All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 3, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:49
December 3, 2015, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Hey, I'm not very good at foreign languages.
This name, Saeed Farhook, does that mean climate change in Arabic?
Well, it may as well.
Anyway, greetings, my friends.
Never.
Now, more than ever, it's the EIB Network in Rush Limbaugh.
And we are at 800-282-2882 and the email address, lrushbo at EIBnet.com.
What an amazing illustration of where this country is.
Just watching the news media since last night following this event.
Let me, folks, there's so many things here that are just rock solid simple that are being made complicated, obfuscated.
It's just, it's absurd and it is obscene to watch the efforts of the left cover this up.
It's as though they think they did it.
The people on the, I'm talking about the Democrats that are talking about this, the media that is talking about this and trying to pin blame on people who had nothing to do with it.
It is almost as though the people on the left in this country feel guilty and are trying to transfer that guilt in order to protect their political agenda.
Ladies and gentlemen, 14 people are dead and a greater number are wounded.
If you can't identify, if you can't admit that what happened here is an act of terror, then you're not trying.
You don't need the motive.
They've got the motive.
They just don't want to announce the motive.
Last night, watching the media on this was as frustrating as anything I've done recently.
Oh, you know, it's very delicate here.
We can't really, they had the name for three hours before they would announce that, well, we're going to be very delicate.
You know, we don't want to cause any backlash?
Backlash?
What is it going to take to wake people up?
I'm telling you, the only thing that explains a Democrat Party on this, and the only thing that explains the left and the media and everybody that's on the left, is they know that their political agenda is threatened by these events, and they're doing everything they can to protect that agenda and make sure that it isn't damaged.
That is the sole reason for the way they treat these events.
Not just this one, but I know Fort Hood, you name it.
Whatever act of Islamic jihad that happens in this country, it cannot ever be stated as such.
If you can't see that this was an act of terror, you're not trying.
Or either you are desperately trying to protect your political agenda from being damaged.
It's just stunning.
It has been eye-opening.
It has been educational, informative, and illustrative to watch the pained efforts of many, primarily in the media and many of their guests, to try to tell people this was not what we all know it is.
Before anybody knew anything, the left on their blogs and websites were out blaming right-wing Christians.
Brian Ross was out there.
Grab audio soundbite number nine because a lot of people sent me emails today.
It was Brian Ross trying to find this guy as a member of a Tea Party group in San Bernardino.
Remember the Colorado shooting?
Brian Ross, ABC News Investigative Ace went on the air claiming that the shooter was a member of a Colorado Tea Party organization and then had to walk it back.
So eager are these people to pin all of this on people that have nothing to do with it.
It's even gotten so absurd now that they are criticizing Republicans and anybody else who prays after these events as a total waste of time, as total phoniness, because prayers don't stop bullets and prayers aren't going to fix this.
And that's the cover of the New York Daily News today.
It is never more obvious to me than it is today that the left knows it is responsible for this.
The left knows that it is as guilty as those pulling the trigger here, and they're doing everything they can to transfer that guilt and cover it up.
So since I got emails from Brian Ross about this, let's listen to how Brian Ross actually touched on this.
Good morning, America, today, George Stephanopoulos, well-known Democrat Party hack disguised as a journalist.
Brian, what more are we learning about the possible motives of the shooters?
It appears to be a kind of hybrid workplace jihad.
He had issues.
He targeted his co-workers, but he also had recently traveled to Saudi Arabia where he met the woman he says he married on his website, the dating line website.
He appears to be an all-American boy.
He enjoyed snowboarding, working on cars, and guns.
He was very comfortable with the gun culture.
He wrote he'd like to relax by going in the backyard for target practice.
I mean, that's so touched that it is unbelievable.
Workplace jihad committed by an all-American boy.
Oh, yeah, just like every other red-blooded, ordinary American Republican.
Loves dating online, loves going out and taking target practice, and who knows what the targets are.
Oh, yeah, snowboarding, working on cars and guns.
Do everything you can, Brian, to avoid what's staring everybody in the face.
I'll tell you something else I have noticed today before I get into in-depth analysis of this.
You know, Obama's out there, and it's predictable what Obama's saying.
Obama's trying to lead everybody to another instance of workplace violence, and that you can see that developing last night.
If you don't care what cable channel you watched, do everything they could to try to tell everybody that they didn't see what they saw and that they don't know what they know.
And so I'm looking at conservative media today, in addition to all the other media today, and I frankly am a little bit blown away by the outrage people on our side, a lot of people, have for Obama and his attempt to portray this as workplace violence, much as Obama did after Fort Hood.
Now, the reason I'm astonished is that I don't know why people take Obama seriously on this anymore.
I really, Obama is the last person anybody needs to listen to for guidance or anything else on this.
Nobody takes workplace violence seriously.
This was an act of terror.
This whole workplace violence thing is an ongoing effort, as I say, to make people forget what they know, ignore what they've seen, and believe some myth.
And that's because the left knows its agenda is culpable here.
The left and its so-called tolerance and political correctness is what permits this, creates the circumstances where all of this kind of activity can flourish.
Workplace violence has become a joke.
When you talk about Fort Hood and workplace violence, everybody mentions that and mentions it as a joke.
No, no.
Mr. Snurdley, my point is: who cares if Obama calls it workplace violence?
It's no different.
Okay, here I go.
What would you expect a lawyer for John Gotti to say?
He didn't do it, right?
You would expect some lawyer for the local mafia hitman to say of a guy he rubbed out, it's an unfortunate accident.
And we fear, feel very badly that it happened.
What do you expect he's going to say?
You really think Obama is going to come out and proclaim this to be an act of terror?
Do you think Obama is going to call it Islamic terror?
He won't even say the words.
Does anybody think Obama is going to hear?
Well, he's looking at it.
Well, it could be, might be, it could be out of here, long gone, whatever.
He's not going to say it.
He never has said it.
He won't say it.
Workplace violence, again, folks, is just a misdirection and it is a feint.
I mean, this is the guy who said the video was responsible for Benghazi.
I mean, who in the world still takes him seriously?
I'm surprised he didn't say it was a video that upset this guy, and he may yet do that.
And I wouldn't be surprised if he did.
And we learned that when Said Farhook flew back to Saudi Arabia for instruction to get married or what have you, he happened to see a video that has been on the who cares what this guy says.
We know that it's not rooted in any kind of a reality.
I mean, here's a guy, Obama, talking about beating ISIS by fighting climate change.
Anybody take a word he says seriously anymore?
I'll tell you, back to watching TV last night, I was just, you know, I haven't done what I did last night alone.
I had cable news on.
I mean, I was going all over the place for hours.
And I haven't done that, and I can't tell you how long.
And I learned last night why.
It was frustrating.
It was insulting.
It was insipid.
Everybody tiptoeing around.
There were exceptions.
Megan Kelly's an exception, a couple of others.
But I mean, the general tone.
Some of the guests were okay, but they were tiptoeing around that it even was a Muslim.
They were tiptoeing around that.
Oh, we've got the name.
We can't go public with the name.
It was a very, very, very delicate situation.
All these worldwide activities.
We've got to be very, very certain before we really.
In the meanwhile, everybody knew the name.
I knew the name as of 6 p.m. last night.
So did a lot of other people.
But the networks doing everything.
And I'll tell you what they were doing while they were withholding the use of the name and maybe even summon law enforcement doing this.
You know how far political correctness tentacles spread.
But I have no doubt they were trying to find anything they could to be able to announce that this had nothing to do with Islam.
That's what I suspected was behind the delay in revealing and announcing any of the information that they had, that they were looking for anything they could that would permit them to say it had nothing to do with Islam.
I'll tell you something else that got frustrating to watch last night with all these people, what we do.
You know, the people who are right on guns.
California has some of the most strict gun laws in the country.
Gun control is not the answer to this.
It never will be the answer to something like this.
And more and more reasonable people, common sense, understand that.
But despite that, we still had people on TV wringing their hands.
What do we do?
How do we deal with this?
Oh, my gosh.
There's a simple way, I think, of identifying, because it boils down to, okay, we've got a Muslim population.
How do we know which of them are peaceful and which of them are inclined to jihad?
That really isn't hard.
It really isn't hard.
All of this requires courage to admit certain things and then take action after you discover what you need to discover.
But it boils down to Sharia.
It's as simple as that.
If you have Sharia practitioners, you've got people who are potential problems.
No more complicated than that.
If you know what Sharia law is, if you know what the book on Islam commands of Sharia, there is your manual.
I realize all of this is terribly, politically incorrect to say.
But if people are going to ask seriously, what can we do?
Oh, and wring their hands and say, what do we, there are answers.
There are plenty of answers.
There may not be the political will.
There may not be the cultural will, but there are answers.
There are solutions.
It's just a question of whether or not we as a society want to come together and implement them and then enforce them.
Something else last night I've never seen before.
The care guy, the care group with a press conference.
You ever seen this?
Before the networks had announced the name, no, the name had been announced by this time in some places.
Farhouk.
Syed Farhuk means climate change in Arabic.
The Los Angeles Council or the chapter of the Council on Arabic-Islamic Relations went out to denounce this guy.
He went out and even produced the brother-in-law of Farhouk Syed to say they didn't understand it, didn't know why, didn't make any sense, didn't have any answers, just felt terrible for the victims and wanted to make sure this was known.
Never seen that before.
But this guy said something very key to me.
The tall guy, the executive director of care.
By the way, you need care is the Muslim Brotherhood.
It's who they are.
That means anything to you, fine.
But that's who they are.
And this executive director, in listing the potential motives, said ideological extreme.
We don't know whether it's mental illness.
We don't know whether it's hemorrhoids.
We don't know whatever.
And he then meant we don't know if it's ideological extremism.
Now, that to me was key.
Not religious extremism, ideological extremism, because you know the arguments that people engage in over what Islam is and militant Islam and jihad.
Is it a religion?
No, because Islam is a religion of peace, you see.
And so none of this could happen with a true Muslim Islam believer.
And this guy from CARE did not say religious extremism because that would have indicted Islams.
He called it ideological, which was very clever on his part because people in this country in their efforts to be politically correct often distinguish terrorists and point out that they are not Muslims and they are not part of Islam, the religion of peace.
In fact, they're practicing an ideology.
It's a device used to separate them and distance them from Islam so that Islam remains pure and politically correct, untouched, and so forth.
And this guy knew it full well, knew exactly what he was saying.
And I think it was, at least to me, it was an interesting distinction he was made.
I don't know how anybody, how many other people, if anybody, caught it, nor what it means, other than the guy's very smart and very clever.
And I imagine that his press conference last night worked with a lot of people, which is a testament to how good the guy was.
But they are the Muslim Brothers.
I got to take a break here, folks.
Just getting warmed up, and we'll get your thoughts on this as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears.
Sit tight.
There's more straight ahead right after this.
So in the midst of all this, you know what just happened?
Were you happening to watch TV?
You were screening call.
The Secretary of Defense out there, our illustrious Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, during that last commercial break, was out doing an announcement.
And you know what he announced?
He announced that, wait for it, women will now be allowed to participate in most, if not all, combat roles in the U.S. military.
Take that, ISIS.
Take that.
In the midst of all of this, that's as absurd as Obama going out and talking about gun control.
You want to know how tone deaf the Democrats are?
You want to know how tone deaf the Washington establishment is?
You couldn't pick a worse time to start talking about gun control, gun confiscation.
You couldn't pick a worse, from a political standpoint.
You're the Democrat Party.
You want new gun control laws.
You want to be able to convince people to give up their guns because they'll be safer.
And you do that today.
You do that last night.
Everybody is worried about domestic terrorism.
Everybody is worried about this influx of illegal immigrants from everywhere.
We now have Islamic refugees pouring into the country at the direction of the administration, the president.
We've got rioters.
We've got things going crazy on college campuses.
We've got potentially violent protests happening all over the country.
Obama is letting felons out of jail.
And they now want to talk about disarming us.
How stupid.
Yeah, we're just workplace violence.
That's otherwise nothing to see here.
It's workplace violence.
There's no way.
Here you have a devout Muslim, his father says so, at a government holiday party.
Make no mistake.
It was a Christmas party.
That alone could have been enough to set the guy off.
Who knows?
But I don't even think, I think it was premeditated.
It was planned.
It has to have been with everything we know about what happened.
And I want to go back one thing, an observation here about this CARE press conference that happened last night.
You realize how quickly they went into gear?
They were there on the spot.
They knew that this was Muslim-related, and they knew they had to get in there and do damage control right off the bat.
They weren't waiting for the media to announce anything.
They knew, and their press conference, and as, well, sensitive and apologetic as it was, nevertheless gave it all up.
They knew.
They knew it was Muslim, and their effort was to dissociate themselves from the shooter and his wife, girlfriend, whoever it was.
And something else about this, you notice they were able to get to the shooter's brother-in-law.
How did they do that?
I mean, they got to this guy before the FBI did.
How does that happen?
The name hadn't been announced.
Wait a minute now.
Let me get to the time.
Maybe the name had.
Yeah, because they were talking about the guy.
Okay, so the name had been announced.
But man, they found this guy's brother-in-law in time for their press conference?
Or maybe the brother-in-law call CARE?
Hey, you guys going to do a press conference?
Because I want to show up and say I had nothing to do with it and I didn't know this guy and I don't want to.
How does that happen?
I mean, I'm just sharing with you thoughts that I had while watching all of this.
And it just boggles my mind how it's all right out in front of us and the efforts that were undertaken last night to tell everybody that what we saw didn't happen and that what we know about it isn't right.
I'm telling you, it was so pointed.
The left got into gear so fast with their automatic narratives.
Another Planned Parenthood shooting or another right-wing Republican group shooting up.
I mean, they're waiting for these events to happen.
And then the New York Daily News headline today, God isn't fixing this.
Have you noticed how that was immediately on the lips of many leftists out there?
As though this has been planned in advance for the next event such as this, we're going to go after these Republican presidential candidates who offer prayers for the families of the victims in the aftermath.
I mean, within seconds of that happening, here comes this anti-barrage, anti-prayer, anti-religious barrage from all over the internet, as though that was structured and planned and put in place and just waiting for the go signal.
My point is, none of the reaction to this is spontaneous.
It's all structured.
It's all planned.
I'm talking about the reaction from the left.
And I maintain to you that that structured, planned, orchestrated reaction comes from a place of reality.
The reality is that they know they have to deflect attention away from themselves because it is their political correctness.
It is their political agenda which is making these events more possible.
It is their policies.
It is their attitudes that is making these shootings, whether it be jihad, whether it be unrest in the inner city, Ferguson, whatever it is, they are the enablers.
Their policies, their attitudes, their criticisms of the country justify or make possible the justification of these events.
It's almost as though when these events happen, there's a bit of excitement because they get to go into gear immediately with their planned responses that tar and feather and blame Republicans for this.
When once again, there isn't a single Republican fingerprint on any of this.
There isn't a single conservative fingerprint on any of this.
In fact, if there were policies in place that had been implemented by Republicans or conservatives, the likelihood of events like this happening could be much less.
I mean, I even saw, while the attack was still going down, right after the program, while the attack was still going down, somebody on CNN asked, is there a Planned Parenthood nearby?
And don't think they weren't hoping there was.
But how in the world do these people on the left think that attacking prayer is going to help them politically?
The front page of the New York Daily News, God isn't fixing this.
And they have pictures of Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, and Lindsey Graham, and their Twitter quotes.
Cruz, our prayers are with the victims, their families, and the first responders in San Bernardino.
Rand Paul, my thoughts and prayers are with the victims, Rob Paul Ryan, California in your prayers, Lindsey Graham.
Thoughts and prayers are with, they want to go after that.
Who have these people on the left become?
Well, who have they always been that they are now revealing themselves to be?
That they think they are scoring points politically.
Remember, everything to them is political, and everything is about two things: destroying their political opponents and advancing their own political agenda.
And how in the world, who must they be now, to believe they advance their political agenda by attacking prayer, attacking people who seek solace and peace in prayer.
The left and the Democrats are the original new age, touchy-feely crowd.
They're the ones that encourage people to engage in this kind of introspection and self-analysis.
But boy, when you happen to be praying to God, the fact that that offends them and angers them, they apparently can no longer contain themselves.
Chris Steyerwald, writing at Fox News today, without Christian voters, Democrats don't have a prayer.
He said, back when Barack Obama could really deliver from the podium.
By the way, that's now a common refrain.
Everybody thinks Obama's lost it.
Have you noticed that?
I mean, Richard Cohen's column of the Washington Post yet today, Obama's system, he's lost his pizzazz, he's lost his engagement, he's lost his interest, he's lost his energy.
It's everywhere.
And especially among people on the left, they're really worried about it.
Obama doesn't seem engaged.
Obama's this, going after things, global warming, climate change, nobody cares about that.
Strategic, by the way, that's actually kind of smart that he's doing it.
I'll explain that in a minute.
But there's a lot of frustration about Obama.
And a lot of people writing of Obama as he ain't what he once was.
Boy, man, this guy has really, really fallen.
Very dangerous belief to have.
Because I think Obama is more dangerous now than he's ever been.
He's got one year left with everybody thinking he's impotent and not engaged.
If I were Obama, I would love that.
Nobody paying attention to me.
Nobody thinking I've got anything left.
Nobody worried about what I'm doing.
I mean, that's clear sailing, smooth sailing again with nothing in my way is the way I would see it if I were him.
Anyway, Steyerwald says, back when Obama could really deliver from the podium, meaning back when he really gave good speeches, one of his very best lines was about how, quote, we worship an awesome God in the blue states.
Close quote.
The language was no accident.
Awesome God is the name of one of the most popular evangelical worship songs of the last generation.
In 2004, when Obama gave that speech about how we worship an awesome God in the blue states, back in 2004, it would have been impossible to imagine a sitting U.S. Senator chastising believers for their prayers in the wake of a mass murder, but one senator did on Tuesday.
Many on the left embrace the idea not that as Obama has said before, thoughts and prayers are not enough, but that prayers were pointless or even damaging because they distracted from what most Democrats believe should be a move to advance extensive gun control.
And there you have it.
But I have a different take on this.
We worship an awesome God.
That may well have been one of the most popular evangelical worship songs of the last generation, but that's not what Obama meant when he talked about awesome God.
That was a defensive statement.
It's always been said that Democrats have a problem with God.
Many people have criticized them that basis.
And I think Obama's, we worship an awesome God in the Democrat Party was his way of saying, oh, yes, we do believe in God.
Much like Obama will launch a military strike somewhere.
Oh, yes, we do believe in using force.
Oh, we're not afraid of using the military.
You know, it counters some of the clichéd criticisms.
Steyerwalt's point is that if the Democrats run off Christians, they don't have a prayer of winning elections.
And he goes on in his piece to analyze why that would be.
And he asked the question, what could possess members of the Democrat Party to denounce prayer and to do so before the means and motives of the killers were still unknown?
How does political stupidity of that magnitude come to seem like a good idea?
The single largest group of Democrats on the spectrum of beliefs was none.
There was a headline, the Pew study on religion in public life, most recent one.
Democrats went from 74% Christian in 2007 to 63% Christian in 2014.
The share of Christian Republicans dropped by five points to 82%, about the same as the population overall.
But the headline was that for the first time, the single largest group of Democrats on the spectrum of beliefs was none.
Those professing no faith whatsoever now make up 28% of Democrats.
So they're out now in the midst in the aftermath of this attack talking about more gun control and taking guns away from average ordinary people who end up being the victims of these events.
And now mocking, lampooning, attacking God and prayer in the aftermath of an act of terror.
We're dealing with truly deranged, sick, dangerous people, if you ask me.
Oh, yeah, we got other things today.
Not just this, but I do want to get all my thoughts in on this.
I'm trying to do them in a chronological order as things happened on TV last night.
And by the way, the press conference is underway now.
The chief of police in San Bernardino, we are not going to join it because I don't know how long it's going to go.
I'm sure many of our EIB affiliates have dropped off the program here momentarily to cover that press conference, but we're not going to for a host of reasons.
But I did just listen to a bit of it.
And here's the, what I heard was the police chief announcing what they discovered in the PERPS house last night.
And it was a list of ammunition and guns and bombs.
If anybody wants to sit here and continue to try to make the case that this is workplace violence, they need to be sent to a shrink.
For example, 12 pipe bombs, material for 12 pipe bombs, 2,9mm rounds, several other rounds, different size ammunition, material to make improvised explosive devices, IEDs.
This wasn't workplace violence.
This wasn't somebody that got ticked off over something that happened at the office and goes back home.
These are people that were planning further attacks.
The police chief and answering questions said, oh, yeah, they had enough in there for many more attacks.
But of course, we stopped them before they could engage in them.
This guy is not who the media is trying to tell you who he is.
He's not some innocent little guy that got somehow ticked off at something.
The story that they are telling about Saeed Farooq is just, it's meant to diffuse, distract, and misdirect you.
But the armament inside this guy's house dispels any idea that this was anything other than what it was.
And it certainly wasn't workplace violence.
And it was not random, and it was not spontaneous.
Let me grab a phone call here, get one in the first hour.
It's Amy in Colorado Springs.
Welcome.
Great to have you on the program, Amy.
Hi.
Hey, Rush.
It's great to talk to you.
Thank you so much for taking my call.
How are you today?
You bet.
I'm doing well.
Thanks.
Well, I just want to say I don't think it's random at all either.
I'm here in Colorado Springs, and obviously we just had a shooting not too long ago.
And I think there's these sleeper cells everywhere.
We've been so blind to this problem and not doing anything about it.
And now they're starting to come alive, and we're going to see a lot more of it.
I have a feeling.
Yeah, you know what?
It's a good point.
Some of the things I heard from people attempting to tell us that this wasn't what it is.
Well, I've never seen a woman be involved in one of these.
It doesn't sound like it's Islamic jihad.
You never see women.
And then another one was, why go after a place like this?
I mean, it's a government building for people with disabilities.
I mean, what the hell?
Why go in there?
Precisely because it's a government, precisely because it's easy, precisely because there's a lot of people in there, precisely because it's probably a gun-free zone since it's a government building, some form or other related government services building at least.
But the whole point is to hit where nobody thinks they will hit.
For example, who ever dreamed that 19 people would hijack airplanes and fly them into the World Trade Center?
Nobody thought that until it happened.
So now people are saying, who would go after some people in a disability building?
Exactly.
So the I love all these wizards of SMART trying to tell us, no, it couldn't be what our prejudice makes us think it is, because it doesn't fit the pattern.
What pattern?
It seems to me it fits a pretty clear pattern.
A bunch of essentially totally innocent people are dead for absolutely no reason other than they are not Muslim.
What else do you need?
It's like Rudy Giuliani said, if you can't see that this is an act of terror with 14 people dead and many more injured, you're a moron.
Back after this, don't quote.
You think if the shooter's name had been Said Cruz, that they would have withheld the announcement for three or four hours?
How about Saeed Trump?
Said Limbaugh.
And Obama says, well, you know, people on the no-fly list are getting guns.
We've got to stop it.
Whose fault's that, Mr. President?
▲
Export Selection