Great to have you, Rush Limbos, serving humanity behind a golden EIB microphone.
Great to have you here on the fastest three hours in media.
Telephone number if you want to be on the programs, 800-282-2882.
Email address, LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
Here is the latest that we have on the Republican campaign.
Excuse me, most of this stuff is focused on Trump, as you would expect.
First, a daily caller.
Headline, new study may prove Trump is right to never apologize.
Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump is renowned for making no apologies for his many provocative statements, and new research may show that he is right to never say sorry.
Writing in the Washington Post today, Richard Hanania, a political science and stats graduate at the University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA, shared his findings on what effects a public figure's apology has for making up for remarks that some people find offensive.
Hanania, which is the guy's name, H-A-N-A-N-I-A.
Hanania, maybe it's Hanania.
Who knows?
They never do provide pronouncers with these stories.
Just leave you to fly on your own on these.
Anyway, this professor of statistics and political science surveyed 500 people to get their response to two statements made by Rand Paul and former Harvard president Larry Summers.
Respondents were shown Rand Paul's skepticism of parts of the Civil Rights Act, and half of them read a statement where Paul did not back down.
And the other group read a statement that made it appear that he had apologized.
In real life, he never did.
The professor here found that the apology had virtually no effect on whether a respondent would vote for Rand Paul.
However, an apology made a notable difference in the case of Larry Summers.
Now, you remember in 2005, it's hard to believe this is 10 years ago, but it was.
The then president of Harvard got into hot water for saying genetics play a role in why there's so few women scientists.
Half of the respondents read a statement where Summers appeared to double down on the remarks, and another half read his apology for the comments.
64% of those surveyed said Larry Summers should be punished, 64%, after they read the apology.
Only 56% of those who read the non-apology said he should be punished.
In other words, the apology had a negative effect on Summers.
He was worse off after apologizing.
So the UCLA professor says, given these results, why would politicians apologize at all?
Now, to be sure, my experiments certainly don't suggest it's always inadvisable to apologize, nor can my findings speak directly to Trump.
Nevertheless, my findings offer a cautionary tale to anyone who assumes that the best remedy for controversial statements is, I'm sorry.
Yeah.
Yeah.
My own thoughts on this.
Well, okay.
How many of you, let me just get right down here with the pig slop.
How many of you guys, I'm speaking one-on-one here.
I'm not asking you to answer out loud.
How many of you have cheated on your spouse and gotten caught?
That's okay.
I can see a show of hands.
That's all I need.
Now, how many of you denied it, denied it, denied it, no matter what?
And how many of you admitted and apologized?
Okay, now, of those of you who apologized, how many times a day are you reminded that you did it?
And you can never get past it.
And it's when you have an argument with your spouse, even if the affair happened 10 years ago, you're still reminded of it as though it happened last night.
Those of you who never admitted it, is it constantly brought up?
My guess is no.
You never admitted it, and you certainly didn't apologize, which is admitting it.
So I ask you, I'll also tell you this.
This is a little inside baseball, too, and it goes way, way back and doesn't even involve me, strangely enough.
When I was in Sacramento, which would be 1984 to 1980, middle of 88, there was a very controversial episode that happened with another person on the radio station.
And after this controversial statement was uttered, there was a big debate on whether or not the personality should apologize.
The general manager of the station at the time, and it doesn't matter what it was here, folks.
It was one of two things.
It was either insulting an advertiser, it was insulting a caller, it was insulting, it was not making a political statement about a public figure.
It was something a little bit more localized than that.
The general manager said, You never apologize.
I don't care what you never, we do not apologize.
As a matter of policy, we don't apologize.
We're not going to admit it.
It's not going to get us anything.
It's not going to get one more ounce of goodwill than we already have.
And I've never forgotten it.
But today, in our current culture and climate, people apologize before they even commit an offense.
Remember the regime 9-11-2000, whatever the Benghazi date was.
The State Department in Cairo put out an apology for something that had not happened yet, trying to head off a riot, so they said.
We now know in the aftermath what was really going on.
But the State Department in Cairo put out an apology apologizing for a video.
There hadn't been any unrest.
There hadn't been any protests.
And this apology came out of nowhere.
And every well, we're trying to head off any protests.
What they were doing was setting up something that they knew was going to be happening later.
But this apology, does it seem to you that like every day in public life somewhere, somebody's apologizing for something?
And it's just what these apologies always seem to include something along the lines of that really wasn't me.
That's not who I am.
I wasn't myself.
And I apologize for nobody really apologized for what they do.
They apologize for you misunderstanding it and being offended.
Anyway, I think the guy's survey is kind of crazy anyway because he had plenty of opportunity here to survey Trump, people on Trump, and he didn't do that.
Anyway, Donald Trump is dominating the Republican field in New Hampshire.
This is from the Politico.
Donald Trump commands the field in New Hampshire, according to the results of a Bloomberg St. Anselm College poll of Republican voters in the state released this morning.
Trump's at 24, Ben Carson's at 17.
And you know, Carly Fiorina, what happened here?
Carly Fiorina skyrockets into second place or third place, depending on the poll.
And then after, you didn't hear anything about her.
I mean, there was some negative publicity about her time at Hewlett-Packard and Lucent and so forth, but man, it's like she's become invisible.
And she did eke out in a couple of polls, the position in double digits.
She's back down now to 6%, 7%, 8%.
Back down into single digits.
The Politico says that this New Hampshire poll represents a blow to Jeb Bush, whose favorability rating in New Hampshire dropped to its lowest level in almost a year of polling, despite a big ad-buy from the right.
Actually, right to rise super PAC supporting Jeb.
57% said they had a favorable view of Jeb, down from 59% in May and 61% last November.
So Jeb is losing ground in the all-important state of New Hampshire.
Asked a series of questions about the perceived shortcoming of the candidates in the field.
53% said they were less supportive of Jeb because of his advocacy of amnesty for undocumented immigrants.
Companion story from the AP, Trump's Republican critics pushing for GOP-backed takedown.
Don't expect Democrats to take down Donald Trump.
If the GOP's baffled establishment wants to dismiss their party's billionaire presidential frontrunner, they're going to have to do it themselves.
Right, because there aren't any Democrats attacking Trump, except constantly.
When is this?
They're going to have to take him down themselves.
Democrats all over the place are attacking Trump.
There are a lot of people attacking Trump.
You know what's amazing to me?
When is the last time?
Seriously now, folks, I'm just throwing an observation of mine out there to you.
When is the last time you remember a political party working so hard to bring down its own frontrunner?
Now, there have been times where parties have tried to take out other candidates.
When?
When's the last time?
So Reagan 70.
So was Reagan ever the frontrunner in 76 that they tried to take?
I know they tried to prevent Reagan from becoming the frontrunner.
And at the 76th convention in Kansas City, I was there.
We all know what happened.
I mean, there's no doubt that the Republican Party didn't want any part of Reagan in 76, and they bit the bullet in 1980.
But have you ever seen, I mean, Trump is a far and away frontrunner.
Have you ever in your life, do you recall a party, either one or any, name your pick of some oddball party, try to take down their own frontrun?
Never seen anything like this before, have you?
Luis Gutierrez, Democrat Illinois, big proponent of amnesty, big, big, big Obama supporter, is launching an effort to force Saturday Night Live to cancel Donald Trump's appearance.
This is in the Chicago Sun-Times.
Representative Luis Gutierrez, Democrat Illinois, a national crusader for immigrant reform, launched a drive yesterday to dump Trump from his November 7th Saturday Night Live hosting gig.
Having Trump headlines Saturday Night Live is a level of endorsement that says to America that every hateful and racist thing Trump has said since he launched his campaign is acceptable and no big deal, Gutierrez said in a letter to Stephen Burke, CEO of NBC Universal, and to Brian Roberts, the CEO of Comcast.
So having Hillary on, oh, that wasn't any big deal.
And no, that wasn't an endorsement of Hillary.
No, no, no.
What an admission.
And by the way, Luis Gutierrez is not the only one trying to get Trump taken off Saturday Night Live.
There are two or three other groups, all Hispanic in nature, Latino, are doing their best to take Trump out.
ABC News, Trump leads in expectations shows strength on attributes.
It's just another poll.
And it just shows that Trump is gaining in strength, depth, and durability.
Now, what I'm looking for, what did I do with this?
There is a huge story.
I thought I had it in the stack.
I'm going to have to find it in a different stack.
You know, our old friend Mike Murphy, the consultant, Mike Murphy is running.
He's either running the Jeb campaign or a Jeb super PAC, one of the two.
Murphy, there's a story either about Murphy, I think it's political.
I know I got it right here, in which he just launches into Trump, just launches and makes the case that Jeb's going to be the nominee.
It's just a matter of time.
They're sitting right where they want to sit.
They're right where they want to be.
They've got all this money.
They haven't spent nearly what they've got.
They're going to be ready to unload this money once it gets down to real voting time starting in February.
And Trump isn't going to have a chance.
And the American people aren't going to want Trump.
Trump's a phony baloney, plastic banana, a good time rock and roller.
Jeb's the only guy with any chance, any hope for the Republican Party.
I mean, it really is.
It is the inside the beltway consultants class and the establishment, I mean, just launching a giant self-ho fight back.
And I'm going to find that.
I thought I had it in this stack.
I'm sorry.
I got a lot of stacks here.
And soundbites along these lines.
Britt Hume, also an establishment voice on Fox News.
In fact, grab that.
Well, what would this be?
That's right.
Audio soundbite 15.
This had to be tough for Britt Hume to say, but this was Megan Kelly's show.
You know, let me take the break.
Let me get the, we're getting up close to the break time here.
Let me find that Murphy piece.
We'll get to this soundbite when we get back here.
Don't go away.
Okay, here we go.
This is Britt Hume.
This was last night in the Kelly fire with Megan Kelly.
She said, what do you make of the Byron York piece today suggesting the Republican establishment is preparing for war against Trump, saying if we have to take him down, we will.
The negative ads will start, and we'll go after him and Iowa, go after him in New Hampshire.
We're not letting this man get the GOP nomination.
That's what I mean.
I've never seen, ever, a political party try to take down its frontrunner.
I mean, not like this.
And I don't care what you think of Trump, but he is the frontrunner, and you would think the Republicans want to win.
Now, they were this vicious about Reagan.
They just never said it.
No, no, that's true.
1976, 1980, the Republican establishment was just as opposed to Reagan as they are to talk radio or whatever manifestation of conservatism today.
They just didn't say it publicly like they're now saying it about Trump.
And I have his Murphy piece here, which ran into politico.
Anyway, here is Britt Hume's reply.
It's become clear because it's getting late, Megan, that his lead has persisted so long.
You're looking at the kind of percentage of the vote that in a place like Iowa, or perhaps even New Hampshire, could be the winning percentage.
So you posit Donald Trump having won Iowa and New Hampshire and or New Hampshire and going into South Carolina where he has a lot of support.
You're looking at somebody who's got a tremendous head of steam and might become impossible to stop with a disaffected Republican electorate.
So his nomination now becomes something that everybody has to say is possible.
That's new ground.
Britt Hume is a voice of the establishment thinking in Washington.
So now they're coming to grips.
Hey, you know, this could really be happening.
Expect Trump to have dropped out by now or to have made a gaffe that would force him out.
They're still hoping for that.
Many of them are still hoping that there's some giant gaffe, something so embarrassing that not even his lunatic supporters will tolerate.
In fact, you know what the latest parlor game is among inside the beltway establishment journalists?
They are beginning to do story.
You may see these pretty soon.
They are commissioning stories, man on the street stories, going out and finding Trump supporters at a Trump rally and asking them one question.
What would it take for you to stop supporting Donald Trump?
You will begin to see some of these stories.
Oh, no, I have no idea what the answers are going to be.
I haven't seen one yet.
I'm just postulating here that this is going to be part of the effort.
They're going to dispatch and commission these stories, and the stories are going to serve as research as well as quote-unquote journalism.
What would Trump have to do?
What would have to happen to get you to drop your support for Donald Trump?
Because the establishment is about pulled all of its hair out.
I mean, they're about run out of options here.
And now they're talking about throwing all this money at Trump, starting in the Hawkeye cokey, then moving into New Hampshire.
By the way, Trump is drawing even bigger crowds than the mainstream media is reporting.
And Trump has developed a trick that he uses with the media before his appearances begin designed to get them to actually show how big his crowds are.
They're underselling and understating his crowds, in some cases, by as much as half.
From the email.
Mr. Limbaugh, I think it's simply deplorable that you would actually ask male members of your audience to admit having affairs and to discuss it.
I would expect something of someone far less than you.
I didn't do that.
That did not happen on this program.
I didn't do that.
I don't know what she thinks she heard, but I didn't do it.
And I haven't done it.
Here's Bob in Coral Springs, Florida.
Bob, great to have you.
Glad you waited, and nice to have you.
Hi.
Thank you, Rush, and I'm proud to have you as a nearby neighbor.
Trust me, I live in Broward County.
I don't have anybody like you near me.
Thank you, sir, very much.
My reason for calling, and I'm not going to apologize for going back a couple of seconds, but when you were talking about how Bernie Sanders and whatever in attacking the rich, I just got a new customer.
He got a new contract for building eight 120-foot yachts.
Each one of those yachts is well over 100,000 manhours just to assemble it.
So my position is: I love the rich.
I'm self-employed.
I don't get jobs from poor people.
I only get jobs when rich people spend money.
You know, I'm sure people trash on you about your jet, but they don't think about the man hours that it takes to maintain that thing, the pilot, the people you employ.
Liberals got to start thinking about what's the effect that they're talking about.
If the government spends the money, they're just going to give it away.
They're not going to produce anything.
Obviously.
If you allow the rich people to just spend their money and have a good time, it's beautiful.
I love rich people.
Well, the Democrat Party, in its current incarnation, is rooted in class envy and exploitation.
And they're presiding over one of the worst economies in peacetime that we've had.
There is no recovery.
We are not creating jobs.
We're losing jobs.
In fact, try this story.
This is in the stack unrelated to politics.
Washington Free Beacon.
This is stunning.
Listen, there are 6,455,000 more students with bachelor's degrees today than jobs available for them.
This includes jobs that would be created in the next seven years.
And you know where these numbers come from?
The regime.
They come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics.
Now, we've got 94 million Americans not working.
The regime tells us the unemployment rate is 5.1%.
It's an out-and-out lie or misrepresentation.
We know that people are being forced into part-time hours because of Obamacare.
We know that Obamacare is collapsing.
They don't even have half of the projected sign-ups that they thought they would have by now.
Obamacare co-ops are closing and going out of business.
Exchanges are in big trouble.
There is no economic recovery.
There is no economic activity.
You know it when you see it.
You feel it when it's happening.
None of it.
You can't see it.
You don't feel it because there isn't any.
The millennials don't have career jobs to go to.
It's tougher and tougher to find jobs, period.
There's a sense all over the country that things are not right.
People may not be able to put their finger on what or why, but things aren't right.
Even the people who are working are scared they're going to lose their jobs.
Even people who have decent incomes are worried and frightened they're going to lose it.
Even those that you would consider to be secure or those you would consider to be well off, they are worried that it could all go poof because there isn't any solid foundation underneath us.
Every day you're treated to stories about companies laying people off here or there.
The overall, and the immigration that's happening all over the world, the producing countries are being flooded with people who do not produce, and they're making demands, entitlement type demands.
And there's a cumulative effect on people, all of this news, and it adds up to things aren't right.
And this is one of the major things that both parties in Washington have, I think, no clue about.
Routinely, we hear from Obama and other Democrats about how great they are, how well they've done with the economy and the recovery.
And we know they're lying, but do they?
What they don't understand is what they don't know, what they don't get because they're not living it.
I mean, these worries and fears do not exist inside the beltway.
The unemployment rate there is 3%.
The median income, six figures inside the beltway.
The average income, six figures.
The rest of the country, nowhere near that.
Inside the Beltway, they all have great pensions or they all have great retirement plans or whatever, and none of them are threatened because they're all backed by the federal government or corporations that are intact and doing well within the beltway and with work that comes commissioned by the government.
But outside, and the thing they don't understand inside the beltway is the fear.
There's genuine worry.
The just unstoppable tide of illegal immigration, for one thing, it has, if nothing else, a subliminal effect on people.
People do not see themselves getting raises.
They see their taxes remaining the same or going up.
There's a new fee here, a new fee there.
People who have signed up for Obamacare are learning how much new money they have to spend on health care that they used to not have to spend, not just on their premiums and not just on the deductible, but the actual cost of day-to-day treatment.
And there's a palpable fright out there among people, even those who are doing well, that it could all go poof or be taken away from them.
Now, there's, to be honest, there's some of that all the time.
You wouldn't believe the number of people who acquire big money for the first time in their lives who think it's all going to be taken away from them before they die.
It's an interesting phenomenon, but it exists.
But this is not that.
I mean, this is just standard, ordinary, everyday people who haven't been fired, haven't been laid off, and they're not really threatened with that, but they still worry it's going to happen.
There's an unsettledness out there.
And when you have 6,455,000 more students with college degrees than there are jobs available for them, how in the world does the same government report an unemployment rate of 5.1%?
The number of Americans who hold bachelor's degrees now in their working years exceeds the number of jobs created by 2022.
These are government projections for college degrees by 6.5 million.
In other words, the government says that there are 6.5 million fewer jobs than there are college graduates by the time we get to 2022.
And that does not include any factor regarding global warming and the effect that it has on the job market.
I'm just kidding.
Now, before I go, he alluded to people sliming my jet.
I'm not aware of that.
Have you seen any of that?
He must be spending time on Twitter.
If there's any of that going on, it'd be a net sewer.
Okay, politico.
Bush ally Mike Murphy.
He is the man in charge of the Jeb Bush Super PAC.
He granted an interview to Bloomberg Politics that was published yesterday.
The name of the super PAC, by the way, is Right to Rise USA.
Mike Murphy, a traditional inside-the-beltway Republican establishment consultant.
He has represented John McCain.
He has represented and run the campaigns of Arnold Schwarzenegger and of Mitt Romney.
Just FYI.
In this interview with Bloomberg Politics, Mike Murphy said the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency is as one of a false zombie frontrunner.
Mike Murphy says of Donald Trump, he's dead politically.
He will never be president of the United States, ever.
By definition, I don't think you can be a frontrunner if you're totally unelectable.
I think that there is a weird logic about this.
It says here that Senator Ted Cruz stands to gain the most from a potential Trump collapse.
But Murphy said, nope, nope, nope, that's a minority lane of voters.
Nope.
Only viable candidate the Republican Party has is Jeb Bush.
And as Jeb's campaign manager, de facto Murphy says, we're right where we want to be.
We're being overlooked.
We're thinking, everybody thinking we're blown out, have no chance.
Trump's a false zombie.
Nobody's going to vote for this guy for president.
It isn't going to happen.
We're going to be in there to pick up the mess.
And we're going to start when they start counting votes in February in Iowa.
It's much more in-depth than that, and it is pointed.
It is the fastest three hours in a reason, fast three hours in media for a reason.
Show is over.
Well, it's never really over.
It just ends for a while, as it's doing right now.
But we'll be back tomorrow, 21 hours from now.
And as always, great appreciation for you being here today.