All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 5, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:39
January 5, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And I'll tell you, Obama is mad.
I have not seen this kind of expression on the face of Barack Obama as often and as consistently as I have the last 15 minutes watching this fatwa he's announcing on his executive action on guns.
This is amazing.
He is really, really ticked off about this.
Anyway, folks, greetings.
How are you?
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh back at it.
Three straight hours of broadcast excellence headed your way.
Telephone number if you want to be on the program, 800 282-2882, and the email address L Rushbow at EIBNet.com.
This is striking.
What I have been watching and listening to for, I guess it's the last 15 minutes, maybe a little bit longer.
But Obama's got a bunch of sycophants and supporters gathered in what looks like the East Room of the White House.
And he's mad.
He is scowling.
He's getting all kinds of support and and uh and ovations, but he is angry.
He is scowling, his uh facial express his eyes are piercing.
Uh he looks at that camera as though whoever's on the other side of it, he hates and he's just saying nonsensical things about about guns.
I mean, he admits on one hand that everything he's talking about here is not going to stop any of the events that have taken place with guns, like the San Bernardino massacre and that.
Then on the other hand, he says, but even if even if we just stop one act of violence, it's worth what we're doing here.
And then he's going on and on.
I don't understand why anybody would oppose what I'm trying to do.
We're not trying to take guns out of the hands of people.
We're just trying to make it harder and harder for people who have criminal intent to get guns.
How do you know?
The fact of the matter is that this is such gun control is such a mandatory issue.
If you're a liberal democrat, you have to have this particular point of view on it.
And the point of view is that you've got to get rid of guns.
The point of view is that it is not who uses the gun that's the problem.
The gun is the problem.
The ammunition is the problem, and you've got to get rid of it.
And he stands up there and acts like people would be crazy to think he really wants to take away people's guns.
People are not crazy.
We have listened to liberals all of our lives.
We know exactly what they want to do.
And those of us who have been paying attention know exactly how they go about it.
We know how they go about getting everything they want.
If they have to deflect, if they have to lie, if they have to distract, if they have to state that exactly what they want is not what they want.
Whatever.
We know what they want.
They want ultimate power and control.
We know why.
They have contempt for average ordinary Americans and every other type person.
Don't think they're capable of leading their own lives responsibly, and don't even want to give them the chance to.
It's just an uh unquenchable thirst that they have for power and control over people, and getting guns out of the hands of people would represent the pinnacle of resting control, arresting freedom and liberty away from people and gaining control over them.
And it is just it's amazing to sit here and and watch this because he tries to smile now and then to soften the message, but it is clear.
He is angry at a lot.
I I think what I'm actually watching here is pent-up rage and anger over whatever it is that has made him angry the last seven years.
Whatever he's wanted to do and hasn't succeeded, this clearly is one of them is uh is is securing significant gun control measures.
He's mad at Congress.
You know, here's the thing.
He's up there issuing his least latest fat was today is executive actions that implement.
See, this is what the media is not going to tell you, but what he is implementing today, or what he is suggesting be implemented via his executive action, are the very things, legislation that has been rejected in Congress at least three times by wide bipartisan majorities.
Wide bipartisan majorities have voted down, have rejected the very things that he is seeking to implement here by executive action.
It means that the same people who say we we don't need guns to protect ourselves because we can count on the police, the very same people who say we can't trust the police to do anything.
You don't need a gun, you've got the police to protect you.
But then the police come under fire, are accused of being incompetent, untrustworthy, corrupt, what have you.
But who gets to decide who has criminal intent?
At the background check phase of this, who gets to decide that?
How does anybody know who has criminal intent unless they already have a record?
But I mean, even to advance that argument is to fall for the trap that Obama and the leftists lay.
And to get they try to secure you into debating on the uh term and within the frameworks that they suggest.
They want you to debate the idea that there are ways of identifying criminal intent before it happens, and they want you to well, who could oppose keeping the guns out of their hands?
He's quoting Reagan, he's quoting George W. Bush, claiming they are just like him, and what he wants is no more than what they wanted, and all they wanted to do was to make sure that it was tougher and tougher for criminals to get guns.
Don't be fooled.
He's not worried about the criminals getting guns.
That's not his focus.
His target is on the innocent.
Everybody, every liberal Democrat, every gun control advocate, wherever you find them, in order to succeed, they have to take guns away from the law-abiding.
Otherwise, there's no gun control.
Otherwise, there's no success.
So, how about a presumption that everybody with a gun is capable of committing a crime?
About see, this is where we're headed with this.
If Obama and the leftists, his buddies in the media could do it, they would try to establish as public opinion that anybody with a gun is a potential criminal and has an agent of deadly force at their disposal, and we must not tolerate this, and we must not let this happen.
Make no mistake, the effort is to taint and impugn the reputations of law-abiding people.
That's where the majority of guns are.
That's the greatest repository of gun ownership outside the military in our countries, law-abiding people.
It's like taxes.
If you're really going to raise taxes because you want to raise revenue, you've got to raise taxes on the middle class.
Raising taxes on the rich will not net you that much money compared to raising taxes on the middle class.
Same way of thinking.
You really want to get guns off the street, you've got to go where most of them are, and most of them are in the hands of law-abiding people who do not and have not used them to commit criminal acts.
Isn't it interesting that every time we have a criminal act of mass shooting a San Bernardino?
Isn't it amaz that the immediate reaction is that we've got to get guns out of the hands of law-abiding people?
In addition to that, we had to listen to how they were nice, ordinary, common everyday people, members of a religion of peace, and then they got radicalized.
Yeah, see, they weren't even bad people to start with.
It was just They got radicalized and then they got guns, and the kind of guns they had are not the kind of guns Obama's talking about trying to control.
I mean, RPGs, rocket launchers, whatever you name that was in that arsenal in that basement in that home in San Bernardino.
But Obama is not concerned about stopping gun crime.
Otherwise, he wouldn't be doing everything he can to release major drug dealers and other criminals from prison by shortening their sentences.
So make no mistake.
There he is.
That scowl, that look, you have not, I have not been able to miss that.
Even and he, by the way, what makes that stand out to me is he's got nothing but love and adoration in this room.
Everybody in that room thinks Obama's a rock star.
Everybody in that room thinks Obama's a second coming.
He's being applauded practically every sentence.
And it's not making him happy.
He is just sneering and scowling.
He's really, and when that happens, that's when you need to pay attention.
He says, why are people so afraid of background checks?
I don't know anybody who is afraid of background checks.
There's some people suspect them.
I mean, when you have people like Obama and people of his ilk in charge of the background check who can want to basically establish the fact that if you have a gun, you are a potential criminal.
And make no mistake, that's what they want people thinking.
They're aiming right at the low information voters.
And looking right at them, and they're trying to create this impression that if you have a gun, you know somebody has a gun, they're dangerous.
You need to be on the lookout for them.
They are potential criminals.
They've got guns they can shoot you, they could shoot your dog with that.
This is the kind of thing they want people to think.
It's the only way they can get what they want is to get guns out of the hands of legal, law abiding people.
You know, there was uh what's her name?
Jennifer Rubin.
She's a uh blogger.
Changing subjects here.
Because cookies rolling sound on this.
We'll have some examples, some soundbites and mobile.
It's still going on here.
So we can't wait for Congress to act on it.
Oh, we can't wait for Congress.
No way.
Why are people so?
Congress needs to get on board.
The room erupted when he said Congress needs.
He said, We're no longer going to allow Congress to hold America hostage.
Room erupted.
He's scowling and he's sneering.
It's not defiance.
He's really, really ticked off at something here.
Anyway, Jennifer Rubin said blogger, I think at the Washington Post, and she was on um, I didn't see it.
I was told about a meet in the press on Sunday.
And she said that talk radio is the reason for all the anger in America.
Yeah.
Talk radio is responsible for it.
As though anger is somehow unwarranted and ugly and irrational, and something that we need to find an explanation for, because there's nothing to be mad about.
Why would anybody be mad in America today or yesterday or last year?
No, so this anger, it's really irrational.
And when the establishment wants to fix blame, always seem to turn to talk radio.
It's been that way for 27 years I've been doing this.
Angry white men.
Uh I mean, cliche after cliche after cliche.
It's always the fault of talk radio.
And here NBC News, and she was on Meet the Depress, which is NBC's show on Sunday, uh, poll.
Whites and Republicans rank as angriest Americans.
Nearly half of Americans are angry, and no groups are angrier than whites and Republicans, according to a new NBC News Survey Monkey Esquire online poll about outrage in the country.
Overall, 49% of Americans said that they find themselves feeling angrier now about current events than they were one year ago.
Whites are the angriest, 54% saying they have grown more outraged over the past year.
That's more than Latinos, 43% of them are angry, More than African Americans, 33% of them are angry.
73% of whites said they get angry at least once a day.
You believe this?
Compared 66% of Hispanics and 56% of blacks.
So 73% of whites said they get angry at least once a day.
Obviously, when they listen to talk radio.
And 66% of Hispanics and 56% of blacks, they only get mad once a day.
The far fewer of them.
I guess that explains all the rioting and looting that white people are doing it.
Uh wait, that isn't happening.
How do you explain that?
Uh was it say a 60, 73% of whites angry at least once a day?
66% of Hispanics, 56% blacks.
Obviously, that would explain all the rioting and looting.
And then it hit me.
The uh group here that's said to be the angriest isn't doing any of that.
But they are listening to talk radio.
The poll also found Republicans are angrier than Democrats.
61% of Republicans say current events irk them more today than a year ago.
Let me tell you anecdotally, I don't know anybody angrier than any Democrat you run into.
Any leftist, any Democrat, I don't care where you find them.
Twitter, Facebook, the movies on the street, Walmart, I don't care what they're mad.
They are livid constantly.
Not just once or twice a day.
They get up mad, they go to bed matter.
But beside all of that, note here that the attempt in the media is to cast anger as irrational, irresponsible, uncalled for, very, very bad, and very, very wrong to be mean and angry.
As though there's no justification.
You know, if you ask me.
Everybody ought to be angry over what the left has done and is doing to the country.
It makes perfect rational sense for people to be angry.
Now the political class and the establishment, they don't like anger because that means they know people are mad at them.
And as far as the elites are concerned, there's no justification for people being mad at them.
They're special people.
They're the best and brightest among us.
We all ought to love them.
We all ought to appreciate them.
We all ought to bow down and celebrate them, but instead we're mad at them, and they don't like that.
So they want to cast this anger as irrational and irresponsible.
To me, it's entirely common sense.
What decent American who can't find a job and hasn't been able to for I don't know how long isn't mad.
People that have student loans, people that have Obamacare mandates and responsibilities, and that's just scratching the surface.
People looking at the the very identity and structure of their country being changed daily.
The southern border being overrun.
What are we just supposed to sit back and twiddle our thumbs over this?
The anger is justified, but of course they try to discredit the anger and discard it on the basis, well, it's all because of talk radio.
See, once again, you are too stupid to even be mad until somebody tells you to be.
You don't have the mental acuity or ability to even get angry on your own.
You have to wait for your local talk show host to tell you to get mad, and then you do.
And then they go on TV and blame talk radio for it.
This is people supposedly on our side doing this.
Anyway, I take a break here a little long in the opening segments.
The next one's gonna be a little short.
I apologize, it's just the way it worked out.
We'll be back after this.
You know what else?
Obama trotted out this.
We're the only advanced country in the world where mass shootings happen.
With the frequency they happen.
There's no advanced country in the world where things like this happen as often as they happen here.
It's a constant strawdog that he is always you.
We're the only industrialized, we're the we're the most advanced industrialized Country that doesn't have health care for its people.
We only had the best health care system in the world.
And he's running around saying the only advanced nation in the world that does not have health care for all its people, but we do.
We did.
And now he wants us to believe that we have more random gun violence in this country than anywhere in the world.
Maybe we have more random gun violence in Chicago than we have anywhere in the world.
But he won't say it that way.
But it's it's bogus anyway, what he's saying.
It always comes down to how the United States is at fault, or the United States is incomplete, or the United States is flawed somehow, some way, and he's by God gonna fix it.
On a cutting edge of societal evolution, Rush Limbaugh serving humanity, executing a signed host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
No, he knows that.
This is this is another uh, I don't know, contradictory or conflicting or otherwise interesting factoid, that the more he goes out, Obama, the more he goes out, starts talking about controlling guns and taken out of the hands of people, oh whatever he talks about.
Gun sales skyrocket to record levels.
Now he has to know this.
So what really is the purpose?
This is all political, folks.
Do not for a moment doubt me.
Do not for a moment fall for the fact that this is about safety and about preserving life and about stopping violence or anything.
It's not about that.
No, it's not about that.
Liberalism is responsible for so much violence they promote.
In fact, you look at his anger businesses.
Notice when white people are mad, oh, that's bad.
You know, we're supposed to condemn it and blame talk radio.
When anybody else is mad, Muslims, African Americans, Hispanics, we're supposed to stop and understand the rage.
We are supposed to study it and learn from it.
We're supposed to figure out why they're mad.
And we are then told that the reasons they're mad, why they make sense, they're justifiable.
White people anger constantly is unjust, it's illegitimate, and must be condemned.
There's no reason whatsoever white people should ever be mad.
And if you are, there's something wrong with you, and we're gonna get the bottom of it.
Probably find out you listen to talk radio.
But when they're looting and rioting in Baltimore, St. Louis, we'll stand back.
When they're blowing up the World Trade Center, we're supposed to stand back and understand the rage and ask ourselves, what are we doing that makes them so mad?
But not when white people get mad.
When white people get mad, we can demn talk radio, we condemn white people, and so forth.
Very, very inconsistent.
For purposes, why this is all political, folks.
It's uh, you know, whatever you see, white people are angry, it's just a disguised assault on what the left thinks is still the majority of the country.
They hate majorities, they despise the majorities.
Majorities by in their world by definition of corrupt and racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobic.
That's exactly what a majority is, and that's why when Republicans are the majority, it's never supposed to be treated as such.
And that's why we start to hear about minority rule and minority power.
And that's what this is.
This is an attack on majority thinking, it's an attack on majority cultures, majority values, majority lifestyles, it's an attack on the basic structure of a country.
Disguised as we really Care about violence and care about and we really, really want to stop as much.
It's not about that at all.
Everything they do is political.
Look at this.
Right here, my formerly nicotine stained fingers.
Politico, doctors can now report some mentally ill patients to the FBI under Obama's new gun control executive order.
Delivering on its promise to deliver common sense gun control.
A regime yesterday finalized a rule that enabled health care providers to report the names of mentally ill patients to an FBI firearms background check system.
The action was one of a series of steps that President Obama had called for in January of 2013 in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut shootings.
While the 1993 Brady law prohibits gun ownership by individuals who've been involuntarily committed to asylums.
Found incompetent to stand trial or otherwise deemed by a court to be a danger to themselves or others, federal health care privacy rules prohibited doctors or other providers from sharing information without the consent of the patients.
But now if a doctor thinks that you're a wacko, they gotta call the FBI.
What do you think the doctors in Manitowat County, Wisconsin are gonna do now?
Have you seen that murder making of a murderer?
Have you watched it?
People have got to watch this.
If I start talking about it, I'll it'll be spoiler after spoiler after spoiler.
And it's it's it's the only thing I'm gonna tell you is when you watch it and you will watch it.
The Avery family and friends, don't forget this.
The Avery family and friends, exactly what Washington elites think of you bitter clingers.
That's who they think you are.
All of you, all of you pro-life, all of you common ordinary, everyday conservatives.
That's who they think you are.
And I'm not exaggerating.
That's who they think you are.
IQs of 70.
Incest.
I'm gonna stop there.
Don't want to go anymore with spoiler alerts.
So now remember what I told you way, way, way back in the early days of Obamacare and the debate before it became law via budget reconciliation.
Don't forget that either.
This Obamacare became law without one Republican vote.
I mean, it was it was done in budget reconciliation.
The only trick they could come up with to get it passed.
Empowering doctors to report anybody they think is mentally ill to the FBI.
What how many of you?
You all have a family out there.
You all, there's at least one in your family you think's nuts, right?
Some of you have even more than one that you think is nuts.
Some of you have people in your own family you would commit if you could.
As Ross Perot once famously said, we've all got the crazy ain't up and up in the attic, Lara.
Well, now some doctor in Obama almost responsible and required to report a mentally disturbed person to the FBI.
When the government has complete control of your health care, they own you.
And that's why Obama and the left want and wanted socialized medicine.
Because once they have that, they can control everything you do.
They can control what you eat.
They can't control every aspect of your life because they can assign a financial value to it and thereby claim that the way you live is high risk and deny you health coverage.
So you have to change the way you live, change things you do in order to qualify.
They've got you but a shorts, folks, and this is exactly why they want it.
It isn't about better health.
It isn't about treatment.
It isn't about affordable insurance.
It's about Total control of a country.
So here comes an executive order empowering, requiring doctors to report mentally ill people to the FBI.
And then what?
What happens then?
Well, it's the FBI can do whatever they want.
Whatever they come in and do, how are you going to stop them?
It's the FBI for crying out loud.
Federal law enforcement, what are you going to do?
You are under their power at that point.
Here's uh Jim and in Granby, Connecticut.
You know, I'm I hope I didn't steal your thunder here, Jim.
Uh, but I'm gonna if even if I did, I'm sorry I'm gonna get you on.
Uh welcome to the program.
How are you, sir?
Great, mega deals, Rush.
Hey, uh, actually it was relief, and they've got it totally reversed.
You were giving statistics on anger by percentages by race, and you encapsulated my feelings perfectly.
I am sick and tired of the only illegitimate frustration and anger being the frustration and anger of white people.
If you're if you're a minority, somehow we have to bend over backwards and understand your anger.
There's some legitimacy to be found there.
If you're a terrorist who shoots people up at Charlie Hebdo, we've got the secretary secretary of state bending over backward to try to find some logical line to legitimize that anger.
That's a good call.
He did not even have to bend over backwards.
He just came out and frankly said it was rational.
The shooting up of Charlie Hebdo was rational from the from the from the Muslim point of view.
Exactly.
He was trying to say that the murder of 126 people in Paris wasn't rational.
That was random, but Charlie Hebdo, eh, you can see why they did what they did there.
It was the point that he was making.
So that anger, murderous anger, understandable on the part of militant Islam.
You're exactly right.
You're you are you're exactly right.
We are supposed to be tolerant of all anger by any minority or anybody that we claim to be uh claim to be a victim of anything.
We understand their rage.
We're supposed to study it and understand why they're mad and understand they're mad because of us.
It's our fault.
But when uh whites get mad, it's always illegitimate, never tolerated, always must be condemned.
There's never any reason for it.
And of course, it's all the fault of talk radio.
Back after this, folks.
It is doctors uh reporting patients and mentally ill.
Jogged my memory.
So I went to the encyclopedia of the world wide web, and that's Rush Limbaugh.com.
My website is a veritable encyclopedia, especially about items discussed on this program.
Lo and behold, I knew this all sounded familiar.
Back in January 2013, it was January 16th, it's almost three years ago, I predicted this-a-vis Obamacare, because three years ago we reported on the story that the regime or the administration has deputized gun snitch doctors.
What this story was about doctors three years ago, under the tenets of Obamacare.
If you were listening, you'll remember this.
Doctors were being ordered, instructed to talk to patients and get information from them about gun ownership.
Where the guns are in their house if they have them.
Who has access to the guns in their house?
And where the ammunition is kept.
Doctors.
Three years ago, doctors were told, quote, permitted to do this.
Doctors were permitted to ask their patients these questions about guns.
It essentially is deputizing doctors as agents of the state.
So I I knew that Obama using doctors, I knew it rang a bit.
I knew I remembered this, and lo and behold, that's what I remembered.
That's what we found with a scan of Rushlinbaugh.com three years ago.
So now today, Obama is allowing and even demanding that doctors report mentally ill patients to the FBI.
You know, this is a common tactic in communist and totalitarian countries.
It was famously used in the Soviet Union.
It's still used in Cuba, and it is used in communist China.
The way it works is anybody that disagrees with the regime is labeled mentally ill or can be labeled mentally ill if they express a point of view that objects to the ruling government's point of view.
I gave you a great example would be climate change.
You have no doubt heard all of the vitriol and anger aimed at people who don't believe in man-made global warming.
They're called deniers.
Others on the left have proposed that they be shut up, that they be denied the opportunity to speak and comment on various websites like Facebook, Twitter, you name it.
It's not a stretch for somebody to claim they are mentally ill.
They do not understand.
They pose a great risk to their neighborhoods and their communities and the world because they don't understand the dangers of climate change.
That is a mental illness.
You get a doctor to claim somebody who thinks that climate change is no big deal is mentally ill, and who knows what can happen to them.
Commit them or whatever and get them out of the circulation of the mainstream.
Do not think this is beyond the stretch of the imagination is who these people are.
Remember, they're not interested in debating anybody.
They're not interested in a debate in the arena of ideas with the public opinion determining the winner.
There is no alternative point of view, and there should not be one that's justified and permitted, as far as radical leftists are concerned.
So it's not a stretch here.
So you go from three years ago to doctors being permitted as part of Obamacare.
This is part of qualifying for Obamacare.
Doctors ask you where your guns are in your house, where the ammo is, uh, how hard is it to get to the guns that you have, and then they must report that.
Now doctors can report anybody they claim to be mentally ill to the FBI.
What do you think is going to happen to a doctor?
Let's just pick one thing.
Dr. Snerdley decides to inform the FBI that some patient of his who happens to be a political opponent of the regime is mentally ill.
You think that doctor might be rewarded somehow for getting an enemy of the state off the street by reporting them as mentally ill.
So not far beyond what is legitimately possible here.
And I know most people when presented what I've just presented.
Ah, come on, Rush, don't be silly.
That's absolutely stupid, ridiculous, it would never happen.
Well, 20 years ago, 25 years ago, there are things that are routine today that everybody back then thought would never happen.
And then today they're routine.
So don't say that they could never happen.
The fact of the matter is there's a political party today that wants things like this to happen.
I mean, they're beginning to happen.
I mean, what do you do?
A doctor can report mentally ill people FBI for crying out loud.
Doctors can take surveys of their patients on gun control, gun ownership, and so forth and so on.
Anyway, that take a brief time out.
We uh Tom Coughlin forced out a retired or whatever coach of New York Giants, had a fascinating thing to say yesterday, in addition to his sorrow at having to leave and so forth.
Is characterization of modern players struck me.
Yeah, it's not just Tom Coughlin of the New York Giants, the owner of the Phoenix Suns.
In the NBA, I had this room yesterday, I didn't get to it.
Phoenix Suns owner blames millennial culture for the team's problems.
And I will explain all of that, and we'll uh get into the Republican presidential primary news when we get back.
▲
Export Selection