All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 15, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:13
October 15, 2015, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, this is kind of funny.
I was reading a website out there called a mediaequalizer.com.
Apparently, CNN was scrubbing all the favorable comments of Bernie Sanders from their website after the debate.
And Bernie Sanders supporters were livid.
They were complaining about CNN's pro-Hillary coverage.
Seeing their comments repeatedly deleted by CNN, Bernie Sanders supporters are hopping mad, already feeling that CNN's coverage had become rapidly pro-Hillary in the aftermath of the debate.
Facebook users leaving reactions on CNN's page are continually reposting them because CNN's taking them down.
Can you believe this?
How petty if that's true, CNN actually scrubbing pro-Bernie comments?
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
It's great to have you, Rush Limbaugh here behind the golden EIB microphone.
Well, what's the question?
Well, it's in these – Snerdly wants to know how does anybody overcome Trump's 67 percent essential approval rating on the economy?
If you're another Republican nominee, you have to hope that something's going to happen to force Trump out.
I mean, it really is stunning.
The polling data that shared earlier, it's a CNN poll.
And this number, it's a poll of Nevada and South Carolina, where Trump is leading by 16 points in Nevada, 18 points in South Carolina.
And he's way ahead in both states when voters are asked which Republican has the best chance of winning the general election.
I didn't mention that to you, but that number is, there's nobody even close to him in Nevada and South Carolina on the question of best chance to win the general election.
It's Trump going away of the entire Republican field.
But the number that has everybody standing up and taking notice, you know, everybody thinks that Trump's numbers are big because of immigration.
And there's no question that that's true.
But Republican voters in Nevada and South Carolina combined.
This is the economy, October 3rd.
What I'm looking for here to see if this is nationwide or in these two states.
Let me just...
This is Nevada voters, not nationwide.
It's Nevada voters.
Who'd be best on the economy?
Donald Trump, 67%.
Closest is Fiorina at 7%.
That's Nevada.
The South Carolina number is 59%.
59%.
Closest is Bush at 7%.
Those are huge leads.
Now, okay, so in Nevada, it's 67%.
In South Carolina, 59% favor Trump.
Say Trump's best in the economy.
Now, when you go to Nevada, Republican voters and ask them, well, what's the most important issue to you?
They say the economy.
So Snerdley's question, how do you overcome that?
You don't.
You don't overcome that at all.
You have to wait for Trump to stumble.
The best thing you could do, if you're in the Republican field, if you're Fiorina, Bush, Carson, Rubio, Paul Cruz, you're looking at Trump at 67% and yourself at anywhere from 4% to 7%.
The first thing you do, what is Trump saying about the economy?
That's the first thing you have to ask yourself.
So let me just ask you, what is Trump saying about the economy, Mr. Snerdley?
What's he saying about?
What has he said about the economy that would engender 67% of people in this poll claiming he's the best to deal with the economy?
No, I don't think he said much about the economy.
Really, he's had a tax plan.
But other than that, all he's said, I'm going to make this country great again.
We're going to make this country great, and I'm going to run rings around the ChiComs.
And I'm going to run rings around the Mexicans.
And we're going to have put the best people, and we're going to put the American people first, and we're going to build this country back up.
We're going to have the greatest economy we've ever had.
I'm going to have the greatest job creation.
That's what people are reacting to.
He hasn't had a whole lot of specifics in how he's going to do it.
And so far, the people who favor him don't seem to need any.
They're just, I think, celebrating the attitude that he's.
They're not hearing that attitude from anybody else in their minds, and certainly no Democrat.
There is no Democrat that talks about America the way Trump is talking about America.
A lot of the other Republicans do, but they're not using the verbiage that Trump uses.
He doesn't specify how he's going to do it other than his tax plan.
But he says, we've been there before.
I'm going to build it back.
I'm going to have the best people.
I'm the smartest people.
I'm not going to take any gunk from the Chikons.
I'm going to take any junk from the Mexicans.
We're going to fix what's wrong here.
We're going to have the best buildings.
We're going to have the best bridges.
We're going to have the best roads.
We're going to have the best here, the best this, the best that.
We're the Americans.
We do it the best and we have the best, and that's what I'm going to do.
People are going, yeah.
Well, oh, I think the Republican consultants are experiencing a massive number of conflicting emotions.
And I think that they end up still being in denial.
I think that most of them are telling themselves that Trump's not really in this for real.
There's something else going on.
And once Trump's accomplished what he's really trying to do here, then he'll get out.
That's what I think the majority of the consultants are thinking.
But hmm?
Yeah, now Ivanka went out and she did an interview, and she is said to be the energy behind the campaign, the brains behind the campaign.
It's pointed out that she's entirely opposite of him in private and so forth.
But all that did, by the way, was cement the fact that his campaign's serious.
And all it did was cement the fact that women are crucially important to Trump.
I mean, the Ivanka interview is a net, I mean, a massive net positive.
So I think the consultants and the Republican establishment in general, it's got to be very difficult for them.
This is all upside down to them.
Everything Trump is doing in their world would have sent their candidate into retirement by now.
In their view, saying, being, doing, behaving the way Trump is is instant death, instant political death.
Your campaign will be brought to a screeching halt.
I mean, you don't hear Trump talk about the independence.
You don't hear Trump talk about all the things that the establishment talks about.
In fact, let's go to grab audio soundbite number one.
I had on Monday of this program, I had an assessment.
I saw something, and I issued a bit of a warning on Monday where the Trump campaign and his voters are concerned, and this was it.
I have noticed not so subtle changes in the way Trump is going about this every day.
He's not making flamboyant statements nearly as frequently and as profoundly as he did early on.
He's still bombastic.
He still goes out and does the, I'm the greatest, I'll be the greatest, it's going to be the greatest, we're the greatest, you know, all of that, which is entertaining and it's inspiring too to people who want it to be the case and to people who believe that he can make it happen.
But he is more and more issue-oriented and substantive each day.
His answers to various questions now have a little bit more depth to them.
And it's not, I don't think because he's had to study up on things.
I think his approach is changing.
You know, you have a sense of presence.
Everybody does when you're a public figure.
And if you're good, you know when it's time to transform and how to transform.
And that's the point that I was making on Monday.
Okay, Trump's been in this a long time now.
It's not the first day.
And I think what we're seeing is evidence of just how serious he is.
He is in the middle.
They're in the midst here of a transformation to more substantive, less flamboyant, but still there.
And he can revive it at any moment and with credibility and does.
But there's a new depth of character here to the Trump campaign and to Trump.
And what I chalked it up to was a sense of stage presence.
Anybody who is a public performer has a sense of stage presence.
It is a sense of empathy that tells the successful performer how he or she is being perceived.
And it is that empathy which and that stage presence that then instinctively instruct a public figure what direction to take.
And I think what's happening to Trump is that as he's in it longer, it becomes more and more likely that he can win and will.
And that carries with it new levels of responsibility, public perceived responsibility.
I'm not saying that Trump was joking at first and is all of a sudden getting serious.
I'm talking about the way he is presenting himself in public.
And if you have a sense of stage presence about this, and he does, then you know when it's time to either evolve or transform yourself.
And he's in the midst of doing that now, which was my point.
Now, let's go to the Today show this morning on NBC.
Katie Tour interviewed him about the campaign.
And this, it's about 19 seconds.
This is the result.
The GOP frontrunner is still ahead, but with Ben Carson creeping in, now signs he might be changing his tone.
For a candidate not known for second-guessing himself, the brash billionaire does admit.
I think I could be perhaps a little bit, I can watch my words a little bit, maybe be a little bit more politically correct.
All right, see, now he doesn't really mean he's going to be more political.
He's just evoicing what I just told you is happening.
He now has a sense that his chances are really lock-solid, not lock, but they're rock-solid good.
And so he is admitting here that his tone is going to change a little bit.
He's got to be very careful, though, that the substance doesn't change.
And I really don't think he should even be talking about this.
It's the old, you execute the marketing plan, you don't tell people what it's going to be.
You just do it.
But she asked him a question and he answered it.
And he said, yeah, yeah, I'm going to be watching my words a little bit, maybe a little bit more politically correct.
What that means, don't worry, Trumpsters, it doesn't mean he's going PC.
It just means he's going to get a little bit more serious more of the time.
That's all it means because he has a sense that the situation requires it now and that the circumstances demand it now.
Now, having said that, just to show you that he has not lost anything and he's not, I don't want any of you Trumpsters getting worried yet.
Let's go to Richmond, Virginia last night, a campaign event, Trump back to form.
I watched Hillary last night with we're going to give this, we're going to give that.
The poor woman, she's got to give everything away because this maniac that was standing on her right is giving everything away.
So she's following.
That's what's happening.
This socialist slash communist, okay?
Nobody wants to say it.
I call him a socialist slash communist, okay?
Because that's what he is.
So then you see her stand up.
Now it's her turn.
And she goes, oh, I'm going to do that too.
Yeah, so don't worry.
Just showing it.
Trump's there.
He still has the capacity to do what it is that put him on the map and he's willing to do it.
But he's going to be mixing other tones in with this now.
Now, he got heckled at Richmond, Virginia.
I think what's happening here is that the establishment is sending hecklers out.
We know that a Jeb Bush campaign babe ended up at the No Labels event in New Hampshire.
And the Jeb Bush campaign babe, Lauren Beck told her Beckmellon Beck Beck, she stood up.
Mr. Trump, it sounded to me like you don't care for women much.
And I said, woman, it really bothers me that you don't much like women.
So she was a Jeb Bush plant.
He gets heckled in Richmond last night.
And I think that the I think it's pathetic, but I think some of these Oppo research people, that's figure the best they can do.
They think Trump can be taken off his game.
I'll tell you what they think.
They think that he's such an egomaniac that one voice of disagreement or challenging him will so shock him and so anger him that he will lose his cool and expose who he really is to people.
And then Jeb can come riding to the rescue.
That's what they're thinking.
So they send these hecklers in.
It could be the Democrats doing it too.
But at this stage, my money would be on the Republicans paying for the hecklers.
And they may not even have to pay for him.
Just may have to sell them in there.
So, again, Richmond, Virginia campaign event.
That's why we have freedom of speech, folks.
I'll tell you how dishonest the press is.
We have thousands of people in this room, six, seven thousand.
We have about ten people over there.
They'll get the headline.
You won't.
That's pretty disgusting.
Yeah, I know exactly what he's doing.
One of the first rush to excellence appearances I made was Laughy At Louisiana.
Now, there were two, two women.
I was going to describe them, but I thought better of it.
Standing out front of the arena inside where there were 2,500 people.
And the headline the next day, Limbaugh protested in Baton Rouge.
And he had a picture of the two people holding signs.
And there were 2,500 people inside.
He is exactly.
That's how he handled the hecklers.
Got to take a break.
We got more.
Stay with us.
Don't go.
By the way, an important point on these hecklers at Trump in Richmond, they look like they could have been illegal immigrants.
But regardless, you know what happened?
It wasn't really Trump that shut him up.
It was his audience.
His audience just was not going to put up with it.
And I'm going to tell you something.
This is remarkable, too.
And it speaks volumes about the depth of Trump's support.
These people are not going to put up with the usual politics, stuff that usually happens.
Hecklers show up.
Usually people just stand or sit silently while the hecklers do what they do and security comes along, finally, after all, escorts them out.
The Trump people drown them out.
The Trump people outshadowed them and basically let them know that they were not affected by them, didn't care what they were saying.
Get the hell out.
And when that happens, whether it's Trump or anybody else up there, that inspires you and gives you all kinds of confidence as well.
But mostly, it indicates the depth of support people have for Trump.
They're not going to let a bunch of outsiders come in and ruin the event that they have waited a long time to attend.
And they're not going to let somebody come in, more importantly, and do any damage to the candidate they support.
They're not going to put up with it.
Here is Mitch in Sunbury, North Carolina.
Great that you waited.
I appreciate your patience.
Hello, sir.
Good afternoon, Professor.
It's an honor speaking with you again.
Thank you.
I have a theory regarding your opening monologue today and that Obama's leaving the troops in Afghanistan.
All right.
What is it?
Well, we already know he's been excoriated by the right for the vacuum that he created in Iraq by withdrawing all the troops out of there.
Does he really want to go 042 and pull them out of Afghanistan where ISIS can take over there as give validity to his own?
I just, I have a problem plugging Obama into the usual holes in which we judge presidents.
For example, Obama, he doesn't want to have two losses.
He's already taken it on a chin with ISIS there.
And I don't think Obama cares a blasted rear end about any of that.
I think this is about legacy.
I think it's about perception that he's doing something.
I think it may, if it involves anything, it's Putin.
It's sending a message to Putin because Putin's out there talking about Obama being weak.
So Obama, oh, yeah, you want to see weak?
All right.
Well, I told everybody, I'm going to bring home those people we have in Afghanistan that can't shoot anyway because of my rules of engagement.
Well, I'm going to leave them there.
All right?
I'm going to leave them there.
One thing of that, Vlad.
Hey, Blair.
I'm leaving them there.
And that's what this is.
But won't that give validity to it and show him as weak again by the withdrawal and just creating another vacuum for ISIS to show you?
Show as Obama as part of the country?
As weak to who?
If anything, his supporters are going to be mad that he's...
I got it.
I got to explain this after the break.
I'll do it then.
Great to have you back, my friends.
Rushland boy here on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
800-282-2882.
I wanted to close the loop on what the last caller was, Obama in Afghanistan.
The caller said that we're going into Afghanistan because we can't afford to lose twice.
I really think, folks, that when you look at Obama and foreign policy, you can't plug him in the usual holes where you judge past presidents.
I don't think I could be wrong.
I think he may be concerned about losing Afghanistan twice.
I don't think in Obama's mind, he hadn't lost anything.
I think the guy has the ability to tell himself he's lost anything.
And, you know, Iraq, if you look at what he did in Iraq, the Secretary of Defense is just out there.
What is this guy's name?
Ash Asher?
Ash Carter.
Must be short for Ashton.
And Ashton sounds too elitist.
So he's going to go with the nickname Ash.
Right.
Okay.
So Ash Carter said, we're not going to give up gains we fought to achieve in Afghanistan.
Wait a minute.
What's wrong with that is gains?
You told us we won.
You told us Afghanistan was mission accomplished, and that's why we were leaving.
Now all of a sudden, it's just gains, and we're not going to get out now because the gains that we won are in jeopardy of being lost.
Well, then we really didn't win.
So one of two things is happening here.
Obama announced to pull out of Afghanistan.
I know this is the case.
He announced pulling out of Afghanistan just like he announced closing Gitmo, which also hasn't been done.
And he did that to mollify the loony-tuned leftist supporters that he's got, which you saw on display at that Democrat debate.
There isn't any war worth it.
We've got to get out of all wars.
We're the reason for all wars.
We deserve to lose the wars we're in.
And they believe that the only solution is to never get them in the first place.
So that's what Obama had to do to get elected, tell people we're going to get out of Iraq.
We're going to Afghanistan.
I'm going to close Gitmo.
The fact that he didn't do any of that, other than Iraq, which gave us ISIS, he's just got a little bit of time left here to build his legacy, and he knows that leftist history writers are going to write the legacy.
But I really think Putin is a factor in this Afghanistan.
Syria, Putin, ISIS.
I guess the caller has a point in the sense that Obama's not so far gone that he doesn't care about the perception that America wins or loses these things.
But I just don't find a whole lot of evidence that Obama's really interested in winning any of them.
I still think Obama believes the United States is the problem and not the solution.
And I really believe that Obama does believe that our presence is what destabilizes all these places, that it's our fault and that the solution is for us to get out and not be a presence or a factor.
But at the same time, circumstances require an American presence for perception reasons, which is what I think he thinks Afghanistan is.
The real question is, you know, what do his supporters think?
The donors to the Democrat Party.
Here's the lead Democrat not getting out of Afghanistan after claiming we were and claiming it was victory.
And now we're staying.
He's no better than George W. Bush in their minds, the way they look at things.
Other news, it turns out more people watched NCIS than watched the Democrat debate.
After the debate the next day, remember the stories?
Wow, wow, CNN, wow, wow, man, really great.
And they had a pretty good number, but it was not the most watched show of the night.
Scientists claim that they can change your belief on immigrants and God with magnets.
This is from the UK Daily Express.
A bizarre experiment claims to be able to make Christians no longer believe in God and make Britons open their arms to migrants.
Scientists look at how the brain resolves abstract ideological problems using a technique called transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Researchers safely shut down certain groups of neurons in the brains of volunteers.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation, which is used to treat depression, involves placing a large electromagnetic coil against the scalp, which creates electric currents that stimulate nerve cells in the region of the brain involved in mood control.
Researchers found the technique radically altered religious perceptions and prejudice.
Wait, prejudice or judgment?
There's a difference.
But you would never know that from the media today.
Belief in God was reduced almost by a third using transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Belief in God reduced almost by a third.
Participants became 28.5% less bothered by immigration.
Well then, shutting down these neurons a good thing.
Maybe this treatment can be incorporated into Obamacare.
Maybe in order to qualify for free health care, you have to undergo transcranial magnetic stimulation.
And if you're a bitter clinger, it's the first thing you have to submit to.
This way Obama can eliminate from your brain every Christian belief that you have and your hatred or disagreement with immigration.
Obama can fix it with a little magnetic coil up on your head.
Dr. Kaise Izuma from the University of York said people often turn to ideology when they're confronted by problems.
So being bothered by immigration numbers is a matter of ideology and not say a matter of economics or common sense.
Who knew?
The scientists targeted the posterior medial frontal cortex, a brain region a few inches up from the forehead that's associated with detecting and responding to problems.
Okay, so now folks, settled science.
Any objection to illegal immigration, any belief in God, can now be claimed to be not rational thought.
And they can fix it with transcranial magnetic stimulation.
You know what's going to happen?
You're going to, you've heard this story, and some time is going to go by.
Weeks, months, maybe a year.
And whatever, in a period of time from now, you're going to hear a story about this.
You're going to go, I've heard about this.
I heard about this.
Where did I hear about this?
Oh, a transcran.
And you're going to remember you heard it on this program.
And mark my words.
UK Daily Express, there are now people who believe they can fix a belief in Christianity and fix an opposition to illegal immigration with something called transcranial magnetic stimulation.
In other words, belief in God is a natural mistake.
It's a brain malfunction that can be fixed.
And so is opposition to immigration.
That will be the takeaway.
What else do I have here, massive craving?
Oh, there's a weatherman in France, if I didn't know better, was a daily listener to this program when it comes to climate change and global warming.
But for now, brief time out, sit tight and more straight ahead.
Don't go.
No, I'm just feeling a little stressed out.
I've got to write something for national review.
It's got to be submitted by tomorrow.
It's going to be really hard.
National Review has got their 60th anniversary issue coming up, and they've asked me to write between 750 and 1,000 words about the role of this show and AM Radio Talk Radio in the last 20, 30 years in the American political so forth.
I'm just uncomfortable writing about myself.
I've got a hook for this, but I'm just uncomfortable writing about, you know, personal pronoun I this and I that.
It just makes me nervous doing that.
So I'm stressing out over it.
Bottom line.
It's one of these things that until I get it done tonight, I'm not going to feel free.
And I didn't want to, you know, I've been putting it off and putting it off and putting it because I didn't have a hook for it.
But I finally came up with a hook.
Now I've got to put this thing together.
No, no, no.
They asked me three weeks ago and I said I would do it and I just kept procrastinating.
No, I told them I would do it.
I wait for that massive bolt of inspiration for the hook for the idea.
And it didn't come until yesterday.
And Rich Lowry, poor guy, he's been, you know, time's drawing short here, Rush.
I mean, we got a great issue already.
We'd love to have it, Rich.
Rush today.
I'm sorry to issue.
I got a hard deadline here.
It's Friday.
Oh, gee, okay.
So that's where I am.
Yeah, Royals win last night.
I thought about starting on it last night.
I said, no, no.
And then the Royals game ended, and I said, you have to be in the right frame of mind.
I can't do this when I don't want to do it.
I can't do it.
I'm not inspired.
So I've been waiting for the hook.
Finally, I got a hook to do it.
By the way, folks, I have over the we actually over the past year, we have literally been inundated at rushrevere.com.
All of the readers of the books and then some have been requesting a Liberty, the horse stuffed animal, a cuddly stuffed animal.
And we finally have responded to the massive public demand.
And Liberty now has a plush and cuddly stuffed animal sidekick.
And it is just the cutest thing.
And it is perfect for your little child to have this stuffed horse animal while you're reading the books.
And we got it in today, and this is it.
I'm holding it up for those of you on the diddle cam so you can see it.
I mean, it's just, it's, I have to, even I, El Rushbo, have this is just cute as it can be.
And it is a replica of Liberty, the talking horse, and the Rush Revere Time Travel Adventures with Exceptional Americans series.
It's an ideal gift, and it's by popular demand.
We have people requesting these things practically from the first month or two after the first book went out.
And you can see one at rushrevere.com.
That's very simple.
www.rushrevere.com.
I tried to balance the new thing on top of the computer to monitor so it'd be up there all show, but it won't stay.
I need some kind of a support up there for it.
And I meant to show you earlier, and I just remembered it just now.
Matt in Peoria, Illinois, I've got about 45 seconds that I wanted to get to you.
How are you, sir?
Omega, extra large in the thigh, spandex, pantsuit, ditto's right.
Well, thank you very much.
Can I quickly give a shout out to my conservative mentor in Bellingham, Washington?
Sure.
Mark Nelson, we love you and keep teething off the Northwest liberals.
Rush, Bernie Sanders' campaign bragged today that they received $2 million in contributions after the debate.
In the interest of fairness and socialist principles and the fact that Bernie didn't earn all that, I challenged Bernie Sanders to share that wealth with the other proletariat candidates, Chafee, Webb, and O'Nalley.
Now, that's an interesting proposition and challenge that you've made.
Bern, I didn't know he got, did he get $2 million?
I think, wow.
Okay, so I got two million.
If I were Bernie Sanders' social, I'd be upset that any of my supporters had that much money.
How can anybody supporting me have that much money?
How come it hasn't been taken from them yet?
But it's a good point.
Will he now share it with the likes of his other candidates?
And there's no way.
No transcranial stimulation.
It's a new liberal term for electric shock therapy or a new liberal term for brainwashing or cleansing as they might look at it.
Open line Friday tomorrow, my friends.
We'll see you then.
▲
Export Selection