I became a news anchor when I was uh 21 years old in uh in a small market, it was uh 95, I think, at the time, but then moved to Louisville, Kentucky, which is in you know, at that time a top 40 market, and I was amazed at uh uh the amount of bias.
I I don't know that I was sophisticated enough to know what it really was, but I I saw people quote people whom they've never talked to.
I I saw parts of stories that that I had followed that had nothing to do with what I had seen.
I was anchoring um and was told at one point that I uh I now have a new co-anchor.
Her name was Bunny, and uh that she was gonna be my co-anchor.
Uh apparently she had just graduated from some fine girl school, but you know, hadn't ever worked in a radio station.
Uh, she may have done an internship.
Then I was given a uh I had a perfectly good white sportscaster who What was this TV or radio you're talking about here now?
This is TV.
TV.
So you you had to have a co-anchor that had never done it before.
Yep.
Yep.
Did it on a class project or something, but after I got to know her, I I asked her, I said, Janet, how many times have you done this?
Have you did she ever?
You know, because she didn't know some of the basics.
She didn't know how to write a script, she didn't know how to, you know, produce the news to tell the people in the booth what to do next, and write out the script.
It was amazing.
And she never went out to cover a story.
In fact, they did a feature on her when she came, because she was going to be the first uh white full-time female anchor in Louisville at the time.
Now we're going back to the early 70s.
Yeah.
And one of the lines from the uh the article was uh, and uh once Carson and Dean were off the air, um she went out to dinner with me so I could get to know her better, and the somewhat portly dean stayed back and prepared the 11 o'clock.
So I I knew right away I was no longer the star star of the show.
Um the sports guy wasn't too bad.
He was a nice guy, but um he was very difficult to understand, and when he got nervous, he uh couldn't be understood, and obviously.
Well, see the bottom line here, what what we have here is a living, breathing example of I I lived through it always it was in radio.
It did not happen to me.
I want to stress, I saw it happen to others.
It did not happen, but I saw it.
Uh it was discussed constantly.
It created bitterness, created anger.
There were some people, a lot of people who were apolitical, didn't understand it.
Um what do you mean, EEOC?
What do you mean affirmative?
What do you mean diversity?
They didn't understand.
I don't even think diversity was a term back then.
But they didn't understand it.
Uh their whole experience had been work hard, get good, get as good as you can, get noticed, get lucky, get hired.
And then after you get hired, work your butt off and try to climb the ladder or go to a bigger market.
And all of a sudden they get thrown out for somebody that's never done it before because they happen to be not a man.
And they didn't they didn't understand it.
My only point is that this stuff is alive and well today, and but it has created a circumstance where people are in the business, have no business being there.
The only thing they're gonna do is fail and get fired and get angry and be stigmatized and fall back on victimhood status, and if they're not there mentally, and if their fires of anger are stoked by external sources, such as the drive-by media and whoever knows whatever else, and they're not all there, then you have potential like this.
I'm the my only point in this, folks, is there are explanations for this.
Whether people want to face it or not is another thing, but it is not the gun.
It is not the second amendment.
It has that it had nothing to do with the guy got his gun illegally.
It has nothing to do with it.
The gun's an inanimate object.
It was this guy who went and got the gun for a specific reason and pulled the trigger on specific people for a specific reason.
You could have had all kinds of gun control in the world.
You could have gotten rid of the second amendment.
This guy would have found a way to do what he did.
Because he was the problem.
And since in this country, people are never responsible for what they do, they are the product of their environment or whatever, I'm trying to tell you how this guy was made into what he is.
He wanted to be something, he wasn't good enough to be it.
But he got hired nevertheless, because it was the safest thing to do, or safer thing to do at all these places where he worked.
It was just, it wasn't worth.
And then the day came where they had no choice but to get rid of him, and that just makes him even angrier.
And he chalks that up to bias.
He chalks it up to racism or unfairness or whatever.
He turns on the TV and he sees he's validated in thinking that.
At every time there's an incident of crime where race is involved, this guy turns on a TV and he sees that his anger in his own mind is validated.
That the world is stacked against him.
He doesn't have a chance, no matter what.
He's better than anybody else around, but they never give him a chance.
And then he has to listen to all these people make fun of him and the staff and supposed racist company just builds and builds and builds.
It's not the gun.
Quick timeout.
Thanks, Russ, for the call.
We will be back after this.
Don't go away.
The views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right, 99.7% of the time.
Oh no, no!
It's 99.
We got up, Dawn while you were gone, 99.8.
We got a it's been over a year and a half since we heard from the opinion auditing firm, the Sullivan Group, and a surprise audit came in.
And they have now documented over it's been actually what's a year and a half since the last audit, but it's been like three years, stuck at 99.7, now documented to be almost always right, 99.8% of the time.
I mentioned uh I mentioned Ben Shapiro's piece at Breitbart, the headline in this story, Black gay reporter murders straight white journalists, media blame the gun.
Now, the the reason for that is if this were the exact opposite.
If it were a straight white journalist who had murdered a black gay reporter, that would be the headline.
That would be the angle.
That would be the uh the hook, the narrative that the drive-by media would be using to report this story.
But since it's in a way that they don't want anybody to think is possible to happen, this story has to be about the gun.
This shooting, this incident has to be about the gun and gun control.
Here's a pool quote from the it's an opinion piece, obviously, by Ben Shapiro.
Teaching Americans that they are not victims would be a great way of battling evil.
Most victims are not evil, but virtually all evil people think they are victims and thus they justify their violence.
But teaching Americans that they aren't victims would undercut the Democrat Party message that all minorities are victims, and thus it would require bigger government.
And that message and its attendant political success must take precedence over the building of a more inclusive, more understanding country.
What he's saying here is that the Democrat Party agenda first, last, and always.
Whatever.
I got, I'll tell you a little story.
I was out in California over the weekend, my little time away, and I I uh played golf with some friends, and one of them said, uh you um you heard you heard that podcast uh serial?
I said, you mean the thing it ran on NPR?
Yeah, yeah.
It was great.
I said, no, I didn't know.
Why not?
I said, because it's NPR.
Oh, come on.
Are you serious?
You're not gonna leave.
That's right.
I said there's politics and everything.
I am not going to expose myself to the stuff that they use to entrap people.
You can't could not make this guy understand that there's a there's an agenda, political agenda to everything the left does.
This is this has been one of my quests, by the way.
It has been one of my objectives to get as many people as possible to understand that everything they see is political.
Some of it's well disguised, but everything is to advance the Democrat Party agenda one way or the other, particularly if it's in the pop culture.
That's where some of the most deadly liberalism is found.
It's well hidden and it is camouflaged.
The whole it's it's not quite to the level of subliminal because you can point it out to people, you can if you know how to spot it.
Uh.
But the open resistance that I meant, no, not people don't want to think, they don't want to think they're being fooled by something number one that they think is just entertainment.
But the the Democrat agenda first, Democrat agenda last, Democrat agenda always.
And part of the Democrat agenda is making as many people possible think they're victims.
And victims of what?
A racist capitalist America.
If they can pull that off, then that's a success.
Plus, the the beauty from the Democrat standpoint of making people think they're victims is they're not responsible.
It's always somebody else's fault.
Therefore they've got enemies.
And here come liberal Democrat politicians understanding the point they're and offering to go fix it.
Get even with those people that are doing these horrible things to them, not hiring them or making fun of them or whatever it is.
And they're gonna get even with these powerful forces, usually on the right, usually Republicans, and so they want as many people victimized as possible.
So you teach Americans that they aren't victims.
You tell people that there's more self-determination in their life than they ever thought, and they have much more control over the outcome of their life.
You start teaching them that.
You start telling people they can be better than they are, that they're capable of much more than they think, and that there isn't a whole deck stacked against them, no more than against anybody else.
That everybody else has obstacles to overcome, so go and attack them.
You teach Americans to do that, you would undercut the entire Democrat Party message.
The Democrat Party message is the deck is so stacked against you that you can't overcome all that without us.
And what will we do?
We will get those obstacles out of your way, and if we fail to get them out of the way, we will punish them.
We will raise Their taxes or whatever.
We'll take their health care away from whatever.
But you can really and you can also count on the fact that whatever the Democrats promise to do, it will never end up helping you.
It will tell you, they will tell you to feel better when your enemies get punished, or what have you, but you never end up doing better.
You remain victims permanently.
And you remember to blame everybody else permanently.
There's an added side benefit, too.
The more people can be made to think they're victims, the bigger government must become in order to deal with all the injustice and all the unfairness.
And that will take precedence over anything, including in this story.
Therefore, this old poor guy, he's a victim of PTSD, of unfair bosses or what have you.
And he finally reached his wit's end when he saw what happened at Charleston.
And he went out and did it.
He's not responsible.
It's somebody else's fault plus the gun.
And we don't fix any of this until we get rid of all of that.
Which is one of the many things conservatism is devoted to.
We'll be back, folks.
Don't go away.
Then I take a break here at the top of the hour.
We'll come back and we will get into the details of the latest news coming from the presidential campaigns, polling data, and uh other exciting stuff out there.
▲
Export Selection