All Episodes
Previous Next
March 21, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:42
March 21, 2016, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
That's right.
I forgot to ask the staff on the other side of the glass here.
What are your thoughts on the Hulk Hogan Gawker trial?
So what happened was that Gawker has been ordered to pay 115 million dollars to Hogan for a violation of his privacy.
I mean, this is just this scourge of our culture on trial here.
Everything about there's nothing redeemable about this at all except the argument that it put forth, and that is freedom of the press versus the right to privacy.
And the press took a huge hit on this.
Now many people, what do you mean?
Gawker's not the yes it is.
Gawker's media, Gawker's the press.
Gawker is the one place in the world with no morality.
Absolutely zilch zero, no morality.
And they don't have 115 million dollars.
If this holds up, they're out of business.
I don't know how they can they get they can stay around.
I know this the jury is meeting today to actually get to the penalty phase.
The first award was 115 million dollars, and you know, it can be trebled, who knows what I mean.
You reach a point where not even what do they have, 50, 60 million I read that they've got, they took it took a loan or something.
I mean, wipe them out, uh no matter what happens.
And I what's fascinating about this is this is a jury of people in Tampa, Florida, which dropped the hammer on the media and said, No, you don't have the right to publish that kind of thing about anybody without their permission or whatever.
And you want to see some of the reaction out there.
You've got a even some conservative blogs are supporting Gawker while not defending Gawker.
They're thinking, oh my goodness, this is horrible.
This is the worst thing that could have happened for the media, and other people are celebrating it.
Uh because they just like the media, whoever it is up on the chopping block, uh actually getting blunt force trauma uh thrown right at them.
So it's it's fascinating to see how this plays out.
Anyway, folks.
Yeah, Snurtley C certainly is trying to steer me into providing you the details of the case, acting like he doesn't know.
Well, what Rush, what were the details?
Well, it involves a shock jock in Tampa by the name of Bubba, the love sponge, and his best friend, the estimable and brilliant Hulkster Hogan of the WWE.
And what happened was that uh the love sponge decided to let Hulkster Hogan have sex with his wife.
And Bubba taped it.
Bubba videotaped it without apparently the knowledge of Hulkster Hogan.
I know it's Hulk Hogan.
I'm trying to dress this up as best I can.
So anyway, somebody sent Gawker the video of uh of Hulkster Hogan uh having sex with the wife of uh the love sponge.
And apparently everybody involved except the Hulkster knew that it was happening.
Well, I don't know about the love sponge's wife.
No longer, by the way, is she the love sponge's wife.
You didn't know that?
No, she's uh she's gone.
Somewhere.
So Gawker got hold of the video and they and they ran it on their website.
Gawker is seven different websites.
Gizmotto is Gawker.
Um the Gawker empire, the best way to describe them is no morality.
And anything gets close to morality, they're not interested in it.
The more immoral, the more perverse, the more fascinated they are with it.
There were no boundaries, there were no limits.
So then the Hulkster decided to sue Gauker for invasion of privacy, that this was highly embarrassing to him, despite the fact that the Hulkster has been known to go everywhere And talk about his sex life.
But still the jury decided, well, the Hulkster didn't know about this instance, and we don't, we're not passing judgment on what he did.
And we're not passing we're just saying the media did not have the right to publish that video without the Hulksters' permission.
It's really what it came down to.
Not being a public figure did not absolve Gawker here at all.
Being a public figure did not allow Gawker the privilege of publishing the uh the video, which Hulkster Hogan said just destroyed him.
It it it it ruined his uh self-esteem, uh, made him a joke.
Uh it uh embarrassed him, you know, all of these uh things.
Uh so the jury returned the verdict on Friday was a two or three-week trial, and the jury's verdict came in uh guilty Gawker, civil action, decided for the Hulkster, and uh 150, it was a hundred million dollars that Hulkster Hogan was asking for.
The jury said, no, no, no, let's make it 115.
And they did, and that's before we get to the actual penalty phase, which is the application of even more damages.
I don't know if the judge can reduce this on his own.
I'm not uh he probably can at some point.
But anyway, the Gorker guys in uh in preparation for this went out and and tried to secure all kinds of money in anticipation, not that they expected to, but in case they lost, they wanted to have some pool to be able to uh to pay this.
They're gonna appeal it.
They claim that a couple of uh very relevant items of evidence were excluded in this case that they believe once they are included, they will prevail.
So, but the throw out the details and what you have here is 14th Amendment versus First Amendment.
Freedom of the press versus a right to not I don't want anybody tinfoil heading.
I know there's no right to privacy specifically written in the Constitution.
It is assumed by many because of the Fourth Amendment, uh, the right against um obtrusive searches and seizures and so forth.
But clearly the media takes it on the chin here to the extent that the rest of the media identifies with Gawker, but they are.
I mean, they have websites, they publish news and pictures and commentary.
Uh it probably wasn't helpful that the former CEO of Gawker was asked at when he was testifying, he was asked, is there any limit?
Hulkster Hogan's lawyer asks, is there any limit to what you won't publish?
Is there any sex tape out there that Gawker would not publish?
And this guy said, Yeah, probably if it was a four-year-old baby, we wouldn't publish it.
That probably was not helpful.
Uh the apparently the Gawker CEO was was sort of a smug, arrogant in your face kind of.
These guys all walk around with chips on their shoulders for one thing or another.
Um we shall see what happens next in this.
But it's going to it's going to be a subject for law school debate, law school teaching classes and so forth, as uh as time goes forward.
As I said to open the program, President Obama has landed in Havana.
One small step for man, one giant leap for Marxism.
We have a montage of drive-by media types.
This is the most excited they have been for an airplane landing since Gorbachev touched down in the U.S. in 1986.
That's when they all had the first collective known Gorbesm.
Well, they are just thrilled.
They are just doesn't matter that Raul Castro did not show up at Jose Marti Airport to greet Obama.
They don't care.
Obama landed in Cuba.
They're excited.
Here is the montage of what the media sounded like.
Big day for the U.S. and Cuba.
Say that airplane.
It's Air Force One.
And it's been on a journey that's taken 90 years.
History has just been made.
President Obama touching down Air Force One landing here in Havana.
The first U.S. president in nearly 90 years to step foot on Cuban soil.
The first sitting American president to set foot on the island in 88 years.
This is a momentous thing that we're watching right now.
Obama making history as the first American president to visit since Calvin Coolidge 88 years ago.
To have the American president on Cuban soil.
The implications are deep and yet unknown.
That was Chris Cuomo to have the American president on Cuban soil.
The implications are deep and yet unknown.
So today on CNN's New Day, Alison Camarada spoke with Chris Cuomo about what he was wearing as he's covering Obama's trip to Cuba.
Camarada said, Hey, Chris, we can't help but notice your culturally appropriate garb that you're wearing.
Tell us the history of your shirt.
Here's what Chris Cuomo said.
My guy, this shirt belonged to my father.
It was given to him by Fidel Castro.
It marked conversations going on decades ago.
That were the same as those today.
The concern was the freedom of the people.
What is the point of this communist regime if it is not to truly make everyone equal?
Not at the lowest level.
Not demoralizing everyone, but lifting everyone up.
My father, generations of politicians have been telling us.
So I wear this shirt as a reminder of that.
Did you hear that?
I gotta I gotta reign it back.
I gotta dial it back here.
Did you just hear how communism was defined here?
It's no wonder.
What's happened?
This is what this guy where did this guy pick it up?
From his dad from school.
This is incredible.
It marked conversations going on decades between Mario the Pious and Fidel Castro.
And they were the same then as they are today.
The concern was the freedom of the people.
What is the point of this communist regime if it is not truly to make everyone equal?
Not at the lowest level, not by demoralizing everybody, but lifting everyone up.
Are you kidding?
That's what communism is.
Well, if they've been at it for what, 40 or 50 years in Cuba, can anybody say success?
Did you know that?
Did you know that the purpose of communism was to make everybody rich?
Did you know the purpose of communism was to elevate everybody?
Everybody was to be equal.
Everybody was to be the same, not demoralized, not at the lowest level, but lifting everyone up.
My father, generations of politicians have been fighting this, so I wear the shirt as a reminder.
Well, no.
Good.
I've got to take a break.
I cannot.
I friends, welcome back, Rush Limbaugh meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
It sound bites like this.
That slap me in the face and make me realize something that has escaped me all these years.
For example, Chris Cuomo, who is the morning drive anchor, if you will, on the CNN, is uh talking about the shirt that he's wearing.
And he's very happy that his dad, Mario the Pious, was in constant contact with Fidel Castro over the wonders of communism.
The freedom of the people.
Communism imprisons people, but not to these people.
No, no, no.
See, I always thought that these people knew.
This is where I was wrong.
Back in the days, the 70s, 80s, I'm listening to these people speak glowingly of the Soviet Union, glowingly of the Soviet Union system, happily pronouncing Soviet expansionism, uh opposing Ronald Reagan, any effort to reign in communism.
That was considered the problem as far as the left and the media was Concerned.
I thought they knew that communism imprisoned people.
I thought they knew that communism denied upward economic mobility.
I thought they held out hope for it if only the right people could be put in charge with a sufficient amount of money.
I did not know until this day.
I probably shouldn't admit this.
I did not know until this day that every leftist pro-Soviet democrat in this country actually believes that communism is about lifting people up.
And actually believes that communism is about freedom.
And that communism is about elevating people.
Not demoralizing them at the lowest level, but lifting everyone up.
I thought they knew the problems of communism, but were holding out hope that its promise of equality and sameness could be marshaled into utopia.
I did not know until this day that they think the original purpose of communism is to elevate people, to give them freedom, and upward economic mobility.
I'm ashamed to admit this.
I've been laboring under...
A misconception.
I was giving these people the benefit of the doubt.
That they knew communism as currently constituted was horrible.
But I thought they knew that.
I thought they nevertheless held out hope that it was the best way for sameness, equality, equality of outcomes.
I did not know that they believe communism equals individual freedom.
I did not know that they believe communism stands for upward mobility and equality.
This explains a lot to me.
Now, how is it that if they believe this, and if Chris Gornos's father's been talking to Fidel about this for years, why hasn't anybody been able to pull this off?
Why is it that no matter where you go in the world, socialism, communism is an abject failure and does the exact opposite of what these people believe it's designed to do?
I am a little bit more understanding now of these dolts, given what they think it is.
If somebody were to come along and you're a student in junior high, kindergarten, wherever, no matter where you go, in school, they tell you that communism is about individual freedom, economic prosperity, and...
Everybody enjoying it, everybody being the best, everybody being the same, nobody losing, no competition, total freedom, do whatever you want, and the state will make sure that everybody ends up with a lot.
Well, what numbskull wouldn't find that attractive?
If on the other hand you teach communism for what it really is, they have to build walls to keep people in, that if you disagree with the thinking of the state, you're going to end up in a dungeon like they have in Cuba.
You're going to have people political prisoners who will be shot and starved.
You'll have a lot of your country, the people who believe that communism was about freedom, they're going to be in jail.
They're going to be on trial.
Many of them are going to be shot.
Many of them are going to be killed, many of them are going to be executed.
And by the way, communism cannot promise upward mobility because it's impossible in the system.
And communism cannot guarantee individual liberty and freedom because you must all think the same way.
If it were taught that way, nobody would support it.
This has been the great question.
I say, how do these people believe in this stuff?
In the real world, it's never worked.
Never.
The promise.
The utopia.
The dream.
Never.
In fact, not only has it never worked, it's never even been approached.
It's never been near.
Nobody's ever gotten close to it, no matter where you go.
And yet, they continue to hold on to it.
They continue to believe in the promise.
What promise?
There isn't any promise except prison.
Poverty.
Total mind control.
But Chris Cuomo, look at what he thinks it is.
It's about freedom of the people.
Make everyone equal, lifting everybody up.
Unbelievable.
Why hasn't it happened then?
You know, folks, just this week, an unfazed associated press reported that the Coast Guard said nine Cuban migrants died.
Eighteen were rescued off of Florida.
Nine Cuban migrants died at sea.
Eighteen others were rescued by a cruise ship after their 30-foot boat was found about 130 miles from the Florida coast.
The Coast Guard said that the migrants were severely dehydrated when they were found Friday and said they had been at sea for 22 days.
The bodies of those who didn't make it were placed overboard, said Coast Guard Petty Officer Mark Barney.
Well, what were these 27 Cubans thinking for crying out?
Why in the world would you abandon such a paradise?
In fact, why would any of the people who have left Cuba, why any of the people who were shot trying to get over to Berlin Wall?
Why any of the people trying to get out of Venezuela?
Why any people leaving these communist paradises?
What were they thinking?
They need to have an immediate meeting with Chris Cuomo, so that Chris Cuomo can explain to them that communism is about freedom of the people.
Not at the lowest level.
No, no, no.
Everybody will be equal by lifting everyone up.
What were they thinking?
Why in the world would these 27 people leave such a place?
Back to the phones.
This is Jennifer.
Jennifer in uh in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
How are you?
I'm great.
Thank you.
Um, I called Mr. Snerdley and I said, I I can't, I've been a Republican all my life, and I can't believe the Republicans putting as much effort as they are into trying to stop Trump.
As why didn't they help push Romney across the finish line?
I mean, their lack of energy to do that.
Versus the energy I see to stop Trump, it's I'm incredulous.
And it it makes me believe that they have never wanted to win.
They foisted these candidates on me, and as a good Republican voter, I hold my nose, I vote for them, but they don't even want to win.
Yeah, and you know what people are saying to them this year?
It's time you held your nose.
You've been asking, you're exactly right out there, Jennifer.
They have been telling us, you know, like a hold your nose.
You have a duty to be loyal to us and the party and vote for McCain.
You have a duty to be loyal to us and vote for Bob.
No, you have a duty to be loyal to us and vote for Romney.
And people this year are saying, you know what?
You hold your nose this year.
You have a duty to go out and help us win for once.
I'm there.
And Rush, I'm not, I'm not some blue-collar worker.
I I am in, you know, I'm educated, and I am just flabbergasted about my country and the people that supposedly are leading it.
Well, I gotta tell you, you know, you have a point.
I have never seen this kind of energy from Mitt Romney.
The energy Mitt Romney is expending to stop Trump.
I have not seen this kind of energy in beating Obama.
The Republicans are having these, like the New York Times has this big story yesterday, folks, about this massive effort that's underway.
Republican leaders map strategically to derail Trump.
It's going to be a massive 100-day Event that kicks off on April 5th with the Wisconsin primary.
And they are energized and they are in gear and they are revved up and they're going to do whatever it takes to stop Trump.
And I will bet you, whatever they do, we won't get 10% of this effort to stop Hillary Clinton.
And there is the rub.
That is what this is all about.
Republican voters, just like Jennifer here, do not see this kind of energy or desire when it comes to beating Democrats.
And the vast majority of Republican voters I know think that the real problem in America is the Democrat Party.
And there's no effort to stop them, no pushback.
It's I'm beating a dead horse making these points.
But I understand, Jennifer, where you're uh where you're coming from.
There's this story here, folks, uh this from MediaIt uh headline Gingrich Cotton, among those rumored to be meeting with Trump today, Washington, in a series of closed door meetings today in Washington.
That would be Washington if you're newt.
The Republican frontrunner is expected to meet the upwards, a meet with upwards of two dozen GOP leaders.
Although none of the politicians have public publicly confirmed that they're scheduled to sit down with Trump.
NBC News has reported on at least a few of the possible attendees.
The list of Republicans are going to sit there and uh and talk with Trump include Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who is reportedly the organizer of the meetings, as well as a fervent Trump supporter.
Former Republican candidate Newt Gingrich, also rumored to be in attendance, along with Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton and New York representatives Tom Reed and Chris Collins.
Okay, so looks like what is this uh 24, two dozen GOP leaders going to meet with Trump.
What's gonna happen to these 24?
What do you think the party establishment's gonna do?
You think my leak stories trying to uh impugn the integrity of these 24?
This is not this they're not speaking for the party.
These 24 guys meeting with Trump, they are not part of the cabal that's trying to deny Trump.
I mean, Newt's out there, he's actually a supporter of Trump.
You didn't know that.
Newt Gingrich, oh yeah, Newt's Newt supporting Trump.
Newt Newt Gingrich is supporting Trump on the theory that if you don't, you may as well be supporting Hillary Clinton.
See, that's what people can't as I keep trying to tell everybody I run into, and it's amazing, folks, how so few people realize this.
And I look, and I can understand it in part.
We're in the middle of a Republican campaign.
So the Republican contest is the focal point.
I understand that.
But what this is all about is beating Hillary Clinton.
All of this is all about beating the Democrats in November.
But when the focal point happens to be on stopping this Republican or that Republican, and I have to tell you, look, I can't emphasize this enough.
This group, this cabal, they don't want any part of Ted Cruz either.
Logic would say that if you want to stop Trump, you've got to rally behind Cruz.
He's your second largest vote getter.
He is a Republican, whatever else you want to say about him.
He is a Republican, and there's no doubt about it.
But they don't want any part of him either.
So the two Republican front runners, which have together combined to collect what, 75% of the primary votes are not wanted.
The Republican establishment, the RNC, whoever these people are, they don't want to unify behind either of these two.
Because neither of these two are ranking members of the quote unquote establishment.
And the establishment holding on to what it has is more important than winning elections.
This is this is um it's mind boggling because the end of all of this is beating Democrats.
Not just in the presidential election, but everywhere else you can as well.
And at some point that result is um in its objective is going to uh once again certainly.
Now I know, look, folks, I know, but Rush, but Rush, you're leaving up a very important fact, and that is a lot of people think Trump can't beat Hillary.
Well, let me you think whatever third party compromise you come up with is going to beat Hillary?
You think somebody that's not been in these contests is going to beat Hillary?
You think Mitt's gonna beat Hillary?
You think Jeb's gonna beat Hillary?
Pick a name.
The establishment is telegraphed, they don't want Trump, they don't want Cruz.
That means they have to be doing what they're doing to find another name to be the nominee.
This is not just about stopping Trump, folks.
This is about stopping Cruz as well.
You Cruz supporters don't automatically assume if they stop Trump, it's your guy.
If they want a contested convention, it means they don't want Cruz either.
Okay, so who do they want?
Well, don't laugh when I tell you Kasich.
There are some that would love to have Kasich in there.
They've been quoted as saying so.
There are some that think this would be the way to get Jeb the nomination.
Others think Paul Ryan do not.
I know that Congressman Ryan, Speaker Ryan, I don't want this, I don't want to be do not pay attention to that.
If it comes down to a draft, whoever is drafted for the good of the party or whatever, will accept it and carry the spear forward for the good of whatever.
The only reason to do a contested convention is to nominate somebody that has either been defeated in the primaries up to now or somebody who has not been involved in them.
Michael Goodwin writes for the New York Post.
He used to write for the New York Daily News.
He says he's a registered Democrat, but not like the Democrats of today.
Well, I'm gonna call him a conservative just based on the I've I don't know him.
I've never met him.
I read his work, and his work definitely comes across as conservative.
He had a piece in the New York Post yesterday saying, you know what?
It's time for Trump.
It's time for revolution.
It's time he goes through all the reasons why existing current approved Republican Party candidates are simply not the answer this year.
Oh, look at Snerdley, he knows who Goodwin is, and he you can't believe what I just said, can you?
And he says he's got friends telling him that he what are you sick?
What are you have you lost your mind?
Do we need to commit you to an institution?
Are you serious?
And he's dead serious about it.
And one of the reasons why is he thinks Trump can beat Hillary.
He thinks the Trump army can be bigger than anybody knows.
He's one of the people, and there are some who think that Trump can totally redraw the electoral map.
By that he means take Democrats, they're traditionally Democrat in the electoral college presidential race and convert them to the Republican couple, like New York.
Like Michigan.
But the takeaway here is exactly what young Jennifer said there.
Where is all this energy to stop Trump when it comes to beating Democrats?
We have never seen anything like this from them when it's Democrats who are the opponents, have we?
You know, I'm really disappointed.
We had the next caller just dropped off, and it was, I was so looking forward to it.
I just noticed it uh about a minute ago, and I looked up again, and the caller had uh had dropped off.
But it's it's a uh Cruz supporter, right?
Who he was saying he doesn't like me categorizing every opponent of Trump as a member of the establishment.
So I'm looking at it.
Why who's getting that idea?
You know, I I ran into this last week when I was making the point that one of the threats posed by Trump is that a lot of political professionals, if he wins, and even now, are being shown to be unnecessary.
Republican consultants, uh campaign stratagists, fundraisers.
I mean, Trump's going against every theory that there is about how to win an election.
There's a book, folks.
There's a procedure.
When you get into a club like this, there's a way things are done.
There are the fundraisers, the donors, and they provide the money for everything.
The donors provide the money to go hire the consultants, the money to buy advertising, the money to charter the plane to take the candidate and the press around.
Then there are the strategists to help the candidate come up with what he thinks about things.
And then there's the campaign manager who organizes where you're going to go when and organizes the events.
There's all these people, and they're all that it's a job.
It's a career.
And you try to get hired every campaign.
And you go to a candidate and you pitch yourself as the best guy to say win the independence.
I'm the best guy know how to buy media the cheapest I know how to do, and they pitch their wares, they get hired.
Trump isn't doing any of that.
And he's winning.
And in the process, he is sort of blowing up this book.
He's he's blowing up this.
You can only do it this way.
You've in every group, you know, if you've worked at a big company or anywhere else, and you try to do something different than the way they normally do it.
You hear, well, you can't do it that way.
We've always done it.
Well, that's what this is.
We've always done it.
We always do it this way.
Every campaign has got the same jobs, just different people filling them, has the same fundraiser technique, the same outreach to fundraisers, same dependence on donors, or what have you.
So I'm making the point that Trump winning here, and if he goes all the way and wins is going to blow this book up.
He's going to blow up this formula.
And that's the last, these are all experts.
You can't win without them.
You can't win without the consultants, you can't win without the fundraisers.
You can't win without the bundlers.
You can't win without the strategist.
You can't win without the analysts.
You can't win without the media coordinator.
And Trump's doing all those people are going to be threatened, I said.
Well, it turned out every blogger on earth thought I was talking about him.
And they're writing things.
Is there no principled opposition to Trump?
And I'm talking about ten people.
How many consultants are there at the presidential level?
They all get recycled.
Mike Murphy was the guy that ran Bush.
And by the way, there's a story about him.
He blew through a hundred and fifteen million dollars for four delegates.
They asked him if he felt bad.
He said, no.
No.
I don't feel bad about any of it.
We did what we thought would work, and it didn't, but there'll be the next campaign.
115 million.
What about the people who donated the money?
What'd they get for it?
Bob Schrum on the Democrat side ran the the uh the uh the uh Kerry campaign, he's run other Democrat campaigns.
Never won a dime.
He gets hired every year.
This is my point is how the establishment works.
Well, Trump coming along showing that these guys aren't necessarily these guys are all telling candidates you can't do this without me.
You can't do this without us.
It's no different than program directors telling me you cannot succeed unless you have guests, and I'm the guy to book your guests.
I can get the best guests in the world.
You can't succeed without guests.
So really it's no different.
But for some reason, everybody opposed to Trump thought I was talking about them being blown up, and I was talking about really a finite few number of people in professional jobs within the official party structure.
So many people thought I was talking about them.
Which it surprised me that I thought I had been specific enough.
Anyway, that's why I want to take this guy's call.
He thinks that I am if if you don't support Trump that you are establishment.
And I'm not talking about voters.
I'm not talking about citizens here per se.
I'm talking the establishment thing.
You know, put a moat around Washington.
I thought I had been perfectly clear about this.
But that's why I wanted to take the call, straighten this guy out.
I'm assuming that's what he wanted to say.
Now I'm out of time here, so we'll be back.
Man, here we go.
Fastest three hours in media.
We uh I've got some sound bites I need you to hear, folks, and we uh when we get back from from Ted Cruz and uh and Trump and Hillary speaking at uh the American Israel Public Affairs Committee today.
Trump and uh Cruz are there later.
We'll be back.
▲
Export Selection