All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 21, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:39
December 21, 2015, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 Podcast.
And greetings, everyone, thrill seekers, music lovers, conversationalists all across the fruited plain.
Here we are.
Christmas week.
Told you on Friday that I was going to be here today.
And I am.
And we're going to be here tomorrow, too.
And I'm not sure about Wednesday.
What's the schedule on Wednesday?
I'm not here on Wednesday.
Not here on Wednesday.
What if I decide I want to be, though?
That just screws everything up, right?
They're all shaking there.
No, no, you're not here on Wednesday.
You already told us so.
Things are screwed up enough already, and I would screw them up even more by showing Imagine where we've gotten to.
Now, my showing up on my own show would screw things up here at the EIB.
It makes about as much sense as everything else happening out there today.
Hi, folks, how are you?
It's uh it's great to be with you.
It always is.
Telephone numbers 800 28282.
And the email address, L Rushbow at EIBnet.com.
So Hillary Clinton leaves the debate stage to go take a whiz.
They timed it for she had an hour forty five, a minute 45 seconds to get there, a minute 45 to get back, and whatever length of time it took to do the business.
They had Huma.
Huma wiener was standing guard.
They even timed this.
They set this up.
They had Huma standing guard outside the restroom.
When Hillary shows up to use the restroom, she finds out that there's somebody in there.
So she refuses to go in.
There are multiple stalls in this restroom.
But Mrs. Clinton, in full queen mode, refused to go in the bathroom when there was another woman in there.
And so she waited until that other woman came out.
That other woman just happens to be the girlfriend of Elliot Spitzer.
Client number nine.
Not that that matters to anything.
It's just an interesting little side note.
So Mrs. Clinton waits until Spitzer's girlfriend comes out of the bathroom before she goes in.
And that means that she was late getting back to the debate.
What?
Bladder shy?
No, I think it's probably security paranoia.
Um, or or else it is queen like.
Uh things.
Who knows?
But I think the larger question is, how long did that debate?
I didn't watch it.
Did anybody watch Democrat debate?
How long was the debate?
Well, but okay, but how long it was two hours?
You mean you can't hold it for two hours?
You can't, you can't, you can't go to the bathroom before the debate and make it through two hours without it.
Where are her medical records?
This is the thing that that that made me curious about this.
Two hours?
You have to leave the debate during a commercial break?
Who does that?
I mean, if anybody else has done it, we've never heard about it because they made it back on time.
It shows you Mrs. Clinton's priorities.
She didn't.
She didn't care about getting back on time.
That was not her priority.
Then she's out there lying again about Trump being a recruiting tool for ISIS.
He says there's videos out there of ISIS using Trump.
It turns out there is a video out there, and it uses her husband.
ISIS is using her husband as a recruiting tool.
And also Barack Hussein Oh is in that video.
But imagine Hillary Clinton using talking about a video even now.
I mean, I just I thought it was laugh riot funny.
And she makes it up, and I read some things over the weekend, places sympathetic to Hillary, and they're not upset she lied.
And they don't think it means anything.
They just think it is she's trying to.
And I've even, some of the tech blogs.
Hillary's an absolute doofus when it comes to tech, folks.
She is worse than your grandparents who don't want to know anything about it.
She's got this illegal server.
She's doing all of these things with her email that are in violation of the law.
She doesn't understand the first thing about it technology-wise.
She is she doesn't understand encryption.
She doesn't know what she's talking about when she brings it up.
And I'm reading, it's it's this is the irony of this, is is one of the puzzling things that I don't know that I'm ever going to be able to answer.
But I read all these tech blogs, which of course are populated by left-wing young people journalists and so forth.
And the people that they are in favor of, the Democrats, here comes Mrs. Clinton as an absolute blithering idiot.
She is an incompetent.
She's unaware.
She doesn't know the first thing about it, and it doesn't matter to them.
The fact that she's ignorant about the thing they care about most, the fact that she's ignorant about encryption, which they, I mean, these millennials, they care about this stuff, keeping the government out of their bedrooms and wherever.
And yet they end up supporting people who violate their rights and don't know anywhere near as much as they claimed, and yet they get their support.
Nothing Mrs. Clinton could do.
She's going to be given the benefit of the doubt because there's a D by her name.
She can be as stupid about things as uninformed about things as wrong about things.
She can lie left and right, and she's still going to get the benefit of the doubt in terms of good intentions.
Whereas a Republican presidential candidate, if he made or she talked about encryption or anything high-tech-wise like Hillary does, they'd be laughing at him and making fun of them and calling them old fogies and the old guy that's yelling at people to get off the yard, and we don't want this guy to be president.
We don't anybody like this running our country because they're such doofuses.
And yet Mrs. Clinton, who is at the head of the class of doofuses, when it comes to anything modern, they look the other way at.
Which brings me to an overall subject based on something I read over the weekend.
Dinesh de Sousa, name ring a bell.
Dinesh D'Souza, a well-known conservative journalist and a well-known conservative filmmaker now.
Dinesh D'Souza has made two movies about Obama, which attempt to explain things about Obama that no one else in the liberal media will say about his background.
Why he is the way he is, the way he is, what he is doing to the country, motivations, why he's doing it.
All of this time, I've interviewed Dinesh D'Souza two times for the Limbaugh Letter about his two movies and about one of his books.
I think he's even been on the program a couple of times over the recent number of years.
And all of this time, I was under the impression that Dinesh D'Souza got Obama.
I was under the impression that Dinesh D'Asouza knew Obama.
I was under the impression that Dinesh de Souza knew what we were up against with Obama.
It turned out I was wrong in a very key way.
Now, this I don't want anybody to misunderstand.
This is not a criticism of D'Souza.
It's an eye-opener about a lot of people on what I call our side.
You remember back on January 16th of 2009, a few days before Obama was to be inaugurated.
I mentioned on this program the Wall Street Journal had asked me to write 400 words, along with a lot of other people, on my hopes for the administration of the first African American president, Barack Heno.
And I told you what I told them.
As I wrote back, I said, I don't need 400 words.
All I need is four words.
I hope he fails.
Well, little old me, I assumed that virtually everybody that I knew, and even the people I knew of on our side, quote unquote among us conservatives, would know exactly what I meant and would agree with it.
And then we all saw that apparently very few people agreed with it on our side, and many were aghast and appalled that such a thing would be said Even before the new president, the first African American president, historic president, was inaugurated.
How dare something like this be said?
It would fuel those on the left who want to misportray those of us on the right.
And I literally was, and I was wrong to be, I was surprised.
The reason I was surprised was because I I figured that, like me, most everybody on the conservative side of the aisle knew liberalism, understood what liberalism is.
I thought after two years of an intense campaign that the people on our side, the people opposing Obama, had learned what I had learned about Obama, had learned how truly radical he was.
And not just in the Alinsky mold, and not just in the Reverend Wright mold, but I mean literally radical, radical, the most radical leftist Democrat ever elected to the White House, and maybe by a long shot.
And I was under the impression that people on our side understood the danger, the real danger to the country.
And I, even now, after reading a review of Dinesh de Sousa's book, I was I was shocked over the weekend.
Barack Obama put Dinesh D'Souza in jail.
Are you aware?
You know, we have all these people out there, Trump and praising Putin and all this.
You people in the media, if I may make a brief departure, you're gonna have to learn something real quick about Trump.
He doesn't lie.
If he says something, he may exaggerate it, but whatever he says, it's gonna end up being true to one degree or another.
And you're always gonna get up with egg on your face.
Every time you think Trump says something outrageous that you think is an out and out lie, it's gonna it's gonna come back and bite you.
Trump says nobody's proven Putin killed journalists, nobody Putin put journalists in jail.
No, but Barack Obama has put journalists in jail.
And the journalist he put in jail was Dinesh D'Souza.
On a trumped up phony campaign finance charge, there is no question that the Obama Department of Justice went after Dinesh D'Souza.
It's been studied.
Things that D'Souza admits that he violated campaign law.
He's not claiming he didn't, but it was tiny and practically irrelevant and common, and nobody's ever been prosecuted for it the way D'Souza was.
And nobody's been imprisoned for it.
And in fact, there have been many who've done far worse and have broken campaign finance law in many more egregious ways than D'Souza did.
They've never been prosecuted, much less convicted and put in jail.
But D'Souza was.
And he's written a book about it now called Stealing America, What My Experience with Criminal Gangs Taught Me About Obama, Hillary, and the Democrat Party.
And you know what this is?
Up until now, Dinesh D'Souza admits that he thought all this time Obama was just a liberal, a democrat, another in a long line of Democrats, and that the liberalism of Obama was just an intellectual exercise against which we must debate.
There was nothing inherently destructive about Obama.
He was just a liberal.
And it was an intellectual challenge for us on the right to go up against Obama and to see if we could win the argument in the arena of ideas.
I was stunned.
I have to tell, I was stunned that it took being put in jail for Dinesh D'Souza to admit that he didn't know what Obama and the modern day Democrat Party was really all about.
Meaning the transformation of our country, the destruction of our country as founded, and the transforming of it into something it was never intended to be.
The all-out assaults from day one on all the traditions and all the institutions and the people who have defined this country and made it great, it has been the singular mission of the Obama administration to transform this country.
The evidence is everywhere.
And D'Souza was not alone.
I can quote you David Brooks.
I can quote you all the conservatives who praised the nomination of Eric Holder for attorney general.
You can even see it in this most recent recent budget debate.
It is clear that many Republicans and a lot of conservatives, even to this moment, do not really understand what we're up against and what we have been up against for seven years.
As far as they're concerned, it's just liberalism, and we face here an intellectual debate and challenge in the arena of our ideas.
And our task is nothing more than convincing the American people that our ideas are superior to theirs.
It is shocking.
This is a guy D'Souza who put together two movies on Obama.
If anybody should have known what Obama was about and who he was and his purpose, it should have been DeSouza.
But this is the eye-opening thing for me.
I still, I shouldn't again I shouldn't admit this, but it just I guess it just shocks me that even now, toward the end of Obama's seventh year, we still do not have apparently a majority of people in the Republican Party or maybe even in the conservative movement, who really understand what Obama is doing.
And it may even be worse than that.
It may well be they do understand it.
It may well be that they're fully aware of the effort to overturn this country as founded.
I mean, that's what's taking place here.
And I don't I don't I don't see how that can be so easily denied.
I mean, the evidence is staring in the face, more so each and every day.
My quote unquote problem is I knew it before Obama was even inaugurated, what was coming down the pike.
I knew what his purpose with Obamacare was.
I knew when he threw back the Winston Churchill bust in the Oval Office.
I knew when I listened to tapes of Obama talking to his buddies in 2002, 2005, 2006.
I knew what he thought of this country, unjust, immoral, should not have existed, and not a legitimate superpower.
There's no such thing as American exceptionalism.
That, folks, is not just the average ordinary serving up of liberalism that we debate every day.
This is the first time in our country's history that a leftist radical has such a leftist radical has been elected and has proceeded unopposed for seven years in erasing the origins of this country under the guise of fixing it.
Under the guise of fixing the never-ending racism and bigotry and sexism and homophobia, all these other things that in Obama's world define this country.
I think it's one of the things that explains this budget deal.
I think it explains a lot.
The Republican Party not pushing back, not wanting to disagree.
If they do recognize what I recognize, it must be pretty daunting to say so and stand up and fight against it, which maybe they don't want to do, I guess.
Could be any number of explanations.
I can take a break, though.
Sit tight, we'll be back, don't go away.
Yeah, I know my audio cut out.
I just had to wait for the comeback.
I think my batteries loose in here.
Anyway, greetings, welcome back, folks, Rushlin Baugh.
Let me let me read to you just to batten down what I'm talking about here.
Andy McCarthy wrote the review in National Review Online for Danusa d uh the Dinesh D'Asouza's book.
Uh again, by the way, nothing there's nothing personal here, and there's no attack on anybody.
This is just again for me an eye-opening learning experience, an opportunity for this to be a teachable moment, actually.
But it just the things that that have happened here for seven years that need not have happened if only people had been awake.
Precious worthy recriminations after the first Democrat presidential debate.
Hillary Clinton, amid what is more coronation than a contest, had proudly boasted of making the Republicans her enemy.
How despicable Republican gray beards gasped.
I mean, after all, this is just politics, not war.
At the end of the day, we're all fellow patriots.
We're all in this together, not red states and blue states, as Obama himself framed it in 2004.
But we're all one people.
These old Republican gray beards, these old line Republican moderates.
Yeah, we're all together.
All of us are defending United States of America.
Democrats have their ideas and we have our ideas, and Obama's just the latest Democrat to come along.
But now Dinesh DeSiza has seen the D'Souza has seen the light.
He would tell you now that Hillary hit the nail on the head, that she does look at us as the enemy.
I've been screaming this and shouting this for seven years.
The Democrat Party considers us a greater threat to them than they do any foreign threat.
Anyway, I'm guessing on time here.
I want to develop this a little further, and there's a companion piece, as it turns out in National Review about the new totalitarianism of the Democrat Party, which is out there for one and all to see if you want.
Ha!
Where are you?
Welcome back.
El Rush Ball.
Serving humanity simply by showing up.
By the way, a little observation.
If Hillary Clinton thinks that a little thing like Donald Trump saying there should be a moratorium on Muslims can drive Muslims to terrorism, stop and think about that.
She's out there saying that Trump is a recruitment for ISIS.
She is a he's a recruitment for terrorists.
That Donald Trump and what he says and the things he does end up being recruitment videos or messages for ISIS.
Now stop and think of that for a second, because what is she saying?
She's basically saying that Donald Trump saying there should be a moratorium on Muslims can drive them to terrorism.
Well, then isn't Trump right?
I mean, if all it takes is suggesting there's a moratorium for a while on Muslims entering the country till we get a handle here on who's coming in, who's already here, what their plans are, and if that's going to cause them to go join ISIS, isn't Trump right?
And isn't Hillary an abject fool for trying to make that point?
And this is another Democrat trick.
Abu Grab, recruitment tool, all the pictures there.
Club Gitmo, recruitment tool, everything the Republicans do or say somehow is going to make ISIS members swell.
It's going to cause Muslims to start joining.
But then Muslim Islam's a religion of peace.
How can people of a religion of peace end up joining a terror group when Islam isn't about terror?
It seems to me that the logic is totally absent pretty much everything the Democrat Party Mobile on down have to say about this.
Just a little side observation there.
Now, don't worry, I could spend a full two hours on this concept here that I'm developing, and I'm not going to do it because, in a sense, we've been there and done that.
My only new addition to it today is I continue to be amazed at how many people still don't get it or are just seeing it for the first time, or at least admitting it.
That, hey, you know what?
We're all fellow patriots, we're all Americans here.
I mean, this is just common, ordinary, everyday political argument and dispute.
There's nothing more to this than that.
Now you can say that the Republicans have chosen to stay silent because they're afraid of being called racists or Obama's gonna be.
I don't know.
I'm worn out, folks, and the excuses.
I'm worn out.
We won two landslide elections, and somehow the the they were dealt a bad hand in the budget.
We win two landslide elections, the Democrats lose a thousand seats, and sometime, somehow the the clock ran out.
All of these excuses.
And every time Obama wins, it's not just liberalism winning and another day that we lose and making it harder and harder to eventually win the argument.
This is not about winning the argument anymore.
That's just phase one.
There's a whole lot of really bad stuff that's been done the past seven years.
It has to be rolled back if this country is to resume its normal behavioral track.
These people set out to transform this country into something it was not founded to be, and they've had a lot of success while the Republican Party is Sat by, and some of our intellectuals have sat by silently, just thinking there's nothing more here than an academic debate going on.
And the only thing I'm saying, I'm surprised that D'Souza was one of these.
I thought D'Souza was among the crowd of us who got it from get-go and understood it.
But apparently it took being thrown in jail on a trumped-up charge for D'Souza to finally see who Obama is and what his agenda is really all about.
And that the nation, as we know and love it, is actually in the process of being transformed, and some might say up for grabs now.
Now, the companion piece I referenced as Kevin Williamson in National Review Today, the Democrats' theme for 2016 is totalitarianism.
Well, it's more than a theme.
Share with you the beginning of this piece.
At the beginning of December, Rolling Stone writer Jeff Goodell asked Secretary of State Kerry.
This is a journalist now, Rolling Stone Magazine, far left, rock and roll magazine, beginning of December, a writer there asked John Kerry whether Charles and David Koch, two libertarian political activists, should be considered an enemy of the state.
Now, Charles and David Koch, Koch Industries.
True, they're wealthy.
Yes, they're libertarians.
They raise money, they stand for traditional American values.
They employ tens of thousands of people.
I mean, they're standard ordinary everyday American citizens.
They are great patriots.
Rolling Stone Magazine goes ask John Kerry, should they be considered enemies of the state?
He also posed the same question about Exxon.
Should Exxon be considered?
Do you realize enemy of the state?
You know what kind of language that is?
Enemy of the state.
There's no such concept in the U.S. Constitution.
When we're talking about domestic politics and competing ideas.
These kinds of phrases, enemy of the state, this kind of status occurs in dictatorships, in tyranny, banana republics, and so forth.
So the Rolling Stone writer Jeff Goodell asked Kerry if the Koch should be considered an enemy of the state, and Exxon should be considered an enemy of the state.
And John Kerry, who ran for president in 2004, said that he looked forward to the seizure of Exxon's assets for the crime of proselytizing impermissibly about the question of global war.
John Kerry responded to the Rolling Stone writer by saying, yeah, he looked forward to the government seizing Exxon's assets for the crime of opposing global warming.
Folks, this is not Lyndon Johnson back in the days with Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon.
This is this is a whole different ball game that we're involved in here.
You have a Secretary of State who's unafraid to acknowledge that he'd be perfectly willing and is looking forward to seizing Exxon's assets, a worldwide multinational corporation simply because of the way they talk about global warming.
How in the world can we still have Republicans or conservatives thinking that all this is is something akin to a debate in a faculty lounge in Harvard or Yale?
How can it be that so many people still fail to come to grips with what we're up against?
And that all of this in the country's support for Trump or anybody other than an establishment candidate.
It's patriotism.
It's not racism or sexism or bigotry or any of these things.
It's people who love their country who see it being snatched away from them, who see it being transformed before their very eyes.
How can you not, with the borders wide open and the influx of people who in no way, shape, manner, or reform even understand where they're coming, except for the fact that it's a welfare state.
Or it's something to undermine, if you happen to be a terrorist sleeper cell member, it's a place to come to undermine, it's a place to come to get even with.
It's a place to come because you think it's guilty of all these atrocities around the world for 200 years.
We have made a joke of the whole concept of any new arrivals assimilating and become Americans because to this current crop of liberal democrats, Americans are a dirty word now.
America equals the white male patriarchy that has to change.
We have to get rid of it.
And if you think that that is an exaggeration, hang in there and be tough, because I have found a piece you might think it's written by a Kook and a wacko on an oddball, and it is, but that's the point.
The kooks and oddballs and wackos have become the mainstream, the radicals, and now the mainstream.
Writer Rebecca Traester, Obama and Hillary represent the death throes of exclusive white male power in the United States.
This was last Wednesday, and it's not in the communist Daily Worker, it's in New York magazine.
The current election campaign pits the forces of backlash, the old and angry, that would be the white male power structure, against the forces of front lash, that would be the new and different.
The new indifferent are Hillary and Obama and left-wing causes.
She posits in this piece that Obama and Hillary represent an altered power structure and changed calculations about who in this country may lead.
She said, while the resistance may be symptomatic of death throes, a rage at the dying of the white male light, it nonetheless presents a very real threat.
Imagine Ted Cruz or Donald Trump or Marco Rubio in office with a Republican Congress and Supreme Court seats to fill.
Voting would be restricted, immigration would be halted, abortion would be banned, equal pay would be unprotected, same-sex marriage would be overturned.
We are can't permit this.
That is the way they are mobilizing.
This moment, this election, these years represent the death throes of exclusive white male power in the U.S. So, as far as this woman's concerned, believe me, she's not an outlier.
She's mainstream.
Your support for Trump or your outrage against the Washington establishment, Republican or otherwise, all it means is that you are in the white male camp, and you have always had the power.
You've always been able to dictate the social norms and the political direction.
You've been able to dictate everything about this country, but not anymore because we're taking it away from you.
You destroyed this country, you white males going back to the founders.
You implemented all of this hate and racism and imperialism.
You destroyed poor people all over the world.
You became an illegitimate superpower by stealing every other nation's resources.
Everything about you is illegitimate, including your white race, and we are getting even.
And this is what's mobilizing out there.
It's right in front of your face.
It's everywhere you look, from the White House on down to whatever it was, occupy Wall Street, you name it, hands up, don't shoot Ferguson, Baltimore, it's everywhere.
This is what's mobilizing it.
And it's not just anger at white male power, that's a way to mobilize the anti-forces.
This is a direct frontal assault, it's not even happening under cover of darkness now.
It's a direct frontal assault on the very idea of the United States of America.
As a capitalist entrepreneurism, entrepreneurial nation of individual liberty and freedom, transformed to a nation of totalitarian state control to enforce upon a majority of people, things that they oppose would never support, would never vote for because they are illegitimate by virtue of their own existence.
That's what we're up against.
And apparently, folks, it's still a very precious few of us who actually understand it.
And the danger is, if we're wrong, well.
Okay, we've been wrong, and the results are not so bad.
If we're right, but we can't get a majority to follow us.
And if we're right and we're not able to stop this, then all this fear that people have, the future of their kids and their grandkids, it's real.
The fear, the opposition that exists out there, it's not it's not rooted in racism and bigotry and sexism, and it's rooted in patriotism.
And a love for what this country was still is in some places and should always be.
Anyway, I'm long here.
I've got to take another break.
Pretty much move on from this point.
You get the drill.
I mean, the point is that if you want to understand why the Republican budget deal the way it was, they don't understand what we're up against.
And even that, it's hard to rationalize.
I know.
Well, we were dealt a bad hand.
Well, the clock was ticking.
Well, I none of that just don't understand it.
We won two landslide.
You know the joke.
Gotta take a break, I'm sorry.
Back in here just a second.
Do you still think I'm exaggerating?
Well, let me remind you, or in some cases, let me inform you things that you may not know.
The Democrats and their allies on the left have now voted in the United States Senate to repeal the First Amendment.
Not on a blanket basis.
It came up in a specific sense, but there was a vote on repealing the First Amendment.
All about climate change.
The Democrats have proposed putting people in jail for holding the wrong views on global warming.
Now, when they say this, there are people say, that's a kooks.
They're not the kooks and not.
Well, they're kooks and oddballs.
They've become the mainstream, folks, is the point.
I was having lunch after golf on Saturday, so people were telling some stories of the crazy things they're reading and what's going on on campus.
You know what?
I was reading about those things 25 years ago myself, and I was laughing about them.
Today, they're happening.
They're coming true.
And now you're talking about things that haven't yet come true.
You're laughing about them.
I'm telling you, they want to make them real.
This stuff is happening.
It's no laughing matter anymore.
They're telling us exactly what they're going to do, when they want to do it, and how they're going to get it done.
The Democrats and their allies have voted to repeal the First Amendment.
They have proposed putting people in jail for holding the wrong views on global warming.
They have sought to prohibit the showing of a movie critical of Hillary Clinton.
They have proposed banning politically unpopular academic research, again, tracing back to global warming and other things.
They have demanded that funding politically unpopular organizations and causes be made a crime, and funding politically unpopular organizations and causes would be anything the left disagrees with.
They have they've been attempting to criminalize conservative policy for years now.
And the reaction has been looked cookie students.
Look at those crazy wacko extremist Democrats.
Man, they have a piece of work or what?
They're mainstream now.
They're dead serious.
They have proposed that RICO, organized crime statute, be used as a weapon against targeted political groups.
They have filed felony charges against a Republican governor for vetoing a piece of legislation.
They have engaged in naked political persecutions of members of Congress.
They have used the IRS and the ATF as weapons against political critics.
On college campus, they shut down unpopular ideas or simply forbid opposing ideas from being heard in the first place.
They have declared academic freedom as an outdated concept.
Yeah, man, those wacko students, look just those weird students.
The people implementing these things today were the wacko students of the 60s.
Sorry, folks, another obscene profit time out the clock's the clock.
Back in a second.
Don't go away.
Why, it looks like we got a lot of people still living about the budget deal that want to weigh in here on the phone, so that's coming up.
And there are other things out there.
I own half the soundbite roster again today, folks, but I'm purposely delaying it because, as you know, uh, do not make this program about me.
By the way, have I told you about my four books?
Just giving a little levity.
Sit tight, we're coming back.
▲
Export Selection