All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 9, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:28
November 9, 2015, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And here we are back at it.
Rush Limbaugh.
With half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Here on the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882 and the email address lrushbo at EIBnet.com.
What do you bet?
Yeah, yeah, I'm going to get to the Ben Carson stuff here in just a second.
Hang on, we're going to get to all of it.
We get to all of it every day.
Well, we get to more of it every day here than you're going to find anywhere else.
But we're going to get to the Ben Carson stuff.
Yes, I'm still steaming about this.
Still peeved about it.
It's, you know, Politico was ripped to shreds.
They were fully exposed on this.
And the media, even some elements of the media started turning against them.
Now they're trying to put the pieces back together and reestablish the politico piece in part.
The drive-by circle of wagons.
The reason they didn't circle the wagons at first is because this was so egregious.
I mean, they wouldn't want to take the chance of losing all credibility.
This is such an outrageous thing that the Politico did.
But give it a couple of days.
Now they're trying to put it back together to protect the Politico.
But I'll give you details here, what I'm referring to in mere moments plus soundbites.
And for those of you on hold on the phones, I sincerely ask you to hold on if you can.
We are going to get to you.
What do you bet that over half, if not more, of the protesting agitator type students in Mizzou actually think Michael Brown, the gentle giant, raised his hands and surrendered and was running away and was nevertheless murdered by the cop.
Don't shake your head.
What do you bet the majority?
I'll bet you it's 90% believe it.
It's what the race hustlers said.
It's what was still promulgated as the reality of that story for months afterwards.
People have been encouraged to believe that.
That's where this whole Black Lives Matter thing sprung up.
Black Lives Matter.
And then you get into trouble if you say, no, all lives matter.
No, that proves you're not sensitive to the cause if you think all lives matter.
My point is that you've got, I think you've got a bunch of community organizers here, not even students, that are getting the rabble all worked up, succeeding in doing so.
Anyway, the majority of students there, the majority of people, just want this over so they get back to some sense of normalcy there.
The news media coverage making it look like this whole incident captivated the entire, captured the whole campus, and that everybody wanted the President Gunn and everybody wanted all of these demands implemented and so forth.
Let me read you the last demand.
The demands issued supposedly by students and the football team.
We demand, this is demand eight.
We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding, resources, which is funding, and personnel for the social justice centers on campus for the purpose of hiring additional professionals,
particularly those of color, boosting outreach and programming across campus and increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility.
You go through every one of these demands and there's not a specific complaint of anything.
The complaint is white privilege.
The complaint is white majority.
The complaint is not enough money for the minorities.
Not enough power for the minorities.
Not enough positions of power for the minorities.
And so somebody needs to pay for this.
In this case, it was the university president.
Here's demand number seven.
We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding and resources.
No, no, it's in number seven, too.
It's not just in number.
Every demand wants more money, folks, and more resources.
Back here to demand number seven.
We demand the University of Missouri increase funding and resources for the University of Missouri Counseling Center for the purpose of hiring additional mental health professionals, particularly those of color, boosting mental health outreach and programming across campus,
increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility of the counseling center, and reducing lengthy wait times for prospective mentally ill clients.
This is a college campus, a university campus, and they need outreach to the mentally ill.
Well, now be careful with what they're saying is that apparently at this institution of higher learning, there are a lot of wackos.
There are a lot of mentally ill people, and they're being ignored and taken for granted and underfunded and under-resourced and underrepresented, and most of them are people of color.
Now, it's a university.
What are the mentally ill doing there?
Who are they?
The professors?
Who are we talking about here?
Oh, we know exactly who it is.
Who do you think the mentally ill are?
Who do you think the mentally, who do you think the well, of course it's the oppressed?
Who do you think it is?
No, no, no, no.
No, no, no, no.
Well, mentally ill is, yes, the result of a lifetime of discrimination and a lifetime of poverty and lack of resources and opportunity.
But what is mentally ill's code words for things?
You look at, I know what it is.
If you don't, you figure it out.
Nothing I can gain by pointing it out here.
Demand six, we demand the University of Missouri composes a strategic 10-year plan by May 1st of next year that will increase retention rates for marginalized students, sustain diversity curriculum and training, and promote a more safe and inclusive campus.
No complaint specified, just a bunch of demands.
What is retention rates for marginalized students?
Exactly right.
They want to keep the failing students in school and probably on scholarship.
They don't want the university to be able to kick out failing students because they're not really failing.
They're marginalized and mentally ill, you see.
And they are mentally ill because of the oppressive society and culture of the United States of America as represented on the campus at the University of Missouri.
They're mentally ill because of racism, sexism, homophobia, misogyny, all of that.
American culture and society has made them mentally ill, and therefore we need...
They're victims!
No, no, there's nothing specific for transgenders.
They're all included here.
That's the whole point.
Who do you think we're talking about here?
Is there anything else here?
Oh, number three, we demand the University of Missouri meet the Legion of Black Collegians demands presented in 1969 for the betterment of the black community.
1969.
I guess that's a long time for some demands to be ignored.
We demand the University of Missouri create and enforce comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum throughout all campus departments and units.
Mandatory for all students, faculty, staff, and administration.
This curriculum must be vetted, maintained, and overseen by a board comprised of students, staff, and faculty of color.
Students, staff, and faculty of color get to determine the racial awareness and inclusion curriculum.
I mean, the inmates have been granted the asylum here.
And let's see, from thehill.com, Senator Roy Blunt, Republican Missouri, said today he hopes the University of Missouri becomes a role model for dealing with racial tensions.
Racism has no place in our society, he tweeted.
Well, apparently, neither does reason to do it.
See, this is, it's easier just to tag along with this, accept the premise.
There's less friction if you simply accept the premise, and particularly if you're Republican and you want to prove to people you're not a racist or a sexist or a bigot or a homophobe or what have you.
Okay, on to the latest on the Ben Carson story.
In no particular order, I'm going to go back to November 6th here.
This is last Friday at the end of the day, which was a barn burner of a day here on the EIB network, where Politico's Ben Carson scoop went wrong.
Now, to refresh your memory, Politico runs a story on Friday, claim what they didn't claim anything.
They wanted the reader to believe that Ben Carson, in his book and on the campaign trail, has been telling people that he applied for admission to the Naval Academy and was accepted and was offered a four-year scholarship and then went to the Naval Campaign.
That was what they wanted.
Everybody, it was such a rotten, poorly written headline.
And the story was bouncing off the headline.
And the story was Carson's claims untrue, campaign acknowledges, apologizes for whatever.
But the thing is, Carson never said that he went to the Naval Academy.
He never said that he applied.
All he had said was that he was the leading ROTC student in Detroit at one point and as such met General Westmoreland.
And General Westmoreland spoke highly of West Point, as he would to any ROTC person, and extolled the virtues of going there and made it clear to Carson that if he did go, it would be paid for.
It would be a scholarship.
Turns out we have found advertising paraphernalia for West Point that they use that even describes what they do as a scholarship.
They tried to say that Carson lied because there are no scholarships at West Point, that everybody goes and, well, the Naval Academy too, but everybody just gets in.
And it's an obligation.
Everybody goes to the two academies on a scholarship.
Anyway, the whole thing blew up because it became clear that Carson had never done anything that he had to admit.
He hadn't lied, but the other aspects of his story about beating up a kid and being a bully and having a violent youth and so forth are trying to track people down and they can't find any evidence of it.
So it means Carson's lying.
And that became the premise of the story.
Anyway, it didn't take long to totally blow up the Politico story and illustrate it for the phony journalism that it was.
Not just the biased, but racist journalism that it was.
And so at the end of the day, on Friday, some news organizations were starting to hit the Politico.
This was CNN Dylan Byers, where Politico's Ben Carson scoop went wrong.
What initially looked like a disaster for Ben Carson could now be a major black eye for Politico.
On Friday, Politico reported Carson had fabricated his application and acceptance to West Point, that his campaign had acknowledged as much.
That story initially headlined, exclusive, Ben Carson admits fabricating West Point scholarship.
Seemed like the sort of story that had the potential to ruin his ambitions for the presidency.
But CNN says here the Politico story was not accurate on some key points.
It wasn't accurate on much of anything, folks.
And in the wake of pushback from the Carson campaign, which called the story an outright lie, Politico softened its headline, removed the fabrication language, and changed some key details, even as it said it was standing by its story.
But there was never any evidence in Politico's story that Carson ever claimed to have applied to West Point, yet they said that he did.
Well, no.
The way they wrote the headline and the accompanying story, they wanted the reader to think that Carson had written a book, and in the book, he accepted a scholarship to West Point and attended.
And now Politico had discovered that he never went to West Point.
And so what they want, my God, did you hear what Ben Carson's doing?
Ben Carson lied about going to West Point.
Why would somebody lie about going to West Point?
And why, after all this time of lying about it, wouldn't West Point come out and say he never was there?
Well, because he never lied about going to West Point.
He never lied about applying.
He never lied about getting a scholarship.
The whole thing was an assassination piece.
As I so clearly and brilliantly laid out on Friday, following pushback from the Carson campaign, Politico softened its headline, changed its lead, and Mediaite even had a story.
Politico changes headline of controversial Ben Carson West Point story.
But this story is from this morning.
Even Politico is still lying about it, even in their updated editor's note.
The editor's note continues to say that he implied that he applied for admission.
When the quote they cite goes on to say the opposite in the very next, he never applied.
He simply said that Westmoreland made it available or made it sound like something attractive to do.
But Carson from the get-go always said, no, medicine is where I want to go.
He never even toyed with the idea.
And yet even the revised Politico story in the editor's note tries to imply that he applied for admission.
And of course, didn't get it, which is why he didn't go.
And that's why he's lying.
He can't face the humiliation of being turned down in his application to West Point.
But he didn't apply.
So even as of the weekend, Politico was still trying to turn the screws in after trying to appease some of their buddies in the media by softening the headline.
But Ben Carson never once claimed he applied or was granted admission to West Point.
I played golf Saturday morning.
Oops.
Let me get this in real quickly.
I played golf, and a guy came up to me.
Gee, Rush, I bet that Ben Carson story lying about West Point.
And I said, Tim, please go back and look at it.
You're buying into a Bill of Goods.
This is exactly what they want.
People, he never applied.
He never went.
He never said he did either.
Everything in that story is an out-not lie.
And he looked at me.
And he's one of us.
He looked at me with his mouth wide open.
He couldn't believe.
I mean, I literally, I didn't even engage in a conversation.
I just said, Tim, it's not true.
You're falling for it.
Don't be a dupe like this.
He never went.
He never applied.
The whole thing is a made-up lie.
The look on his face was all you needed.
He couldn't believe it.
Take a break.
I'm up against it on time.
No, Tim looked at me like he didn't know what I was talking about.
Like I was the nutcase.
I mean, that's the danger.
He saw it.
He saw it in the news.
He didn't see the original political.
I asked him where he saw it.
I forgot what he said.
It wasn't the politico.
He saw it in some repeating network.
Great illustration of what we continually are up against.
I need to get a phone call in here, folks.
We're going to start with Peter in Dunwoody, Georgia.
I'm really glad you called, Peter.
It's great to have you here.
Hi.
Hey, Rush.
Thanks for taking my call.
I really appreciate it.
And I just want to say really quickly that I'm 26 now and I'm a college student.
And I remember listening to your show when I was a little itty-bitty kid in the back seat with my parents in the front.
And they listened to you for years.
So I just want to let you know I was raised on your radio show and I love it.
That means you're well-rounded and adjusted.
And that will flavor everything from now on.
You say it's credible and intelligent.
So it's great for you.
Thank you.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, anyway, I wanted to just basically validate your point about the colleges these days.
When I first started my semester this semester, I've only got a few weeks left here.
But when I first started, I had a course, and it was mainly my American literature course.
But about three or four weeks into it, my professor had gotten us into different readings about slavery and Civil War and that sort of thing.
And so I felt like that was quite normal.
But here at the end of the semester, this professor has based his entire course on basically the injustices of America, what America has done wrong, what the founding fathers did wrong, and slavery.
And that has been the entire course.
That's it.
And I've actually noticed the same thing with other professors as well, even my accounting professor, which has nothing to do with any of that.
And it really is surprising.
This is my point.
I'll bet you when you were driving around in the back seat listening with your mom and dad or your dad, you might have heard me say it.
You might remember.
You might not have.
If you did, sounds like an exaggeration to me.
Now you've encountered it.
You're a student at age 26.
Now you've encountered it.
My point is, that's why I think these universities, they deserve what they're getting.
They're the ones that have poisoned these kids' minds with all this hate.
These universities, these professors have filled these young skulls full of much with a bunch of drivel.
And it's created all this anger, and they're finally taking it out where they are instead of waiting until they get out of school to do it.
So I checked an email.
Rush, I can't believe you just glossed over that.
He's talking about our first caller who said even his accounting professor got into how rotten America is.
Slavery and all that stuff.
Folks, I didn't need to ask him how the accounting professor got it.
It had to be a discussion about reparations.
If you're taking an accounting class and the professor starts going on and on and about all the unfairness in America and the founding and the racism and bigotry and all that kind of stuff, there had to have been a discussion of reparations.
And maybe not, maybe not.
Maybe accounting is just a cover for what the story was.
I mean, we've had history professors who teach current events politics.
They don't do a smidgen thing about history.
Who knows what's going on in these classes other than the inculcation of hate?
I don't mean to be screaming here.
I just get revved up about this.
I think, well, Mr. Snerdley is saying we'd be thrown out if we went to a college today.
You mean by standing up to the professor and not taking the crap?
Yeah, maybe.
That's the thing.
I don't know how many 19, 20, 21-year-olds are going to stand up to this stuff anyway.
Everybody's so scared to death of getting a bad grade.
I mean, this is what happens.
This is why, look at, I really, there's a part of me that really loves this is happening.
Look at, this is not the first, look at the Duke La Crosse case.
Yale, I mean, there are any number of stories all across the country where universities are becoming, well, they're nowhere near places that are educating people.
They're indoctrinating, they're propagandizing.
But when you spend all of these semesters teaching all of this hate, what do you expect is going to happen?
I think this is liberalism coming back and getting bitten by its own teachings.
And this is, you know, the professors and these kind of, it's not supposed to be taken out on them.
The students are supposed to learn this hate and then leave campus and go tear society down or what have you.
And the students are finally figured out, why wait?
We can get what we want now.
These people are as intimidatable as anybody else is.
In fact, probably easier to intimidate a major American university than it is a major American corporation.
It's a toss-up, but I would venture to say it's easier to intimidate a university because it's all liberals running the place.
And they are the first to cave.
And they're the first.
No, I'm not what you're.
Oh, no, it isn't me.
Of course not.
We'll do whatever you want to prove that we're not what you say we are.
And of course, Republicans, you know, I'm going to throw some of them in that thinking as well.
Author of the Ben Carson piece, Politico.
His name is Kyle Cheney.
He's the author of the piece of Politico.
And it turns out, we have a little background on this guy from Breitbart.
And he has a history of over-the-top rhetoric and exaggerations.
Much like his hit piece on Carson is.
Joel Pollack has the story.
Kyle Cheney, the political reporter who wrote last Friday's hit piece on Ben Carson, has a flair for hyperbole.
Writing about a 2004 arrest, quote, I was in Guantanamo for 12 hours.
Cheney was arrested during an anti-war protest at the Republican National Convention in 2004.
He's a politico writer.
He was at the time an editor for the student newspaper at Boston University.
He joined the protest as a demonstrator, not a journalist.
Later, Cheney wrote an angry op-ed about his detention.
He attacked the bushies and the Republican demagogues.
He decried the ambush in which he was arrested during a protest he admits he knew he had no permit and attacked the New York City Police Department and its henchmen, slamming, quote, the steady stream of outright lies and unmitigated praise for the law enforcement efforts spewing from the bowels of Madison Square Garden.
This is a classic, irrationally angry leftist, a former protester of Republican conventions and all things Republican gets hired as a writer at Politico.
Cheney complained about his detention with dozens of others in Pier 57, which is Guantanamo on the Hudson.
He later agreed to a deal, along with other defendants, in which charges were dismissed, quote, if we stay out of trouble for half a year.
Still resentful, weeks later, Cheney claimed that America, quote, can never claim to be what it once was, a land that cherished freedom of expression, distinguished between peaceful protesters and malicious terrorists.
And it goes on.
But the clear, the one thing that's clear here, this guy is a true partisan hack.
And he ends up writing the piece on Ben Carson at Politico.
The Washington Post has an utterly contemptible piece by Carlos Lozada, the headline, Ben Carson, the humble bragging instrument of God.
It's more of the same, maybe even more despicable since it just boils down to the Washington Post mocking Carson for believing in God and then having the temerity to write about it in his books.
And make no mistake.
You know, I've got a companion story here.
This is a good time for this.
It's a story at thehill.com.
Dem's Democrats search for fountain of youth.
Democrats lean heavily on young voters to win elections, but their leading candidates for the White House are 68-year-old Hillary Clinton and 74-year-old dinosaur Bernie Sanders.
The two other Democrats who were often implored to enter the race are Biden, 72, and Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren, who's 66.
Democrats are led on Capitol Hill by Nancy Pelosi and Dingy Harry, who are both 75.
Pelosi's top two lieutenants, 76-year-old Stenny Hoyer, 75-year-old James Clyburn.
In comparison, Dingy Harry's expected successor as the Democratic leader in the next Congress is Chuck Schuma, who is a spry, 64.
The age of the Democrat Party's linchpins is a sensitive subject as the party prepares for life after 54-year-old Barack Hussein.
Oh, since Obama's election in 2008, Democrats have racked up net losses amounting to more than 1,000 seats in state legislatures, almost 70 House seats, 13 Senate seats, and 12 governors' mansions.
And so the Hill has a story here.
How can this be?
The Democrat Party is the favored party of the youth.
The Democrat Party doesn't have any youthful people running it.
The Democrat Party is Jurassic Park.
How can this be?
And you may think it's a legitimate question.
And you may wonder, why is it not an issue?
The Democrats really are nothing but a bunch of old people.
The Democrat Party really is a bunch of guys, get off my lawn, type of guys.
The Democrat Party is literally a bunch of gummers.
So ask yourself, why are they the go-to party for the American youth?
Why are they the go-to party for the millennials?
Why are they the go-to party for young journalists?
Why are they the go-to party for Silicon Valley Hollywood?
Seriously, why?
Why are they?
Well, what do you mean by media branding?
Okay.
Okay.
I don't think that's what it is.
Snerdley just said it's because of media branding that the Democrat Party has been branded as the party of youthful exuberance and young, exciting, futuristic ideas.
And I don't think that's it at all.
In fact, I know what it is.
And you know why I know what it is?
Because I read these little minions.
I read the millennials and what they write.
I go to their blogs and their websites.
They hate Republicans.
They make fun.
ought to read what these youthful young people are writing about Ben Carson.
And he's just the latest lunatic to come along and headline a Republican Party, which is nothing but a bunch of lunatics.
And invariably in the litany of criticism, you'll find rabid Christian or some reference to some degree of devoutness Christianity.
It is, I think it's a combined, I don't believe the Democrat Party has support because people love it.
I think the Democrat Party has support because the people we're talking about here are either afraid of or hate or don't take seriously the Republican Party.
And in large part, it's because it's a conservatism.
But even more importantly than that, I think that there is an absolute hatred and distrust and fear of people who are religious.
Those people are usually pretty sure of themselves, which is off-putting to people like this.
They're pretty confident.
They're pretty sedate.
They're gentle.
They don't seem to have a whole lot of doubts about the unknown.
And these people we're talking about, they're living lives in total abject fear and panic because they don't have any religion in their lives.
They're looking for a replacement for God.
So they go to environmentalism or they go to any other aspect of racism, bigotry, wherever they can find a belief in something larger than themselves.
But it isn't going to be religion because they associate Christianity with legitimate fools.
To them, Christians and religious people are dangerous kooks who think that everything is – they have a distorted view of Christianity because that's how they've been taught about it.
They've been how it's been explained to them.
And so it's not that the Democrat Party offers them anything.
The Democrat Party doesn't.
Where is the youth at the top of the Democrat?
Where is the hip in the Democrat Party?
There really isn't any hip.
You ever watched a White House correspondence?
They have to import hip.
They have to import Hollywood people.
The Democrat Party proves better than anybody ever has that politics is showbiz for the ugly.
That politics is showbiz for the aging and the decrepit and the ugly.
There is no youthful leader in the Democrat Party.
There is no JFK anymore.
There's no JFK Jr.
There's nobody.
I'm not altogether convinced that a majority of youth actually oppose conservatism anyway.
It's just that it's fashionable to say so.
Just like it's fashionable to join the protests at Mizzou.
It's the path of least friction.
But I am convinced that among certain people we're talking about, there's this abject fear of Christian religious people.
And you can see this Washington Post story, Ben Carson, the humble bragging instrument of God.
Ben Carson became convinced of two things during his teenage years.
First, he was uniquely talented, quote, one of the most spectacular and smartest people in the world.
And second, that God would answer his prayers, however specific they might be.
That's the lead.
That's why you're supposed to hate Carson.
That's why you're supposed to suspect Carson, because he believes in God, and he believes in himself.
Nobody's supposed to be that sure of themselves.
Nobody's supposed to be that confident.
And nobody is supposed to trust and rely on God to help them out.
That's silly.
That's stupid.
There is no God.
Don't you know?
There is no God.
And the fact that people believe there's a God, that is the biggest, I don't know what to call it.
I think that one of the largest obstacles or the representations of fear that non-believers, liberals, whatever have, it just stymies them.
I've got to take a break.
Again, I'm along here, so.
Here's a little passage that I will define for you or translate for you.
This is from the contemptible Washington Post piece describing Ben Carson as a humble bragging instrument of God.
It's also why Carson has expressed little regret over his controversial comments on the Holocaust, mass shootings, and slavery in Islam.
What that means is his belief, and his weird, his weird belief in God has kept Carson from apologizing for what he said and has kept him from apologizing for getting all these things wrong.
What were his controversial comments on the Holocaust?
He said, if the Jews had been armed, Hitler would have had a little bit more trouble.
I can't say that.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
That's crazy talk.
Mass shootings.
What's he said about mass shootings?
Gun-free zones, they are ripe targets for people who want to do mass shootings because they know there's nobody there to stop.
You can't say that.
That's crazy.
That's what a belief in God mentioned.
I think it's stupid stuff like that.
In Islam, I wouldn't want somebody who believes in Sharia law to be president because that means they won't honor the Constitution.
That's see, that kind of Christian belief is discriminatory, and we can't have that in America.
That's what all that means.
Ben Carson scares the heck out of them.
It scares them he might become president.
It scares them that anybody like him, any religion, religious conservative might become president.
That's why they support the Democrat Party.
I'm convinced.
They're scared to death of religious people.
That's why they're attacking them everywhere they can.
Indiana, over gay marriage or what have you.
One of the objectives of the left is to stigmatize religious people as lunatics, intolerant bigots, you name it.
That's one of the ongoing, never-ending objectives of liberalism.
You might say, as I have said in the past, that maybe rather than doing what they were doing or are doing, they would maybe seek God, maybe add God to their lives, maybe instead of being so angry and scared all the time.
And that ticks them off like you can't believe.
Because to them, God means judgmentalism.
Religion means what you can't do.
Religion means being stigmatized for having a good time, no matter whether it's debauchery or whatever.
And they don't want anybody judging what they do.
And it's not so much.
These people are laden with guilt already.
They know that the things that they're concerned with here, the things they're doing, are they're not right.
They're not productive.
They just don't want to be called on it.
They already have the guilt in the first place.
They just don't want to be called on it.
And they don't want to be punished for it.
So they're a mess, folks.
They're an absolute mess.
And I have talked my way through what I intended to do was take two phone calls here.
I'm sorry.
I promise I'll get to them here.
William Buckley, in his book, God and Man at Yale, wrote of the very premise that I just raised, just a couple of lines that I will share with you when we get back.
And I believe it sums it up well.
Hang in there, be tough, my friends.
▲
Export Selection