All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 27, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
30:53
September 27, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yester Rebob, here we are back at it.
Rush Limbaugh Cutting Edge.
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800 282-2882, the email address L Rushbow at EIB net.us.
It's a new email address.
Now I'm just going through my stack of stuff here to see what I have left that I haven't touched on that still fascinates me.
Not all of it does.
Each and you know show prepping the time I get to it, the program starts, I lose interest in some of it.
Um couple stories here in Lester Holt.
I mean it was predictable what Lester was gonna look at folks.
If you didn't think, if you were hoping that Lester Holt was gonna somehow be fair-minded, you don't remember what happened to Matt Waure.
I mean, it was telegraph to Lester Holt way in advance what was going to happen to him.
If if if he didn't go after Trump on his fact checker theory or business or challenge Trump that he was gonna get the same treatment Matt Wauer got, and the Jimmy Foundation.
That was not a surprise.
There still are some stories.
Breitbart here five times.
Lester Holt shilled for Hillary Clinton at first debate.
And they talk about uh Lester here and his Candy Crowley moment.
Bowing to pressure from the Clinton campaign and the drive-by media by fact-checking Donald Trump.
By the way, this whole fact-checking business.
It's not what it is.
You know what fact-checking is?
Fact-checking is nothing more than a an opportunity for the drive-bys to opinionate in the news.
By calling it fact-checking.
Now here's a piece from the uh it's Kelly Riddell.
I didn't print where this comes from.
This might be McClantch.
No, it's not McLean.
It might be Brightpart.
Don't think it's Bright Bart.
I'm sorry, I didn't print out the the web flight website.
And it's it's a popular one, I know that.
I just don't remember what it is, but there are eight examples where fact-checking became opinion journalism.
This is the whole point.
In fact, James Taranto, who is a great blogger, the best of the web blog, part of the Wall Street Journal Empire, James Taranto, actually tweeted that fact-checking is opinion journalism pretending to be some sort of heightened objectivity.
That's even better because that's exactly right.
The drive-bys do their fact-checking under the guise that they have no bias whatsoever.
That they're totally objective, and they're looking at these claims and they're being the final arbiter with no bias whatsoever, and it's patent BS.
And so what Kelly Rydell has done here is give eight examples of supposed fact-checking, which are really nothing more than attempts at opinion journalism.
And one of them, the first one is from the New York Times.
And the way the format is, we'll we'll read to you what the Trump quote is, followed by the New York Times or whatever organization we're quoting here, their fact check.
So the first Trump quote is this.
Do people notice that Hillary is copying my airplane rallies?
She puts the plane behind her like I've been doing from the beginning.
Fact check.
Donald Trump did not event, invent the tarmac rally or the campaign plane backdrop.
Doesn't address what Trump said.
Do people notice that Hillary is copying my airplane rallies?
Trump never claimed to invent it.
He never claimed to be the first.
He just said that Hillary is copying his tarmac rally, which is true, by the way.
But the New York Times fact check, Donald Trump did not invent the tarmac rally or the campaign plane backdrop.
Irrelevant.
But A great example of how a supposed fact check is really nothing more than a slapdown.
The next Trump quote or assertion.
Mrs. Clinton destroyed 13 smartphones with a hammer while she was Secretary of State.
Trump made this statement in speeches in Florida in September.
The fact check.
An aide told the FBI of only two occasions in which phones were destroyed by a hammer.
Oh, so Trump is lying.
Trump is saying that Mrs. Clinton destroyed 13 smartphones, and the fact check, no, no, no.
He he he she only destroyed two.
The next Trump quote, we have cities that are far more dangerous than Afghanistan.
The fact check.
No American city resembles a war zone, though crime has risen lately in some like Chicago.
Urban violence has fallen precipitously over the past 25 years.
These are not fact checks.
These are bogus opinion-oriented assertions.
But of course, the low information voters that read this stuff, and some even some well relatively intelligent people think that what we're getting here is legitimate fact-checking.
Should point out that the New York Times wrote on September 9th that murder rates rose in 25% of the nation's 100 largest cities, and that the number of cities where rates rose significantly was the largest since the height of violent crime in the early 1990s.
So while the New York Times is fact-checking Trump and his claim that cities are far more dangerous in Afghanistan, they fact-check there's no such thing.
We don't have any cities that look like war-torn areas, strife with war and so forth, and then they proof is that the New York Times has been worse in describing American cities than even Trump.
The next Trump quote, we are presiding over something the world has not seen.
The level of evil is unbelievable.
Trump said that Fort Myers, Florida rally in September 19th.
New York Times fact check.
Judging one level of evil against another is subjective, but other groups in recent history have without any question engaged in as widespread killing of civilians as ISIS.
So Trump is attacking ISIS, and the New York Times does a fact check and says, no, no, there's some just as bad groups.
It's insane.
It's not fact-checking.
I'm telling you, it's not fact-checking.
It's it's it's well, it's opinion journalism.
It's it's it's worse than that.
The next Trump quote, September 20th in High Point, North Carolina at a rally.
Hillary Clinton is raising your taxes.
It's a very substantial tax increase.
The New York Times fact check.
Clinton has not released the full details of her tax plan, but she has sworn off tax increases for households earning less than $250,000 a year.
The vast majority of tax increases she proposes affect the highest earners.
Well, the fact check says that Hillary's gonna raise taxes.
That's what Trump said.
Hillary Clinton's raising your taxes, a very substantial tax increase.
They want to fact check and say no, Trump's wrong, and in fact checking they admit that Trump is right.
And then in December, when George Stephanopoulos asked her, is that a rock solid promise on not raising taxes on households earning less than 250,000 she hedged.
She said, Well, it certainly is my goal.
And then the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
That came up last night, and Trump nailed her on that.
She was trying to go back and forth, change her mind originally for it, then decide that she was against it and so forth.
Anyway, I just want to share with the example these fact checks because this has become a campaign uh plank.
The idea that Trump needs to be fact-checked is nothing more than a phony baloney, plastic manana, good time rock and roller technique to allow journalism to do opinion hits on Trump while supposedly occupying a position of objectivity.
It is one of the dirtiest, lowest, schemeest things that the drive-bys of the modern era have engaged in.
It is illusion, delusion, allusion.
It is just plain and simple lying.
And they call it fact checking.
Selena Zito, I've mentioned her today a couple of times, and I've quoted from her columns in recent days and weeks.
Pittsburgh Tribune Review doing an in-depth study of the voting population of Pennsylvania, and how so much of it seems to be moving toward Trump.
She had a speech recently in the uh a piece, a column recently in The Atlantic, with I think a really uh pithy, if you will line.
To try to explain to people how Trump is covered and perceived.
And it's this, it's very simple.
The press takes Trump literally but not seriously.
Trump's supporters take Trump seriously, but not literally.
And that is so true, and it is such a divide, and the drive-by's, they are totally out the lunch on this.
You know, one of the, I've read this the other day, this is true too.
One of the amazing aspects of being a liberal.
So if you're a liberal intellectual, if you are a liberal magazine writer, if you're a contributing editor, if you're a blogger, if you are uh somebody who runs a left-wing website, if you're an elected official, if you're an elected Democrat, a liberal this or that, they have this arrogance and this belief system that every one of their voters is a likewise highbrow, superior intelligence intellectual.
They do.
They think every liberal is mensa.
Every liberal in the world is as smart as any other liberal.
That's what makes liberalism what it is.
Liberalism is the ideology of the intellect.
It's the ideology of the super smart.
And by same token, they think that anybody who's a Republican or conservative is an absolute deliverance type hayseed hick.
And so they are totally incapable of understanding.
They take Trump literally, but not seriously, and they think everybody else does on their side.
Everybody on their side, they think looks at Trump the way they see him as a buffoon, a braggart.
And they think that his supporters ought to see him that way, and that if they work hard enough, they can make Trump supporters see Trump the way they see Trump.
But that'll never happen because Trump supporters don't take him literally.
Because they know what he means.
They know what he's talking about.
But since the drive-bys are into rhetoric a hundred percent, they use rhetoric to disqualify their political opponents.
They take anything their political opponents say, and if they find it offensive, they go on a war path until they've destroyed that person.
Yeah, it's it's just another example of the great divide and the disconnect that exists.
And I think these people, this whole campaign season, this entire year of this campaign has been noteworthy for illustrating this divide.
How the establishment of both parties to this day still doesn't really understand the Trump phenomenon.
The closest they can get to it is to insult Trump supporters and say they're a bunch of angry racist bigots who finally have found a Svengali, who's willing to say what they believe, and it's total contempt, it's total condescension, and they don't get it.
And as such, they are continually surprised when Trump doesn't go away.
When Trump continues to grow as popularity expands, they literally are clueless.
Take a brief time out.
We'll come back.
Continue with more after this.
Okay, let's go back to the phones before I share with you a little interesting political story I just got.
Michael in Cleveland's been waiting for quite a while, and I appreciate it.
It's great to have you on the program, sir.
Hi.
Hey Rush, thanks for taking my call.
Uh I just wanted to make a brief point.
Uh earlier in the program, you mentioned that uh a lot of Trump supporters, uh, you know, maybe knew a lot of what he was talking about when he was missing the low-hanging fastballs, and that half of Hillary's supporters probably even knew that.
My question is, or my point is that I think he did miss a golden opportunity because by that analysis, half of Hillary's supporters don't know these things about the Clinton Foundation, about the emails, about Benghazi, and I think that's sort of maybe what upset some people that support him.
Uh, not so much that, you know, oh, he didn't say what we know, but with a hundred million people watching, you know, maybe you know, twenty million don't know some of these.
Yeah, that's a good point drive by media.
That's a good point.
That is a good point.
It was an opportunity to inform others who may not know because all they read is the drive by's and the drive-by's cover this stuff up.
Exactly.
So I think that's why some people uh on our side were going, God, you know, you missed, you missed, you missed.
And it it wasn't that, you know, we wanted to hear him preach to the choir, but you know, a golden opportunity for with all those eyeballs on that debate last night.
Well, so you were one of the ones that was disappointed.
Do you think he hurt himself at all by this?
I I don't think he hurt himself.
I agree with you in the fact that uh, you know, he he's talking to the people, and you know, we want him to fight even more.
Uh uh, you know, someone that's a supporter, I'm uh, you know, on the fence with him a little bit, but I don't think he hurt himself.
Uh, but I do think he missed some opportunities to, you know, to get some of the moderate people on board uh to draw attention to some of these items that's a good point.
They were just low-hanging fastballs.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, whether they're moderates or wackos, it doesn't matter.
It's still it's it that's an excellent point that by not mentioning it, he missed the chance to educate it, force others to talk about it.
Exactly.
And force her to talk about it.
Well, look, there's two more debates.
And one thing I saw, I saw a Trump tweet after the debate in which uh wasn't a complaint.
He was noting that there were no questions on Benghazi, there were no questions on the emails, and there was no questions on the Clinton Foundation.
And I have to say, I looked at it and said, Donald doesn't matter.
That's why you're there.
If Lester doesn't bring him up, bring them up yourself.
You can answer any question Lester asked you with anything you want to say.
Lester could ask you about race relations, and you could launch into the foundation.
And of course, Lester's gonna say, Mr. Trump, you didn't answer my question.
In which you can say, you're not asking good questions, Lester.
There's any ways, number of ways of doing this.
But I know what happens in this situation.
I think I know what happens.
It did not happen during the Republican debates, because there were 15 or 16 people up there with him.
But I think this is the first one.
You folks, we're overlooking something here, or maybe not giving it enough weight.
Um this was a big deal last night for Trump to do that, and I am not making any excuses here by any stretch.
Don't anybody misunderstand me here.
I've done radio all my life.
The first time I did television, I was petrified.
I was so self-conscious, because I wasn't experienced at it.
It's a whole different thing than radio.
And where I have literally no nervousness, qualms, self-consciousness, none of that on TV.
It's all different.
I was going to talk about Arnold Palmer, yes.
I met Arnold Palmer at the Bob Hoop Chrysler Classic classic.
Bob Hope was still alive.
It was the last year that Bob Hope actually attended the tournament.
And I was paired with Arnold Palmer on day one.
My partners were Tom Glavin of the Atlanta Braves and Chris Chandler of the Atlanta Falcons.
And I I don't play golf for a living.
But I've got this giant television audience.
I'm in Arnold Palmer's force and meeting him for the first time.
I am nervous as I can be.
I can't.
I'm just praying it was overwater.
I was just praying.
I don't care what it looks like.
Just don't let me hit this in the water.
And birdieing the hole with like a 50-foot putt.
And Arnold Palmer says, I'm impressed.
And I said, Mr. Palmer, I'm so nervous, I can't begin to tell you.
And I and I think Trump last night, I'm not saying he was nervous, don't miss it.
I'm saying he did something last night that it hasn't been done in our lifetime.
Somebody that's not in politics do something like that against somebody, whoever it is, who has made a lifetime of it.
And I wouldn't be surprised if Trump were a little self-conscious last night.
And when you're self-conscious, you're not focused.
When you're thinking about yourself, however, for whatever reason.
And that might be one of the low-hanging fruit.
When you, when you if it doesn't occur to you naturally, and you have to, okay, I remember what should I say?
You get you get distracted trying to remember when or what you should say.
Look, folks, I leave this program every day.
I go home beating myself practically every day up for failing to get something in that I really wanted to talk about.
It's not that I forgot it.
I just didn't budget my time well.
I always think I could have done this, but I'm sure Trump is the same way.
But the next time he does this, he's going to be better because he's going to have some experience at having done it under his belt.
You watch.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
And a limbaugh institute, the EIB network.
Great to have you here.
By the way, I did something during that.
I had I had to sniffle during the um reminded me.
Trump got beat up for this last night.
For having the sniffle.
He didn't have a sniffles last night.
I don't because I am a highly trained broadcast specialist who understands the technology here.
That's how Trump was breathing.
They have positioned the mic.
I don't know.
I'm not charging anything here.
But his mic was positioned in such a way that you were able to hear him inhale.
He was breathing through his nose.
Because it's more polite to do that than to open your mouth wide and then breathe.
And you can hear when people do that too.
If you if you listen to a radio, a broadcast professional knows when to breathe and how to breathe.
And you can hear it.
It's like stage spit.
Do you know what stage spage spit is the sign of a highly professional live performer?
I first bore witness to this, interestingly enough, when I was attending the Super Bowl in San Diego.
It would have been, it was this, it was a Super Bowl with the Broncos and the Redskins where the Redskins just wiped them out.
Doug Williams is a quarterback for the Redskins, and Timmy Smith, the unheard of running back at 135 yards or whatever.
Just the Broncos scored first.
This is the episode I had my first flyover.
Seeing the end zone planes coming right out.
I went bonkers when I saw it.
But the night before there was a concert, Frank Sinatra and Liza Minelli.
And Liza Minelli was spitting all over the place.
And I said, What the hell is this?
I was positioned at lighting when I could see it.
And I talked, well, that's state spit.
Somebody if it that means she's really doing well.
It has to do with projection and and voice control.
And you have to get rid of the saliva in your mouth.
And you can't spit when you're performing.
You have to find a way to get rid of them as you're singing.
And it comes out and it's the same thing with breathing.
You will hear on an audio only commercial, when you're listening to radio, you'll hear somebody go real quick, take a real deep breath in the middle of it, and if they have compression on, you'll hear that really pumped up and sound as loud as somebody's voice is what compression does.
Trump last night was breathing through his nose.
Which of course is going to sound like a sniffle.
Yes, I did stage spit all the time in a rush to excellence.
So you have to know how to do that.
You have to be able to uh shall we say project the saliva.
You can't sit there and swallow all night in the middle of a performance.
*cough*
Sinatra was with stage spinning too.
It's not glaring.
I mean, you it's not actual spitting, it just the saliva comes out of your mouth as you're singing.
And it's the same thing with what Trump was doing last night inhaling.
He was inhaling through his nose.
And it you could just hear it like you can hear it when I do it there.
Now, what did Howard Dean say?
I didn't know what.
Mm-hmm.
Are you kidding?
Are you kidding?
Howard Dean speculated it that Trump might be blowing coke.
You ever wonder why you didn't hear Hillary breathe.
What are you gonna say?
Because she's a reptile and doesn't breathe through her mouth, what are you gonna say?
No, no, no.
Did you but did you you didn't hear her breathe, did you?
Wonder why.
Wonder why.
Well, in many cases, you don't hear anybody breathe at these debates.
I mean, uh, but you can do amazing things with microphones and compression.
I happen to love compress.
Now, don't think of I talk to people.
It's amazing, I talk to some audiologists about my implants.
When I say compression, they think that I'm talking about compressing data to make it smaller.
I'm not talking about, I'm talking about compression of the dynamic range.
And it goes back to the old AM radio days.
You know, if you want to hear what compression is, there's really no way you can do it now.
Um but back in the 60s and 70s when Motown and that and and the top 40 hits were what they were, they were pressed with cons with compression.
The stations added it because so many convertibles driving around with all this noise, you had to be able to hear the radio station.
Compression adds volume.
And it does it by every element of a song is the same volume.
If you hear Sundown by Gordon Lightweight, the beginning guitar riff, not compressed.
You hear it, but it's not it's not there.
It's it's but when you hear it compressed, it's as loud as his voice when he is singing.
You can't I happen to love it.
I've loved it.
Light foot.
What I say.
Uh lightwood.
Light foot.
Light foot.
I wish there were ways I could demo it here, but I can't, because we're on AM stations and they they compress their signal much more than FM does.
The FM guys don't do it because those are audio files, and they just claim compression is nothing more than distortion, and they're not gonna muddy up their precious signal on FM with distortion.
Well, believe me, it's something if you never know exists, you're not even gonna know it until you listen to a song, one of those hear my sniffing here.
You listen to say, can't help myself with a four toplesses back from 1965.
You listen to it on the radio back in the end, and then go buy the album and listen to it at home or on iTunes, and it's gonna sound totally different because the version you buy, there's no compression, they don't add it at the studio level.
And it sounds like a whole different song to you.
I happen to love compression.
Well, you can compress if they wanted to last night, they could compress Trump's mic.
I don't know that they did, but what happens when you do it, any little noise.
The microphone picks up is made to sound as loud as his voice.
We we're uh the compressor here, right in this drawer, right to my left.
I have compression running on my audio feed just because I like to hear myself sound.
I like my voice compressed rather than flat.
Our stations add compression too.
It it By the way, it's that compression.
I could come here with a huge head cold.
And compression would hide it.
I would have to tell you I have a cold.
Unless it's a really severe one, and then you would notice it.
To me, it's a magical thing.
Some people don't like it when they hear it, and some people, you know, I've tried to show them AB side by side.
They don't hear the difference, which is really frustrating.
Because it tells me they don't hear half of what I say either.
Because you can't miss it.
Well.
Did he land based a microphone in Trump did?
Oh, that's right, he did.
He gave a oh, that's right, he gave an engineer at one of his rallies a little business.
Because his microphone kept cutting out on him or something.
Uh folks, direct TV.
If you have direct direct TV, watch a TV show on Direct TV versus how you hear it from iTunes, if you happen.
Totally different audio.
It's it's compressed.
Direct TV compresses it from their satellite now.
Well, it's actually from their going up to the satellite, but it's it's uh it's all to make sure that you hear what's going on in a crowded room.
It's done for reasons.
It's a long way around saying that uh Trump's breathing last night, inhaling through his nose, was it was conspicuous.
And it could have been his microphone placement, it could have been he was looking down and aiming at the microphone.
But my only point is not have a cold and he's Tower Dean said this cocaine, this is ridiculous.
It was just how he chose to breathe rather than through his mouth.
And I know it was distracting to some.
It was not distracting to me because as a again, a broadcast and communication special, you have to breathe.
You can't do that without breathing.
Now, normally, like you didn't hear Hillary breathe.
And we think she does.
We're not sure, but by the way, if you're if you go ask some, if you know somebody who's a broadcaster audio engineer, and you go tell them that Limbaugh was talking about compression, they may not know.
You tell them if they're confused, just use the term the limiter.
Some broadcast engineers will think I'm talking about the limiter when I mean compression.
I know what I'm talking about.
Some of them don't.
The limiter just limits the peaks, lows and highs, and compresses everything down.
It does the same thing.
Anyway, uh all I'm trying to say is if you go talk to an audio engineer and you tell him you heard me talking about compression, and you're gonna say, No, he's not, he's talking about a limiter.
You tell him one the same.
Look at this.
Look at this.
So we've got a fact check from Politico.
Here's the headline.
Trump exaggerating Clinton's 30 years in national policy.
Trump has said at least three times Hillary Clinton's been working on trade issues and other national issues for 30 years, but it's Clinton said it hasn't been quite that long.
In 1986, she was Arkansas First Lady, and her involvement on trade policy would have been limited at best.
Okay, make it 26 years.
This is exactly the point.
This is a so-called fact check.
Trump lied, Trump got it wrong.
Twenty-five years then.
Ten years, I don't care what it is.
The woman hasn't advanced the ball at all.
She's continuing to complain about the things she complained about when she first showed up.
Nothing's any better.
▲
Export Selection