All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 11, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
31:37
February 11, 2016, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Had a lot of time today being spent reviving Hillary Clinton from her debacle in New Hampshire, the Congressional Black Caucasians.
If you didn't know any better, just glancing at Fox News every now and again, you would think they've endorsed her 10 times today.
Well, I mean, you have to look at the news that way.
You have to look at the cumulative effect of things.
You watch news doing other things.
You see the Congressional Black Caucasians endorse Hillary.
Then 10 minutes later, you see it again.
In the next hour, the next newscast tells you that they should do the same videotape.
And by the time you finish the day, the Congressional Black Caucasians have endorsed Hillary 20 times.
Cumulative effect.
You get the news, I mean, and so forth.
So the cumulative effect, the impact it all makes on you, particularly if you're a Democrat voter in their primaries, it's overwhelming by design.
Not just Fox.
It's the way the news happens.
It's not news.
It's soap opera.
Great to have you here, folks.
800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program and the email address, LRushbo at EIBnet.com.
Speaking of that soap opera, let me conduct, consult yesterday's stack that I didn't get to because there was a story in the stack that explained partially.
You know that soundbite we have where everybody in the news described the choice of Cheney as gravitas.
Well, there was a story that explained how this happens.
And it was about Hillary Clinton.
And I guess I didn't save it.
But you know what?
I don't need to because my memory being superb.
And I remember what it was.
Hillary granted an interview to some news organization on one condition.
The news organization had to describe her and her campaign with words provided by Hillary.
They had to call her campaign vibrant.
They had to call it exciting, uplifting, or they wouldn't be granted the interview.
And the story was about how whoever it was, okay, we'll do that.
The story was that Hillary Clinton, her campaign, was writing the news story.
Now, there's no way a Republican could get away with that.
But of course, the Democrats do.
Marco Rubio, you know, he's got one shot left here.
South Carolina, Jeb Bush, one shot left here.
Trump wants to wipe everybody out in South Carolina.
Trump is running around saying, if he wins this, it's over.
There is no way he's going to run the table.
Forgetting Iowa.
He's going to run the table.
If I take them all out here, there's nowhere else.
Now he's forgetting about the SEC primary, Super Tuesday on March 1st.
But again, he's trying to create this impression of inevitability.
We'll start with Rubio in Hilton Head, South Carolina this morning during a campaign event.
Donald Trump has zero foreign policy experience.
Negotiating a hotel deal in another country is not foreign policy experience.
Jeb Bush has no foreign policy experience, period.
I can tell you today unequivocally that there are things we do not know about ISIS and there are things we do not know about terrorists because of what Edward Snowden did to this country.
Ted Cruz said Edward Snowden was a great public servant.
I say Edward Snowden is a traitor and if we ever get a hold of him, he's going to stand trial.
Okay, so one of the rubs on Rubio is, and Governor Christie, of course, with that kamikaze mission at the debate on Saturday night.
It was.
How else would you describe that?
It was a murder-suicide.
He was a murder-suicide.
He decided kamikaze is going to take Rubio out no matter what.
Now, the objective was not to commit suicide.
The objective was take Rubio out and get Rubio's voters.
But it didn't move Christie at all.
It hurt Rubio, but it didn't help Christie at all.
So it was a kamikaze mission.
And what Christie was saying was, this guy got no experience.
He hadn't done anything.
Marco Rubio, cute little guy, yeah, speaks well now and then when he's not repeating himself, Christie says, but he didn't have any experience.
So Rubio's countering that by saying none of these other guys do.
You telling me Trump's got foreign policy experience, and you don't get that negotiating hotel deals.
And don't tell me Jeb does, because Jeb doesn't have any.
And Cruz is out praising Snowden to hell with that.
So Rubio is coming with both barrels firing now, which don't get mad at me.
That's the option he's got.
Now here's Trump.
Trump's explaining why we are in such dire economic straits.
Because we've let China take over our economy, as you've been hearing me say for a long time, we are very, very vulnerable.
We are no longer controlling our own destiny.
We are in a big sphere of other countries all over the world that control us, and they're manipulators.
They have a tremendous power over manipulation of their currencies.
And we are into that web.
And even though we're not manipulators, because we're not smart enough to be manipulators, believe me, our leaders are not smart enough.
We are nevertheless in the manipulation business because of the fact that some of the great money changers of all time are people that, you know, were wedded with them.
And China would be number one.
All well and good.
But I'm.
I'm sorry.
The biggest explanation for America's economic woes I just gave you in the previous half hour.
It's the Democrat Party.
It's liberalism.
It is socialism.
It is big government expansionism.
You simply cannot keep gobbling up pieces of the American economy, otherwise known as our pie.
You can't keep goblet.
You cannot continue to make it smaller.
You can't make it smaller while the government, which produces nothing, grows.
The government destroys wealth and creates debt.
The government does not create wealth other than with crony socialism or crony capitalism, but in that case, it's creating wealth for donors.
It's creating wealth for political simpaticos.
It is not creating wealth for the government because the government can't.
It's $20 trillion in debt.
Now, the CHICOMs are not our friends, don't misunderstand.
But this is a Republican presidential primary, and the opposition here is not the Chikoms.
The opposition is a Democrat Party.
The Democrat, I mentioned earlier that one of the reasons we're in this plight is something no more complicated than salesmanship.
Liberalism has done a much better job selling itself to the great unwashed and to the low-information voter than capitalism has in selling itself.
The Republican Party has sought to let capitalism speak for itself.
They have not promoted it.
They have not promoted free market entrepreneurism because they're afraid of being called conservatives if they do that.
So there hasn't been any competition.
The left really hasn't had to compete against any alternative ideas.
There hasn't been any salesmanship except here on talk radio.
There has not been coming from the Republican Party any sustained message of how wonderful free market capitalism is, how it is the explanation for this nation as a superpower, how free market capitalism is the sole reason why we have the greatest standard of living known to exist ever in the history of humanity.
Not socialism, not communism, not whatever other ism.
Capitalism.
But it has been denigrated, destroyed, beat up, maligned, impugned every day on college campuses for 50 years, if not more.
In junior high and high school classrooms, ditto.
On the drive-by news every day and night for 50 years, ditto.
There hasn't been any pushback.
There hasn't been any competitive capital.
In fact, the success stories in capitalism try to hide.
They try to hide so people don't come try to steal their money.
The success stories in capitalism try to remain hidden.
They don't talk about how they did it.
They don't talk about wealth because it's thought to be insensitive and unfeeling.
And so the success stories, i.e., the motivators, those who can inspire, shut up because they have been made the suspects.
We have made suspects out of achievers.
We have made suspects out of success.
We have made suspects out of people who want to achieve.
We have made suspects out of people who want to achieve and succeed at things.
We have even denigrated hard work.
Oh, yes, we have.
We have denigrated hard work.
We have attempted to disqualify it and disclaim it on the basis: well, it's not fair because not everybody has the time to work as hard as so-and-so does.
If you doubt me, go back to half-baked Moon Bay, California, where they tried to ban homework because not everybody had a home or not everybody had a decent enough home in which to do homework.
It wasn't fair that students had nice homes could do homework because they would get ahead of students that didn't have nice homes and couldn't do homework.
So homework was banned.
Education was banned.
Teaching, self-teaching, everything, banned.
Under the supposed guise of freedom and equality.
And that's where we are.
Capitalism doesn't have anybody who wants to sing its virtues.
Everybody's afraid.
Everybody's afraid they're going to be attacked.
Everybody's afraid they're going to be maligned, impugned, maybe imprisoned.
They're going to be called thieves, whatever else.
So they just go about their business and shut up.
And then when they do become successful, what do they do?
Make excuses for it.
Well, you know, I lucked out.
I just wanted these lucky guys this had.
Instead of being used as role models, people who inspire others to show how it was done, we make suspects out of them.
It's a horrible, horrible thing.
Yeah, the check-ins.
But our biggest problem, the biggest obstacle to the creation of wealth in the United States of America is the Democrat Party.
You want some names: Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, take your pick.
John Kerry, Dick Durbin, the names are endless.
Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi.
And note, all of them have theirs.
All of them have their multi-millions.
They've all got their business.
Pelosi is filthy rich.
So is Harry Reid.
And they all do this on government salaries.
Wonder how that happens.
Yeah, Bernie Sanders is right.
The game's rigged, but his party has been doing the rigging.
And you think the Republicans are totally blameless.
No, I'm not.
The Republicans are off the playfield.
The Republicans are not even trying to advance the ball for what they believe in.
They're trying to make everybody think they're not who they are.
They've been so successfully tarred and feathered.
But yes, I'm here to tell you: liberalism versus capitalism, it's hands down.
Liberalism is to blame for the plight this country is in.
Socialism is to blame communism or the desire to be one of those isms, which desires are harbored by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
They've said so.
I don't have to make it up.
They say so, particularly Obama.
He has not hidden his desire and admiration for all of those isms, if you just listen.
And we have aired many of the soundbites where Obama has said these things over the years.
Folks, we're seven years into this regime.
If what they believe in had any element of truth, don't you think there'd be some signs that we've turned around and we're getting better?
Wouldn't there be some job creation?
Wouldn't there be some economic growth?
Wouldn't there be some sign?
Wouldn't there be some optimism out there?
Wouldn't there be some indication that finally we got rid of the evils of the Iraq War and the Bush administration or whoever else went wrong there?
And we finally turned the corner.
But no, they don't even admit that.
They can't.
They still act like this country is in the throes of the Iraq war and the Republicans are still running it after seven years of them being listened to their campaign.
Listen to Hillary.
Listen to Bernie Sanders.
You would think that Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan are still running this country.
Not Barack Obama and not his Democrat cohorts who have taken this country and run it right into the ground the past seven years.
You would not know any of that happened.
I wouldn't expect them to admit it.
But the education system is so, so inept and woefully out of whack that people are unable to critically think and arrive at these conclusions on their own.
It's a sad, sad, sad, sad state of affairs.
Back to the audio soundbites.
I mentioned earlier, Obama's blaming me.
Be blaming me for the lack of a good tone in politics.
Blaming me for the lack of improvement in the good tone of the public.
Well, he's worked hard.
He's the president.
He's the most powerful man in the world.
I am holding him back.
And I held back Bill Clinton, folks.
Same thing.
If it wouldn't have been for me, why we'd be in so much better shape in this country.
And I'm just a guy on the radio.
Audio soundbites will start.
Bill Clinton.
No, we'll do Obama first.
Two bites.
Springfield, Illinois yesterday, the Illinois state capitol.
Obama addressing the Illinois General Assembly.
It's been noted often by pundits that the tone of our politics hasn't gotten better since I was inaugurated.
In fact, it's gotten worse.
It has.
That there's still this yawning gap between the magnitude of our challenges and the smallness of our politics.
That's BS.
We had an importation of our politics nationally and on cable and talk radio, and it seeps into everything.
What is he talking about?
What is this?
The still that yawning gap between the magnitude of our challenges and the smallness of our politics?
He's a failure in terms of the things he promised to do.
He was going to unify us, create a new toll, whatever it is.
He's not failed in his liberal agenda, but he's.
We're not unified.
We're not loved.
We're not adored around the world.
We're laughed at.
We're joked about.
We're mocked.
Now we got pictures of our sailors in tears being held captive by the Iranians, which John Kerry assured us, no, no, no, they were very polite, then they got rid of our, we've solved a problem, don't sweat the Iran nuclear deal still on, of course.
Oh, wonderful.
Yes, so Obama notes that the tone of our politics hasn't gotten better.
I thought he was the answer.
I thought he was the one we've been waiting for.
I thought Barack Obama, remember all the things people invested in him?
How can some little guy on a radio stand in a way?
How has that happened?
How's a guy on a radio stop Obama from changing the tone?
If Obama wanted to dwarf me with the success of his policies, Obama could render me irrelevant by making everything he believes in work for people.
Problem is, it isn't.
It's all getting worse.
But see, in Obama's world, there shouldn't be any opposition.
That's the problem.
The reason he blames me is because I'm here.
There shouldn't be any opposition.
The objective of all leftists is to eliminate opposition.
No fair level playing field, no playing field, period.
No opponents.
Just get rid of them.
The Soviet Union, Cuba, they put them in jail.
In this country, they audit you.
They don't let you have a 501c3 tax status, or they just try to destroy your reputation with elements they control in the media.
Whatever.
They silence opposition.
Here's the next Obama bite.
Trying to find common ground doesn't make me less of a Democrat or less of a progressive.
It means I'm trying to get stuff done.
The fact that that's hard to do is a testament to how difficult our politics has become.
It means that you're wrong.
Folks are worried.
Well, I'm going to get yelled at by here, or this blogger is going to write that.
Or, you know, this talk show host is going to talk about me, and suddenly I've got a challenger and calling me a rhino or not a real progressive.
No, it means you're trying to get stuff done.
It means you haven't gotten stuff done.
It means people are miserable and you need a scapegoat back after this.
And it's not just Barack Hussein Obama who has sought to blame failures on talk radio.
After I get off the radio today, with you, Rush Lemba will have three hours to say whatever he wants.
Would you like to leave him in?
I won't have any opportunity to respond, and there's no truth detector.
You won't get on afterwards and say what was true and what wasn't.
Yeah.
That was the Clinton calling KMOX St. Louis from Air Force One back in 1994 in the summer.
Here is Cannon Foley, Alabama.
It's great to have you on the program, Ken.
Hello.
Thank you, Rush.
Marine Corps dittos today.
Well, snippet five.
Yeah, it was some of what you've been talking about as far as the 60s came out.
See, I was in college in the 60s, so I had some of those types of instructors.
So they've had 50 years of this.
And, you know, so I know what you're saying.
My question is, or I statement then asked for a question, is, you know, the news media and the liberal side constantly is after Trump because he responds with double-barreled response when somebody attacks him.
And yet they don't say anything about Obama, the Clintons, who are masters at cutting people off at the knees if they disagree with him, and if there's any public and comment.
And, you know, an example with that would be Brett Hume when he mentioned something when he was still the White House correspondent and he mentioned something about Ginsburg.
And Clinton just tore him up.
And again, the double standard.
My question would be: one of the few unfiltered venues that the Republicans can do are during these debates.
Why don't they bring some of this type of stuff out?
I mean, you know, during these debates when they start talking about, you know, countering the Democratic movement.
You are largely suggesting that they counter media.
Your observation is about how media treats Trump differently than how media treats Obama and Clinton differently, all of which they don't want to be seen criticizing the media on that basis because it's be portrayed as childishness and so forth.
But the overall answer to the question is that look what they're doing to Rubio.
Rubio tries to focus on Obama being the problem, and everybody is trying to wipe that out because by denigrating Rubio for repeating it all those times and looking bad, but Rubio is one of the only guys running against the Democrats in these debates.
Dave and Spokane, Washington.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Appreciate your patience.
Hello.
Hello, Rush.
What a great pleasure to talk to you.
Thank you.
I appreciate that, sir.
You bet.
Hey, I've been a longtime listener since 89, and you back then were talking about the incrementalism of liberalism and how we had to look out for it.
And you've been preaching that ever since then, and what we're seeing today with the millennials, as you said earlier in your show, First Circle, they have come full circle.
They've achieved their nirvana as far as they've been conditioned and educated.
You don't have the ability.
You can't do it.
They've been educated.
The deck is stacked against them.
They've been educated that the game is rigged and that they don't have a fair shot.
Yeah, their minds have been polluted and poisoned with all kinds of stuff.
Yes.
As Erickson said in your newsletter, you will be made to care.
That's right.
No matter what.
We're not going to do it through killing a lot of people, which the menu, let me tell you what that means.
You will be made to care.
It's not just that you're going to get out of the way and let there be gay marriage.
You are going to love gay marriage.
And until you do, we're going to make an example of you.
That's what it is.
That's right.
And you're going to bake a cake and you're going to sell flowers to who we say you can do, even though you take the risk and open your own business and you have no say in it.
Exactly right.
It's a sad day.
Yeah, but there's always, we're not done yet.
It's incremental.
I always am hopeful during campaigns like this.
Campaigns are golden opportunities to educate, inform, present alternatives.
You know, what's always been frustrating about the past seven years is there hadn't been any pushback or opposition.
But compounding that is, we're living the reality of these people now.
We don't have to warn people about what's going to happen if these people succeed.
We don't have to try to scare people into waking up.
It's happening.
The negative, the dreary, the absolute destructive results of liberalism are on display every day in most people's lives.
All that has to be done is to explain to people why.
The objective, most of them have been conditioned to believe it's the Republicans simply because they don't care.
I mean, that may sound crazy to you.
How can you get away with blaming people for certain economic circumstances because people you don't even know don't care about it?
And you tell me how that works.
But appeals to emotion are very seductive.
But look, here's the thing about campaign.
The Republicans haven't even been on the field, folks.
That's the frustrating thing.
That's what all this is about.
The Republicans haven't been pushing back.
Not only have they been pushing back, they haven't been selling an alternative, promoting alternative or what have you.
It's got people fit to be tied.
Hello, Donald Trump.
Somebody appears to be opposed to this.
Don't care what he is.
I don't care if he's liberal, conservative.
I don't care what.
He seems to be opposed to what's happening now, and so am I. Republican Party, desperate to try to understand what's happening here, only needs to look in the mirror.
Dave, I appreciate the call.
Here's Jimmy in Brooklyn.
Jimmy, great to have you on the program.
Hello.
Shittos, Rush.
I want to add to your explanation of the communist movement.
In the communist publications, they talk about things like capitalism is racism.
To destroy racism, you have to destroy capitalism.
And you have World Marxist Scholars Conference, World Socialist Scholars Conference.
The Communists control the teachers' unions.
And here's the worst thing.
The communists control the schools that teach the teachers.
And they're teaching to build activists.
And in the communist publication, they call the schools, the universities, they call them communiversities.
So this is, like you were describing a little while ago, this is a communist movement that's been basically unopposed.
They feel they're winning.
In their own literature, they say they're going to win elections and get power legally.
And this is why you see young people gravitating toward Marxism, socialism, perhaps without even realizing.
So I've been describing this as a slow-motion coup.
It's revolution by evolution.
And they're winning because there really has not been an adequate fight back.
And one of the ways they do it, too, is political correctness, which is Marxist mind control.
Oh, yeah.
That's just pure censorship in addition to all of that.
You raise a good point here, and I want to expand on it in a way.
Now, you go back to the 80s and the 70s, and you start accusing the Democrats or the left of being communist or pro-communist or communist sympathizers, which happened with the situation in Nicaragua Sandinistas versus the Conference and so forth.
It was a real tough sell because there was an evil empire back then.
And that evil empire was the Soviet Union.
And there were real people that led it.
People like Mikhail Gorbachev and Yuri Andropov and Leonid Brezhnev and so forth.
And so too.
Accuse what you just did here, Jimmy, of the modern-day Democrat Party of actually being communist and advancing communist agenda.
It was a tough sell because nobody wanted to believe that we actually had people in this country that loved the Soviet Union and wanted to turn us into it.
It was guaranteed to fail because of that.
Well, now there's no Soviet Union.
Russia is back.
Vladimir Putin and the KGB.
But there is no Soviet Union.
So it's a little easier today, I think, to make the connection.
Whatever terminology you want to use, statism, authoritarianism, communism, socialism, liberalism, or whatever.
The fact that there isn't an evil empire today, a single repository, one kingdom of the place, makes it, I think, an easier sell because having an evil empire was actually a distraction in terms of trying to educate people who the Democrats are, what their ideology is, and what their ultimate objectives are.
Nobody wanted to think.
Nobody wanted to believe the communists.
I mean, they did to McCarthy and others who came along and tried to make the connection because of the existence of the Soviet Union.
Well, now the Soviet Union is gone.
And the closest thing that you would have to would need to be the Chikons or the Castros in Cuba.
And so you basically eliminate those.
But it has not, just because the Soviet Union is gone, does not mean that communism doesn't exist anymore.
When the Soviet Union fell, I told everybody that the environmentalist movement would become the new home of displaced, wayward communists.
And it was true.
It was true then, and it is true now.
Communism was never a devotion to a nation state.
And that's what made it a tough sell.
Communism was never a devotion to the Soviet Union.
Communism is a, just like capitalism, it's a different way of organizing people politically.
It's evil.
Depending on where you go, certain communists have built walls to keep people in.
They've had dungeons to put political opponents in.
They have murdered dissidents and so forth.
None of that happens here.
So it was always a tough sell.
But if you just stick with the simple organizational purpose and structure of communism, there's no denying what the Democrat Party is.
Liberalism, socialism, what have you.
Centralized government, command and control, economy, usurpation of individual liberty and freedom.
It's the objective.
What people have trouble getting their arms around is the purpose.
You talk to average, ordinary, low-information voters, you try to convince them all this.
The first question they're going to have is, why do people want to do that?
Well, they want to control you.
Well, why?
What's worth, why would anybody want to control me?
It's hard for people who are not communists to relate to the communist dream.
It's hard for people who aren't to understand why anybody would want to be.
Because there's nothing good about it.
So why would anybody want it?
The only people for whom it's good are the rank and file elites who lead it, who run it.
And for them, it's simply a way to organize the legal theft of a nation's wealth.
Pure and simple.
And in order to get away with the thievery of the nation's wealth, you have to have massive total control, punitive control.
You have to make people docile.
You have to make people complacent.
You have to do certain ways, usually fear, to make them go along with being stolen from.
The worst thing for you as a communist leader is a bunch of people who don't want it to stand up and oppose you.
That's when you have to go grab the guns.
So what you do is you just shut them up.
You give them enough to keep them happy, whatever it takes, while you're stealing them blind.
But in order to get away with the theft, you have to keep them docile.
You have to make it perfectly clear to them that there's no point in resisting, that there's no future in resisting, that the only thing that can happen to you if you resist or to your family is absolute, you don't want to even think about what could happen.
And that's how they do it.
Anyway, I appreciate the call.
We got to go back after this.
So, folks, do not go away.
I've got this call up here.
Is that Lissy?
She'll never get her question in because she's not a highly trained specialist.
Here's her question.
If the Republicans don't win, Lissy, we'll try to get to you tomorrow.
Snerdley's going to get your number, and if you'll let us call you back, we will.
Her question is: if the Republicans don't win, and with everything the Democrats are touting, if they win, why we're further down the road to socialism, communism, she wants to know what I'm going to do if that happens.
Now, I would have been easy to skip that.
You'd have never known we had that call.
I could have just told Snerdley thanks, but no, thanks.
But no, we'll tackle that.
Open Line Friday tomorrow, right?
Make sure we have a way to get a hold of her.
That's right, folks.
We're out of busy broadcast time for today, but there's always tomorrow here, and we'll be back Open Line Friday.
And you can prep, be thinking, whatever you want to ask or say is what we permit.
I put on my benevolent dictator hat for Open Line Friday.
▲
Export Selection