All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 12, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
28:38
October 12, 2015, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, sir, Rebob.
Welcome back.
You're tuned to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, and the email address, LRushbow at EIBnet.com.
Okay, Cookie got the soundbite here from Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz.
This was yesterday on CNN's State of the Union.
The last hour, I read to you what Debbie Blabbermouth-Schultz said.
She was talking to Dana Bash, who didn't find anything odd about this at all.
So Dana Bash says to Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz, who runs the Democrat National Committee.
You know, I call her Blabbermount now.
Wasserman, that's her middle name.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
I've been calling her Blabbermouth Schultz because she never shuts up.
Anyway, question, do you believe that Bernie Sanders could beat any Republican?
I believe that any one of our candidates will stand in stark contrast when it comes to the priorities of the American people and how they're going to make the decision on who they vote for for president to any of the Republican candidates.
The Republicans have been trying to outright wing one another.
Look, between the 15 Republican candidates that are left, all of whom are trying to out-Trump Donald Trump by saying, yeah, let's kick women out.
Let's kick immigrants out of this country.
Let's take away health care from women.
So there you have it.
Yeah, let's kick women.
Let's kick immigrants and kick them out of the country.
It's what the Republicans want to do.
And there's Dana Bash nodding.
Right on, Debbie Blabbermouth.
Right on.
In the meantime, from theHill.com headline, Democrat National Committee officer, I was disinvited after call for more debates.
It turns out that Representative Towesi Gabbard, or is it Tulsi?
Yeah, Tulsi Gabbard, and it might be Gabbard.
I don't know.
She's from Hawaii.
She's a Democrat.
So vice chairwoman, Democrat National Committee, says that she was disinvited from the debate on CNN tomorrow night after calling for more debates.
Yeah, she said this to the New York Times.
When I first came to Washington, one of the things that I was disappointed about was there's a lot of immaturity and petty gamesmanship that goes on.
And it kind of reminds me of how high school teenagers act.
It's very dangerous.
She said, well, we have people in positions of leadership who use their power to try to quiet those who disagree with them.
When I signed up to be vice chair at a DNC, no one told me I'd be giving up my freedom of speech and checking it at the door.
And what happened was she said that we need to be doing more debates, not fewer.
But Hillary wants fewer debates because the more Hillary appears, the worse it goes for her.
I have made this observation.
I don't know how many times do not doubt me.
When Hillary hasn't been heard from in a while, wow, that's when her numbers go up.
It's when she starts talking in public that her numbers start to go down.
And O'Malley and Bernie have wanted many more debates.
And the DNC, which is in a tank for Hillary, has said no.
So this woman, vice chair, comes, they throw her out.
Meanwhile, Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz says that it's the Republicans who want to kick women and immigrants out of the country.
Well, they've kicked this woman, their own woman, to the curb, which is how it works with these people.
I was disinvited after call for more debates.
Donald Trump on Fox and Friends this morning.
Right out of the gate here, fresh from getting out of bed over to Fox and Friends to rip into Obama.
Steve Croft's interview with Obama was referenced last night.
Steve Docey said, so what did you think?
You watched the Obama interview with Steve Kroft.
What do you think?
I watched his performance last night and I thought it was terrible.
I thought it was sad because everything's negative.
You know, there's nothing positive.
I watched him last night.
I saw him say that.
I mean, he can't say I think he's going to make it, in all fairness to him.
He can't say, I think he's going to be the next president, in all fairness, right?
But I thought it was a little bit sad because there's so much negativity.
And then, you know, he goes, what else you got?
Like, he's doing great.
And he wasn't doing great.
He's doing poorly.
And, you know, I just, I don't get it.
What's going on in our country?
It can be fixed in many cases very easily.
But we have somebody that's more worried about climate change than he is about all of the problems that we have.
Right.
So he was being reacted.
I guess Obama had something negative to say about Trump.
He's not serious or some such thing.
And that's what Trump was reacting to.
I watched it.
He didn't have anything positive to say.
He's some guy negative and sad.
He's more worried about climate change and all the problems.
And that's right.
Because climate change is how, well, climate change and the insiders are using it to coalesce and enable this gigantic government authority over everybody.
Then, back on Face the Nation, Trump's all over the place yesterday, Face the Nation on Sunday.
No, did you hear what Schieffer said?
Bob Schieffer, he said he wouldn't have quit.
He wouldn't have retired if he'd have known Trump was going to run.
Somebody else said something like that recently.
It was Letterman said, I wish if Trump were still there, I'd still be, whatever.
It wasn't Letterman, it was somebody else.
Anyway, too late, Bob.
They've got your replacement.
Glue Factory.
Think glue factory.
So John Dickerson, it's a new host of Slay the Nation, said to Trump, says, where are you on the question of a safe zone or a no-fly zone in Syria?
Now, I guarantee you that Dickerson asks Trump this question thinking that Trump doesn't know where Syria is and then doesn't know what a no-fly zone is or a safe zone and further doesn't know if we've established one.
I guarantee you this question was designed to expose Trump as not knowing anything about it and thus not being qualified.
I do not like the migration.
I do not like the people coming.
They're going to have riots in Germany.
What's happening in Germany, I always thought Merkel was like this great leader.
What she's done in Germany is insane.
It's insane.
They're having all sorts of attacks.
You see some women, you see some children, but for the most part, I'm looking at these strong men.
I don't want these people coming over here.
200,000 people, this could be the greatest Trojan horse.
This could make the Trojan horse look like peanuts if these people turned out to be a lot of ISIS.
Turns out that Trump understands exactly what's going on, what he wants to talk about.
By the way, he's right on the money on Merkel.
A lot of people are shocked at Merkel and what she has openly said and what she is openly permitting in Germany.
It's taken a lot of people by surprise.
Not the least of whom is me.
I still can't believe what she has said.
$700,000, $800,000 a year to rebuild our economy, to totally change our country for the better.
Anyway, I mentioned at the top of the program that Mary Mapes and Dan Rather and that whole episode with the forged documents and the phony story about George Bush and the National Guard, there's a movie that has been made that tries to say that Dan Redder got railroaded.
That he and Mary Mapes are right on the money, that this story was accurate, and that CBS fell in with big corporate interests, decided it was better to be in bed with the president of the United States than to support their own anchor, i.e.
Dan Rather.
So they found somebody to go out and make a movie of this.
And even CBS has come out and denounced the movie as a bunch of fiction, which it is.
But they convinced Robert Redford and Kate Blanchett, the star in this thing, which is history revisionism.
And it's actually based on Mary Mapes' biography.
Mary Mapes fell in with this guy named Bill Burkett, a genuine loony tune.
Bill Burkett claimed that he had memos, signed memos, and all kinds of paperwork from the commanding officer of the National Guard when Bush was there, claiming that Bush never showed up, that Bush never made an appearance, that Bush didn't fly, did it only to get out of serving in Vietnam.
And so Rather and Mapes put this story on 60 Minutes.
They ran with it, and it turned out the people at Powerline, the guys over at the Powerline blog, totally exposed the documents as 100% forgeries.
And it was a giant investigation.
CBS found out about it and summarily canned Dan Rather and Mary Mapes.
So Mary Mapes writes her biography about this in an attempt to hold on her reputation.
Somehow I end up in this biography six times.
Minor references.
But last Thursday in New York, the New York Times hosted a Times Talk conversation with the actress Kate Blanchett, the actor Robert Redford, Dan Rather, and Mary Mapes to discuss the new movie Truth about this scandal that happened in 2004.
Susan Dominus is the moderator.
She said, Mary, when you watched the movie starring Kate Blanchette as you, did you immediately know it had to be a lie?
No, I made that up, folks.
She didn't actually.
But if I were Mary Mapes and they had Kate Blanchette play me, I would know they're lying.
But anyway, that's just an aside.
Here's the real question from Susan Dominus.
Mary, when you watched the movie, was there anything that either made you cringe personally?
Like, that was painful to relive that moment.
Or, obviously, there were some very intimate, emotional scenes involving, you know, your...
Well, maybe you can talk a little bit about your family life that, you know, Kate portrays in the movie.
Like, you know, the scene with your father.
One of the sort of subtexts in the movie is this cascading series of events where everything is just raining down.
And every time I turned around or Dan turned around, there was something new and newly hideous happening to us.
I have an estranged father, and we had not had contact for many years.
But a right-wing radio show got in touch with my father and talked to him about his relationship with me.
And then suddenly I'm driving down the road and there's my father on Rush Limbaugh talking about me, about how I always had a radical feminist agenda.
You know, you haven't talked to me for 15 years.
How do you even know that I am.
But that was the level of personal attack and personal pain.
I don't know, Mary.
Maybe it was a wild guess that you had a radical feminist agenda, given that you do.
Well, anyway, she's running all over saying that her dad was on this show.
I mean, driving around the road listening to Rush Limbaugh, and there's my father on Rush Limbaugh talking about me.
We went back over the weekend.
We went back and we searched the archives.
You know, every word I have ever uttered has been preserved at the archives of rushlimbaugh.com.
Not every word searchable yet, because we hold some of it back, obviously.
Every word that I have uttered is there.
So we began an exhaustive and extensive search.
What in the world was she talking about?
Because I don't remember her dad being on this show.
Do you remember her dad being on this show?
2004?
No, he didn't call in.
That's not what happened.
This is all I ever said about it.
And in fact, this was at 1.55 p.m. on September 21st, 2004, the last 20 seconds, last 30 seconds before the break.
I'm heading into the top of the hour break, and this is what I said.
This is what she claims, driving around listening on the radio.
This is what she heard.
All right, that's it for the second hour of the EIB Network.
One hour to go.
We'll get back to the latest of CBS.
And Dan Rather, Mary Mapes, you hear what her father said about her on the radio yesterday?
That she's gone crazy with liberalism and that she got into journalism to advance a radical feminist agenda.
Her father's in Seattle at least 70-some-odd years old.
Her stepmother said he shouldn't speak of her that way.
We'll be back in just a second.
That was it.
That was it.
So she apparently heard that, but she thinks that her father appeared on the program.
Now, I don't want to, I'm not trying to.
Her father was on the radio somewhere, which is what I heard about.
And I think I know where her father was.
Her father was on with John Carlson out in Seattle.
I guess who found her father is John Carlson.
And that would have been, well, it was 2004.
And I heard about that.
That's what I was referencing here.
But she's driving around listening to the Rush Limbaugh program and imagines hearing her father.
You know, these liberals can't take people saying things about them they think are untrue.
Now, here's a woman who has engaged in a total fabricated, made-up story about George W. Bush.
She and Dan Rather have used and accepted forged documents from a genuinely questionably all-there figure, a guy named Bill Burkett.
And they have no problem doing a phony story containing forged documents, promulgating a lie that George W. Bush never went to the National Guard just to get out of service in Vietnam and never did his required service at the Guard.
They've had no problem putting that story out.
None whatsoever, lying through their teeth about it.
And then let her hear that her father describes her as she has a cow.
These people literally cannot stand.
Either they can't stand when people tell the truth about them, and they certainly don't know how to deal with it when people make stuff up about them.
But man, oh man, do they know how to lie about people?
They were trying to destroy Bush's presidency.
They were trying to affect the outcome of the 2004 election.
This is September, folks.
They're trying to elect John Kerry here.
And she's on this New York Times show last Thursday whining and moaning about something that her dad said on this program about her being some radical feminist.
She can't even take it.
Has to whine and moan and complain about it.
Then whine and moan and complain about getting caught using forged documents and telling lies.
Anyway, I take a break here, but you sit tight because there's much more coming.
Don't go away, folks.
Here's Ebony in San Diego.
Really glad you waited.
I appreciate your patience.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
I am a millennial with a true-to-heart Republican father who I have been in a long-lasting ongoing debate with about the fact that I am a registered independent and what it really means to be a registered independent.
So if you can please help us settle this, what is the true meaning or definition of a registered independent?
Now, wait, I'd be glad to do that, but I need to know the circumstances.
You said you're having a debate with your.
We've been debating about this for a while now because he is a registered Republican, a true-to-heart registered Republican.
He's always raised me that you cannot, as a voter, separate your spiritual beliefs from your political beliefs.
So if I'm serious about my spirituality, then I need to be, you know, more or less voting as a Republican because that aligns with the political party.
Okay, so your dad's a registered Republican and you're a registered independent.
He's not happy with that.
He's trying to tell you.
You ought to register Republican.
Well, what have you told him is your reason for registering independent?
What have you told him why you're doing that and what an independent is?
That's actually one of the main points I bring up.
I bring you up when we're talking is that I say Rush has multiple times said that as a millennial, I've never seen a true Republican president.
And so I don't really have that, I guess I don't have that image of what that really means.
And I guess the first president I really witnessed was Bush.
And I actually voted for Bush the second time, but I voted for Obama, and I am not voting for Hillary.
And I don't know who I'm voting for, but I don't know.
Well, if you're, then you'd have, well, you don't know who you're voting for, but is it possible you would vote for a Democrat in 2016?
I can't see anyone.
All right.
No, at this point, it's about which Republican would I vote for.
The first thing I need to clarify when I was talking about millennials was that, and this was not a critique or criticism of liberals.
It was an attempt to wake up conservatives.
The point that I made was, Republicans, conservatives running around whining about what millennials think.
And I had to remind them, you must realize by virtue of their age, they've never had a chance to vote for a real conservative.
There hasn't been one on the ballot, Republicans.
You put up a bunch of moderate squishes, but you haven't put up a conservative.
So the millennials don't know what one is.
Therefore, what they think of conservatism is what the media tells them and what the Democrat Party thinks of them and what the Republican establishment thinks of them.
And I've not seen, well, the practices of what, because my dad doesn't even agree with, you know, the views of whatever, the Bush or whatever, the candidate.
He doesn't fully agree with it because they don't represent for him true conservatism.
So he doesn't even, so I'm asking him, you're not, like, it's almost a question of like, why are you a true Republican?
Why are you still, I guess you can say.
Well, that's, no, no, wait.
That's because there's no way he's a Democrat.
So he's a Republican holding out hope that the conservatives will make a move and take over the party.
Exactly.
That's why he wants you on his side doing it as an independent.
My guess is that his view of an independent is that you're not committed.
An independent is sitting around waiting, but really won't commit to anything until they make up their minds.
And even then, they don't want their commitment to be seen as to a party.
But doesn't it think, well, can it be that one side isn't correct on everything?
Can I be agreeing with this side on certain particular things that I'm saying?
Well, of course, but let me ask you this.
Are you married?
Yes.
Is your husband right about everything?
No.
And you're still married, aren't you?
Yes.
All right.
In fact, your husband's probably very rarely right, my guess, and yet you're still there.
He's right.
He's a smart guy.
He's pretty right.
Okay, even better.
So he's right a lot of times, but he's not perfect, and yet you're still misses whoever.
So then I think about the independent as like a nice, comfortable place that I can feel where I'm sitting here and I can say, well, I'm not going to fully commit to either party until I see those parties.
Oh, that's exactly what you think.
You can't say that they've been.
That's exactly.
That's exactly, Ebony, what you think.
And I'm not here.
I'm not taking the occasion of your really, really good quality question.
I'm not going to bash independents here.
That's not the point.
But your dad, I understand exactly what he's talking about.
You just said it.
You're going to sit around.
You're waiting.
You're picking and choosing.
In the process, you get to tell yourself, you're not close-minded.
You're open-minded.
You are open to all things.
Whereas these people that identify themselves one way or the other, they're just rock-solid committed and they're closed-minded or what have you.
You want to portray yourself as someone who is vastly broad-minded and open to anything and not locked rigidly into something because you fear what people might think of that.
Or you don't want to think ill of it.
It stands to reason for a lot of people because the media and both political parties, by the way, have made the independents feel godlike.
Consultants, particularly Republican consultants, have vaunted independence to a level of importance that's greater than rank-and-file Republicans.
So it stands to reason you'd want to be one.
You'd want to be the focus of everybody's attention.
You listen to your average Republican campaign consultant running around telling, yeah, he who wins the independence wins the elections.
I'm the guy that can get to the independents.
The independents don't like us when we're critical of Obama.
The independents don't like it when we're doing it.
You've got to dial it back.
You've got to be more moderate.
And so people say, I'm one of those.
I'm one of those.
I'm an independent because I want to be the focus of everybody's attention.
And there's a difference between independent and moderate, Ebony.
A moderate is a gutless liberal that won't admit to being one.
An independent is a little higher up on the chain than that.
But your dad just wants a teammate.
He just wants you on his team.
That's all.
That's what he means.
But I'm fairly confident.
You know, I'm kind of pleasantly surprised here.
I got people in the email asking my thoughts on the Chase Utley suspension in a Dodgers Mets game on Saturday night.
And I figured if I went into that, the low-information crowd would actually have a fit.
And by the way, the Royals playing an elimination game right now.
They're tied 2-2 in the fifth inning with the Houston Astros.
And if the Astros win, the Royals are out, which means I'm not going in to throw out ceremonial first pitch because this is it.
Well, not that I was scheduled to.
No, no, no.
I wasn't scheduled to.
That was just the first pitch.
I just made a joke until they get – so that's what happened.
He ceremonial first pitch and anthem singers to guarantee victory.
That's what I did when I worked there.
Look, on the Chase Utley thing, the league suspended him for two games.
The reason the league did this was to prevent the Mets retaliating.
I'm convinced that they suspended Utley for two games that the Mets would not retaliate, bench clearing brawl during the playoffs.
But now that he's appealing the suspension, he can play, which means the Mets are going to retaliate.
They will.
There's no question the Mets are going to retaliate.
I don't blame Utley.
I mean, Utley, it's who he is.
It's how you play the game.
For those of you people who have not been taken over by modern-day political correctness, that's how you play the game baseball.
He was not breaking up a double play.
He was taking a guy out.
That's exactly what you do.
He didn't even start sliding until he was past the bag.
The problem in that play, very simply, I think made by the umpires.
The umpires ruled that Tejada missed the bag.
He was the Mets shortstop by centimeters.
And the replay showed that he missed the bag, but he was trying to touch the bag, and they got taken out.
And they awarded Utley safe.
They awarded him safe at second because the shortstop missed him.
Utley never even tried to touch second base and never did touch second base.
So how do you assume he left the field?
He gave himself up.
I don't understand you calling him safe at second after that play when he made no attempt to touch second base and never did.
And I remember an axiom I was told way back in my days of the Royals.
I was asked, you know, I can't source this, folks, because I don't want anybody.
But there's a rule of thumb on close bang bang plays.
You know, empires don't see everything.
They're human beings.
They miss some things.
Now there's replay, but it's always been determined that calling somebody out has the least effect on the outcome of the game.
Close bang bang play, first base say you haven't seen.
This is not including plays of the plate.
Just a bang bang play at first, bang, bang play, a stolen base.
Out call has the least effect on the game.
You call him safe and you're not sure.
So, but that's what they did.
They called Utley safe when he never even touched the bag, made no effort to touch the bag.
That's where I think this all went.
That kept the inning alive.
That changed the whole shape of the inning, and the Mets fell apart.
They lost their shortstops.
So my two cents.
Here's Doug in Spokane.
Doug, I'm glad you called.
It's great to have you with us on the program.
Hi.
Hey, Rush, 24-7 did us to you.
Thank you so much for taking my call.
I appreciate you being a subscriber, sir.
Thank you.
Yes, sir.
And just real quick, two points.
I believe Ben Carson is going to be proven to be prophetic in his first debate performance in which he said that Hillary's not going to be the nominee.
I don't think that that's going to be, I don't think that's going to happen.
And the second point I wanted to mention just real quick, I think that the general elections with the possibility of Carson and Trump are pretty much a gone, are pretty much gone to the Democrats right now.
Therefore, I believe that the legislative branches, the Senate, the House, are the best hope for the return of the constitutional values of our country was founded upon because the low and the no information voters predominantly vote in those general elections.
They're going to vote, as you so aptly pointed out earlier in the program.
They're going to vote for the Democratic Party.
They're going to vote for Santa Claus every time.
Wait, I want to make sure I've got dwindling time.
You think Trump or Carson would lose the presidential race?
Well, I think with the possible exception of Carson or Trump, I believe that the general elections, for the most part, are going to be going to the Democrats apparently because of the no and low information voters that are out there right now.
And I believe that the legislative branch is really our last best hope for accomplishing some kind of goal.
You know what?
That's going to scare a lot of people because they're looking at the legislative branch as the last best hope that's caved in.
But still, your point is well taken.
Under normal circumstances, we should have been seeing all kinds of examples of that the last seven years, or certainly the last four, back after this.
Fastest three hours in media.
There they are.
Bye-bye.
Gone.
Steelers, Chargers tonight on Monday night football.
And fingers crossed for the Kansas City Royals in Houston to prolong that series.
And we'll see you tomorrow, my friends.
▲
Export Selection