All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 30, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:17
December 30, 2015, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you very much.
Welcome.
It is the Rushlin Baugh show.
I am Eric Eriksson.
I I guess if they ever invite me back, we're gonna have to change that.
I'm I'm the editor of Red State for one more day.
I'm gonna go yes, milk it for all I want.
Starting a new site on Tuesday.
I I so I do local radio in Atlanta, and my radio show is not owned by the radio company that owns Red State, and I just I want to own every pixel.
And Rush and I have actually talked about this a number of times, and he's been very supportive.
So I'm gonna go out and start a new website called the Resurgent on Tuesday.
You can get me there.
You can also get me at Eric on the radio.com, E R I C K. Um my parents they spell it correctly with the C and the K folks.
No insult intended.
Okay, I I I actually I want to direct you there intentionally because I want you to see these quotes, and I've got a piece up there.
Yeah.
ERICK.
I I will try to slow down.
I've actually got a sticky note on my laptop that says slow down.
Snerdling Yes, yes, that they're all they're all giving me a hard time for talking fast.
And I'm from the South, too.
You gotta see these quotes, though.
Because I went back to nineteen seventy-nine and nineteen eighty, and what were they saying about Ronald Reagan at the time?
Because I hear now repeatedly the same refane.
You know you've heard them that if Donald Trump is the Republican nominee, Hillary Clinton's gonna get elected.
If Ted Cruz is the Republican nominee, Hillary Clinton is gonna get elected.
Because neither of those two men, according to the talking heads of the day, can make inroads with moderates, can make inroads with independents.
And you know the irony here is the very same people who say, for example, that Donald Trump can't make inroads with moderates independence are the ones saying, well, his voters aren't really Republicans.
They're they're they're radical moderates, they're the Ross Perot voters.
So he could bring along oh wait, no, it's it's the Republican establishment he couldn't bring along.
You know, i i i mister Trump and I have had issues in the past, but I I would gladly vote for him over any Democrat.
I would vote for him over many of the Republicans running for president.
Uh absolutely.
John Kasich, heck no.
Um but these talking points that they're saying, if you go back to nineteen seventy-nine, nineteen eighty, I I want you to listen to this.
This is from a story in the Christian Science Monitor, March fifth, nineteen eighty, as Ronald Reagan was securing the nomination.
The headline was Is defeat probable for GOP if Reagan wins nomination?
Again, March fifth, nineteen eighty, as Reagan's on the cusp of winning it all.
Can conservative Ronald Reagan possibly attract enough independent and democratic voters to win in November?
Reagan is the opponent of choice for Carter, says I. But Reagan can reach a cause and cross and cause mischief in the Democratic constituency.
Reagan appeals to blue-collar working class voters, just like Trump and Cruz.
He can win Democratic votes.
Carter could beat Reagan more easily than he could beat Bush or Baker, a moderate Republican, would appeal to moderate Democrats, while upper income Republicans might defect from Reagan to the Democrats.
Ford is, of course, that's Gerald Ford, the former president, the strongest in the polls against Jimmy Carter.
But if he became a candidate, he could sing the same way Kennedy did after he declared.
This is actually written about Reagan in 1980.
How much of that is similar to what you hear about uh Trump and Cruz, the outsiders, the upper income Republicans might defect.
The establishment might defect.
But they appealed to blue-collar working class voters, but nobody cares about them.
Five days after that piece, Newsweek had uh had a piece called The GOP's Hamlet.
You could hear this again with McCain in 2008 or the Huntsman Campaign in 2012 or Kasich or Christie or Bush this time.
You could hear it all.
The talk of another Ford candidacy, only three months after he formally removed himself from a string of primaries, betrayed an air of alarm on the part of many middle road Republicans, faced with Bush's unexpected slide in New Hampshire, that would be George H. W. Bush, and Howard Baker's Chronically Weak campaign.
Republican centrists, Gerald Ford among them, saw in Reagan's resurgence the potential for another gold water debacle.
Dun.
Now you should know that in 1979, much like how many times have we now heard stories about we need Mitt Romney to save us?
I think there have been in the Washington Post alone, Bob Coston and whoever he writes with have written at least five stories since the beginning of 2015.
Help us, Mitt Romney, you're our only hope.
I mean, Republicans as Princess Leia begging Mitt Romney to be their Obi-Wan Kenobi because he's their only hope.
You know what happened to Obi Wan, don't you?
Darth Trump, I mean Darth Vader got got rid of him.
Jerry Ford, this this again from Newsweek, Jerry Ford says one Republican aide, is the only politician around who can neutralize Carter's positives and accentuate his negatives.
Ford remains the panic button choice of many of his party, and the Republican most feared by Carter strategists, yes, just like you know Bush, Christy Rubio, um K Stig, they're they're the ones that Hillary Clinton fears.
Gerald Ford, the squishy moderate was the one that Jimmy Carter feared.
March twenty first, nineteen eighty.
George Esper, the Associated Press, wrote up a press conference from the soon to be third party candidate John Anderson, who said, I can't believe the Republican Party will condemn itself to the kind of lopsided electoral contest that took place in nineteen sixty four, you know, Goldwater.
I'm afraid that the nomination of Mr. Reagan will only ensure the reelection of Mr. Carter.
I cannot believe that with the mounting problems Americans face, the voters in November will have a choice only between the economic policies of Reagan and Carter.
The Globe and Mail from Canada, the same day, referred to Reagan as Ronald sending the Marines Reagan, whose appeal to independence is at best limited.
But go back to January 1979.
You were you know Elinor Clift from Newsweek.
Can you believe she's been around that long since nineteen seventy-nine, wrote a piece called The Politics of Austerity.
Let me read you this.
The Carter winner book bet in January of nineteen seventy nine for the Republican nomination as Ronald Reagan, and they consider him beatable as long as Carter monopolizes the sinner, or as his campaign manager said, just eighty percent of the people smugly.
June nineteen seventy nine, the Washington Post.
Reagan has not picked up substantial support from party activists who represent either strong moderate or small liberal elements of the party, the polls indicate.
Many appear to be concerned about some of Reagan's followers, arch conservative kooks, one poll respondent called them.
Newsweek, same time, with a beast called the leading man, let me read you this.
All this has led to some grumbling among writer than thou Republicans, that Reagan may be sacrificing his ideological purity to his White House ambitions, a charge he angrily denies.
He wants to get the best advice he can, whether these people support him or not, says an advisor, Martin Anderson, as Reagan was reaching out trying to build coalitions with Republicans to get the nomination.
You notice, by the way, so in this Newsweek piece, they say that the Republican moderates are concerned that Ronald Reagan would have let Chrysler go b bankrupt instead of bailing them out.
Remember that that debate that what was it, the Fox Business Debate, I think it was, where Republicans were horrified that Ted Cruz said we shouldn't have bailed out the banks and John Casey gave the ringing defense of who cares about principles, we've got to save the banks with people's tax money.
And Republican establishment, oh thank you, John Kasich for talking since.
Same thing.
Same thing.
The economist also hit the Barry Goldwater angle in 1979.
If Mr. Reagan does not lose the Republican nomination, present opinion polls suggest he will lose to either Senator Kennedy or President Carter next November.
The Gallup poll showed that.
The Republican Party's minority status among registered voters also puts Mr. Reagan at a disadvantage ever since 1964.
When he made a rousing speech for Barry Goldwater, Mr. Reagan's been the darling of the right.
They went on to say that even though he practiced conventional middle of the road politics as governor of California, his political language had a hard right edge.
How many stories have you read in the last couple weeks that behind closed doors, secret or secretly recorded?
Ted Cruz sounds reasonable.
It's just on the stage, he sounds like one of those far right kooks that none of us like.
I mean, and there are more, I've got there's no reason to belabor this point.
All throughout, they make the point that that Ronald Reagan is the second coming of Barry Goldwater.
There's no way he can win.
Republican moderates are scared to death.
One delegate of the Republican Party said, Temper your ideology with pragmatism.
Don't depend on right wing groups.
B, wait for it, wait for it.
A sensible conservative.
That's that's what they said about Reagan.
They're saying it now about Trump.
They're saying it now about Cruz.
They'd be the second coming to bear goldwater.
Barry Goldwater, by the way.
We should revisit 1964 because there's this mythology.
Kind of like uh Republicans and and the media all say we can't win a government shutdown because look in the nineteen nineties.
What actually happened?
We lost nothing in the nineteen nineties.
And we know from George Stepanopoulos' biography that Bill Clinton was within a day of caving, but Bob Dole opened the government first.
Bob Dole preemptedly surrendered right as Bill Clinton was about to surrender.
George Stephanopoulos wrote that in his book.
But the mythology has become you hear this from the talking heads all the time.
You hear them attacking Ted Cruz for 2013.
Because of Ted Cruz in 2013, Republicans lost everything.
Oh, wait.
They didn't, did they?
Just like in the 1990s.
But that's that's the talking point.
And the talking point against Cruz and Trump right now is he'll be just like Bear Goldwater.
In nineteen sixty-four.
Goldwater, it was a landslide defeat.
Folks, in nineteen sixty-four, we were less than a year from John F. Kennedy having his head blown off by an assassin.
Does anyone really think the country was going to reject John F. Kennedy's running mate, vice president, turned president because of the assassination, Lyndon Johnson, in favor of Barry Goldwater?
answer is no.
John Kennedy barely beat Richard Nixon.
Had it not been for fraud in Chicago, John Kennedy would have lost to Richard Nixon.
But less than a year after his assassination, polls in the country showed there was virtually no one who admitted they voted against Kennedy.
Almost everyone said they were for Kennedy.
That's why Barry Goldwater lost.
Had nothing to do with him being a conservative.
The nation was not going to reject Lyndon Johnson who became president because his president lost his head to an assassination.
It wasn't gonna happen.
But let's not let facts stand in the way of a good talking point.
Eric Erikson in for Rushland Ball.
Welcome back.
Buck Sexton's gonna be in tomorrow.
Ed on Twitter says he's sorry to nidpick, but Darth Vader didn't really get rid of Obi Wanka.
I know, I know, I know.
I won't discuss the new Star Wars movie because I don't want to give spoilers away to any of you who haven't seen it yet, the five of you who haven't seen it.
Let's go to the phones, 800 282.
Hey, did you see the movie?
Good.
I I'm just I'm making sure here.
I've got a few friends.
I got a friend of mine the other day who tells me I just I don't get the Empire Strikes Back.
I fell asleep.
I was like, you're not my friend anymore.
Yeah, I know.
He he's he's no longer in my world.
800, 282-2882 is the phone number.
Let's go to Gene Colling from my home state of Louisiana.
Go tigers, Gene.
Thanks.
How about that win?
Oh, it's fantastic.
I thought it was too.
Um, Mr. Erickson, I wanted to tell you that I enjoyed your gumbo recipe very much.
Wow, thank you.
Well, we we have a cooking call, Snerdley.
What's that?
Snerdley gives me a hard time for cooking.
I I love to cook.
It's a great distraction from my day job talking about politics.
Exactly.
It's very soothing.
Tell Mr. Snorley he should take up the hobby.
He wants me to cook for him.
Well, Gene, thank you very much.
I appreciate that very, very much.
I I do.
I enjoyed it and I was offended as you were by the um the Times, the New York Times putting um potatoes and carrots and all that in the gumbo.
Yes, i i it was outrageous.
They were making some sort of frogmoor stew or something.
Gene, thanks very much for the phone call.
I I should have shot that article in the New York Times.
You know, I I for those of you who haven't made the connection.
Yeah, some sort of diversity stew or something.
I don't know.
Yes, but it's a gumbo.
You don't put potatoes and gumbo and and corn and whatnot, and the New York Times wanted to.
It was an outrage.
I am the guy, for those of you who haven't connected it because it apparently became a scandal.
Uh I shot the New York Times.
Not not the actual building, but the newspaper.
They put their their call for gun confiscation editorial on the front page of the New York Times, so I took it to my local gun range and shot it uh from top to bottom.
And people were all upset.
Your grouping's terrible.
Well, I wasn't going for grouping.
I was going top to bottom of the editorial, shooting holes in it.
And I did, and and people got really up.
I'm still to this day.
That was what, three, four weeks ago, and I am still getting angry emails and tweets from people for shooting their precious Bible at the New York Times.
Yes.
I mean, people were really, really outraged by it.
Had calls to the state to my local radio station.
They needed to take me off the air for it for inciting violence and and whatnot.
For putting seven bullet holes in a copy of the New York Times front page, their gun editorial.
And that that's what it was.
It was the gun editorial.
They are outraged by me having done that.
Pundits coming out of the woodwork.
How dare he do something like this?
There are sensible arguments, but this isn't one of those sensible arguments.
Well, I mean, I didn't think the New York Times argument was very sensible either, because I mean they don't want to admit it, but ultimately the New York Times wants to confiscate everybody's gun.
Uh that that's the only way to to do gun control in this country.
And when you get them a few drinks or or they don't think anybody on the right is listening, they finally admit it that that's what they want.
So I just put bullet holes in the front page of the I should have done it to that recipe Gene was talking about, though.
I I didn't think about it at the time.
Putting potatoes and corn and gumbo, among other things.
Disgusting.
Okay, to my now present hometown where I live, Makon, Georgia.
Ed is on the Rush Linbaugh show.
Welcome.
Hey, Eric.
Um, this has something to do with something you said a few days ago.
I am seventy-two years old, and I want to know how old I have to be before I start smelling funny.
Okay.
I I I need to fill you guys in on this.
I I forget what the story was the other day, but it was something about Hillary Clinton and old people, and I mentioned old people smell, and this still has people upset.
It is actually you Google it.
Google old people smell.
I don't mean to offend anyone.
I I have dear senior citizen relatives who get into their eighties or nineties, and and there is an actual scientific explanation for old people smell, which I didn't actually know at the time, and and people sent me the link, and they're actually thank you, Ed, for bringing this up for Russia's show.
I I don't want to get angry emails from people, please.
Spare me angry emails.
There actually is a scientific thing, and I just, you know, Hillary Clinton is getting up in age.
I I'm I'm just I I I i it varies person to person.
I I I you gotta definitely be in your eighties or nineties, but you apparently lose your sense of smell as you get older and you develop odors and stuff, and yes, uh listen, this isn't me, this is science.
Don't blame me, blame the scientists.
Who speaking of science, uh uh this the website Patarico has this what?
I I'm trying to get myself from ticking into a hole.
Snerdley's not letting me go with this.
So the scientific explanation is that as older people, as you age, not only do you lose your sense of smell, but you begin to secrete different hormones as you get older, and it causes what is commonly known as here.
I'll Google it for you.
Old people smell.
You gotta read the study.
I'll read you.
This is from Time magazine.
Old people smell as a real thing, and it's not due to mothballs or a musty house.
Researchers at the Mon Alchemical Census Center in Philadelphia confirmed that elderly people really do have a distinct scent, so recognizable in fact, that people can identify them by body odor alone.
This is Time magazine and science.
Um you're gonna get me in trouble With Rush for spending time on his show talking about old people smell.
Can I talk about the North Pole instead?
As I've got fifteen seconds left.
I can't talk about it.
Now we we we've gone off the deep end here.
When we come back, I will resurrect the show and keep us on point.
What Donald Trump did to Savannah Guthrie was so brilliant.
And the North Pole.
It's melting, except it's not.
I'll explain that when we get back.
Eric Erikson in for Rush Limbaugh.
Welcome back.
Glad to be with you.
800-282-2882, folks.
It is the sixth day of Christmas, so Merry Christmas to you.
Happy New Year as well, which is coming up.
I keep the lights on at my house until January 5th.
It drives my wife insane.
But it was the way I was brought up.
You can still get Christmas presents for people as a result.
And I do highly recommend a Rush 24-7 subscription where you can find all of Russia's stack of stuff.
You can watch the video of Rush.
You can watch the live stream.
You can listen to the live stream.
It just, it's a fantastic product and a website.
And you know, I'm leaving redstate.com tomorrow.
I'm building a site tied into my radio show, uh, which is locally in Atlanta.
I'm going to call it the Resurgent, and you know, the Rush Limbaugh website is one of those things where you know having access to the stack of stuff and the radio show, it it's talking to Rush about it.
It's really been an inspiration.
I'm a big fan of the site.
I'm a subscriber.
I hope you will be too.
You can go to RushlandBall.com.
Have you heard that the North Pole is melting?
They run these stories every year.
The North Pole, uh, Paterico.com, uh notice this, that Time magazine is reporting the temperature of the North Pole is over fifty degrees higher than average.
Clearly, this is global warming, folks.
The temperature of the North Pole hit 42 degrees Fahrenheit on Wednesday morning, which Discovery News says is fifty degrees higher than average for this time of year.
Storms over Iceland and Greenland, fairly common in winter, are pushing warmer air to the Arctic.
There's just one problem when you follow the link.
It's not to the actual North Pole.
It's to North Pole Alaska, which isn't even in the north of Alaska.
It's in the the center of the state.
It's completely wrong.
It's actually below freezing at the North Pole.
I just checked, it's below freezing at the actual North Pole right now.
But according to Tom Global Warming, these people just you know it's it's I guess the Alaskans uh the North Pole or Santa Claus is gonna become a terrorist, I guess, because of global warming, according to Barack Obama's logic.
Insane.
You know, one of the insane things that's happening right now within this Republican primary is watching the establishment guys lose it.
They are beginning to come unglued over the thought that Cruz or Trump could get the nomination.
They are becoming on they are throwing everything at him.
There's a story out today that uh Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee are trying to build some sort of alliance potentially with the Rubio campaign or some of the other campaigns to to destroy Ted Cruz in Iowa because you know they're they're supposed to be the social conservative guys.
They're supposed to be the guys the evangelicals and Iowa graduating gravitating to, and and that's not happening.
They're going to cruise.
The evangelicals and I were going to cruise.
Um the the Iowa, the family leader there, the Bob Vanderplatz, friend of mine, and they've endorsed Ted Cruz.
Uh and the establishment's losing their mind that Cruz might actually pull off an Iowa win and could bounce out of Iowa and go into the South.
Remember, one of the things that's happening this year that has not really happened in the past is the calendar has changed.
It used to be you went to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and then Florida.
That's not happening this time.
And Nevada along the way, the Nevada Caucasus.
That's not happening this time, though.
You're going to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and then the SEC primary, they're calling it.
The Southern states, although it's not all southern states, Minnesota and a few others are in there as well, but primarily the southern states are going before Florida.
Remember back in 2008, Rudy Giuliani.
He said that that his path to victory was through Florida.
That he could ignore Iowa, he could ignore New Hampshire, he could ignore South Carolina, and then he could he could go all in on Florida and win.
And there are a lot of pundits out there, Republican, the the independent political analysts on TV all saying, listen, Rudy Giuliani, if you're gonna posit a path to victory that no one has ever done before, the burden is on you to prove it's viable, not us.
That seems to be the path some of these guys are taking now.
They're gonna wait for Florida.
Except this time before you get to Florida, you've got Georgia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, Texas, Minnesota, a bunch of other states all in there together on March 1st before you even get to Florida.
So Cruz could bounce out of Iowa, looking at the polling right now, if the election were held today, sort of analysis.
Cruz would win Iowa.
He could springboard into South Carolina, get a bump from momentum, because the the psychology of voters is they like to back a winner, and then he could run through the South.
He's gonna get Texas.
He could get Georgia.
He's got a huge viable ground game in Texas and Tennessee.
There's I mean, even some of the guys like Chris Christie, Rand Paul even, who's next door in Kentucky, they couldn't get a full delegate slate of uh Republican delegates on the ballot in Tennessee, Cruz has.
And they're starting to freak out by this.
So now you look at New Hampshire, where the moderates, the establishment guys are making their stand.
You've got Chris Christie, John Kasich, and Jeb Bush all attacking Marco Rubio, just savaging the guy, pointing out he hadn't been showing up in the Senate.
Of course, Rubio has pointed out that Christie has m been out of uh New Hampshire or New Jersey for about six months of the past year when he's still the governor.
But they're all they're piling on a Rubio, they want to stop Rubio because they all recognize Rubio needs a win in New Hampshire if he's going to be the viable guy.
The establishment is refusing to consolidate.
It's all their egos.
All of them think about this.
John Kasich, Jeb Bush, thinking that they're the man who can stop the Cruz Trump triumph.
They're the ones who can stop it.
Not a Rubio, not a Chris Christie.
And now you've got Santorum and Huckabee apparently in Iowa wanting to help the squishes, stop Ted Cruz there.
They are the establishment wants to pile on and attack the conservatives.
They want to call them Barry Goldwater.
They want to say that they can't win.
There's no way they can build bridges, there's no way they can attract moderates, there's no way they can attract independents.
But meanwhile, they can't decide among themselves who should be the alternative.
They all want to be the alternative, and they all want to stop that young whippersnapper Rubio from becoming the alternative.
Some of these guys haven't been in office since 2007, and they think that they're more viable than current elected officials.
And they're making their stand in New Hampshire.
And now I've had several people tell me that Chris Christie, they're starting to see a pulse for him in Iowa against Rubio, that this could scuttle Rubio's chances.
And that has left the establishment guys going absolutely unhinged, just coming out of the woodwork to savage Cruz and Trump to throw everything they possibly can at him, particularly now at Cruz.
They are just piling on Ted Cruz, attacking him over everything.
Do you know they actually did a fact check on Ted Cruz?
Ted Cruz told a crowd something that was true.
He told the crowd that the Democrats in the Senate had proposed legislation to scuttle the First Amendment.
And it's true they did.
They wanted to pass legislation that would have altered the First Amendment, fundamentally altered the first amendment, and it declared that corporations, for example, weren't people under the First Amendment.
The Supreme Court has long held that corporations have voices and they wanted to get rid of all that.
They wanted they want to curtail freedom of religion.
Ted Cruz pointed that out.
And of course, his Republican establishment fr uh foes are now waving press articles from fact checkers saying that Ted Cruz is wrong.
No, he was absolutely right.
He was absolutely right.
But let's not let truth get in the way of beating up the conservatives.
These guys say nicer things about the president than they do the conservatives.
But they can't agree among themselves who's the best guy to go against them.
This again, this is another parallel to 1980.
If you go back to 1980, the Republican moderates, at first they were desperate to get Gerald Ford in the race, just as now they've been desperate to get Mitt Romney back in the race.
And then they couldn't agree between them who that shoes who should be the guy who rallied around them.
Whether it was Howard Baker in the Senate, Bob Dole in the Senate, George H. W. Bush in the Senate, they couldn't agree among themselves who would be viable, or George H. W. Bush wasn't in the Senate, former CIA director at the time.
They couldn't agree.
And as a result, they divided themselves up, and Reagan was able to consolidate conservatives and win.
And right now that seems to be shaping up, particularly with Cruz right now.
More and more evangelicals and Iowa are going to Cruz, as Ben Carson has slowed down and gone down in the polls, a lot of his voters have been gravitating to Cruz, and it is just driving people in Washington crazy.
It's very interesting.
I hear from Republican insiders all the time in Washington.
Ted Cruz just isn't likable.
He's not a likable guy.
Well, you know what?
If you look at any poll out there right now, people outside of Washington find Ted Cruz totally likable.
They they find him likable.
It's the guy he's in Washington who don't like him because he's been he's been going after them.
There was a a hit job on Cruz out the other day in the political about how he's just not a team player.
He just hasn't really done anything.
He's just said no to a lot of things.
You know, I would posit, I would submit to you that when we have what, eighteen, nineteen trillion dollars in national debt now, that we need more politicians willing to say no to things.
And I think voters agree.
That's why they're gravitating to guys like Cruz and Trump both, who are willing to pound their fist and say no, we're not going to do this, as opposed to let's just do everything from Washington.
Ronald Reagan is still right.
Government is the problem.
Unfortunately, there are too many Republicans who think government controlled by Democrats is the problem.
Eric Erikson in for Rush Limbaugh.
We'll be back.
Welcome back.
Eric Erikson filling in for Rush Linbaugh.
Buck Sexton in tomorrow, rush back next week.
Uh Merry Christmas to you, happy New Year.
Let's go back to the phones to Lee in Salisbury, Maryland.
How are you?
Good, sir.
How are you?
Good.
Yeah, I have a comment.
Um I I believe even if Hillary Clinton gets the nomination.
I think Benghazi is going to be the thing that's going to cost her.
Because what I think she's been successful at is putting it on the back burner.
And it's it's kind of bothering me a little bit that it seems like nobody's talking about it anymore.
When a bunch of people died because of her decision not to send anybody there.
And the Republicans need to press that issue.
As soon as whoever wins the nomination, who it might be, um, I don't know who it's going to be.
I'm hoping it was going to be Donald Trump, but I don't know now.
And they need to press that issue because I believe that that is going to come back to haunt her.
Lee, I let me tell you, I don't have inside knowledge here, but I I back in the day I did political consulting, and my sense of things is that it's strategic by Republicans right now not to mention Benghazi.
And the reason it's strategic is if they and they found this out last year when they brought it up over and over and over and over, and it was nonstop every day for months on end, people eventually tuned it out and glazed over and did the there they go again.
Uh they're still collecting information, they're they're still fact-finding, they're still having hearings on it, they're still interviewing people, they're still digging through emails, there's gonna be another huge batch of Hillary emails released tomorrow.
It's gonna be interesting to see what they say.
But I think it's gonna come back on the campaign trail.
Right now they're so busy focusing on who's going to be the Republican nominee and the differences between each of the candidates, in some cases small differences that have to be magnified to try to show from a candidate perspective who's better, that they're not focusing on Benghazi.
They're not focusing even so much on Hillary right now.
They're focusing on each other.
And in doing that, they don't want to uh overwhelm the voters or get the voters to tune out or glaze over, or they they want to be able to keep the issue fresh when Hillary Clinton is the nominee.
You know, the Republicans moved their nominating convention to July.
Usually, you know, the the out-of-party um party the the out of White House Party has its convention in August.
The incumbent White House Party has its convention in September, end of August, early September they used to both be in August, and and George Bush after September eleventh moved his in 2004 to be closer to September eleventh.
But the the out-of-party power or the out of power party goes first and the incumbent party goes second.
The Republicans have moved theirs to July.
And that's important because if you remember in 2012, the Republicans they ran out of money in the primary.
Mitt Romney had spent all of his money securing the nomination, and because he wasn't officially the Republican nominee, They couldn't actually spin money for Mitt Romney.
So Rheinz Prebus and the Republicans have moved up their nominating convention so they can start spending money earlier than the Democrats are going to be able to.
Hillary never foresaw that this was going to be anything other than a coronation.
She did not foresee Bernie Sanders being ahead of her in New Hampshire.
She did not foresee Bernie Sanders, who by the way is an economic illiterate.
I'll get into that.
But she never foresaw him being able to to put put points on the board against her.
So they they didn't do what the Republicans did.
The Republicans are going to have a window where they're able to spend a lot of money against Hillary Clinton.
And Lee, I think that the Republicans are going to turn it into an issue then, uh an issue of competence.
Thanks very much for the phone call.
You know, remember the Hillary Clinton advertisement about uh Barack Obama.
Would he be ready for the 3 a.m. phone call?
I think that's going to be a theme that the Republicans are going to pick up, that she was not ready for the 3 A.M. phone call.
Jim and Monmouth, Oregon, welcome to the EIB network and the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Hi, Eric.
Thank you for taking my call.
I I thought it was very timely with the call you just had.
I was a chaplain at Ground Zero.
And uh I was with the families and the the rescue workers and the people at the morgue and it was kind of non nonstop making notifications to people about the details of somebody's untimely death.
And I I have two talking points.
You said a lot about talking points, thank you.
For telling people they can push back.
They can have powerful talking points back at people and I have two of them for Hillary Clinton.
The first one is I hope people never get it out of their minds.
Dover Air Force Base.
Flag draped coffins.
Hillary Clinton with her arm around grieving families, lying with a lie they made up next to the caskets.
I mean, who can do that?
Right.
And the second thought I had had to do with this, she did get elected.
All the scrutiny about these emails and the deception and the cover-up.
What on earth is the first husband going to be doing if nobody's scrutinizing his emails?
Right.
She's going to be able to conduct some of his business on Air Force One and at our at our expense.
If I if I ever wrote a second book, I think I'll call it tag team to tyranny, like a wrestling match.
So that'd be a good title.
You know, Jim, uh it thank you very much for the phone call.
One of the issues I think the Republicans are gonna have to raise again is the Clinton Foundation, too.
And the the double dealings of Hillary in the State Department while the Clinton Foundation was getting a lot of money, and and that's kind of been shoved aside by reporters who don't want to interrupt Hillary Clinton's path to the nomination, and they'll protect her when she gets the nomination.
They'll try to keep these stories off the front burner, but it's a real story.
And what would Bill Clinton do with the Clinton Foundation if he were to become the first gentleman of the United States?
I assume that's what they would call him, the first gentleman.
Well, what would they do?
I don't believe they would shut it down.
I think they just keep doing what Hillary Clinton was doing.
You know, I I I have long said and maintained that the Clintons have financial anorexia.
They look in the mirror and they still see poor people.
They're surrounded by a Democratic Party of Kennedys and Rockefellers and you name it, and and they're j from from Arkansas and and they've just they they they are in it now to get what they can because they see all these other Democrats, the Heinz Careys, you name it, getting all sorts of money, and and they still look in the mirror and see themselves as poor.
And that's not gonna change when they get to the White House.
And it's gonna be you and me who are the ones lining their pocket with taxpayer dollars if we're not careful.
Eric Erickson in for Rush Limbaugh.
Welcome back.
It is Eric Erikson filling in for Rush Limbaugh today, the phone number 800 282-2882.
You guys need to check out the latest issue of the Limbaugh Letter.
You need to be a subscriber to the Limbaugh Letter.
I've got members of my family, my parents are dedicated readers, and you should be too.
Can I guilt you into doing it?
You should go to Rush Limbaugh.com.
You can subscribe.
We got a lot of other stuff.
I don't have time to work in a phone call right now.
When we come back, I do want to take on the case out in Oregon, uh, Melissa Klein and Sweet Cakes by Melissa, the government ordering them to bake a cake or take their money, uh though they they don't want to, uh forcing people against their will.
Oh, and we do, we're gonna have Betsy McColly.
Great.
There's so there's this article out.
Oh my goodness.
Um the New York Post has this story that in New York City they are outraged by Asian parents.
Why?
Well, because Asian parents spend time helping their kids with homework and whatnot, even though they're busy and working, and it puts them at an advantage, and we just can't have that.
▲
Export Selection