All Episodes
Previous Next
April 22, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:18
April 22, 2016, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Indeed, it's Buck here in for Rush today.
Open Line Friday continues.
Thank you so much for joining me on the EIB Network.
It is an honor and a pleasure to be here.
You can check me out Monday through Friday at 7 Eastern on the Blaze TV, the Buck Sexton show.
Please do check it out.
You can also download my daily podcast at theblaze.com/slash Buck Sexton.
Please do.
And if you want to tell me during the show either how much you love the show or you hate the show, you can go to facebook.com slash BuckSexton and I will read it.
I may block it after I read it, but I will read it.
So please do check it out.
All right, Hillary time.
Ooh, get excited.
So now my Hillary impression is not particularly accurate, but I feel like it captures the essence of things that's Hillary.
I've been told it sounds a bit like Iago from Aladdin.
So if I fall into that by accident when we're talking about Hillary, at least you know where I'm coming from on it.
I like to give speeches for a lot of money.
You know, it's sort of like that.
It doesn't really sound like her, but you know who I'm talking about.
So, you know, or people have also said, well, Gilbert Godfrey was the voice of Iaga from Aladdin.
So Hillary, there's, you know, she's able to sort of escape by, and there's this pretense now that sort of the pantomime, the theater that's going on between Hillary and Bernie continues because at this point, it's just useful for her, really.
I mean, I know that she's spending money and there's all this analysis of how, oh, it's going to hurt her in the general.
Look, if it was just Hillary, maybe people would spend a little more time looking into who this person is that is the Democrat nominee.
Do we have to keep saying presumed?
This is like saying alleged when there's a signed confession and a videotape and everything else.
But you technically have to say alleged.
I guess we technically have to say Hillary is the likely Democrat nominee.
She is the Democrat nominee.
So that's what's going to end up happening here.
But there's a very interesting piece on her that just came out.
I think it was, let me see, when was this published?
It was the last 24 hours.
It was yesterday afternoon.
And this just solidifies what we already know.
To borrow from the French novelist Flaubert, she is a woman who is so corrupt, she would willingly pay for the pleasure of selling herself.
I mean, she just cannot get enough checks from enough corporations.
Can't find a way to get around it.
Loves it.
Absolutely loves to get the big money from these companies.
The Associated Press has done a review.
This is the piece, a review of federal records.
And what they found, and this will shock you not at all, but I think that we need to overcome the numbness that has set in across America for all things Hillary, that she can lie about anything.
She can disregard rules, whether it's about email and the classification system, or she can be involved in her husband's horrific character assassinations of women who bring very real charges against him for either sexual harassment or worse, by the way, and just escapes with all this.
It's like, ah, well, you know, it's the Clintons.
You know, what are you going to do?
The Clintons are going to be the Clintons.
No, that is not okay.
That should not be the thinking.
The AP has gone in because her speeches, I mean, she has a rapacious lust for money and power.
I think that's fair to say.
Her and Bill, both of them.
And Bill's got lust for a lot of things.
But I mean, she has, you know, really a desire to amass tremendous wealth.
And you'll hear the sycophants.
I mean, the Hillary supporters.
And oh, sometimes I have to go on TV and listen to this stuff either face to face or across a satellite feed.
Where they're like, well, that's what the market will bear.
I'm like, oh, well, you know, I mean, drug dealers could technically say the same thing, right?
That's what the market will bear for my product, but their product is illegal.
Now, what Hillary's doing is not necessarily illegal, although I want to see what's in all these emails on the private server.
We'll have to wait on that.
But it is certainly gross.
It certainly looks corrupt.
And in some places, at some times, the mere appearance of corruption, not necessitating, legally speaking, a quid pro quo, a what for what?
You do this for me.
I do this for you.
Just the appearance of corruption, absent that quid pro quo, is enough to bring charges against people.
And yet Hillary Clinton is on the speech circuit, which are people say, oh, lots of people are on the speech circuit.
No, usually the people that go on the speech circuit are, first of all, none of them are getting paid what she's getting paid.
And they're also not the spouse of somebody who's getting obscene amounts of money while that person is a very prominent public figure with business.
Let me get into the nitty-gritties AP story and then I'll step back a little bit for what this means.
So the APs looked at these federal records and regulatory filings, and they found out that almost all of the 82, this is from the piece, all of the 82 corporations, trade associations, and other groups that paid for or sponsored Clinton's speeches have actively sought to sway the government,
lobbying, bidding for contracts, commenting on federal policy, and in some cases were in direct contact with State Department officials or Hillary Clinton herself while she was Secretary of State.
So people are giving her money and are then calling her while she's the Secretary of State.
And these are people who have business before the United States federal government and in some cases, specifically the Secretary of State or the State Department, the Department, as it's called.
Because presidents come and go, but the Department is forever, as they say.
True thing about the State Department.
I used to work with a lot of state guys.
You know, I used to come across them down in my D.C. days.
Langley, State Department, we used to hang out sometimes.
So, anyway, where were we?
Love you, State Department.
What?
CCI, you know, that's how we roll.
We do some fun stuff.
So I will say this: she's getting all this money.
She's getting paid for these speeches.
The sycophants are saying, well, that's what the market will bear.
Other public officials go on the speaking circuit when they're done, right?
They wait to cash out when they're done.
Clinton realizes, wait a second, I can cash out while I'm still in the game and get so much more cash.
It's a brilliant strategy.
Look at that.
Who could have thought such a thing?
And as I pointed out before, the whole notion that her spouse, Bill Clinton, can get paid, I'm worth at least $800,000 an hour for speeches.
You know, that he can give a speech for $800,000 and that his wife can be the Secretary of State and he can be giving these speeches to foreign entities with business before the State Department, that he even considered giving a speech to North Korea at one point.
That came out on the records.
I mean, he didn't do it, but he was like, I mean, you know, North Korea needs speeches too.
You know what I'm saying?
They got cash to throw around.
Not for their people or anything, but for me.
And he's doing this whole thing.
And we're supposed to think that this is normal.
This is acceptable.
This is completely insane.
The problem with the Clinton, the corruption is actually so apparent and so rampant that you're sort of overwhelmed by it.
You're like, wait, wait, what?
This is what goes on?
This is what's happening?
It's what the market will bear.
Why does the market bear that?
This is, has anyone heard a Hillary Clinton speech who's telling me this is what the market will bear?
You know, we're going to bring jobs back, and I care about the middle class and women's access to health care.
It's like, oh, brutal, brutal, just straight up.
Brutal speaking voice, boring, not a good presenter.
Look, I'm just saying, I'm just telling like it is.
Yeah, it's a brutal speaking voice.
That's right.
It's rough.
It is an auditory assault every time.
I'll say it.
It's definitely not worth $225,000 or whatever.
But what they found, going back to the records here, because I just, this stuff drives me insane.
This is who, you know, if Republicans can't get their stuff together, okay, if conservatives and sort of, you know, the Trump movement, if we can't figure all this stuff out, everybody, this is who, you know, and we can figure out what that means, but this is who your next president's going to be.
Maybe you think that's not a big deal because, you know, it really is business as usual for the most part, but it's a continuation of business as usual under Obama for the last eight years.
So don't whine to me about how terrible Obama's been for eight years, but say, eh, you know, if Clinton's, you know, more important to show the conservative base who the real boss is by making sure that Ted Cruz doesn't get elected or Donald Trump does or whatever.
Just never Hillary, all right?
Just can we just agree on that?
Just never Hillary and we'll work from there.
We'll figure out all the rest.
So she gets paid.
You know, you got Bernie Sanders coming out, actually, saying, somebody gets paid $225,000 for a speech.
It must be an unbelievably extraordinary speech.
And you know what?
Sanders, I'm feeling the burn on you, my bro.
You're correct.
You are correct.
That would have to be one heck of a speech.
And it's not like she gave a couple of them here and there.
They looked at over the course of two years, she got $21.6 million from public interest groups.
She spoke to Wall Street groups.
Now she's all, you know, I want to reign in Wall Street.
I'm going to show them who's boss.
And then she's telling you this, and she's essentially holding one hand behind her back for the brown paper bag full of cash from Goldman Sachs.
I mean, this is preposterous.
Who could believe this stuff?
I'm going to reign in the banks.
Really?
You know, I don't know why she'd be doing that.
She loves the bank.
She loves some Wall Street cash.
And what's funny is the Bernie supporters are calling her out on it.
And everybody knows, but they also know that, you know, even a democratic socialist is kind of a tough sell to the American electorate.
So they're just going to all just sort of eat their peas and pull the lever for Hillary.
And that's the plan.
They're just going to do it, even though they know.
So phony baloney.
The whole thing, it's just all nonsense.
I mean, I love it.
She's talking about me.
I love Brooklyn.
It's like, yeah, you moved to Chappaqua as fast as you possibly could and really spent most of her time either in DC or on private jets flying around the world to give speeches to people or as Secretary of State, where her biggest accomplishment seems to have been how much time she spent on taxpayer-funded private jets flying all over the world to go to, you know, basically a lot of fancy cocktail parties and dinners.
What was her big accomplishment as Secretary of State would have to be the complete destabilization of Libya, which is currently a failed state with warring militias of various sort of various degrees of jihadism.
And yeah.
And also an ISIS affiliate has popped up there because things are so bad.
Controls, they estimate 100 miles of coastline.
But that's her big accomplishment, which she now, by the way, throws at Obama's feet.
And everyone's kind of okay with that because, you know, Obama's not running again, right?
So whatever.
If Obama's got to kind of rhetorically speaking, take the fall for that.
That's why she can say, you know, wow, I didn't really do it.
I know, it does sound like Gilbert Godfrey, but, you know, Hillary, Gilbert, whatever.
There's some similarities in the voice.
This is what the market will bear, though, these Hillary speeches.
Now, the financial services and investment industry paid Hillary Clinton $4.1 million looking at this review of her speeches.
This is, by the way, just between 2030, wait, it's not just Wall Street banks.
This is the AP, this is the header, or the first paragraph rather, on this Associated Press piece.
It's not just Wall Street banks.
Most companies and groups that paid Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to speak between 2013 and 2015 have lobbied federal agencies in recent years, and more than one-third are government contractors.
Okay, a third of the people giving Hillary money essentially exist at the exist at the beckon call, exist at the behest of the federal government giving them money.
What are you going to tell me?
They didn't know that Hillary was running for president.
And now she's going to say that she's going to stand up to the corporations and she's for the little guy.
She loves Brooklyn so much, she moved to Chappaqua as fast as she could because, you know, she's of the people.
This is just, nobody can buy this, right?
I mean, look, if you, if you really, if all you care about is you want the first, you want sort of the baby boomer generation and the feminists from that generation, feel like Hillary is the, you know, the culmination of the dreams of that generation and, you know, abortion on demand and sort of leftism a la carte and all this.
I get it, right?
You vote for Hillary because that's what you're going to get.
But don't sell me all this crap about how she cares about the little guy.
She cares about the little guy if the little guy has about 200 Gs to write her a check to come hang out for a bit.
Other than that, doesn't care about the little guy much at all.
800-282-2882.
It's always fun to do a little Hillary bashing on a Friday.
Open Line Friday continues.
Buck Sexton in for Rush Limbaugh back after the break.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh today.
Open Line Friday continues 800-282-2882.
Also, you can consider it open social media too because you can write to me on facebook.com/slash BuckSexton.
Please click like on the page.
And you can follow me on Twitter at BuckSexton.
And I live tweet throughout the show during the break.
So you can be like, hey, Buck, don't ever do that scary Hillary voice again.
It makes my children cry or in the car, and I might take that under advisement.
You can let me know that in real time right now, my friends.
If you get on Twitter, you can go to Buck Sexton.
It is me responding to you.
I don't have some staff.
I wish I had some staff to do that kind of stuff.
I do not.
It is all me.
Yeah, I don't have quote people to handle anything.
I'm the guy who came in here with a knapsack on full of granola bars.
That's me.
That's it.
I can't talk about what the Langley buddies helped me do.
Can neither confirm nor deny.
That's all some secret squirrel stuff there.
Allegedly, I'm trying to take over.
I'm a CIA plan to take over conservative media.
I don't know if anyone out there has heard that.
There's a certain host.
He's naming names.
He's naming names.
He's held on the dossier.
He's naming names.
He's coming after me.
He's had enough.
He's based out of Austin.
That's all I'm going to say.
That's all I'm going to say.
Okay.
So he's named names, the guy who's CIA because he says he's CIA.
Where was I?
Oh, yes.
Wait, before we get into calls, and I will, if you're on hold, please stay because we will get to your calls in just a second here.
But I just want to give you one more little bit of Hillary fun.
Yeah, that's right.
Hillary fun.
Words you don't usually think of together.
So there's a Hillary pack out there.
First, let me, I want to set the table a little bit with this.
You hear a lot of complaints on the left about Citizens United, a Supreme Court decision that has taken on the effect on the left of being the equivalent of a boogeyman.
It's like, you better, you know, you better recycle, young man, or else the Citizens United is going to come out of the closet for you.
I mean, you know, they're going to attack you.
It's hiding under your bed.
Citizens United was a Supreme Court case that said the government can't decide that there is an artificial constraint before an election that all of a sudden eliminates the First Amendment, i.e., you can't make an anti-Hillary documentary three months or six months or whatever before an election.
That's what it was about.
And during that case, when it was being argued, it was asked.
The government was asked.
So can't you then ban an anti-Hillary book?
What's ever seen a book in a movie?
And they're like, well, well, I mean, yeah, I guess theoretically you could ban a book.
So you anti-Citizens United people are the pro-book banning people.
Just putting that out there.
Meanwhile, they complain about it because people don't know anything.
And it's like, yeah, Citizens United is terrible.
Citizens United is funded by the Koch brothers and Halliburton, Dick Cheney.
You know, just throw together a bunch of things that scare people on the left who get their news from the Daily Show and other places.
It is still on.
It has a host who is so unfunny, it's almost funny watching him try to be funny.
But there is still a daily show.
It's no longer intentionally a comedy, really, I think you could say.
It's sort of unintentional comedy.
It is not funny.
Jon Stewart was a propagandist for the left, but he was a talented guy.
He was talented at what he did.
I will say that.
Sometimes I found myself laughing, even though I knew it was a pile of lies.
I haven't even gotten into that.
Never happens anymore, but the guy who's on now is just not funny.
I haven't even gotten to it.
So Hillary, where, do I have enough time?
Yeah, I've got a minute here.
So Hillary always talks about Citizens United.
I hate Citizens United.
You know, meanwhile, they're like, you know, Goldman Sachs is like throwing cash up on the stage to, or not just Goldman.
I don't want to just pick on Goldman, Morgan, all.
They're all throwing all these private equity guys too.
They're all throwing cash up there.
Everybody's throwing cash up there.
Okay.
Government contractors, as we know.
But she has a PAC that is spending a million dollars.
This is the Daily Beast writing this, which is a left of center site.
But Hillary has a pack that's spending a million dollars to, quote, correct commenters on social media platforms like Facebook.
They're spending a million dollars.
This applies to all of you.
Any of you who are writing, you know, Hillary is the worst dot ever.
You might get a response from this pack called Barrier Breakers.
And is that what it's called?
I think that's what it's called.
Correct the Records.
It's called, oh, no, it's called Correct the Record.
I don't know.
Correct the Records Barrier Breakers project says in a press release that it has addressed more than 5,000 people who have personally attacked Hillary Clinton on Twitter.
So that's right.
There's a PAC that's spending money that, oh, by the way, is directly coordinating with the Clinton campaign because technically online comments are free and are therefore not covered under some of these rules somehow.
And they want to make sure that you don't say anything mean about Hillary without getting a slapdown on Facebook, on Twitter, on Reddit, on any internet platform where you can post your comments.
This is the sort of thing that Pravda wishes or wished it could have done in its day.
But Hillary's one-upping them left and right and spending a million dollars coordinating with this pack to do all this.
Buck Sexton and for Rush.
We'll be back in a minute.
Indeed, the buck is back.
Please do tune in to my show on the Blaze TV, 7 Eastern Monday through Friday.
You can learn more about it at theblaze.com.
Download my podcast at theblaze.com slash BuckSexton.
And if you want to tell me that the Hillary voice is terrifying your children, which some of you actually have in the past few minutes, or is terrifying you and or your children, you can send me a message on Facebook at facebook.com slash BuckSexton.
Let's take some calls because it is Open Line Friday.
There are rules here.
I can't just run roughshod over them.
800-282-2882 is the number.
Marcel, Colin, from southern Brazil.
Thank you for your time.
What's up?
Hey, Mr. Sexton.
Thank you for taking my call.
I've been listening to the show for quite some time now, and I've been following the primaries as closely as I can.
And there's this one thing that is bothering me, which is Donald Trump's justification when he's asked about his past contributions to the DNC, Hillary Clinton, and so on.
You know, when people ask him this, he says simply, you know, I'm a businessman.
I do what I have to do.
I have obligations to my family, to my employees.
So, yeah, I'll do what I have to do.
But the truth is that you don't need to fund dishonest people in order to be a successful businessman.
You don't need to bend the law in every single manner possible in order to provide for your families.
Look, I'm going to say this, and it's funny because I feel like I'm doing something right because the Trump haters don't think I'm hard enough on Trump at all, and the Trump supporters think that I'm some Cruz crony and whatever.
Even though, I mean, I didn't come out for Cruz until after Rubio dropped out of the race, to be honest with you.
So, I mean, I've waited quite a while for this whole process.
I'll say this about Donald, because you raise a very salient point.
Here's what the Trump supporters say about this.
And I go on CNN and have to, and not have to, I like doing it, but I deal with the Trump supporters, some of the most prominent Trump surrogates, the ones that you would probably know from TV.
And what they say and what others say is, well, he knows the system, right?
And this is kind of like if you want to stop, you know, check kiting or fraudulent financial practices, you need to bring in Frank Abignale, right?
Played by Leonardo DiCaprio in that movie.
Not to say that what Donald did was illegal.
I'm just saying you bring somebody in who understands the sort of the dark side of what's really going on.
That's the excuse they give and that he was a businessman and it didn't matter.
Now, I'll say this.
Your point about how you don't actually need to do that to do business, I think is a fair point.
You don't need Hillary Clinton at your wedding to be a successful businessman, right?
I think that's been well established.
No, the guys here are giving me a look.
I'm like, I don't think you need Hillary to show up and be like, oh, for endless love and happiness.
Oh, gosh, horrible.
For me, it's like the music stops and everybody wants to leave.
You don't need that.
I think that Trump spends money on this stuff because he can, because he's a guy that likes attention.
He likes fancy, famous people around him.
And that's what it really was.
So I think it was more about narcissism than, quite honestly, even than politics in some cases for him.
But how much should somebody really care about this, I think, is also a fair question to ask, right?
Does it really matter all that much that he was giving, especially as somebody who was doing a lot of operations and living here in New York City?
You can give money to Republicans, but in New York at least, but then you're definitely wasting your money, unfortunately.
So I could see your point, though, Marcel.
I think that the Trump supporters brush this stuff all off too easily.
I mean, it's one thing to say, yeah, I don't think the Trump should have done that, but I'm still supporting him.
What bothers me is when they say, well, no, what he did was great.
It's like, no, we don't have to go to that extreme.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, sure.
It does make sense.
All right, good answer, what you say about knowing the system, Hillary knows the system too.
That doesn't mean the Republicans should elect.
I don't think there's also any secret sauce here to knowing, you don't have to write big checks to a politician to know this system.
I mean, to know that that's a way to curry influence with people, right?
So, no, I think it's a very fair point.
But I just wish that the Trump supporters out here would stop trying to explain a way.
Here's a perfect example.
Ted Cruz comes out and says, I'm not the first guy.
I admit I'm not the first guy you'd want to have a beer with.
I'm not some hilarious, you know, amazing storyteller.
I'm not going to yuck it up with you, but I'm efficient.
I'm smart, and I'll get things done.
And so when people say, well, if someone comes on TV with me and they say, well, Ted Cruz isn't like the most charming, charismatic politician of the last 50 years, I don't say, yes, he is.
He's the guy you want to have a beer with.
I say, no, he's a guy who is principal.
I make all the sort of pro-Cruz arguments, but I don't pretend that there's nothing you can criticize about Ted Cruz.
And that's what bothers me about the Trump supporters is that there's a, not all of them, right?
Now I'm speaking generalities, but there's an unwillingness to face up to some obvious, obvious truths about their case.
You can still support Donald Trump and say that he's made some mistakes or done some things that weren't great.
Right.
You don't have to be this sort of absolutist Trump supporter, because that is something I always identify with.
Marcel, thank you for calling in from southern Brazil.
Cool to get a caller from Brazil.
That's a first for me.
Thank you.
You know, that's something I always identify with the left, and you saw this with the Obamaites in a very profound way and still do, that everything he does is brilliant.
Everything he does is evidence of some sort of higher strategic intellectual capability that we're just us normal people just can't comprehend.
It's like, no, sometimes Obama makes bad decisions.
I think he makes a lot more bad decisions than good ones.
But I think we could all admit that, you know, he's a fallible human being.
And the moment you cross over into this weird political worship, I just always identify that with the left.
What's funny is that Hillary is so flawed that unlike with the Obama worship, with Hillary, there is a sort of intransigence on the issue.
I even saw a poll that I think it showed 40-some-odd percent of Democrats, and this was a while ago, would still vote for Hillary even if she was indicted for the email, the email situation, which to me is just crazy.
I mean, you're going to have her, they're going to build a cell in the White House for her.
I mean, how is that supposed to work?
But Democrats are like, yeah, we'd still vote for her even if she was indicted.
Instead of pretending that everything Hillary does is perfect and brilliant, which is what the left did with Obama, because hero worship of politicians, I'm skeptical of all politicians.
And I hope many of you are with me on that.
You know, these are people.
They're fallible.
They make mistakes.
There's a certain, it's also with politicians true that there's a certain degree of necessary narcissism.
There really is, because it's a rough, you know, I want to be president.
You want to run for Senate?
You want to do these things?
I mean, you're putting yourself through a lot.
You have to really think that you are the best person for the job.
And that requires a degree of confidence bordering on arrogance.
And it's a balancing act, right?
Between somebody who has the right level of, honestly, the right level of swagger to actually go through with this, right?
What was Mitt Romney lacking?
You could say a few things, but he was lacking in the swagger department.
He was lacking in charisma.
Certainly not lacking in intellectual ability, in a proven track record, in leading a squeaky, clean life.
I mean, his family is like something you'd construct for a TV show in the 70s, like, we're so happy.
We're all smiling and hugging.
I mean, that was kind of the reality of that guy's life.
And yet, he was missing some things.
You need a politician who is between megalomania and doesn't have enough confidence in swagger, right?
You need somebody who gets in the middle there.
So I'm not, and that also means you've always got to keep an eye on them, right?
So I don't do this hero worship thing.
I don't understand.
And you do see this on the left all the time.
With Hillary, though, it's not that they think everything she does is brilliant.
It's everything bad she does doesn't matter because they're just on board because it's Hillary.
They'll excuse everything.
They won't try to pretend nothing is bad.
They'll just excuse everything.
So it's a little bit of a different flavor, but the same idea, which is that reality doesn't matter.
It's just all about their side winning.
And I don't like saying this with the Trump stuff either.
And I see it with the Trump stuff, and it is disheartening to me.
Not all Trump people.
I know some crazy smart people who are huge Trump supporters, but they're very quiet about it.
They're always like, I'm a Trump supporter.
And I'm like, your secret is safe with me.
I don't judge you.
They're like, shh, my colleagues would.
You know, here in New York City, oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah, there's a lot of that.
Peter in Greenwich, Connecticut.
What is up, sir?
Thank you so much for your service to keep me and my family safe with the CIA.
I appreciate that.
Thank you very much, sir.
I tried.
My name is Peter Alexander.
I'm a landscape architect.
I've kind of shaped my life around the environmental movement.
And I have to say, borrowing from one of Schillery's sayings, I think there is a vast left-wing conspiracy that includes Earth Day being Lenin's birthday.
And I wish that was funny, but Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, also known as Lenin for the river that runs through Siberia, which is in fact his birthday.
Lenin is named for a river.
Stalin, not actually his name either.
Stalin means man of steel, like Superman, except that this was a very bad Superman.
Very, very mean person.
Go ahead.
They kind of fit in with the environmental movement because that horrible concept killed about 100 million people just because they knew what they were doing better than anyone else.
But I want to kind of get to the point that there's a movie coming out.
It's only going to be out for a day called Climate Hustle.
And it really exposes that going back to the Clintons, the hatred for CO2 has been totally made up as a political issue.
And the whole point is what Obama signed today, that really one worldwide government, one worldwide currency, and we really should take this seriously.
Radical environmentalism gives the state control of everything, literally everything.
That's why the left likes it so much.
There's nothing, the food you eat, the clothing you wear, the house you live in, the car you drive, everything, the electricity in your house, all of it controlled by the radical environmentalists if they, in fact, get what they want.
And what we see now from some of the other progressive movements, the sort of transgender rights movement and everything, is that they, if given the opportunity, they will take, they will go all the way to the mat on these things.
There's no sort of governor.
There's no slowdown.
It's not like they'll go, you know, we might have pushed too far.
If you're a true progressive, there's no such, you go there and then maybe you try to think about it after you've gotten there.
And with the environmentalist, I think it's no different.
Peter from Greenwich, thanks for your call.
We've got to go to a break, but I appreciate your time.
800-282-2882, Buck Sexton in for Rush Limbaugh back after this break.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush Limbaugh on the EIB, 800-282-2882.
Open line Friday.
We are rocking and rolling here.
If you're a little shy, if you don't want to call in, but you want to tell me some stuff, I will read it.
Go to facebook.com/slash BuckSexton, but you have to click like on the page before you send a message, even if the message is going to have some not safe for work language in it, which I'm seeing some of that.
Excuse me, people.
Excuse me, people.
Heavens, what's going on in this country?
Gosh, people act like such savages on social media.
Lack of decorum is just appalling.
Let's take Mike in New Hampshire.
Mike, what's up?
Good afternoon, sir.
Good afternoon, sir.
Hoping you could share your thoughts on something with me.
That's what I do.
We have a lot of people that are angry about the young delegates voting against the will of the people.
Now, even though the system is set up to work that way, could not the people go out and initiate a recall and send the message back to these politicians and say, we are in control, not you.
Vote against us.
We will recall you.
In what context are you asking about the recall?
I mean, I can speak about the delegate issue, but what do you mean recall?
Recall delegates?
Delegates choose to ignore the will of the people, say here in New Hampshire where Trump won, for instance.
Right.
Now, I'm not necessarily a Trump supporter, but the Trump voters should have the voice, not the delegates speaking and voting, casting their vote.
I hate being, I feel like I'm always forced to be a stooge for the system when I say things like, you know, well, these are the rules that are in place.
We have a representative form of government.
We have a republic.
We do not have direct democracy.
One of the very interesting conclusions that came, you know, there were two conclusions that came out of New York with the most recent primary here.
One is that Trump crushed the opposition.
Another one, side note, is that Kasich won Manhattan.
Manhattan, you and I have got to have a talk.
I mean, I was born here.
I was raised here going for Kasich.
I don't even want to get into it right now.
It just makes me sad.
It hurts me on the inside.
But nonetheless, I like to call him Karate Chop Kasich because of all the hand gestures up on the podium.
But the point about Trump is this: I mean, he won, what was it, about roughly 500,000?
It was roughly 500,000 votes, I think, was what Trump got in New York State, something like that.
Close to that.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And he won every county except Manhattan, and he got 5,000,000 votes.
I think Cruz in Texas got 1.2 million votes.
And because that was a proportional state, Trump still came out of there.
So, you know, we can play this game all day, and we can just point to the ones we like and then point to the ones we don't like and say, well, that's not fair or this isn't fair.
You know, is it fair that Trump got, what was it, 95 delegates in Florida?
He didn't get 95% of the vote.
So what's up?
Well, it's fair because it's the rules, right?
But those are the rules.
So people need to understand that, you know, if the rules are the rules, then this becomes tautological.
It becomes what it is, right?
These are the rules of the system.
And I'm not trying to pretend like there aren't people who are using the rules to their advantage and trying to find a way to stop Trump as a result of that.
But you can't have it both ways.
You can't have Trump saying the rules are stacked against me.
It's unfair.
And the RNC, look, they backed down.
And that was one of the stories I was going to get to today.
I'll get to that in the next hour because next hour is going to be, we're going to have to get into a little bit of Trump of Palooza, which I know some of Russia's wonderful, loyal audience is going to be like, I've had enough of this guy with his Trump stuff.
But anyway, the delegate thing, look, I could play this game all day with you, Mike, and say, well, maybe we should have compulsory voting, meaning you have to vote.
And because we don't have that, all elections are illegitimate because you have whatever, 45 or 50% participation depends on what election we're talking about and on what level.
Or we could say, why do we even, why do we not have just sort of direct democracy, right?
You just, everyone vote for their presidential candidate of choice.
We just all show up and anyone can get on the ballot.
The system is in place.
It's probably, it is Byzantine.
It's a little archaic.
It feels a little, it feels like it could use a tune-up, but these are the rules of the game, right?
Like, why is a touchdown seven and a field goal three?
Because that's what people decided who wrote the rules.
I don't know.
I don't know what to say more than that.
I mean, when you say the vox populi, I mean, the will of the people, well, who's to determine what that is?
I mean, is the will of the people determined by 40% of the GOP that seems to have consistently gone for Trump?
Well, what about the other 60%?
You know what I mean?
The frustrations, I kind of understand, but I think that the narrative has overtaken the reality on the Trump side of things, and people need to look at it much more closely.
You don't have to agree with my answer, Mike, but can we agree that that's at least an answer?
Oh, I definitely agree with what you're saying.
Oh, okay, cool.
Well, then, sir, you are a fellow of excellent judgment and wisdom, and I appreciate your call even more.
Thank you, Mike, for calling in from New Hampshire.
Thank you very much.
That was, wait, I think, oh, yes.
Break time.
800-282-2882Facebook.com slash Bucksexton.
In for Rush.
Back after the break.
Buck Sexton here in for the one and only El Rushbo Rush Limbaugh on the EIB.
It's Open Line Friday, so we've got to take another call here.
We've got Jason in North Dakota.
Jason, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh Show.
You are speaking to Buck.
Hey, Buck, I think you're doing a great job filling in for Rush, and I appreciate you doing it.
Thank you very much, sir.
I always enjoy it.
All right.
Well, what I wanted to say is I wanted to kind of respond to the previous, not previous, a couple callers back who was saying that it wasn't necessary for Donald Trump to contribute to all these democracies.
You've got about 30 seconds, but go ahead.
Okay, first of all, I'm a cruise supporter, but I think the Democrats, especially in New York, have set up a system where they have made themselves the gatekeepers.
Everything is practically illegal, and the only way you can get anything done is to greet the skids with these political contributions.
It's a pay-to-play system.
So in that sense.
All right.
Well, I got to cut it there because we're going to the third hour here.
But thank you for calling in, Jason.
I'll respond to that on the flip side.
Hour three, the GOP throwdown, Trump, Cruz, and more.
▲
Export Selection