All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 4, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:04
September 4, 2015, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host of this program documented to me the screws coming loose here.
EIB microphones about take a tumble here.
Okay.
Drag it again.
The views expressed by the host of this program documented to be almost always right.
99.8% of the time, folks.
Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Yes, sir, 800 282882 email address L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
Great to have you here.
Open line Friday, where you get to talk about whatever you want to talk about.
Doesn't matter if I care about it or not.
Monday through Thursday, I have to care about it because I don't want to get bored because if I get bored, the listeners are going to get bored, and then nobody's going to listen.
But I put that at risk.
On Friday.
Okay, I just saw a cow walking back into the studio here.
And uh right before the end of the newsbreak at the top of the hour, and I saw on the Fox News channel, somebody was interviewing Hillary.
I don't know who it might have been the CNN monitor.
I don't know.
I didn't listen to it and look at it.
I just had a thought.
Oh, is Andrea Mitchell, and we see News Washington.
So this is a third interview Hillary has done in like what two years.
And it was about the emails.
Right.
Because Andrea Mitchell wants her to get this behind her.
Andrew Mitchell's tired of it.
She's fed up with it.
And uh I did see that a graphic went by that that said the Marco Rubio says that she's playing with fire, that she's on the verge of something blowing up.
Let me just ask all of you a question.
Is there any way?
I mean, do any of you really think she's not gonna be the Democrat nominee?
And if you think she's not going to be the Democrat nominee, two things.
Who is and what's gonna cause her to lose it.
I mean, it's easy to, oh yeah, this email they're gonna blow up in her face, gonna be indicted.
Really?
I don't know.
And even if the drip-drip drip-drip-drip-dip-drip still happens, uh what what what's it gonna take?
There's gonna have to be an alternative.
I mean, she's not they're not gonna dump her if there's not an alternative.
Who is the alternative?
How is this gonna happen?
I can see her being the nominee even if she's indicted.
And I'm only being half funny here.
Seriously, how does it happen that she does not get the Democrat Party nomination?
If you want to take a stab at that, have at it.
I mean, I have my own answers to the question, but what good is that?
Open line Friday.
Want to hear what you think.
Um here's the CNN poll.
Donald Trump often vows he'll win the Hispanic vote if he becomes the Republican nominee.
Says here, if so, he might have some work to do.
It's a new Washington Post ABC news poll released two days ago.
Finds that Trump is viewed unfavorably by 82% of Hispanics, with 68% of them feeling strongly so, and just 15% of those surveyed uh said they view Trump favorably.
Those numbers are a sharp contrast to the Spanish-speaking Jeb Bush, who in this poll is viewed favorably by 43% of Hispanic voters, a higher percentage than is usual for Republicans, but only 39% of whites have a favorable view of Bush compared to 48% who have a positive opinion of Trump.
Now, there are two separate polls, the names of which escape me.
I think one's Pew, and the other might be IBD tip, I can't remember, but in both of those polls, back in May, overall, Trump's unfavorables were 61 and 63 percent.
And uh last week, in both of those polls, his unfavorable favorable had done a total flip to now his favorables in one of those polls is 59, and in another one 62.
I mean, it a total flip-flop.
And that was just voters overall.
That was not uh poll by ethnic group.
Now, this poll having come out on Wednesday in the Washington Post, this probably explains why Trump was going spent so much time yesterday in the post pledge presser, speaking of his affection for Hispanics, the numbers that he has hired uh and likes and so forth.
And this is what Gloria Borger was talking about on CNN yesterday after when I zeroed in, because I know she didn't she didn't quite get to say it because it was a four-panel show, and everybody was trying to talk at the same time.
But she was trying to point out that Trump was backing off the red meat that his supporters love.
You know, the Hispanics are rapists, the illegals are rapists and murderers and muggers and personatchers, and he's not talking like that anymore about them.
I know she was going to make the point that he's backing off.
He's starting to sound a little bit more presidential on this, and his she wanted to ask whether or not his red meat supporters are going to be satisfied with the new moderate tone coming from Trump on Hispanics.
Now it it's a fascinating uh premise behind the poll.
What is the premise behind the poll?
The premise behind the poll is this is apparently nobody can get elected president in this country unless they have the Hispanic vote.
During my 27 years, now into our 28th, behind the golden EIB microphone, it seems like it's it's shifted.
One election, whoever got the soccer bombs was going to win.
The next election, whoever got women was gonna win, could not win the presidency without women.
And then another year and a frequent number of years it was African Americans.
If you don't get the African American vote, you don't have a prayer.
It is never said by any of these polling units.
If you don't, as a Republican, solidify turnout among your base, you will never win.
They never poll that.
They always go out and poll things that they are confident will show the Republicans lacking, as in hated and despised by certain ethnic groups.
And that's what this ABC News Washington Post poll.
And Gloria Borger, yesterday on CNN said she had talked to Mitt Romney.
Yes.
The standard bearer.
You know, we won an election with Mitt Romney, right?
So she was going out and talking to Mitt Romney as though he knows how to win elections.
Except he didn't.
And she said that Mitt Romney got 27% of the Hispanic vote, and he told her that the Republican Party just can't do that.
They're gonna have to get far, far more than if they have a chance to win the White House.
And then she cited that Romney told her that George Bush got George W. Bush got in the 40s with the Hispanic vote.
Nobody seems to want to tell the following stat, though.
A bunch of people have run the numbers.
You're probably tired of me pointing it out, but it's as long as they're gonna continue trying this misdirection, I'm gonna continue hitting you between the eyes with the truth.
The truth is if you look at all of the numbers post-election, state by state, group by group, gender by gender, orientation by orientation, however, you want to divvy it, what you will find if everything stayed the same except Mitt Romney got 70% of the Hispanic vote.
He Still would not have won the election.
He would not have won the popular vote, and he would not have won the electoral college vote.
And yet they persist in thinking at the Republican establishment that they don't have a prayer unless they get the Hispanic vote.
And so Jeb goes out and starts speaking Spanish.
As though somehow that's going to convert to uh to votes.
It's it's it's pandering, I think.
And that but how they miss.
I mean, you would think these are people who do want to win elections, right?
You would think that they'd want to be honest about what they have to do to win.
Why do they lie to themselves?
Why did they not tell themselves 70% of the Hispanic vote would not have won it for them?
So then what did they fall short in?
They had to fall short somewhere.
If 70% of the Hispanic vote still would not have secured a win for Romney, then what didn't they get in addition to the Hispanic vote?
Well, we all know the answer.
For whatever reason, four million people who voted in 2008, did not vote in 2012.
Republicans.
I don't know that they were all conservative.
I don't know that they were all part of the Republican base, but four million people staying home is a big number.
Now you will see consultants and establishment types argue with that.
No, no, no, no.
I hear Limbaugh talking about that all the time, but he's wrong about that.
That's uh it's a little bit more complicated.
No, it's not.
And I've never heard them try to explain or I haven't even heard them acknowledge the 70% stat of Hispanics that even had Romney got that, which no Republican ever has, by the way.
No Republican has ever gotten 70% of the Hispanics.
It was never going to happen.
Even if Romney had set records, he still wouldn't have won.
Now I would think they'd want to be honest with themselves about this.
Even if it's not publicly, just honest internally.
Because winning elections is what it's it's all about.
But now they're sitting here.
Now they've got this ABC Washington Post poll, and they got the 82% of Hispanics view Trump unfavorably.
And they're all sitting there, see, see, we told you he can't win.
He's going to bottom out.
You see, it's going to come back.
And I just want to remind everybody that he was 60% disapproval in May in two other polls and did a massive turnaround.
I don't know if it's going to happen with the Hispanic vote.
But it uh it has happened.
And of course, I guess we have to believe this.
It's the ABC Washington Post poll.
You can't run around and say, eh, cherry pick a poll and say you don't believe it.
You can't do that.
I mean, you could, but you wouldn't have any credibility doing it.
You have to go with it.
Now the the Trump Easter Sunday golf course story, uh, been meaning to tell this a couple of days.
Now it's it's just it's an isolated, I forget why I was even going to mention the story.
It related to something that was happening.
But since I committed to telling the story, here it is.
Trump and I had agreed to play golf on a Sunday many, many weeks in advance, not realizing it was Easter Sunday.
We both show up.
Nobody, neither one of us called the other to cancel on the basis that it was Easter.
So we showed up, showed up early, balls in the air at 8 o'clock.
And about 10 o'clock, Trump's phone starts ringing.
Excuse me, will you minute just to rush?
He goes uh a few steps away.
Comes back and says, everything okay.
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Let's keep going.
Phone keeps ringing.
Like every 20 minutes.
And it's Melania, reminding him that it's Easter.
And they've got a big thing going at Marilago.
And we both knew it, but had not acknowledged it because we both screwed up scheduling on that day.
It just wouldn't happen, but it it just escaped memory.
The idea was to play early, get it done and you know, be finished by noon and be able to meet uh church and Easter Sunday that are required.
And Milani was getting worried that Trump wasn't gonna make it.
So he uh he finally said, Rush, you know, I you might we quit early.
I mean, I let's uh we we were, I think, at 15.
And I said, not at all.
This is perfect, let's just hear, let's just jump over, play 18 and head on in.
And uh, and that's what we did.
The reason I was gonna tell you the story, um it was gonna relate to something that was happening at the time.
It had to do with Trump and women, uh, is that he was uh extremely uh deferential when Milani was on the phone, and he did everything he could not to cancel on me and to satisfy the commitment and make it home in time for Easter.
Uh it was just the the reason I was going to tell the story at the time this came up is there was something being said that Trump is the usual selfish, self-centered, self-focused, uh doesn't respect women kind of thing.
And and this the reason I was going to tell the story was to personal experience and dispel all of that.
So we got it wrapped up by like 11 o'clock, and everything was fine.
Everything was fine.
And as we're heading out to the parking lot, he's pointing.
See that?
See that see see that see that that that Rolls Royce that belongs to the richest guy in Italy.
No, no, no, no, it's Nefrario, richest guy in Italy.
And he's pointing out every car he knows who's whose uh car every member is.
It was just you it there's uh uh nothing about his his personality is offensive or or off but you just you marvel, you stand there laughing at it.
Plus you get into it with him.
You know, I um he hits the ball 300 yards off.
He's a he'd be I've heard that he cheats on his handicapped, but he doesn't.
He played to six the day we played.
I played with him a number of times.
Every time I played with him, he he he plays to a six, and he hits the ball a mile.
And uh he was surprised when he found out when he saw how far I hit the ball.
He said, you know what?
This is really you, you you gotta you got a chance at this game.
I mean, you can't play the game, you can't hit the ball far.
You know, nobody wants to tell anybody that.
You know, he's whims out.
I see them using a white tease, the lady sees, I just have to laugh at them, but they're members, so I look past it.
But you can hit the ball.
You can't play this game, but you can't swing hard.
You can swing hard, you can hit the ball, you got good solid contact.
This is a great decision, you should keep after it.
He said, if I couldn't hit the ball 180 yards off the tee, I'd quit.
I would what it wouldn't be any fun.
I wouldn't want to be on here.
I see these guys out there swinging everything they've got, 150 yards, I just cringe.
I cringe my God, but they're good paying members.
What am I gonna do?
I love them all, Rush.
I love them all.
But if I couldn't play, I couldn't play if I couldn't hit the ball like 250 yards, it wouldn't be any fun.
And the whole time, bragging about every hole, how it was designed, why it's better than any other golf hole in the world, why his waterfall is better than anybody else's waterfall, how Vegas copied his waterfall.
We'll be back here in just a second.
Don't go away.
Now there's another poll on Trump's favorability with Hispanics.
It is a Bloomberg poll.
And uh Trump has a net favorable among Hispanics of plus 51 in this poll.
So it's quite a disparity.
The ABC, Washington Post poll, 82% disapproval in the Bloomberg poll, 51% approval.
What are you gonna do?
Here's Art in Hartford, Connecticut, as we head back to the phones.
Thank you for waiting, Art.
Great to have you on the show.
Hi, Rush.
Um, I I'm kind of confused about the whole Iran deal.
And my thought, I mean, the Constitution says Congress is supposed to approve treaties.
Yeah.
And that's a deal between two countries, which this is.
Yeah.
So it came in, I was thinking now, why would the Republicans want to reverse the burden?
Why would they say why doesn't Obama need to get a 66 vote?
And you know, I think they really don't want the decision on this.
I think that they're afraid that if the treaty gets turned down by the Senate, then if we do have to bomb fortune or Ford or Iraq or any of those places, Iraq, not Iraq, any of those places, Obama will turn around and say, this is the fault of the Senate that we're doing this.
And I think they're afraid of that responsibility.
So if they figure this way, if the deal goes bad, they can just say, you know, it's Obama's deal, it's his fault.
So they're they're more concerned about the politics than they are about the principle of stopping Iran from getting a bomb.
They don't care about it.
I don't care about our dead play.
I think you're overthinking it.
I don't think the Republicans are thinking down the road at all.
I think they're thinking no further than their nose.
And it is, we just don't dare publicly criticize or oppose our president.
Obama's loved and adored.
It's African American.
There's nothing in it for us.
So they go through the motions with the corker bill of making their supporters think that they oppose it.
And are fighting it when they're not.
Corker bill actually put the onus on the Senate to stop it, which it was never going to do, rather than putting the onus on the president to make it happen.
They just don't want any part of being seen as opposing Obama.
Yes, sir, rebub having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, now documented to be almost always right, ninety-eight point eight percent of the time.
Latest opinion audit in from the Sullivan Group, here's Vanessa in Vernon, Connecticut.
Hi, Vanessa.
Great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Good day, Rosh.
I'd like to say that years ago, this woman, Kim, would have been getting great support, but because of our efforts, no one understands her courage and her moral values anymore.
So I called the gloat about the fact that she is not receiving the kind of love and support that she needs because of women like Mary Bonato, president of GLAD, and because of women like uh Camille Paglia, a friend of uh Christina Hoff Summers.
And it's the women who take the lead, Rush.
Have you noticed that they're more driven than the men?
The lesbians have have driven this uh destruction of the youth uh effectively, whereas the men couldn't do it earlier Hold a minute.
I'm uh I'm not sure.
I understand from where you're coming.
Are you supportive or opposed to Kim Davis?
Well uh uh of course uh I'm opposed to Kim, but I'm just saying that isn't it great that that we ladies of the left have uh brought about a condition where she's not getting the kind of charity that she deserves, having demonstrated courage years ago.
Now wait, see that's that's what's gonna wait a minute.
She if if you're opposed to Kim, she doesn't deserve any support because she's wrong.
Well, I'm just saying it isn't it remarkable how effective the ladies of the left have been.
In other words, we have a group called the ladies of the left that is part of the Ferris and Friends on LinkedIn.
And we've we've gotten together and we've formed a uh unstoppable group of women to destroy the youth of the country by populating the schools propaganda.
You are you are calling to gloat in victory of your destruction of the moral code of the country and in schools.
Very perceptive, Rush.
That's why we uh admire you so much, and we follow all of your thirty-five undeniable truths of life.
We've stolen them and and used them for our use because as the youth have been been dumbed down, they don't understand, they're propagandized, and they can't speak up because they're they think that that this woman i is uh is wrong, and you know she's right, but we beat her.
And and and and we beat the So wait a minute.
If I'm if I'm to understand you correctly here, Vanessa, you are part of the ladies of the left, you some lesbians, and you've bullied and overpowered every bit of moral opposition, you're succeeding in destroying the moral code of the country, and you're happy.
Uh well, of course, but not just lesbians, the ladies of the left.
Well, I know not just lesbians, but you mentioned lesbians.
I wanted to be sure to include them in the in the glory.
Well, the lesbians are the leaders.
you know the latin had an expression docks feminine a party u_x_ samana party woman will be the leader of the deed And that's why we've been able to accomplish this, where uh the men, for example, Henry Hay, I don't know if you're familiar with Henry Hay, but he was a uh communist uh uh pro uh homosexual leader in the uh earlier years, and and he couldn't get it done.
But once you give it to a d women, they're driven.
We are driven and and we are we are resourceful, we are dedicated.
You know, you mentioned you're devoted to the word the other day, and that's why you've done so well.
We congratulate you.
Devoted to the word.
Yes, you said uh on your broadcast the other day that I am devoted to words and and the word and the meaning of it.
And see, we got you and everyone else using a term called gay marriage.
Once you use that word, the game's over.
We win.
As soon as you drop the label homosexual.
But see, you are you are celebrating victory over what you are acknowledging here is the blowing up of a great moral culture.
You're happy.
That's correct.
So let's realize what has happened to us.
The shows like yours, Russia.
No, no, no, no, no.
Nothing's happened to us.
What we're talking about is what you have succeeded in doing.
When I say us, I mean U.S., United States.
No, that's not what you meant.
Now you're starting to swerve away here.
You gotta own this, Vanessa.
We do own it.
Look at Mary Bonato.
Look at what she did state by state.
Barry Bernardo.
Uh but not Mary Burns.
Got it.
Got it.
Right, right.
She recently showed her effectiveness by putting her head up on the steps of the Supreme Court after the decision was announced.
She had been stealth up to that time.
Do you understand?
Yes, Vanessa.
I I do get it.
I'm sure the audience is kind of perplexed right now, but I I understand this full-fledged hundred percent.
I do.
By the way, do you know how to spell star?
I do.
Why do you ask?
Well, because you're giving all these other you're spelling all these other words, and if you could spell star.
I spell it S T A R R. No, L-I-M-B-A-U-G-H.
Olimbaugh.
Yes.
We love the rush because we got your program and we turned it to our benefit.
Well, I'm happy that you're happy.
Here you have a Democrat woman who has stood up for her religious values.
She has been run roughshod.
Her religious values have been shown not to count.
She's a Democrat, 27 years in office, and she is worthless to the Democrat Party.
They'd just as soon destroy her and put her in jail as anything else, which they have done.
Well, I've been listening to all of these young people who are children of the Tea Party types, and they're they're in support of her doing her job.
You see, they don't understand the virtue that she has.
And we took that ability to understand that away from that.
We poisoned their minds.
Right.
You have succeeded in polluting and destroying.
You have you have succeeded in in in filling our culture with rot.
You have used your enemies in order to do it by getting us to use your language.
You have had great success, and you're calling here to laud it over all of us and celebrate and thank us for helping to make your agenda happen by opposing it.
That's a big part of it.
Well, what did I leave out?
I want a fellow Americans to understand how they got into this mess.
It's not a mess.
Why are you calling it a mess?
You won.
This is the this is the America you want.
No, but it's a mess for them because my I I there are people I love who are walking around scratching their head there saying, What the bleep just happened.
There was a book by that title by Monica Crowley, what the bleep just happened, and they don't realize that the GPS, that is the government public schools, for the last 40 years have been run by they know exactly what happened.
Everybody knows exactly what's happened here.
Well, I want them to be comforted by that, Rush, because you know, I I understand that uh to the victor belong the spoils.
I'm not saying they're comp no no, I didn't you I'm not saying anybody's comforted by it, but you seem to think that you've pulled off this gigantic coup uh over everybody using their aid, unwilling assistance and so forth.
And we all know how it happened.
We all know what's what's what's going on.
I think it's interesting, Vanessa, that you know, If you're on the level with me here, you know what you've done.
You know it's no good, but you still are so happy you've pulled it off that you are more happy, you're happier that others are in misery than you are happy over what you've achieved.
And that speaks volumes, and we will be back.
Okay, using proprietary software and uh special algorithms, folks.
We have we Vanessa has called this program before, most recently back in June.
We have uh we've run both calls through uh our analytical software.
She is a legit leftist.
If you think that she was a satirical parody, satire, wrong.
She's a legitimate leftist.
Uh this has been confirmed.
She's an example of how you should not try that at home.
Try this at home.
But she's she was being dead serious.
She knows full well what she's done, and she's happy she's done it.
And my last commenter is right on the money.
The woman is happier over your misery than she is at her own achievement.
And her real point was that the leftist men are a bunch of wimps and didn't get any of it done, that it took women and lesbians to get it all done.
That was the real thrust of what she wanted to point out.
I kept distracting her.
But uh not intentionally, but just my probing questions.
Now, this would be an excellent opportunity to remind you of a book that uh I suggested, I think last week.
It particularly, I have a story right here.
Millennials have low opinion of themselves compared to boomers.
Did you see this story?
This is a Washington Post.
Millennials have a relatively low opinion of their generation.
They don't even like the label millennials to describe the group that they've been lumped into, especially when compared to baby boomers who eagerly self-identify as such.
And the thrust of the story is the millennials are not happy.
They're not sure who they are.
They don't have much faith in the country.
They're worried about their future.
They don't like all being lumped together.
They they give themselves low rankings in categories like patriotism, responsibility, willingness to sacrifice, religiousness, morality, self-reliance, compassion, political activism.
59% say that self-absorbed is an apt description of their generation.
That's nothing to baby boomers, it's 95%.
And growing.
But nevertheless, you know, everybody talks about the millennials as the future.
And the millennials, according to this, they're not feeling it.
Now, my buddy Mark Levin, his new book is called Plunder and Deceit.
And it's like sixth or seventh book.
And the purpose of this book, it's aimed at young people.
And I guess the after after reading it, my book report would be it is aimed at young people.
And it's an attempt to tell them why many of the things they support are actually to blame for their unhappiness.
Many of the things that they think are right, many of the things they think they believe in are actually the source of their destruction.
And it goes topic by topic, but it's all rooted around the fact that the end of the day, what they end up supporting is big, overpowering government to fix all kinds of things that everybody thinks are wrong.
Global warming is just one example.
Healthcare is another.
But the greatness of this book is it's targeting these particularly, when we say young people, they're adults, but they're young adults.
And it is an attempt to get them, because the media doesn't do it, their education let them down.
They simply are supporting their own, not destruction, but they're they're supporting things that are resulting in the loss of their liberty.
And as they lose their liberty, they lose their opportunity.
Everybody does.
You lose liberty, you lose freedom, you Lose opportunity.
And it's an attempt with hard cold facts and data and irrefutable evidence.
It's an attempt to counter the education that they've all had and to get them to wake up and to realize what they must do in order to have a future they anticipate and look forward to.
It really is not slogging, it's not heavy reading.
I mean, it could be depending on the amount of data you want to uh examine it to be, but just the message is crystal clear.
And again, it's called Plum and Deceit.
Uh just search the great one that might do it.
Actually, Mark Levin, the author, Plunder and Deceit.
Nope.
It's the best way to describe it.
Plunder and deceit is written for young people.
It's an attempt to explain to them how the things they are supporting, they're being exploited, big government making them feel guilty and all that.
The things that they are supporting are actually eroding their liberty.
And it's a it it makes it crystal clear.
Folks, we're not here on Monday.
We have a best of show, right?
Because it's uh Labor Day.
What do you mean you didn't know I wasn't going to be?
Don't pull that on me.
Don't try to pull that.
We are we're not here on Labor Day.
Traditional best of show.
Don't panic.
It'll be a great one.
Everyone in the past is.
Just whichever one we choose, and we'll be back here live on Tuesday.
▲
Export Selection