All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 3, 2017 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:13
January 3, 2017, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Bucks Exton here in for Rush on the EIB.
Phone lines open.
800 282-2882.
Still looking for that jihadist mass murderer in this Turkish nightclub attack, this attack in the Arena nightclub in Istanbul, murdered 39 people.
There's a lot of a lot of footage on the internet of the attack itself.
And ISIS has claimed direct responsibility or has claimed responsibility for this.
And they said it was, you know, an attack on the revel of the revelers on their pagan holidays, something along those lines.
Interesting, though, uh a note that's come up as they're trying to find this suspect who is from uh Kyrgyzstan that his according to the Daily Mail here, his wife said, quote, I had no idea he was an ISIS sympathizer.
We came to Turkey for work.
Uh this is the Istanbul nightclub gunman's wife talking to police.
So the guy's wife says she has no idea.
Now I know there's a couple of ways that this can go.
There's a couple of ways you can interpret this.
Yet another mass casualty attack at the hands of on a civilian target at the hands of a jihadist acting in the name of the Islamic State.
Um but as for his wife and her claim that she didn't know what's going on here, I I suppose that's possible.
She also obviously I think is going to if if she did know, it would be from a self-preservation perspective of her own freedom, very unwise for her to say, yeah, I knew he was an ISIS guy.
And you know, it's you know, nobody's perfect.
We were going to work it out.
I mean, clearly she's not going to tell us that she was uh involved in this or whatever.
So I I whether she's truthful or not, I can't tell you.
And it is possible that she doesn't know at all.
Let's assume for a second that she had absolutely no idea that her husband was an ISIS sympathizer.
Perhaps we'll even find out more about his ties uh to the Islamic State in the days ahead.
It was said that the attack was carried out with some degree of of uh tactical precision, and one of things in the past that's been a well, we've gotten lucky with many of these attacks in the sense that there's been mistakes made, key mistakes made,
usually on the tactical side of things by the jihadist terrorist in the in the very last minutes, uh, whether it was that foil attack on the train where the guy looked like he sort of couldn't get the uh couldn't seat the magazine in his AK 47 or whatever it was a number of times, where the faulty bomb construction.
It's been a lot of this.
Oh, and by the way, I think the Germans arrested yet another migrant that they think was planning a vehicular mass casualty attack, when he's getting in a truck and mowing down as many people as possible.
I think I saw that headline too this morning.
Um but let's say that this lady or this woman uh is telling the truth and that she had no idea that her husband uh from Kyrgyzstan who he came with his wife and children, brother, came with this whole family.
No idea that he was an ISIS sympathizer.
What does that say about the ability?
Let's just extrapolate this for a little bit.
What does that say about the ability of government authorities to be able to discern to yes, vet the ideological background of people coming in from some parts of the world, right?
Specifically, or or most notably Syria, but we could see uh where you know any any number of countries this would be the case.
Um it's believed that he has posed as a family man.
That's what they're saying now.
Well, I mean, if he had a family, I guess he is a family man, he's also just a mass murdering jihadist terrorist.
But if his wife didn't know that he harbored these sympathies and perhaps even received some degree of training, I mean, we'll find out more about this guy in the days ahead, I think.
They still haven't gotten him.
There's a huge manhunt underway.
They've made some arrests in Turkey.
Um this was in a sense similar to the in terms of the way it was carried out, similar to the Pulse nightclub shooting here in Orlando.
So it could be a self-starter jihadist, it could be somebody without any any specific training and ties to the Islamic state.
Uh but as we look at this individual, we look at the whether or not the authorities can do anything about this.
If his wife didn't know, do you really think some asylum agent is going to be able to come up with a real sense as to whether this person is a security threat or not?
Never mind the fact that the mass murdering uh mass murdering jihadist who ran over all these who came via the refugee flow, ran over all these people in in Berlin at the Christmas market.
Uh You know, you look at the way that the people are coming into the country.
I mean, he was on the radar of the security services.
So you've got people who are known to the security services as risks, as having ties jihadists, and they don't have the surveillance capabilities, you know, they don't they don't have the security force, uh security forces set up in such a way, and this is true.
I mean, this isn't just something that they say.
They can't do 24-7 surveillance on all of the possible jihadists, known security threats who want to sort of wage this war in the name of Islam on the West and on other Muslims too, it should be pointed out.
But as they do this, as they look at this, they say, well, we don't have the resources.
And then you look at a case like this where you have somebody says, or someone's wife claims she didn't even know.
These are very real concerns about what it means when you bring in, you know, Germany is learning this lesson the hard way, and it is it is responsible for a rise in uh nationalism in Europe, and it is responsible, I think, also for a change in the tone of the discussion and and even some of the substance of the discussion on what we do in this country vis-a-vis refugees and immigrants.
And I I want to sort of transition from this, okay, we have this mass murderer, uh mass murdering jihadists as his wife, his wife says he didn't even know, he comes from Kyrgyzstan, and you know, you use the refugee flow to enter into the country or if they're claiming asylum status.
Meanwhile, in this country, you have a story that's playing out in a small town in Vermont that I think starts to highlight a lot of elements of this debate.
So we're transitioning now from this terrorist attack in Istanbul, uh, which was tied to the refugee flow, just like the Christmas market attacker in Berlin, tied to the refugee flow and other mass casualty attacks.
Uh the security services over there are overwhelmed, and they're in no real position.
How do you vet for ideology in such a way that you don't think there's going to be any threat?
I mean, they should at least be honest about this.
We're always told that there's no threat, and that's just nonsense, right?
I mean, the Democrats will sort of pretend that this is just a it's a humanitarian gesture without uh any consequences whatsoever.
I mean, no, this isn't showing up and doing doing something kind, you know, volunteering at a soup kitchen that has no possible ill impact.
Bringing people into your country from a war-torn region that has substantial numbers of terrorists who claim that they are at war with the West, specifically want to destroy America, and they are using refugee status or asylum claims as a means of getting entry into these countries, uh, and they're also taking advantage of just the overwhelmed immigration services, whether we're talking about in the European context or here in America.
People are concerned.
And you get this you get these back and forth, the back and forth that's happening up in Rutland, Vermont, um, which is a apparently a nice little town up in Vermont that's going to resettle a hundred Syrian refugees this year because the mayor decided that they wanted to take some refugees.
And the New York Times is running all these pieces as well on how this is the way to, this is how we're gonna revitalize towns that have lost population.
Let's take small towns, I mean, there's so much going on here, by the way.
There's so much worth unpacking.
Let's take a small town in Vermont that's lost population, and let's dump a bunch of refugees from Syria in there, and that's gonna revitalize the town because, oh yeah, they've got the resources to do uh you know, vocational and job training and uh feed and and house and just generally take care of.
I mean, they're having a tough time as it is.
They're they've got a it's one of these areas where you have uh drug addiction issues and the population's already there, unemployment is a major issue, and you've just had this sort of flight of of industries that were the lifeblood, the economic lifeblood of of some of these towns, right?
I'm not talking about huge plants, but whatever businesses were operating there, they've been leaving.
You think dumping a bunch of refugees there, this is a the New York Times writing a whole piece on this, by the way.
If you dump some Syrian refugees in this small town, uh that's gonna revitalize it.
Now how they come up with that, I'd like to know and you've got this mayor up in Rutland who's saying, well, you know, this is not just the right thing to do, it's the smart thing to do because it'll be good for the economy.
And this reminds me of the doing the jobs Americans won't do line.
I mean, as those sort of Americans are lazy and inherently illegal immigrants, because that's what I was talking about.
Illegal immigrants are more willing to work hard than both legal immigrants who are already here, by the way, and just Americans in general.
And this was a line.
People would sort of stand up and puff their chest up and be like, well, you know, they're just doing illegal immigrants, just do the jobs Americans won't do.
Well, are they being paid off the books and are they also getting welfare benefits?
And well, what's it's much more complicated than just doing the jobs Americans won't do.
But now this is being posed as a economic boon.
This is a big benefit for small towns.
Bring in a bunch of refugees.
This has already happened in Germany, by the way.
They got these little towns.
You'll notice that what happened what you see is some of these small towns where the refugees are being resettled, they have no say in it, right?
It just is sort of all of a sudden, yeah, we're gonna take a bunch of refugees.
And some of these towns in Germany are saying, you know, we we got our own problems.
And I'm I'm not really looking forward to dealing with the obvious concerns that will come with people who were one, I mean, overwhelmingly don't speak the language of the country they've been resettled in, and two uh this notion that they're going to be first of all, I thought it was all women and children, so how how they're going to sort of revitalize the economy.
Of course, it's not all women and children, but depending on the day, the Democrats will sort of just constantly hide the ball and play some other game.
Um, but then you get to the security aspect of this, too.
The guy who just shot up a nightclub in Istanbul, Turkey, had a wife and kids, and poses a family man looking for work.
Oh, it's just, you know, a dream of free flow of labor and capitalism.
And then he kills 39 people and wounds many more because he had hit his ideology.
Uh there's no way the German authorities really realistically are going to be able to sift.
I'm sorry, the uh Turkish authorities are going to be able to sift that out just like the Germans wouldn't be able to sift it out, just like we wouldn't really be able to vet it.
Now maybe people want to take that risk anyway, right?
Maybe people think that there's and I look, I've been in the refugee camps on the Jordanian-Syrian border.
I have seen the misery, I've seen the poverty, I have talked to people who tell me horrific stories about what happened to them and their families and their homes.
It is a terrible humanitarian crisis.
But we also have an inherent right at self-preservation and enhancing our own security or supporting our own security here at home.
And to be constantly told, and this is what always turns into, that any concern over migrants, immigrants coming into this country, particularly we're talking about refugees from war-torn Muslim majority countries, that any concern over that is racist, bigoted, and xenophobic, which is of course what this sort of pro-resettlement uh folks in Rutland, Vermont are gonna say, and including this mayor, that it's all based in xenophobia and racism, that there's no rational basis to be concerned.
Well, we keep having examples happening in Europe and here in America of rational reasons to be concerned.
We keep seeing the case play out, and it fits a pretty familiar script, and you get that whole thing on Twitter of, oh, well, we don't know.
Let's not jump to conclusions about the motivations, and we all know the motivations.
Let's not jump to conclusions about the background of the shooter or the bomber or the driver, and we all know the background.
And then we start to have a talk about what to do with refugee policy and immigration policy and whether to limit immigration from certain countries.
And this used to be a discussion you could have openly in America.
We want X amount of people from this country and Y amount of people from that country, this is the way that it was, and then Teddy Kennedy sponsored that immigration bill, what was it, 1965 or eight?
1965, I think, uh, started to change the way that they calculated those figures.
But to even have the discussion right now is to open yourself up to accusations of racism and bigotry and prejudice, and people are just sick of it.
I mean, this is one of the underlying elements of what I think you could call Trumpism.
People are just sick of it.
They're tired of being told that having a moment of pause about having uh people who cannot be really vetted from an area that is actively trying to infiltrate jihadists for mass casualty attacks into Western countries.
To even have that discussion is to be a closed-minded xenophobic bag.
I mean, you just enough is enough.
Enough is enough.
And to add to that now, that all we need to do to revitalize struggling small towns in America is stuff a bunch of asylum.
I mean, asylum seekers tend to come with a lot of a lot of tough stuff.
You know, you know, psychological trauma.
I mean, there's a lot of stuff that when you've been in, especially those who are coming from war-torn countries like Syria.
And I know there's a humanitarian impulse here.
But there's also a discussion to be had about security.
And we cannot allow the sort of virtue signaling Democrat left to browbeat everybody into okay, fine.
Whatever you want to, you know, the more refugees the better.
And oh, by the way, they're the the sort of lifeblood of the American economy now.
I mean, the stuff at the Times is writing.
It's just there's no basis in reality for it.
All right, Buck in for Rush, back in a few.
Buck Sexton here in for rush.
You know, you can get Rush 24-7, and with a membership to Rush 24-7, you don't have to miss Rush while he's out on vacation.
You can also relive Russia's greatest radio moments, scour the archives of years of broadcast excellence, or watch his programs on the colorful Ditto Cam video.
You'll be prepared to deflect any of the craziness that liberals throw at you, and they will throw some crazy, because that's how they do it.
Join today and get four extra weeks of Rush 24-7 free.
Uh you can also go to rushlimbaugh.com and get the limbaugh letter where there's no fake news because the limbaug letter comes directly from Rush.
All kinds of exciting stuff there.
Check that out as well.
Uh let's take John in California.
John, you're speaking to Buck.
What's up?
Hello, Buck.
Hello, John.
So I think that this election, um, I've thought this for quite some time, was less about the issues and more about the fact that the tyranny of not what we keep calling the left, which interestingly enough has more become oppressive and like the right of the 1960s, and that they were squashing the squashing thought.
I think it's always been about the freedom of expression.
And the interesting thing about the Democrats is they can't come up with a candidate to go against Trump except maybe Bernie Sanders, because Trump really isn't coming up with talking points.
He's not trying to figure out what to say to get elected.
He's just saying what he believes what he believes is the right thing to do.
He has a plan, this is what I think, and it's resonating.
The Democrats are scrambling around trying to figure out, oh, what what do we have to say to to win this?
Well, and they're trying to keep together a very unwieldy coalition built on identity politics and social engineering, and you know, you you've got this sort of uh coastal elites and then the pandering to of uh you know illegal immigrants and I mean all kinds of stuff.
I mean, the Democrats, what is it really?
What does it really mean to be a Democrat today other than you want the government to do to be bigger, to take more of your stuff and to do more stuff?
I think that's a pretty good working definition.
Because beyond that, I mean there's no particular principle, right?
There's not a government constraint is out the window, really.
So I'm sorry, what'd you say, John?
Well, I think there is a principle.
I think there is a deeper principle.
The colour that talked about the revolution is touching on it.
It's a deep social change.
We've been living under the tyranny of this meet uh with the media complicit, this tyranny of PC and um uh selective ra uh selectively accepted racism and other things.
And it's that's what the election is about.
If Trump does nothing else but free us of that political correctness jail that we've been in, uh I think it'll be a monumental change.
Oh, I'm I've been saying, John, for some time that I think that one of the greatest things that can come from Trumpism is the end of uh of sort of accusations of racism being enough to shut down debate and also end careers just just all you have to do is level the accusation right you can just wantonly throw it around oh so and so is a racist uh if that is a a result a a product of Trumpism then I think it's something in and of itself that we should celebrate.
Um but John thank you for calling in from California get to talk to you my friend.
Well got a lot more to discuss here Buck in for Rush back right after the break.
Buck in for rush here on the Blaze.com right now peace you might want to just check out uh Brooklyn politician seeks anti Trump staffer to quote resist the threats of the Trump regime and this has now become a job description resisting Trump is now a th is now a thing that you can get hired for specifically that's up on the Blaze dot com right now.
You've got this what is he's a city yeah city councilman looking for communications director to fight against the Trump administration.
Like I said, for celebrities, for Democrats, anything anti Trump is going to be brand enhancing doesn't matter how deranged and hysterical it may be, because we are in the midst of the great Trump scare.
And they're going to continue pushing it as much as they can.
I I tell friends of mine and I do I from New York City, I live in New York City, I tell them uh you know you really have nothing to be worried about.
I mean you can disagree with things and not like things, but you don't need to be worried and they're like, oh no I'm so worried it was Trump is going to come for us.
It's gonna be terrible no it's it's really okay.
It's not no no one's gonna get uh you know her herded up into uh you know detainee facilities or anything it's okay.
But they don't they don't believe they think that I'm I don't know.
Uh they think that I've somehow been fooled into believing that Trump is not the Hitlerian monster that they seem to think that he's going to become it it's just crazy.
You know it's one thing to think you know look yeah did we think that Hillary Clinton was was corrupt and and terrible sure but I mean I never argue that she was Hitler that that would that would be extreme but with Trump there's nothing too extreme.
And anyway on the Blaze dot com like I said this Brooklyn staffer is seeking or Brooklyn politicians seeking a staffer to res quote resist the threats of the Trump regime I found that oh in keeping with what you see everywhere else.
Everyone's just galvanizing the anti Trump resistance before he's done anything before he's even signed an executive order or given a pronouncement as president he's the bad guy.
Going to the lines here for a second Michael in New Hampshire you're on the Rush Limbaugh program speaking of Buck.
Yes whoa hey whoa hey house shooting text what's up Mike whoa hey hello yeah we need you to stop hitting the no you need you to stop hitting the dial why is he is I'm hearing a dial I'm having a hard time hearing you can speak up a little well no we hear you we hear you yeah put him on hold we hear you banging the the the dials there which is probably not good.
Sal in Cooperstown, New York baseball Hall of Fame, Cooperstown, right?
It's well in the Buck, nice to have filling in by the way thank you very much, sir.
Hey I was in Vermont recently and they had on one of these uh great pizza place up in Burlington refugees welcome sign on the front door and a friend of mine didn't want to go in after he saw the sign I said ah you can't let their political views stop you from having great pizza but anyway when speaking to someone there they almost have this mentality like those that voted for Obama wanted to prove you see I'm not a racist.
I voted for a black man and they almost feel if I extend an act of love to these refugees, they're going to spare me the violence and they truly are delusional to think that someone that shakes their hand, smiles at them and kisses them won't also slice their throat given the opportunity.
I mean, it all depends on, you know, each individual, right?
I mean, this is, I think it's a very, very basic conservative principle.
You look at every person as a person, as an individual, as not part of a group or a collective.
But when you're talking about many hundreds or many thousands of people and the enhanced security risk that that group poses based upon its recent history and geographic location and what's been going on in the neighborhood, that's a realistic discussion to have.
But what you're talking about with the sort of refugees welcome sign, I love America does have a longstanding tradition of taking refugees as many other countries.
countries do as well, but it's it's sort of virtue signaling, and and especially for people you know, like the Nancy Pelosi's of the world who go from their wealthy enclaves in DC to their mansions in Marin County, um, which is lovely, uh they they're never gonna deal with the refugee ever except maybe for a photo op at you know uh on the steps of the Capitol building.
So here's a hypothetical, Buck.
Sure.
If if someone said to you we eliminate migration from Muslim countries into the United States, and we guarantee you no more terrorist acts in America.
If you say okay, I'm for it, ban all Muslims from coming in America to even spare one American life, you're labeled all the labels, but yet you're saving American lives.
So you could pose that hypothetical to someone who's so anti um banning anyone, and yet they'll still force it American they would rather force it American lives than be told you can't allow someone into this country.
Now, Sal, with your hypothetical, you have to be prepared for the immediate rejoinders that you would get on that hypothetical, the responses.
I mean, the first one is that even if you did stop all remember, because refugees, I mean, that's actually a part of that that is a legal part of our process, right?
If the government is taking in refugees, they're legal, they're illegal immigrants.
Even if you stopped all immigration, period from uh from Muslim majority countries, right?
Because many of the countries we're talking about, or at least some of the countries we're talking about here have substantial uh non-Muslim populations.
Um for example, if you banned all Iraqi immigration, you'd also be banning Iraqi Christian immigration, you'd be banning a number of other much smaller groups and denominations that are non-Muslim and non-Christian in the country.
Um but even if you did that, you wouldn't stop all terrorism.
So start so start there, right?
There are both uh there would be illegal infiltrations of United States would still be a possibility, visa overstays, that sort of thing, or even not visa oversays, people who who come here and and cross the border illegally.
I mean, if ISIS really wants to get somebody here, and they do, but uh they're always going to try to come up with new ways to get here.
So you're never gonna have a a complete end to this sort of terrorism, at least not in my lifetime, and even banning all banning all the uh banning immigration from all m Muslim majority countries wouldn't accomplish that.
So you gotta start there.
Uh but then you look at it, okay, well, what if we take this country by country and also the notion of a ban inherently sounds very negative, right?
You're banning people, and uh, and I do think uh the Muslim ban that Trump talked about and I said so at the time, and it's it's now I think that's too I think that's too sweeping and it's counterproductive for a number of reasons.
One of them is that we do need assistance from Muslim majority countries, uh governments, and the many Muslims of of good of uh good faith and uh in in those countries to help us in the counterterrorism fight, right?
But look at a country like Syria, where we're talking about the refugees coming in from Syria specifically.
Uh is there a an elevated threat of jihadist terrorism from people that are fleeing Syria?
The answer is yes.
I mean you're more likely to get a jihadist in a population of 10,000 coming out of Syria than you are in a population of 10,000 coming out of Latvia.
Uh by the way, I wouldn't necessarily say like Sweden, because you've actually already had a lot of uh immigration from the Muslim world into some of these European countries.
So, you know, there's there's actually first and second generation uh jihadism that exists in Europe and and it exists here in America too.
So Sal, I mean it it's a I think this is a third time.
It's a very complex issue.
It is a complex issue, though.
There's a lot going on at the same time.
Um but that re that the refugee discussion is divorced entirely from the security discussion is just that's just fantasyland talk.
Uh and as I said, we see it play out time and again where the refugee flow or refugee status is used to infiltrate Western societies for the purposes of mass casualty terrorist attacks.
And then when people say, hey, you know, maybe we should slow this down or we should rethink this, they're shouted down and called racists or bigots or xenophobes.
And that's it's dishonest and it's counterproductive, and and I think you're as sick of it probably as as I am.
Um and all that refugees welcome stuff in a P3.
I mean, that's just virtue signaling.
I mean, they're they're assuming that this isn't really gonna be their problem.
But uh the case of Rutland in Vermont is interesting because you get sort of a microcosm of the debate.
I don't know what the population of Rutland is.
I assume it's in the uh the uh the maybe the low thousands or something, maybe it's even in the in the high hundreds, I don't know.
Um but uh a hundred refugees will be felt in that community, and well, what what does that mean?
The New York Times is making it sound like they're all gonna show up and start Googled.
I mean, maybe.
I I think that's a pretty uh rosy picture to paint.
Um and of course they leave out the possibility that you know if you can settle in a small town, you can obviously get in a car and engage in an attack anywhere in the country.
And this is a debate that we're gonna continue to have, I think.
Uh let's take Patricia in Michigan.
Uh Patricia, you're on the Rush Limbaugh program speaking to Buck.
Hi, Buck.
Hi.
I wanted to comment.
I or I am glad that Megan Kelly's uh moved on from Fox because uh I found her appearance quite annoying.
Um I think she's beautiful, there's no doubt, but when watching a delivery of news, I don't I don't want the newscaster to show so much skin.
It seemed to me her focus was always on her sexual peer peer appeal rather than on the the um subject that she was delivering.
And I thought a good example is Dan Dana Farino.
She's beautiful, but her choice of attire is never distracting from the subject matter, and yet she you know she is beautiful.
But I I just think the movement for women's rights would be better served if if um when delivering news visually they would um dress in a way that doesn't distract from content content I dare say that I think if a man would dress with so much skin and emphasize his sexuality, he wouldn't have a job as a newscaster.
And so I I was always often annoyed with her appearance.
All right.
Patricia, thank you for calling in.
Uh I I did Mr. Snurley, I got nothing.
I got nothing.
What am I where where is there to go with that?
I just Patricia is, you know, she had her say.
I'm Ugh.
I I like I do I don't I don't have any comments on this on these things, these things that happen on the T on the TV screens.
Robert in California, you've got a you're calling.
Hey, buddy.
Hey, uh Buck.
Yes, sir.
Everything everything that uh that these uh liberals are worrying about with Trump, the racism, the whole the entire enchilada they're gonna get from the refugees that they're bringing in here, and our tax dollars are subsidizing these guys.
They don't just come in here and start spending their own money, they're feeding off the American taxpayer.
They're walking around in these four hundred thousand dollar housing complexes, while the people working to build those complexes can't afford one.
And so they'll get what they're afraid of, but it won't be from Trump.
It'll be from the imports.
Well, I uh one of the great ironies of the American left right now, Robert, is that they are the defenders of Islamism and jihadism in all cases and and at all times, when whenever they can, and yet there is no greater threat right now to uh women's rights, gay rights, uh liberalism, leftism, you you name it.
No greater threat than from radical Islam.
Uh they will be able to do that.
But the left, the left will defend the they'll defend their dying breath because for them Islam represents a minority uh non-white oppressed religion, and so therefore it it it overrides the fact that there is no there is no greater repository of regressive ideology in the world right now than some segments of the Muslim world.
But Robert, I gotta leave it there.
Thank you for uh calling in.
Appreciate it.
Uh Buck's exit here in for Rush.
I'll be back right after.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush.
Uh we got some calls up here.
I wanted to get another perspective on the issue of uh Miss Megan Kelly moving from Fox to NBC.
Michael from Miami, you're on the Rush Limbaugh show.
You're speaking to Buck.
Hey, Buck, it's uh absolutely great to talk with you.
Yeah, you know, I've I've heard a lot of people uh kind of upset with Megan Kelly with her whole move, roll decision here.
And I I do just want to say from the other side, you know, I think personally Megan Kelly is one of the most intelligent, smart, and educated uh journalists and newest news anchors we have out there.
Uh steadfast conservative, always held sort of principles, and uh, you know, I think she'll be sorely missed over at Fox.
Um, to be honest with you also from uh from another perspective, you know, a lot of many very few people that have gone up against Trump have actually emerged kind of unscathed.
And uh I know that Megan Kelly did have a slight spat with him uh, you know, about a year or so ago.
And and the way she handled it, which was kind of different than what a way a lot of other people handled it, and she really came out looking as you know, smart and um classy.
And I think that goes really a lot to show for her with that.
Um, you had a caller before that was saying that you know she didn't do enough to you know progress feminism to her position.
And I did want to mention that I don't think it was her responsibility as a personal responsibility to progress the feminist cause, even though you know she could if she's in a position to.
I think her personal responsibility was to be a top-notch journalist and a top-notch news anchor, which I believe she was.
Uh well, Michael here from Miami with a full-throated uh defense of Megan Kelly as journalists.
Uh, Michael, look, I really appreciate the call and also you giving uh your your your sense of this, your side of this.
Um for full disclosure, I mean uh I Megan's always been really nice to me, so I'm yeah.
I've I I think she's a nice lady.
Um, well, well, what's the main topic, Mr. Snerdley, about the the uh about a tire?
I'm not looking at me.
I'm a guy in t-shirt and jeans, usually.
I'm I'm not one to comment on a tire.
Um I think Megan is a is a is a lovely person.
Uh always been very nice to me.
Whenever it was on had me on her show on Fox many times, is always very nice to me.
So uh and I and I exactly I wish her a lot of luck, although I don't think she's gonna need it.
I'm sure she's gonna be very well compensated over at NBC.
That sounds nice.
I gotta, you know, this is I could no NBC, NBC.
Oh, do you think they'll put her on MSNBC?
That's an interesting question.
I don't know.
That would seem to me to be a bit too far.
I don't think people are saying she's not uh not like liberal like a lot of these other uh anchors are liberal.
I I think she's pretty centrist, actually.
Uh oh, I'm gonna get myself into trouble here.
All I'm saying is Megan's a nice lady and I like her.
All right, that's that's what that's what I got.
Exactly.
And uh as for the as for the comments on the female anchor appearances, I I leave that to others.
I am not going to be ungallant today on the Rush Limbaugh show.
I'm going to just say that that I don't talk about ladies' appearances.
None of that.
And I don't know why I'm turning into like uh you know a lady from the BBC over here myself, but it just gives me.
Yeah.
All right.
Um I'm going to get back to drinking my latte now, and I'll be back after this break, everybody.
Buck in for Rush, closing out the show today here on the EIB.
Although I will be back this Thursday.
So not tomorrow, but the next day.
Stein uh tomorrow?
Yes.
Mr. Mark Stein in tomorrow here uh at the EIB.
I'll be back on Thursday, looking forward to it already.
I'm we're doing the research tonight, nerding out.
And maybe I'll get a chance in to tell you about this law in France that says that they can disconnect at night.
They no longer have to answer the emails.
That sounds great.
I want that law here.
I mean, I don't really want that law here because that's a r regulation that interferes with business activity.
But having just been on vacation for a week, it's it's actually nice to be able to disconnect.
It'd be nice to disconnect at night, too.
But I gotta leave it there because we're closing out.
I'll be back Thursday.
Buck sex in for rush, thanks to Mr. Rush himself and the team here on the EIB.
▲
Export Selection