All Episodes
Previous Next
April 22, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:44
April 22, 2016, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24 7 Podcast.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh today.
Thank you so much for joining.
Open Line Friday commences, of course.
Very much like to hear from you as well.
Do give a ring when you get the chance.
In case you haven't already heard it, and I'm guessing that many of you haven't because you probably don't care.
And if somebody said it to you, you'd give them a strange look.
Happy Earth Day, everyone.
Happy Earth Day.
Yeah.
Celebrating the Earth and all that it is and all that it could be.
Yeah, I mean, if if there was ever a day to break out your Birkin stocks from the nineties, today is the day.
But do you wear socks with them or not?
That's the real question.
That's what's really tough to decipher.
So it is Earth Day.
The first Earth Day, I believe it was it, 1970.
This stuff all started out as kind of part of the early hippie environmentalist movement stuff with teachings and go br go back and look at the history of what happened with DDT and the hysteria that banned that.
We still now have malaria in a lot of parts of the world where it could have been eradicated, but it was, you know, some people were worried about the fish and the birds and the pink paradise, which apparently put up a parking lot, and so we had to take all these steps that now in retrospect, especially with people seeing that not only do you have to worry about malaria, but their Zika virus and other things, that Earth Day is has been politicized from the very, very beginning.
But in case you didn't think it was politicized enough, today is a day that the Obama administration is using to uh put one of its big legacy items up on the bulletin board.
President Obama is signing today the or sorry at the United Nations, rather.
You have world leaders who have gathered uh to put into effect the Paris Agreement.
And you've had at least according to CBS 170 world lo uh 171 world leaders gathered at the UN to sign a sweeping climate agreement that was negotiated last year.
You'll remember this.
While the world that pays attention to what really matters was much more focused on a recent major terrorist attack, the Obama administration was decided to go over to Paris and negotiate this deal on climate, the Paris Agreement in Le Borget France.
Because I mean, if you're gonna go to sit around and talk about how we want to prevent the world from getting one degree warmer in a hundred years, not an exaggeration, by the way, or I think it might be two degrees Celsius, something like that in a hundred years.
They're projecting out that far.
These are the these are the fears that drive these people.
As I'm fond of saying, climate change is a religious belief for people who think they're too intelligent for religious belief, right?
It's a form of social signaling.
It's a way of telling people how smart, how evolved, how progressive you are.
It's like walking around with a big t-shirt that says I recycle, and then hopping in your Prius, which as they do more and more studies on, they find not as good for the creating those batteries in the Prius, not really not really as good for the environment as as the environmentalists, I think, would have hoped.
But back to the Paris Agreement.
This is interesting and very annoying on a number of levels.
Of course, Earth Day, the symbolism, bra.
It's Earth Day.
Yeah, man.
Sign it.
Sign that climate change agreement.
Uh this is supposed to be the culmination of all those efforts from all these countries.
By the way, the countries, this is fascinating.
This is the way I want all of my deals to go from now on, whether professional or from signing a lease on a home or something, or at least on an apartment.
I want it to be self-imposed and self-regulating.
So, you know, I mean it's like, well, what do you think you should pay, Buck?
Ah, let's go, let's go half the market rate.
What do you think about that?
That's all I can do right now, half market rate.
Okay, but you know, it I suppose that's what you say the market will bear in this case.
And then if I don't pay for a few months, instead of the landlord coming up to me and saying, hey, you know, you you owe me the rent that you already knew.
Remember, a rent that I set for myself.
That's how these climate goals work in this agreement that President Obama is uh is uh signing.
Um or President Obama has signed.
Uh and it's self uh self-imposed and also self-regulating.
It's a great way to have a deal.
So you decide what the benchmarks are, and you get to tell Other people, or you get to determine whether you're meeting them or not.
But this is this is supposed to be awesome.
This is supposed to be really, really exciting stuff.
So the Paris Agreement goes into effect today.
It is on Earth Day.
I know you're all super stoked about it, stoked.
And this is going to hopefully prevent a sorry, it is to it is they prevent an increase in global mean temperature.
I'm reading this off of CBS right now, of more than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, which is two degrees Celsius.
So a hundred years from now it might be two degrees Celsius warmer if we don't act right now on Earth Day for climate change.
And President Obama or President Obama is treating this as though it's a huge victory.
Now let me just say, even if you were to believe in all the climate change hysteria that's out there, and you you know, hashtag science.
I think all of us are sick of people saying, what are you a scientist?
And then you respond, well, are you are you a scientist?
And you know, no, I think what is it, Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer by trade.
But yeah, sure, climatology, mechanical engineering.
I'm not a scientist, so I can't tell the difference, right?
That's the same thing.
It's you know, hashtag science.
Even in what was it, 1947, I think Orwell in his essay on politics in the English language talked about the words that are much abused, things like, of course, progressive equality.
Nothing's really changed in that regard.
But science was one of them.
Because you can't argue with science, bro.
And then you say, okay, maybe I can't argue with it.
What are the numbers?
Show me the show me the data.
Go, what do you mean you want to see the data?
Just all the scientists, 90% of them think this.
And you go, well, consensus isn't actually science.
Einstein didn't think consensus was science.
He was I from what I understand as a non-scientist, he was a pretty smart guy.
Uh Einstein seemed to know some stuff.
He didn't think that that was the way that you would approach things.
I'm not sure that that's the way that we should approach things either.
So this deal is going into effect allegedly.
What's interesting about it, of course, is that the administration, in its constant effort to just treat things differently from how they are, treat things as something other than what they are.
They say that this is not a treaty.
And you would say to yourself, wait, wait, hold on a second.
This is and and look, I'm not just as I'm not a scientist, I'm not actually a member of the U.S. Congress.
Uh, you know, fortunately for me.
But I'm pretty sure that if you have an internationally binding agreement with financial and legal implications for the United States, that counts as a I think you bust out the T-word on that one.
You usually, I mean, you can call me crazy, but I think that qualifies as a treaty.
But here's the problem.
Uh here's the problem.
That would require the Senate to actually go along with it.
The Senate would have to ratify the treaty.
And it is obviously a treaty.
So how does the Obama administration get around this?
They call it an agreement.
This is very, to borrow from our old friend, Mr. Bill Clinton.
It's very clintonial.
I mean, you know, what is is what is a treaty.
A treaty is a form of agreement, but is an agreement a treaty necessarily?
I don't know.
You tell me.
Who wants a hug?
It's ridiculous.
This is how they this is how they skip around a constitutional requirement.
This is how they decide that they're just going to have an executive branch that acts like the legislative branch doesn't really exist.
So here we are.
I guess they're we're supposed to celebrate.
I'm not really sure how one would celebrate Earth Day, particularly.
And I think the more you look into the origins of this and you read, what is it, silent spring, and you go back to the origins of this environmentalist activist movement.
I'm sure that you'll have if you have children and school-age children, they'll all get to maybe do engage in some group recycling, even though in fact a lot of the recent data shows that recycling takes up more energy and is more uh puts more CO2 in the air than was previously thought, and perhaps is counterproductive if you in fact believe that CO2, which plants need to survive, is a pollutant.
The EPA certainly does.
The EPA now believes that it has the right to regulate CO2 as a pollutant, which is crazy, but that's what they think because you know it's gonna make the world melt in a hundred years.
This is an exaggeration.
These are the projections.
At 100 years, two degrees Celsius.
I'm just reading it, reading it off the news sites.
It's what the administration talks about, and it gets worse than all this too, because this giant this giant bacon all of self-congratulation that goes on with many of these world leaders.
From the developing world, of course, the countries that sign on to this that aren't going to actually have any uh any changes in their own policies, this is just great because, you know, they figure this is at some point a way to get the first world to pay for some of their stuff.
Eventually, this is just a massive scheme for the redistribution of wealth.
But in the meantime, they get to watch the first world, the developed world, tie itself in knots over a projection that is not a treaty, but somehow is still going to be an obligation that the U.S. government follows through on.
That would seem to be quite strange.
Usually those kinds of things, you know, the Congress has a say, but not in this case.
President Obama on his list on his list of essential legacy items.
And so here we are on Earth Day with the President of the United States pushing for this treaty.
I'm sorry, I see, it just happened.
Because it is a treaty, I will just say it is a treaty.
It'll slip out like that.
No, this agreement.
This the Paris Agreement, you'll notice they don't even call it the Paris Treaty.
They don't seem to want to seem to want to let that slip out there because there would be some obligations that come in.
There would be some constitutional issues.
But this administration's disrespect, not just for the separation of powers and not even just for the law, but for the very meaning of words in the law and the Constitution and elsewhere, that's actually going to be one of the greatest legacies left behind.
That things don't mean what we've always thought they've meant, that with a pen and a phone, it can all be changed, and that the Constitution is at best a suggestion box.
And when it comes to saving the planet from CO2, which is now considered a pollutant.
If you got to save the planet, anything is justified.
Remember, a religion for people who think they're too smart for religion, climate change.
Like to go into a break, I'll be right back.
This is Buck Sexton InfoRush.
Stay with me.
Buck Sexton here, InfoRush Limbaugh.
You can check out my latest at the Blaze.com slash Buck Sexton.
Please download my podcast there.
You can also follow me on Facebook at Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton.
I live tweet and Facebook message when I'm on air.
In the breaks, obviously.
I couldn't do it and talk at the same time.
That would be a little tough, even for me.
I want to finish up with some Earth Day thoughts, though.
I know.
I want to sit around and sing songs about how we're going to protect the planet, and we're all going to be, yay, we're all going to be friends.
It's going to be great.
But we're going to lock up our political opponents.
Because that's what nice people who want to save the earth do.
We're going to engage in massive collusion to try to use Democrat politicians and in fact Democrat prosecutors to bring charges of fraud against Exxon Mobil.
That just popped up this week.
How many of you heard about that one?
It's a little it's a little the other side of the Earth Day coin, if we will, the other side of the organic sustainable produce that you're paying more money for, despite the fact that there's no scientific evidence that I've ever read that organic pesticides are better for you than normal pesticides.
But whatever, bra.
Earth Day, man, come on.
It's amazing.
I love it.
So this is not good.
This is scary stuff.
This is uh this should feel a little Kafka-esque.
You have state uh state attorneys general, people like Eric Schneiderman, who, according to reports, have been talking to some environmental activists, and they're like, okay, what can we do here?
I got an idea.
Let's bring maybe even racketeering charges, fraud charges.
Well, what can we do to go after big oil for their lies?
Their lies about climate change.
They'd also have to prove damages, you would think in this in some capacity, whether this whether this went civil or perhaps even leaving the door open for a criminal, although not sure they would quite go there, but as you know, the mere threat of criminal charges often has enough effect on its own.
You don't have to bring the charges just to say, you know, we could criminally prosecute you, or you could write a check for billions of dollars to the environmental lobby, which is what they want.
The environmentalists want a huge check from Exxon.
The horrible irony here is that ExxonMobil, one of the largest uh one of the largest companies uh in the world, I believe it's the third largest by uh capitalization in the world, and it's certainly the top five.
They're gonna have to they would be forced to write if they lose in court, although they certainly have the resources to fight this.
It really comes down to what they think the lesser of two evils uh would be from a PR perspective from the political uh from the public relations perspective on this, that they would be writing the checks to sustain the climate change wackos who are suing them in the first place.
And then they'll maybe leave them alone for a little while and they'll spend the money and they'll go on, they'll have lots of fancy conferences, they'll pay a lot of people to collude with the data in different places and you know to hide the decline or to change the numbers or do whatever they have to do to fix the ten-year the last ten-year projection that was wrong, and to make sure that they sort of just Jedi mind trick people into it was global warming, but it is now climate change.
And in fact, now I'm hearing people say climate disruption, I think is if you're really one of the cool kids, you don't even call it climate change, you call it climate disruption.
That's another way of putting it.
Climate chaos.
Oh no.
When people start selling me their beachfront property in Malibu at cut rate prices, then I'm on board.
Then I'll believe that this is coming.
When the shores are eroding so fast that all of a sudden I can get like a condo on on the beach in South Beach for 10 G's, then I'll know that this is real.
Until then, thanks, but no thanks.
But this is very serious, though, what what these what the New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and these other AGs are doing?
Uh they're trying to create a a case to bring against Exxon that accuses them of fraud, sort of like what they did to the cigarette companies.
That and that's even raised as the model here.
So cigarette companies hiding uh hiding scientific information that would have led people to know that smoking did in fact cause cancer, lung cancer, and many other types of cancer.
That's equivalent to oil companies allowing us to have an economy and you know, develop into the 20th and 21st century.
Without fossil fuels, we are in the 19th century, right?
Everyone understands.
Even with the energy, even with the stuff we have now, you would be kicked back many, many uh decades.
Never mind the rest of the world, by the way.
You know, I I've I've been to some places.
I mean, you you don't see a lot of solar panels in Afghanistan, and I don't think you're going to any time soon, although I'm sure there's some project with the State Department to install them somewhere.
And the Taliban guys probably show up when they see them and say, what is that?
Um but you're not going to see a lot of that.
And you're also not going to see any honesty from the scientific community about how absolutely chilling it is to not just free expression, but to research, to the expression of free ideas when you have the criminalization of obviously political differences.
And this has become one of the hallmarks of the left.
I'm always fond of reminding everyone, because I I just I I can't seem to get it out there enough, at least not for me to be happy with how well known this is.
And this is a bit of a diversion, but you have to excuse me.
I digress.
It's one of the things that I do hanging out with you on the radio.
Look at all the likely Republican candidates for the presidency that had spurious, preposterous borderline to all the way insane investigations opened up against them.
Off the top of my head, uh Rick Perry, Scott Walker, Chris Christie, criminal investigations of all these possible and as we know, actual presidential contenders on the on the on the Republican side of things.
How many Democrats have had criminal investigations opened of their conduct with no underlying criminality whatsoever?
And people say, oh, Hillary Clinton.
No, no, there's like a hundred plus FBI agents looking into this.
I worked for the CIA years ago as an analyst.
Classification issues are very serious, and if it was a non-Clinton dealing with this, trust me, the person would have a very hard time sleeping given what's going on.
Perhaps we'll get to that in a few minutes.
But the criminalization of political differences is also I said to you before, the changing of basic words and the erosion of uh legal principle and the separation of powers and government, these are these are the real legacies of the Obama administration.
This is what will be left behind.
But as a part of this as well, using weaponizing prosecutors' offices across the country for purely political ends is something that this administration has excelled in doing.
Under this administration it has become effectively normal.
And that's why you have state attorney general, a state attorneys general and and other individuals who are working together to try to find a way to shake down oil companies to fund environmentalists to do crap, nonsense research, so that when they run out of cash for doing useless work when they could be trying to cure cancer or do something that's worthwhile, guess what they get to do?
Shake down the fossil fuel industry again.
Get those oil companies to write some more checks.
800 28282, Buck Sexton InfoRush, open line Friday is open.
Back in a few.
Indeed Buck Sexton here in for rush today on the EIB.
Very excited to be uh hanging out with you for a few hours on this lovely Friday.
Thank you for your time.
You can follow me on Twitter at Buck Sexton or go to Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton and we can talk.
I actually chat during the show with you.
800 28282 open line Friday.
It's not an empty promise.
The lines are open so let's take some calls.
We have Peter in Canada on the line.
Peter, welcome to Rush Limbaugh Show.
You're speaking in Buck.
When you fill in and stop a rush is quite an honor.
Listen, I'll get right to my point.
You know, we're we're facing the same uh uh crap up here.
Um I really hope the legacy of all this one Iraq gets out is you know they're gonna start dragging up the East Anglia information.
I think the fact that everybody's got a smartphone nowadays that this multimedia can help that the whole situation out.
I mean it's really bad what's going on up here.
Our our we cannot afford any anything it's gonna that's gonna throw us off the edge more than we are right now.
Yeah it's crazy.
Look uh science is as I said before not about consensus.
You know it is about consensus usually fashion.
That's really what all this climate change talk is it's an intellectual fashion or fad.
It's something that people buy into not because they care about the world so much as it says certain things about them as individuals, right?
That they are uh learned that they're socially uh progressive and and and they care and essentially they're good people right it's really just moral uh moral exhibitionism you know it feels good so people buy into it and it costs them nothing or at least that's what they think it actually cost people a lot if they go through with all this but it doesn't cost the individual anything and it's completely divorced from the the reality of of decades now of the other of the side that pushes all the stuff being wrong.
You would think that people uh you would think that people would after a time start to change the way they look at this but no they just double down over I mean go back and watch Al Gore's movie for which he made an absurd amount of money.
I mean he made like Hillary Clinton speech giving money for an inconvenient truth like big time money.
And you go back and look at the predictions in there now about you know the drowning polar bear you know the whole thing there's no that's not n none of this has come to fruition.
None of this was real.
I mean there's that uh graphic that he showed of Florida and and the state all this stuff coming underwater and uh by if you if I remember correctly I mean I haven't I saw the movie once and I've tried not to watch it again but I've seen clips of it since then too.
You know 2020, 2030 do you think Flor does anyone really think Florida's going to be underwater in 2020?
Do they really believe that?
Or 2030?
The whole state?
I I don't know I don't think so.
I I'm I'm not seeing people fleeing for their lives from Florida I hear it's quite nice this time of year.
So uh I don't know what to say about the lunacy I don't know you well what's going on up there with this in Canada.
I'm sure it's even a little worse from our c for our Canadian brothers and sisters up north.
Well actually actually we have a lot more people buying into it.
And I think if the information gets out because we have the same mainstream media up here that you do but we have only 34 million opposed to what 350 million you have.
But I'm really hoping at this point that they're going to see the left as information proper facts come out and what I think we're starting to see that now with Donald bringing a lot of stuff to the forefront I think people are starting to look at things differently now.
Well I'm Peter I think climate change is affecting your cell reception but thank you for calling in from Canada climate change.
Just blame every everything on climate change.
And I was you know if if I'm late for Work.
Why?
Climate change.
All that pollution in the air just makes me sleep, bro.
I just can't get up.
I'm just like, ooh, it makes me woozy.
Sounds a little late, you know.
You can use climate change for whatever you want.
By the way, I I would on the issue of politics as leftist politics as a giant social fad.
Uh there is sort of uh uh an intellectual fashion.
There's a lot of ways you could describe it.
There's actually a piece in Vox, which is a very left I some of you probably are unfamiliar with it, some of you are.
It is a very, very left wing uh website.
But somebody on it wrote about how there's a sort of a the smug the smugness of liberalism is just completely overwhelming at this point.
And that for so many people it's just become that they're they're liberal because they're better than other people.
It's it's not that they want to help them.
It was, according to this, this is a leftist writer, by the way.
And I'll see if I can uh pull up this actual piece for you at some point here, and I'll give you the uh the real the real um the title if you wanted to look it up.
Or I'll post it on Facebook.com slash bucks X and see a little treat for you, those of you who go there.
Um but he but he says it straight up that the left initially was all about really kind of Marxism in this country, but we never talked.
There wasn't American Communist Party and labor movements were really about socialism and but you know they will talk about the you know the 40-hour work week and the eight-hour day and minimum wage and child.
They talk about all that sort of history, and there was at least a case to be made that the left cared about the poor.
Now the left just buys the poor off to vote for them and really has a disdain for them, which is going to lead us, by the way, shortly into our discussion of all things GOP, Trump Cruz, etc.
Um, but there is a disdain for the working class on the American left now, and it is from the the absolute top on down.
The leftist elites think that people and this was best exemplified by Obama's comments out in San Francisco, I think it was in 2008, when he said these sort of bitter people cling to their Bibles and their guns.
That's really what the American left now thinks of uh the uh say the working class to say of uh non-minorities who make from thirty to eighty or ninety thousand dollars a year, the American left thinks that they're a bunch of chumps.
Thinks that they're not they're not worth fighting for, thinks that they're you know, they'll still put on the pretension, oh, labor unions.
Yeah, how unions have been getting crushed in recent decades.
Usu unions are on the way out.
And now they realize that why do you why do you need a labor union?
All you need is to have Democrats in control of the state government, and they'll set, you know, they'll set wage laws and they'll set out they'll do all the stuff that unions used to do anyway.
You just need a progressive government, they'll just regulate everything.
And now you have public sector unions, which even the in you know, even FDR, even the earliest union proponents were saying, well, I mean, we can't do that.
That's crazy, right?
You're you're gonna negotiate with govern the government employees, you're gonna negotiate with the government for what they're allowed to make.
I mean, this is this is insane.
Uh, but I digress.
Ray in Livermore, California.
You are on the Rush Limbaugh show.
You are speaking to Buck.
What is up, sir?
Hey, Buck, it's great to have you on board.
Um, a lot of people are celebrating Earth Day today.
There's many people who are busy trying to save the planet.
I would just like to remind those people that the planet is actually trying to kill us.
And I can give you a few examples here: earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, tornadoes, hailstorms, floods, lightning strikes, active volcanoes, ocean waves sweeping people off to sea, sandstorms, scorching heat, arctic cold.
I would can I would contend that the earth has killed more people than ISIS has.
And it's a serious threat to us.
And um I would just like to remind those folks who are busy trying to save a planet that is trying to kill them.
Ray, I I can say that you've you've kind of blown my mind.
I don't really this is a first for me.
Um Mother Earth is engaged in some conspiracy to eliminate all of it.
Well, if you if if I want to just actually continue on with this thread for a little bit, um and and Ray, thank you for calling in.
Uh no, no, actually, if if you look and National Geographic even has figures on this, uh over 90% of all the species that have existed on the planet, according to National Geographic, have all die.
Species die-off is a continuous phenomenon.
The planet Earth and other species and disease and and and change changing climate.
Nature is very powerful, you know.
I know a very wise man who always tells me biology wins, it's also true to say that nature wins.
Um, yeah, in a sense, this is important.
This is also why I say we should just kill all the mosquitoes.
I know people say, what about the birds?
You know, you have this uh this notion of keystone species.
If one species goes away, all the others will die.
I think I think we could live without mosquitoes.
They're trying to create genetically modified mosquitoes in Florida that will kill off all the because if people are freaked out about Zika because they were freaked out about DET back in the day, and now we still have mosquito problems.
But anyway, species die-off is a very real thing.
Says a non-scientist who just likes to read things, which would be me, but over 90% of us.
And there have been certain periods, too.
I can't remember them off the top of my head, because you know, hashtag not a scientist.
Uh, but there have been certain periods where we've lost vast, vast numbers of species.
Yeah, I mean, the earth, the earth is not actively trying to murder us.
That's that I don't think is fair.
It is true, though, that civilization is really the struggle against the you know the natural challenges of existence, right?
So, you know, we're gonna live, you know, uh Mr. Schnurley, we're you know, we're gonna live probably well into our hundreds, you know.
We're we're we're doing well here.
You know what I mean?
You know, we're we're a well-preserved group, this into our hundreds.
Yes, that's right.
That's right.
And our you know, food is way better now than it's ever been in the past.
There's there's more and more and more out there for all of us, despite the sort of Malthusian affect of many of the scientists out there who think that you know what is it, Ehrlich and the Oh, the the Whole Foods Cake?
I might have to talk about that a little bit.
We'll see.
The uh Ehrlich with the population bomb, though.
It's just Malthus retread, because Malthus was like, look, very straightforward math.
We produce X amount of food, we have this many people, they're growing this way over this period of time.
Hashtag science.
We found out how to grow more food.
Who could have thought of such a thing?
Supply and demand.
It's amazing.
It's the only thing you really need to know from economics, and the rest of it is all kind of mumbo jumbo.
All right, let's take.
Oh, people want to talk.
Oh, wait, no, one more earth day, and then we'll get into some tr- Oh no, you want to we want to get into Trump?
I was gonna say okay, it's Trump, Trump, Trump, here we go.
Someone wants to talk Trump, it's open line Friday.
Let's do it.
We have Dan in is it Coaco, Florida?
I'm sorry.
Cocoa, Flor.
I I don't know all the towns, so I didn't know.
Uh Coco, Florida.
Dan, thank you for calling in.
This is Buck, you're on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Oh, I don't think we have Dan.
So I think we get one more climate ch we get one more uh Earth Day person.
Steven in Coldwater, Michigan.
Do we have Steven?
Kind of ironic that the day before Earth Day, the what appears I believe to be the largest bankruptcy of a green company, Sun Edison just took place yesterday.
Ten billion dollars.
Somehow they got another 300 million line of credit for restructuring, which is probably more good money after bad.
And I'm sure a bunch of that money was you know, government-backed loans for a green energy company.
I'm rather confident of that.
I'll have to look into it.
It sounds a little bit like Cylindro, which I'm old enough to remember Celindro.
You know that company that had 500 million dollars of taxpayer backstop uh money that went to a company that was making you know, there's that old joke about how uh we'll sell at a loss, but we'll make it up on volume.
That was Solindra's business model.
They were losing money on every unit sold, but you know, if they had enough taxpayer money, maybe they would get into the maybe they would get into the block eventually, but they did not.
So uh I thank you, sir, for calling in, Steve, and reminding me about that.
I think we have to go into a break here.
Yeah, we do.
800 282-2882, Buck Sexton Info-Rush Lumba.
We were having a lot of fun.
Stay with me.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh today.
800 2822882, open line Friday is a rockin'.
So please come a knocking.
Uh the uh the lines are open here.
We're taking calls in a second.
I mentioned a piece on Vox, which is uh which is like the nation with a different name.
It's a very left-wing site, but they have a piece, the smug style in American liberalism.
Let me just give you a quick quote from it.
Nothing is more confounding to the smug style of American liberalism than the fact that the average Republican is better educated and has a higher IQ than the average Democrat, that for every overpowered study finding superior liberal open-mindedness and intellect, there is one to suggest Republicans have the better of these qualities.
Some self-effacing analysis from a super left-wing site that has some very interesting insights about how the left has abandoned its roots, really, of trying to help those uh sort of the the trying to help the working man and woman.
Now it's just about uh trying to pander to minorities and uh a sort of elitism at the top of professionals and coast uh coastal progressives and then using minorities for votes, and that is the modern Democratic Party.
That's really what it's all about.
And that is how we get the phenomenon of Trumpism, which we are going to discuss now with my friend Mike in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Mike, thank you for calling in.
It's Buck on the Rush Show.
Hey, Buck, thanks for taking my call.
Um just wanted to discuss the you know the rhetoric in the media about um the electability of one or other candidate and the and and people covalescing around either Trump or Cruz, whichever one it's gonna be.
And you know, uh the rhetoric is even spewed by Hannity because I think Hannity wants to promote Trump and he thinks it would favor him.
But in my opinion, um if our candidates cruise, I think the Trumpsters will come on board because the Trumpsters right now, they're Trumpsters.
They don't care about issues, they just care that it's Donald Trump.
But once they're forced to pay attention to what Ted Cruz believes and thinks, I think they'll jump on board.
But on the other hand, the cruisers, we know what Trump is.
You know, I'm obviously a cruiser.
Uh I'm just so I'm I'm clear with everybody listening who may not know.
I've come out and said that my my preferred candidate is is Ted Cruz, but I'm I am never Hillary, I am not never Trump.
So that's uh and I'll get into the never Hillary aspect of things in just a few minutes here.
I wonder, though, my friend uh Mike down at Pittsburgh, I wonder if uh Trump supporters he's really, I think, poisoning the well with all this talk about the stolen delegates and uh the the there's a lot of of nastiness that's the kind of thing that I mean I think I have a piece even here that that there are yeah, delegates this is from politico delegates face death threats from Trump supporters.
Um and so that they've just gone and talked to all these different delegates who are saying that Trump supporters are leaving them really horrific messages and saying they're gonna hurt them and they know they're you know they're gonna find their families and we're watching you and all this stuff.
I I don't know if that's just gonna get swept away.
And by the way, I think it goes both ways.
I think that there's going to be a backlash.
If Trump doesn't come out of that convention as the nominee, I believe Trump supporters in large numbers are gonna walk.
By the way, if Trump does come out as a nominee, there are a lot of people who, in good faith, uh have been willing to hear out Trump and have been willing to be as open-minded as they can with all this stuff, but all it takes is a few Trumpers on social media.
If you're a private person or if you're somebody who's you know trying to share their thoughts publicly about this stuff, uh cursing at you and using horrible language and just acting like uh psychopaths before you're like, you know what?
I'm not into this whole Trump thing.
Um and that's I think that's an underestimated factor in all this right now.
really do.
On the delegate issue and the notion that Trump's promoting that Ted's using the system to his advantage and cheating, That would be like asking Bill Belichick uh not to run the ball and only pass the ball and use half the game.
You know, those roles have been played for two hundred years, and and Ted Cruz is just using the roles and using them to his advantage.
Well, I mean you'll you'll notice that one of the big that there were two big takeaways, and Mike, thank you for calling in.
There were two big takeaways from the uh from the absolute route that Donald Trump handed to his two contenders here in New York.
Ben Carson was I went and voted, and Ben Carson was still on the ballot, which was kind of a surprise.
I th I would I did you know why would Ben Carson still be on the He was on the ballot.
I mean I I almost took a photo of it, but I didn't you know I didn't want to make a big deal of it.
I think I was probably in my district in Manhattan, one of like five cruise voters.
So uh and I don't I don't even know if that's an exaggeration.
I there are prime if we broke into triple digits in where I live in Manhattan, that would be because it went all for Kasich.
He's joking about being the mayor, by the way.
At least he's he is more conservative than Bill de Blasio, aka Warren Wilhelm Zekaiser.
Did you know this?
His name was Warren Wilhelm, and he changed it.
Yeah, it's true.
Because it sounds so dramatic.
So instead he went for Zabil de Blasio.
Because it's like, hey, Billy De Blasio.
You know what I mean?
He's like a union guy.
He's my buddy, Billy De Blaz, the man, instead of Zakiza, which doesn't get the votes from the unions.
All right, I gotta get into a break.
Buck Sexton in for rush.
Back in a few.
Buck Sexton here, in for rush today.
Got a lot to talk to you about.
We're gonna be taking more calls.
This is openline Friday, 800-282-2882.
Um I want to say I you know what I want to do though in the next hour?
I would like to talk a bit about Madame Secretary.
No, not the Tea Leone character, which, by the way, come on, really.
Um, but I would like to talk the next hour about Hillary Clinton.
Because some of you don't know where I stand on that.
And then we'll get into Trump Cruise nonsense.
So let's establish some Democrat fun first.
▲
Export Selection