All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 11, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:38
September 11, 2015, Friday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends.
Welcome back.
Great to have you.
El Rushbo on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the Limboy Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies on Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open live Friday.
And the telephone number is, if you want to be part of the program, 800-282-2882.
If you're going to send an email, feel free.
Email address is 800-282-2882.
Our email addresses are rushboard EIBnet.com.
Anyway, so I mentioned moments ago that we had a piece from Newt Gingrich and weighed in on a Trump situation.
Oh, and Bobby Jendre.
Bobby Jendel has gone all in now.
And Trump's gone all in back.
Oh, yeah, now it's a circus.
But let me find the Mr. Newt.
I may have to print it out again because I've got so many pieces of paper accumulating in front of me here.
Oh, boy, am I glad I found these two things.
Also, this.
Snerdley came in today and said, there's this piece that you got to see on the Daily Beast about why college-educated women can't find love.
And I said, that reminds me, I've got to print out a piece.
And it's from a college-educated, actually a senior at UNC Chapel Hill, the struggle to be taken seriously in the age of subtle sexism.
So these are two women in college.
Is one of them a graduate?
Anyway, two women in college, either both seniors or one's a senior, one's graduated.
The struggle to be taken seriously in the age of subtle sexism.
Meaning, only men do is look at them.
They don't take them seriously.
She thinks that she's onto something new there.
And the other one, why college-educated women can't find love.
What is so funny?
Well, she doesn't, what they do.
I mean, this is why I have never feared getting older.
I have always relished getting older.
I find something more enjoyable about getting older every year.
And the fun part of being older now is to go back and look how people behave when they're 20 when I was 20, 21 when I was 21, and how they all think it's never happened before.
The things they are enduring are a first.
That we can't understand it, that we can't relate to it.
And it's worse than it's ever been.
It's just fascinating to me.
I love the opportunity to try to set them straight and explain things.
I think it'd be a lost cause.
But I mean, the struggle to be taken seriously in the age of what do they think modern era feminazism is about?
I mean, the whole point of modern era feminazism is embodied in my undeniable truth of life number 24.
Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of pop culture.
Bingo!
So here we have a female athlete, by the way, senior at UNC, the struggle to be taken seriously in the age of subtle sexism.
It's so hard.
I mean, she worries that she doesn't have a thigh gap, and a thigh gap is required now.
Well, that's, it used to may not have been a thigh gap back in 1970, but it was something.
Big bazooms or what have you.
It was something.
It's not the onion.
Part of me doesn't want to read this because I don't want to embarrass these women and why college-educated women can't find love.
I could answer that right off the bat without even reading the piece.
It's probably because there aren't very many men on your campuses anymore because they have been driven away.
And so you've got a smaller pool of people to pick from.
And they're not looking for love anyway because you guys have your hookup culture.
Who needs love?
I can answer this stuff.
Get the benefit of wisdom and sage advice that comes with age.
I've always looked forward to these days having every answer to a question any young person would have and being told I'm full of it anyway Because I know that would happen too.
But it's all part of the fun of it.
No, I'm still looking for the Newt piece.
And if I have to, here it is.
No, I'm going to get back to it.
I was just teasing you that these things are coming up.
I can imagine the Trump crowd got a little mad at me for diverting there to the women on college campus.
Trump people want to hear Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.
So here we go.
This Newt Gingrich said late yesterday that the Republican presidential frontrunner, the Trumpster, may want to temper his comments as he gets closer to the nomination.
Newt thinks he can win it all, by the way, folks, just to set this up.
Oh, and by the way, that phone problem I had, it got fixed in the break at the top of it, just so you know.
Multitasking.
I'm just filling you in.
I'm not interrupting myself.
We're going to get right back to it here.
Newt thinks that Trump can go all the way.
He thinks he's well along the way to doing that now.
But he said this.
I think that Donald is in danger because I do think that gradually he's shifting over from this very unusual billionaire who you can't quite imagine as a candidate.
He's now shifting over to a potential president.
And I think the standard becomes very different.
It was on the record on Fox News.
That's Greta Van Cestron last night where Newt said this.
And he's going to have to learn to be more disciplined because it's no longer funny.
Gingrich's remarks come amid intense criticism of Trump with the latest flare-up involving his comments for a Rolling Stone article this week mocking Carly Fiorina's face, which Trump has since denied doing.
Newt said, I think people are prepared to discount to a certain extent Donald Trump being Donald Trump, meaning they'll overlook it because they know who he is and they understand that's part of the deal.
He said, Trump is an extraordinarily powerful force who every once in a while says something that at best is dumb, Gingrich said, later noting that some are supporting the candidate purely for his bravado, and he'd better keep it up in order to keep them.
Nevertheless, Gingrich noted that the celebrity's bid for the White House attracts attention.
He's now conditioned the media that if he does it, they are going to pick it up.
Now, I think what Newt's point here is, is that there are stages and phases of a candidate's candidacy.
And in the early stages, when somebody like Trump comes along, he's brand new and breaks the mold, happily so, everybody excited and thrilled by it.
And the original beginning acts of behavior which break the mold are applauded and laughed at and marveled at in some cases.
But then as time goes on, and as that candidate begins to marshal and gain support, serious support, now in the 30s and low 30s in a lot of polls, Newt's theory is that people will naturally, whether they're aware of it or not,
begin to demand or expect a change in the candidate, an evolution, if you will, that they recognize that the candidate recognizes that this is serious.
And there are certain requirements based on that seriousness.
He can still be filled with bravado.
And he can still call, you know how it's going to manifest.
I'll tell you what Newt really means.
Hey, Donald, talk about Hillary, not Carly.
Hey, Donald, you know, talk about Biden.
Talk about, talk about Obama.
Talk about the Democrats.
Talk about, instead of beating up on all these Republicans, if he did that, he might still get the same chiding from the media.
I mean, if he called Hillary a horse face, I don't know how that would play, but I guarantee you, supporters should love it.
Or if he just called her Nurse Ranchett for him, that's all he'd have to do.
But beating up on all these other Republicans, not so cool.
Because they're really, at the end of the day, not the enemy.
Now, they always can say, but they are right now.
That's the primary.
That's who he's running against.
That's who he's got to beat.
Yeah, but theoretically, we're all on the same team.
But Newt's point is, understand this evolution that takes place as people begin to treat you and look at you more seriously.
There is a demeanor expected by your voters.
And calling anchorettes bimbos and female opponents horse faces or whatever they, whatever the word was, I don't know.
is just considered to be beneath because people investing a lot of serious hope in the candidate, that kind of stuff.
They don't want him to do anything.
It's going to hurt himself.
They don't want him to do anything.
It's going to allow the media to take him out.
They don't want him to hurt himself.
So if I'm interpreting Newt correctly, I also have the solution for this.
If any of you Trump people are worried about this, the way Newt thinks that you might be, the simple way out of this is just do two things.
Issues, issues, issues.
There's plenty of them.
There's this invasion in Europe that's made the order for Trump to talk about related to our southern border.
There is ISIS.
There is all kinds of things foreign, the Iran-Nuke deal.
There are all kinds of things.
The simple subject of taxation.
These are defining things.
And then when you want to start or when you want to continue with the, hey, I'm not going to hit them till they hit me.
There's all kinds of Democrats out there to hit.
And don't be afraid to hit Obama.
I'll tell you, I think this is the one area, that's the one area where no Republican has had the courage to even get close.
We had a caller here yesterday.
You remember this snurdy?
We had a caller, a woman who was in the 230 period.
Had her on here for 10 minutes.
And she was one of these people Newt's talking about.
She get a little worried now.
She said that if Trump would drop this personal insult stuff, he could be at 40 or 45 percent.
I think same token.
If he went after Obama, Obama care.
The nuke deal, any number of, that's another thing the Republican Party isn't doing and hasn't done.
You can own that.
Trump could own that if he wanted to.
I mean, that's fertile ground, uncultivated, made to order.
But look, I'm not an advisor, and I'm not a consultant.
I'm just a guy on the radio.
So keep that in mind.
And we are back.
Open Line Friday, Rush Limbaugh having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Grab audio soundbite 28.
I was, this is, it's Mitch McConnell on CNN this afternoon.
And the point that he's making here, I addressed this in the opening monologue today, which you may not have heard if you weren't here at the beginning of the program.
Discussing all of this, it's just inexplicable.
It makes no sense why we want to assist the bad guys.
Anyway, I don't want to repeat all that.
It's there at rushlimbaugh.com if you want to check it out.
But listen to this.
This is Mitch McConnell explaining, once again, why, I mean, they gave it their best.
freely gave it their best, but I've said we'll be happy to take up any bill that enjoys enough sponsors to override a presidential veto.
Otherwise, this vote stands.
And this is going to be a defining vote for the 2016 election.
What I hear in saying is, once again, hey, you know what?
We couldn't stop it.
He can override the veto.
So we don't have the White House.
So we can't do anything.
So, what we're going to do, we're going to kick this down a can, kick this can down the road.
2016, we're going to remind everybody what Obama did.
And this is going to get us elected president.
This giving away our country to the Iranians.
Yeah, we're holding this, so this is going to be the issue.
It's not.
That's not what this is.
It's far more important.
These guys look at this as just the next piece of legislation rolling through the building.
It may as well be a bill to deal with the snail darters in Kentucky.
It's just another piece of legislation.
Hey, we can't override the veto.
Well, you might not have had to if you hadn't had the stupid corker bill that tied your hands.
But this attitude, how many of these are there now?
We should never lose another election.
We should have so many chits in our bag, the Democrats ought to never win anything.
Because we're keeping track, right?
We're keeping track.
All these transgressions of theirs.
Yeah, everything Obama gets, we're keeping track.
And we're going to use it.
We're going to hold it in reserve in this issue.
This is going to come back.
2016, this is going to be a huge issue.
This is going to be defining.
This means we're going to win because we're going to use it in 2016.
And we're going to tell people that Obama helped the Iranians get a nuclear bomb.
We're going to show how hard we work this time.
That's how they're going to do this.
In the meantime, Iran gets a nuclear bomb.
And we think it'll help us hold on to our committee chairmanships.
As I say, inexplicable.
Back to the phones.
Janice in Naples.
It's great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi.
Hey, I saw McConnell this morning, and he might as well take his thumb, stick it in his mouth, take his binky, and crawl back into his crib and call for mommy.
It's just when I was a high school teacher, that's what I used to tell my kids when they would come in and they're like, yummy, yummy, dish it down.
Just take your thumb and go back to your crib and crawl up.
So you don't like the strategy of stockpiling all the ammo for the next election.
Oh, golly.
Didn't we have that with the Supreme Court wait till the Supreme Court deals with it?
That's what we heard.
Yes, the campaign finance reform.
And so I come back to, you know, your overall thing today about no explanation makes sense.
You know, what a, what a, you are earning your money, bud, today, okay?
Because, you know, as we as we really process, and I've got the time to really watch all this stuff, but, you know, we get confused, and when we get confused, we get weak, and when we get weak, we get defeated.
And Trump, Trump is never confused, and he's never weak, and that's why I think a lot of people feel he won't be defeated.
But my original call, you know, was really what Newt was saying: you know, come on, guy, get a filter, okay?
Get a filter.
You've given a.
Wait, wait, wait.
You agree with that?
You wish he'd get a filter?
Sure.
Yeah, he's got to get, especially with this last one with the arena, because really, the woman is attractive.
I mean, she's very attractive.
I mean, as a 67-year-old woman who, myself, who looks in the mirror each day and goes, oh my God, this is not fun.
He miscalculated on that one.
And that he's better than that.
I mean, the other stuff with the perv and, you know, a lot of his others.
Well, that guy is a perv.
You're talking about exactly.
There was true in his borishness, I guess you might say.
But again, he's with a media that as long as your words are borish, you are unacceptable.
Your behavior can be borish.
Brenton Lewinsky, wouldn't we love to see her on her damn knees in his office?
Okay, borish.
Well, now, if we'd seen that, he wouldn't be president.
And nobody, you know, but those were actions.
And I'm not saying words don't count.
Of course they count.
And we want a strong gentleman.
I think it was a desktop anyway, but a gentle man, you know, in the office, but a strong one.
And, you know, when none of this stuff makes sense, my other thought along this line is, you know, a lot of the argument with putting this deal through is that the Iranians are within, what, two months of establishing a weapon.
It depends on who you listen to.
They're either one month away, six months away, or 15 years away.
We don't know.
Well, they're saying if we don't do this, they're only two months away.
We've had seven years of this administration.
What the hell have they been doing for seven years?
Ten years, exactly right.
Don't leave out the bushers in this stuff.
It's like letting a burglar get into your house with a loaded gun, and you're putting your hands up and saying, we will kill you if you don't do what we want you to do.
I mean, it's, yeah, now I have a sense of.
You're right.
I'm sorry I'm out of time, Janice, but I appreciate that you got through.
Thank you very much.
Be right back here, folks.
You know, I just got a quick flash note here from Diana Aloco, who is the editrix of the Limbaugh Letter.
And she has another theory about Mr. Garrity's piece at National Review, the two words we never hear Trump use are freedom and liberty.
And paraphrasing her opinion, Trump supporters see Trump supporters are comprised many of whom are from the Tea Party.
And what have members of the Tea Party seen?
They have seen the United States government gang up on them and deny them liberty and freedom.
And as importantly, they don't see a whole lot of Republicans standing up in the government doing anything about it.
Lois Lerner got away with it.
Obama and the boys got away with it.
The Tea Party became an enemy of the Washington establishment.
So if members of the Washington establishment were to run around and say, hey, we don't hear liberty and freedom out of Trump, Trump supporters are probably saying, you know what?
We're not hearing it from you either.
And we're not seeing much of it from you either.
So that's another point of view on this that might have some validity, at least in representing your reaction to that as well.
So I wanted to pass that on.
Here's Roger driving through Kansas.
Next up on the program, great to have you.
Hi.
Thank you, Rush.
Megadittos from the Red State of Kansas.
Where are you in Kansas?
Well, I happen to be pulled off the side of the road in Wichita.
I was going from Topeka where I live to Wichita.
I've got to attend a funeral for my aunt.
I'm sorry about that.
I'm going to see you all the way.
And I have a little bit different take on this Iranian deal.
I'm a long-time listener and a first-time caller.
And one of the things you've taught me to do is to think outside of the box when you're dealing with the mental disease called liberalism.
And basically, what I see, I can't figure out for a long time, couldn't figure out this Iranian deal.
Why would we do something if we're not getting a thing out of it?
And I finally came to the conclusion, let's just say, what if Iran already has one or two weapons?
And the $150 billion is to keep him shut up for a while until Obama's out of office so it doesn't happen that they make an announcement under his regime.
You know, you don't have to test a weapon to know that it works anymore.
There's plenty of specs out there from all the American testing that we did to know what mass you need to produce what megaton.
And then it started to fall in place a little bit.
Maybe this is a lot of, maybe that made sense then.
Do you see what I'm talking about?
Maybe that's just hush money to get it through.
Let me see if I understand this because you are, you're on a cell phone, which is my position.
Well, it's not my toughest challenge to hear.
So let me just leave you.
You think that a possibility to explain the inexplicable is that while we weren't looking, the Iranians already have at least a couple of bombs ready to go.
And that Obama, very much concerned that he would look bad if they nuke us while he's president, has struck a deal with them where they will not nuke us until after he's gone so that he won't look bad and they get their $150 million payoff in order to, as a payment for waiting to nuke us or anybody else until after he's gone.
Is that the nub of it?
Well, the nub of it is I'm not saying so much that they were going to nuke us, but the deal is, what if they already just have the nukes?
You know, he kept telling us, we'll never let them have them.
We'll never let them have them.
We'll never let them have them.
We're watching these guys.
Well, what if they already have them?
Then it makes sense.
Maybe you're going to have to shut them up for a while.
You've got to let them keep centrifuges in.
Otherwise, it's not going to make any sense how they get this if we took their centrifuges from them.
But okay, so you're looking at they've already got the nukes, and that's why we're doing what we're doing.
They've already beat us to the punch.
They've got the nukes.
So we can't get an agreement that would make it look like they are doing away with what they need to make them because they've already got them.
Correct.
And so Obama's paying them not to use them?
He's paying them to shut up for a while.
Paying them to shut up for a while.
And then I wouldn't look on Obama's watch if if Iran came out, let's say a few months ago and said when this all this negotiated negotiation started and said, you know what, we already have.
Now what's he going to do?
Well, we would rely on our intel to tell us, just like we have relied on our intel to tell us how successful we have been in defeating ISIS.
Oh, that's right.
I'm sorry.
That intel's bogus.
Oh, damn, I forgot that.
That's exactly right.
There is no intel that we have beaten ISIS.
They cook that intel.
The same people that trashed Bush for supposedly cooking the intel on WMD have indeed cooked the intel on the fact that we're having such success against ISIS.
Well, Roger, look, as far as your theory goes, it could be, I don't happen to subscribe to it.
I don't think the Iranians could be paid enough to stop bragging about them.
I think if they had, I think the day they get a nuke, they're going to parade it through the streets.
Just, you know, the Soviets and the Chikoms, they have these big military displays on May Day where they get their soldiers marching in unison and all their latest weaponry being towed through in front of the great leaders of the time.
I'm not saying that the Iranians might actually parade an actual nuke, but they might make a paper-mâché model of it and parade it through town or whatever.
I don't think, look, anything's possible.
I had never considered this, that they've already got it and Obama's just paid him not to use it while he's in office.
That aspect, part of me says, hey, there could be some merit to that.
Anyway, Roger, I appreciate the call.
I really do.
Thank you so much.
I'm very flattered at your loyalty as a listener having the radio in all day today.
You know, our intel, just to be honest, our intel did not tell us that the Pakistanis had nukes.
They pulled that off without us knowing.
So it's possible.
I mean, I can't reject it.
Look at his theory is based on none of this makes any sense.
And he says, look, you've trained us well.
When liberalism is involved here, you've got to go outside the box.
You cannot look at logic to explain what these people do.
So I appreciate that he is attempting to use what he's learned here at the Institute in evolving a theory.
But his point is, Obama's paying off the Iranians to keep them from admitting they already have what they have so that Obama can say it didn't happen on his watch.
That's really, not that they're going to nuke us when Obama leaves.
If they're going to nuke anybody, it's going to be Israel, which they've promised to do.
I mean, it was this week, the Ayatollah Hominy said Israel isn't going to be here in 25 years.
Mitch McConnell said, hey, that's a great election issue for us in 2016.
Make a note, he said to his assistant.
But we didn't know the Pakistanis got their nuke.
But Obama wanting to make sure that none of this can be said to have happened on his watch.
Yeah.
I can see him going to some donors and trying to help out with that.
Robert and Green Bay, great to have you on the program, sir.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Resist we much, Rush.
Resist we much.
I want to talk about Black Lives Matter's movement.
I think this is a gift draft opportunity for the Republican candidates to reach out to people who haven't traditionally supported conservatives.
I'm not talking about Al Sharpson and tandering to his ilk, but just everyday people who are trying to work hard and put a roof over their head and food on their table.
I think they could stump in the black communities and say Black Lives Matter.
You're damn right, Black Lives Matter.
And they've always mattered to Republicans.
Whether you look back when they passed the 13th Amendment, the majority of Democrats opposed it.
When they passed the 14th Amendment, 100% of Democrats opposed it.
Republicans want prosperity and success for black lives.
Democrats want them to have the minimum wage.
Obama promised green jobs.
Who has green jobs in the black community?
No one I know of.
Hillary heard from the Black Lives Matter movement.
She didn't like their attitude, told them she'd rather talk to white people.
We had that soundbite.
I remember that exactly.
But here's the Black Lives Matter movement, is it a fraud?
Is it run by a white guy trying to stir up trouble?
Who cares?
I think we should steal the narrative on it and just usurp the leadership on this.
So you think that there's actual ground to be gained by Republicans just going at Black Lives Matter?
Damn right they do.
Hell yes they are.
Damn right they do.
Interesting.
Okay.
No matter what's behind it, it's clearly an issue that matters to a lot of people.
Hey, Black Lives Matter, damn right they do.
And they're more important than minimum wage and they're more important than this and that.
And you categorize black life under Democrats and say it's more important than that.
And it's more important than Hillary.
She got so frustrated.
She said, screw you.
I'm going to go talk to white people.
Yeah, imagine if Trump said that.
What would happen?
Anyway, I appreciate the call out there, Robert.
I do.
Thanks much.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
I've got these two opinion pieces by these women.
I'll do some excerpts from them, snerdly, just for you.
In the meantime, quick time out, folks.
We've got more.
As always, we get back.
We're back.
El Rushbo at the EIB network.
I'm watching Ben Carson.
He's in Berkeley, Missouri at a campaign stop.
And he just, he's talking about how he believes the government doesn't need to be involved in solving all of our social problems.
In fact, the country flourished in our early days without government being involved in this at all.
He said, how do we do it?
We solved our problems ourselves.
People helped each other through churches and it welfare state and create a bunch of dependency.
And he gave an example.
And he was talking about how people, it used to not be an urban country at all.
People lived tens, maybe hundreds of miles apart.
Communities were hundreds of miles apart.
And he gave an example.
He says, suppose a farmer one day fell out of his tree and broke his leg and couldn't do the harvest.
Well, his friends and families gathered together and they went out and did the harvest for the guy.
And it's true.
And I talked with Victor Davis Hanson this day after the program newsletter interview, next issue.
And he brought up the one of the ways the left has so co-opted the youth of this country is because everything's so urbanized.
It's essentially his take on Obama's attack on suburbia.
You get people using mass transit, giving up mobility and living tightly together, close together, where things go to hell in a handbasket real fast and you automatically need the government to come in and clean up mess.
It's how you mass educate people toward liberalism because you can control the school centers in these places.
It was really, really insightful comments of Victor Davis Hansen.
And they're coming up in the next issue of the Limbaugh letter.
Okay, here's one of these pieces.
This is by the young woman at University of North Carolina Chapel Hill.
Not going to mention her name.
I don't want to embarrass her.
listen to the point.
You get an idea how this goes when the first line is, I identify as female.
And you know right off the bat, I identify as female.
She's a woman.
And that's not enough.
I identify as female.
And she talks about friends of hers who identify as male in the piece.
But she's very sad and very unhappy.
She's very pretty.
Her pictures is very pretty, but she's just, she's nothing more than a victim of subtle sexism.
Nobody is taking her seriously, and she doesn't know what to do about it.
I'll save both of these for Monday.
▲
Export Selection