All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 6, 2017 - Rush Limbaugh Program
30:56
February 6, 2017, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh having more fun than a Schuman being should be allowed to have.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program's 800-282-2882, the email address L Rushbow at EIB net.us.
Okay, to the global warming hoax.
I want to remind you that Donald Trump is ridiculed to this day for claiming, and all, you know, my little buddies on their tech blogs and many places on the left still ridicule Trump for claiming that global warming is a hoax started by the ChICOMs to make American businesses uncompetitive.
Now, global warming is a hoax.
It is a hoax perpetrated on an unsuspecting population of the world who have been blamed for doing great damage to our climate through no fault of their own.
They were lied to by the oil companies, they were lied to by Republicans and lied to by conservatives and lied to by evil capitalist countries, uh companies.
And by all of this progress in living the lives of the way they have, they have been destroying climate by creating all of this pollution, this CO2 is pollution, stuff that you exhales, pollution, barbecue pits and driving around your SUVs, and so it's a greenhouse gas that the earth is broiling.
The earth is going to be habitable in another 35 years.
But there is redemption.
And that is if you let government take over, and if you stop driving these behemoth cars and let government tell you what kind of car to drive, stop eating Big Macs and beef and all this other stuff, and agree to tax increases and globalization, let the United Nations basically determine how nations can function, then you can redeem yourself.
And for every Prius you see on the road, for the most part, not all, but for the most you see a dupe.
You see somebody who actually thinks they're saving the planet.
Doing good.
Everybody wants their lives to have meaning.
And if you can save the planet, man, can you feel proud of yourself?
You can feel like your life has meaning.
So you go out, you buy an electric car, or you uh keep your thermostat at 79 or 80 in the thumb in the summer, and it's 65 and you you you sweat your butt off and then you freeze and you're saving the planet and all this.
It's bow hunk.
We don't have the power to stop climate change, which means we don't have the power to affect it at all.
We can't stop it.
Lord knows we've been trying.
Anyway, that the point of all this is that there's enough clear evidence out there that it is a hoax, that data is faked, that data is forged.
But the drive-bys will not believe because it's a leftist cause, folks.
The reason that I'm so devoted to explaining this issue over and over is because it contains practically every aspect of liberalism that is dangerous.
That's why it is a seminal issue to the left.
Everything they want is wrapped up in it.
Every bit of power, every bit of control.
You couple climate change and health care and freedom as you have known it ceases to exist.
It is that evil, and it is that dangerous.
And I'm gratified, most polling data today shows that we're nowhere near a majority of Americans who accept it or believe it or even consider it to be crucial.
Doesn't stop the media from portraying it is an issue that all the right people agree with, that all the smart people agree on.
If you don't see this, then you're a denier, you're a cook, you're a quivalent of people who didn't uh admit the Holocaust and so forth.
The first substantive indication we had that this stuff is all faked and phonied up was a hack of an email server At the University of East Anglia in the UK, in which somebody, and the whistleblower there was somebody within the climate change movement, the so-called scientific movement.
By the way, there's another reason that it's real simple how this is not science.
All you have to hear them say a consensus of scientists agree there is no consensus in science.
Science is not a democratic thing.
It doesn't get a vote.
If a consensus of scientists think the earth is flat, for example, it doesn't make the earth flat.
There is no vote, a consensus of scientists doesn't mean anything.
In this issue, it means that they found all the scientists who are being paid via the grant process to produce research that the sponsors want.
And they get their consensus.
Al Gore has become filthy rich off of this hoax.
The emails of East Anglia indicated, emails from scientists to scientists back and forth, indicated and illustrated how they were changing and faking data from the medieval period.
They have to show throughout history temperatures much lower than today in order to make people believe that there's an unstoppable warming going on that can be tied to industrialization.
You go back to the medieval period when we didn't have any industrialization at all.
There were no fossil fuels, for example.
So the only thing putting CO2 in the atmosphere was cows via methane and humans exhaling.
But aside from that, you know, until the railroads came along and the industrial smokestacks, factories and this kind of so they want to try to tie this unstoppable, dangerous warming to the invention of the combustible fuel engine and progress related to that as a means of indictalism.
Climate change is basically an anti-capitalist, pro-communist enterprise.
Trump says Chicom's created it to make American companies uncompetitive.
It would make American companies uncompetitive if we ever did have to make changes that the United Nations and others decree in their climate accords, we would become uncompetitive if the other nations of the world refuse to play along, which China said they never will play along.
But it's it's whether it's a Chinese hoax or not, it's a liberal hoax.
And there are liberals in China.
But the latest news is just another blockbuster.
And you will not see it.
You haven't seen it yet, and I doubt you will see it.
I know you won't see this in the New York Times, and therefore my little tech blogger buddies will never see this.
You won't see it at Buzzfeed, which means my tech blogger buddies will not see it.
You will not see this in the Washington Post, you won't see it on ABC, CBS, NBC.
In the Sunday edition of the UK Daily Mail.
Headline exposed how world leaders were duped into investing billions of dollars over manipulated global warming data.
The mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper, exaggerated global warming.
It was rushed through in time to influence the Paris Agreement on climate change.
America's national oceanic and atmospheric administration broke its own rules.
In other words, the culprit in the latest exposing of the hoax is NOAA.
They run all the weather satellites, supposedly collecting all the temperature data.
The report claimed that the pause in global warming never existed, but that it was based on misleading unverified data.
The problem these people are all having is there hasn't been any warming in the last 15 to 18 years.
Actually, that even to say that gives their their existence some credence.
But it has to be done to illustrate this.
There hasn't been any warming.
Their climate models said that by now temperatures would be X degree warmer and sea levels would be X centimeters higher.
None of it's happened.
And so they have to come up with an excuse for it.
They have to come up with a reason for the pause in the warming.
The mail on Sunday revealed astonishing evidence that the organization that's the world's leading source of climate data, which is NOAA, rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was time to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.
A high-level whistleblower told the Daily Mail this is an American scientist.
His name is Bates.
He works at NOAA and he's fed up seeing what he's seen.
He told the UK Daily Mail that NOAA breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders, including Obama and the UK's David Cameron at the UN Climate Conference in Paris in 2015.
Which by the way, Trump says we're pulling out of and we're not going to live by, and thank goodness for that.
The report claimed, this bogus report claimed that the pause or the slowdown in global warming in the period since 1998 never existed.
And that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected.
In other words, up until this report came out, there hadn't been any warming.
And the client, the climate change people were alarmed.
This report says the fact that there was no warming was a mistake.
That there was no pause, that record heat breaking had continued to happen when everybody thought there was no warming taking place.
And they said instead of the fact that no warming took place, that in fact temperatures have been rising faster than anybody expected.
And this report was launched by NOAA with a huge PR fanfare.
It was splashed across the world's media, cited repeatedly by politicians and policymakers, but the whistleblower, Dr. John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown the Daily Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading and unverified data.
They made it up, just exactly what happened with the email chains and threads at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. The report that was submitted to scientists and world leaders before the Paris meeting was never subjected to rigorous internal evaluation.
The kind that this whistleblower himself had devised.
This is the old peer review.
They had not run the new report by anybody to let them review it to make sure that it was right.
It was not evaluated.
Somebody just wrote it up and submitted it.
Dr. Bates' vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overwritten.
He objected at the time.
But his superiors at NOAA overrode his objections in what he says is a blatant attempt to intensify the impact of what became known as the pause buster paper.
Again, the pause buster papers, the paper presented to people like Obama and others before the Paris meeting to say, you know what?
That pause that we think we've had for 15 years, it actually had been a pause.
We have been setting heat records these last 15 years.
We need to act even faster than we ever knew.
It was all lies.
There was no truth to it.
The whistleblower's disclosures are likely to stiffen President Trump's determination to enact his pledges to reverse Obama's green policies and withdraw from the Paris deal.
In an exclusive interview, Dr. Bates accused the lead author of the paper, somebody named Thomas Carl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data.
He had accused the lead author of the paper of insisting on decisions and scientific choices that maximized warming and minimized proof in an effort to discredit the notion of a pause.
It was rushed so quickly so he could time the publication to influence national and international deliberations and climate policy.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, I'm not really am not.
I'm not trying to sound bragging doshes or this does not surprise.
I think this whole movement is fraudulent.
Because I don't think that they can accurately tell us what global temperatures were in the 1600s and 1700s, the 1800s, it's just not possible.
They the tree trunk data, tree ring data, ice core.
It's all made up stuff to be beyond our ability to comprehend their scientists, they wear the white coats, we therefore believe them.
The fact of the matter is it has been much warmer previous times on earth than it is today.
That cuts against every theory they've got about industrialization and burning of fossil fuels creating CO2.
But it even before you even get to that, this whole thing is bogus to me because I don't believe that we human beings are capable of doing what we are being accused of doing.
Because if we were, we would be able to stop the process.
By the way, and I'm not convinced that the warming is bad, even if it is happening.
And we know it is.
The climate is never constant.
You know, the big question for me, folks, is one about the vanity and the arrogance of all this.
These people in the scientific community promoting this hoax have got everybody believing that the temperatures and the climate and everything as of this moment in the history of the earth is what's normal.
And any deviation from the present is a crisis.
Well, how do we know this?
How do we know what normal?
You know, ice ages have lasted 10, 20, hundreds of years, and they ended.
How did they end?
What caused the ice to melt way back when before there was fossil fuel?
Way before there was humanity living lives of progress.
What ended ice ages?
What brought about warming areas when we weren't doing anything to cause it?
Answer is it's way beyond our pay scale.
We just simply don't have the ability to do this.
To show you how inept they are, we supposedly have had a pause.
This is how stupid they are, folks.
Listen to me, look at me.
We supposedly had a pause for 15 years.
During those 15 years, why didn't they say, see, our research is working, see, our suggestions are working, our reduction of CO2, our elimination of SUVs, our increased usage on electric car, whatever, is working.
We need to do more of this.
Why did they greet the pause as a problem instead of looking at it?
Wow, we can say we're succeeding.
We can say that we're on the right track.
We need to double down on the kind of restrictions we've already.
They're so stupid politically they didn't even realize an opportunity to claim success and credit.
They saw a pause as Panic City.
I'm telling folks, this is the biggest bunch of fraud, one of the biggest hoax that has been perpetrated on a free people in I don't know when.
And here's Eric in Amarta, Michigan.
Great to have you.
Really glad you waited, Eric.
How are you doing, sir?
Oh, I'm doing great, Rush, and I hope you and your family are too.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, I uh when I watched that game last night, and I'm a Packer fan.
And of course I was rooting against Atlanta to begin with, because they what they did to us.
But anyway.
You know, they started talking bad about, you know.
Tom Brady, I'm thinking, wait a minute.
He's a sixth-round draft pick.
Wait, who started talking?
Wait, wait, who was talking bad about Brady?
Oh, just, you know, the I guess the people that, you know, were they the pro-Liana people.
I mean, they were looking at uh, you know, the record and how uh that Ryan had got MVP on the league and all that.
Anyway, they were babbling on them to get he's a sixth-round draft pick.
He really, I mean, he was a mediocre quarterback in Michigan.
So he wasn't, you know, really expected to go anywhere.
But that's the American dream.
The American spirit is to not be expected to do something and to achieve greatness.
And and I will say this, like I said, I'm a Packer fan, but he is the best quarterback right now.
And that's what I'm saying.
Well, I think I think Brady's the best quarterback ever.
I don't care how you measure it.
Uh I don't care how you measure it.
Uh that there's there's nobody can make a claim to being a better quarterback than Brady.
Uh he's had a differing wide character of wide receivers.
The Steelers' great teams are all units stay together basically three, four years standing with the Fordiners in Montana.
Um, but you're right, he is the epitome of a part of America that many people don't like anymore.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Donald Trump was at CENTCOM today.
He he left the winter White House at Marilago and flew to Tampa, which is where McDill is before I was uh on his way back to uh Washington.
And I wanted you to play grabs on by 25.
I don't think I got the transcript, but I know what this is.
Trump addressed the military that's an Air Force base, and he addressed them well, it's also CENTCOM, but he he addressed them about his executive order and the importance of vetting, and I want you to listen to it.
We will defeat radical Islamic terrorism, and we will not allow it to take root in our country.
We're not going to allow it.
You've been seeing what's been going on over the last few days.
We need strong programs so that people that love us and want to love our country and will end up loving our country are allowed in.
not people that want to destroy us and destroy our country.
Applause Now I'll tell you what's great about that.
Freedom, security, and justice will prevail.
That's real people.
That's the men and women at CEN County, United States military who know well what we're up against.
This whole executive order of Trump's has been mischaracterized as bigoted toward religions that Trump doesn't like.
Bigoted toward religions that are not associated with the founding of America.
And that would be Islam.
And there's nothing religious.
This is not a religious ban.
And this is the way, in my humble opinion, that the Trump Justice Department defeats this stay, this temporary injunction on the implementation of executive.
By the way, this judge, when you get right now, this judge does not have the legal power to do what he did because he is interpreting Trump's state of mind.
If you read the judicial opinion that orders this the temporary stay from the judge, this is just Robart guy in uh in Seattle.
He doesn't even address the law of this.
He just addresses typical left-wing touchy-feely things and then presumes to understand the president's state of mind.
And he presumes to understand the president's prejudices and biases.
Even Alan Dershowitz, who doesn't agree with Trump about anything, but is a constitutional scholar, said that Trump could have ignored this.
Trump could have just totally got to go pound sand.
But Dershowitz even said that the president has too much respect for the legal system to openly defy a judge like this, that they're going to go through the process of trying to get this uh stay of his executive order overturned so that it can be re-implemented.
It's not about banning Muslims.
It's about vetting terrorists.
It's about, it's it's not about religion.
This is the thing that the left has been allowed to uh frame this and characterize this via the protesters and the rioters working in consort with the media.
And the Trump people sit there and think, oh, they've done a great thing.
This is what we were elected to do.
People are gonna love it.
And then these people begin protesting within minutes of this executive order.
They they fill up LAX, they fill up JFK, they make it look like the whole country's fit to be tied over this, and then they mischaracterize it as a ban on Muslims and a bigoted religious ban, and they say America's never had a religious test, which we have, by the way.
Just not the way you think or the way it sounds.
But we've always asked refugees their religion when they claim they're fleeing religious persecution.
We have to know what their religion is.
We have to be able to verify what they're saying.
You can't just show up and say, I'm from I'm from San Cordoba, and that is religious persecution, and I want to be in Dubai Medica.
Okay, fine.
Come on in.
That's not how it works.
First thing, where is San Cordoba?
Well, San Cordoba is whatever I happen to be on that day.
Fine.
What kind of religious strife is going on there?
It's the kind of religious life that does not let me practice my religion.
Well, what is your religion?
You're not allowed to ask me that.
I know that's because John Soros told me.
It's not that way.
We do it all the time, and we have done it all the time.
Here's the problem, folks.
And this judge, again, just to rehash.
They love saying that judge, is it Robart or Hobart?
These names have similar sounding.
Judge.
Judge.
Damn.
Um...
Whew.
Well, Robart or Hobart.
Robart.
Guy with a, they say, hey, hey, he's a great judge.
You guys understand that he was appointed by W. George W. Bush.
Doesn't mean anything.
He was chosen by Patty Murray.
Look, I don't have time to get into how these judge things work.
Uh federal district judges, a lot of horse trading going on.
She has praised this guy.
This is the judge that praised Black Lives Matter in a lawsuit out in Seattle.
This is a guy sympathetic to black lives.
This is an activist leftist judge.
Now, here is the problem.
This case, the next stage will be, will be uh briefs filed and then arguments at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
It's the most liberal circuit.
Appellate circuit in the fruited plane.
The Supreme Court right now has eight justices and they're split down the middle.
You get four libs, three conservatives, and Anthony Kennedy, who is thought to vote with the conservatives on something like this.
4-4.
In the event of a 4-4 decision at the U.S. Supreme Court, the case reverts to the prior court and its holding.
So if the Ninth Circus upholds Judge Robart and claims that Trump's constitutional or executive order is illegal, and the court goes, oh, the Supreme Court and they find 4-4.
Sorry, Trump's executive order is found to be unconstitutional.
Ninth Circus would be the final stop along the way since Supreme Court deadlocks.
That's why we've make tracks and confirm Gorsuch, which the Democrats will drag their feet on and try to stop.
But again, this is another classic where what's being reported in the drive-by media about this is not true.
Again, Dershowitz.
Trump is showing respect for an independent judiciary.
He could have easily ignored Robart.
He could have just told a judge in legal terms to pound sand and maintained because the law is on Trump's side.
Federal statutory Law made by Congress is on Trump's side to make these determinations during these such times.
A federal judge cannot overturn Trump and things like that.
Now, a federal judge did overturn Obama because Obama was acting outside federal law.
Trump is not.
Obama was held back by a judge, and you applauded that.
Different case entirely.
But this argument has to be the Trump DOJ, when they go before the Ninth Circus, they have to say this is entirely about assessing the threat posed by refugees and illegal immigrants coming in from these seven countries.
It isn't about religion.
It has to be a legal side they pursue.
Back after this, folks.
Don't go away.
Okay, so the Senate has begun the process or Wilson and delaying the vote on Betsy DeVos, the education sector.
It's all about teachers' unions, folks.
And the problem here is Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who apparently get a lot of donations from teachers' union donors, have announced that I got a vote for her, which takes the way the 50, the two-seat Republican majority.
So if things don't change, and the Democrats are trying to change them, it goes 50-50, and that means Mike Pence would break the tie.
The Democrats are trying to delay this.
This is all about the left trying to maintain control of public education of the current people ruining it.
The current people that use it as an indoctrination training camp rather than education institutions.
The public school system, the people that have overseen the dilapidated destruction of this are desperately trying to hold on to it.
Betsy DeVos wants to wrest control from the teachers' union.
She has to be stopped.
The Democrats are doing everything they want her to be the Trump cabinet nominee that doesn't make it.
They're throwing out or throwing up all the stops.
Thomas Sowell has a great piece on this that I'll have to get to tomorrow.
The New York Post has an editorial today.
Delaying Trump's tax cuts is a huge risk.
This is a big deal to people.
There's news out there today that Trump said Obamacare might not be repealed until next year, 2018.
People are getting nervous.
I know people that voted for Trump, who voted for Trump now.
Not because of trade deals, not because of NAFTA, and not because of vetting of the bad people come.
They voted Trump because they want tax cuts corporate and personal, and they want Obamacare repealed.
And they're not hearing much about it, and they're not seeing anything on it, and they're getting nervous.
And the New York Post apparently is.
So what I thought I would do, I wanted to go back and find out the Reagan tax cuts of the model.
Reagan took office January 1981.
The Reagan, the first phase of Reagan tax cuts passed Congress August 4th, 1981.
Took eight months.
They were signed into law on August 13th.
The Bush tax cuts, you know, he had some too.
They were passed by Congress May 23rd, 2001, signed by Bush on June the 7th.
We think Trump's moving slow, but but not according to history.
Obamacare, that's another thing.
Republicans it's clear they don't want to touch it.
Still, that's obvious.
As every Monday is, we are off to a rousing start for the week.
We are of sound mind, of great voice and imminent creativity, and we look forward to much more of that tomorrow.
Thanks so much for being with us today, folks.
▲
Export Selection