×

Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




RUSH: Operation Chaos continues to unfold right before our very eyes. When I dreamed up Operation Chaos, and when I put it into play, not even I, ladies and gentlemen, in my wildest dreams could foresee all that is transpiring here. It’s fun. It’s a godsend, is what it is. Operation Chaos is actually causing liberal Democrats to admit exactly who they are in their own words. We’re not having to tell people; we’re not having to persuade anybody; we’re just having to play their own words. We got an audio sound bite roster today that will do that and plentiful Stacks of Stuff. It’s great to have you with us. Here’s the telephone number if you want to be on the program today. 800-282-2882. The e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com. There’s all kinds of conversation out there about how the Democrats have become elitists. It’s a joke to listen to Hillary Clinton, whose family made $109 million since 2000, talking about Obama being an elitist. She’s right, but is talking about it as though she’s not. Boston Globe headline today: ‘Democrats Must Renew Bond with Working Class.’ The premise of this story is that when Democrats moved away from redistributive economics, it frayed their bond with blue-collar workers.

The Democrat presidential race is also becoming a race of stereotypes. The Democrats are clearly identifying how they view people in stereotypical fashion, such as Obama referring to his blessed grandmother, what a job this woman did, and he’s thrown her under the bus referring to her as a typical white person. Now we’re getting the stereotypes of what the Democrats have always thought of average Americans, white-collar, blue-collar, white Americans. The stereotype is that blue-collar workers want somebody to take what other people have and give it to them. This Peter Canellos story in the Boston Globe focuses on how the Democrats lost their bond with working class when they gave up redistributive economics. What do you mean gave up redistributive economics? If anything, what has hurt the Democrats is redistributive economics, meaning take from one group, give to another, because as people have done increasingly well in our economy over the recent years, their incomes have gone up, their taxes have gone up, and these people are seeing what happens when Democrats are in charge of all that.

Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, a billionaire, says that ‘Barack Obama would not be a leading presidential candidate if he were white and that the Illinois senator’s campaign has ‘a hair-trigger on anything racial.” Now, we know that Bob Johnson is a Hillary supporter. He’s basically coming out and echoing Geraldine Ferraro, and he says Ferraro was right. The Charlotte Observer reported on its website Monday that Bob Johnson was commenting on remarks previously made by Geraldine Ferraro. He said this, ‘What I believe Geraldine Ferraro meant is that if you take a freshman senator from Illinois called ‘Jerry Smith’ and he says I’m going to run for president, would he start off with 90 percent of the black vote?’ Johnson said. ‘And the answer is, probably not. Geraldine Ferraro said it right. The problem is, Geraldine Ferraro is white. This campaign has such a hair-trigger on anything racial it is almost impossible for anybody to say anything.’

Noted historian John Hope Franklin yesterday — this is from the Raleigh News and Observer — endorsed Obama for the Democrat nomination. John Hope Franklin is the James B. Duke Professor Emeritus at Duke University, and his endorsement was announced by the Obama campaign. And this is what he said: ‘Senator Obama is a truly exceptional leader who understands the struggles of people from all walks of life. As president, he will be the voice of regular people, something that has been missing from the political landscape for so many years.’ Regular people. Just who are regular people? You regular people out there know who you are. Regular people as far as Obama is concerned are not people who go to church. Regular people as far as Obama is concerned are not people who have guns. Those people are bitter. Folks, do you understand what’s happening here? To me, I can’t tell you how upbeat I am. I know we’ve got inflation going through the roof; I know food prices. But we can explain it, it doesn’t make it any easier, but we can explain why all those things are happening, and we can trace it back to liberalism without any question.

What’s happening here is that for the 20 years — it will be 20 years August 1st — that I have been serving humanity from behind this, the Golden EIB Microphone, I have been endeavoring to explain liberalism in as simple and uncomplex a way as I can, and had massive success in doing so. But because of Operation Chaos — remember now, what Operation Chaos is. Operation Chaos does not care which of these two schlubs gets the nomination. Operation Chaos has as its objective, and you’d have to agree that it is unfolding like a script, brilliantly written, flawlessly acted. The purpose of Operation Chaos is to keep this race going and to create huge animosity between the two candidates. It is to make sure that Mrs. Clinton doesn’t get dispirited and quit the race, keep this campaign going, have these two attack each other, have them continue to campaign. If Mrs. Clinton had gotten out of this after Ohio or Texas, had Operation Chaos not gone into effect, had we not implemented the operation prior to Ohio and Texas, she might have not quit on her own, but the pressure that could have been brought to bear on her to get out would have been much greater after she won Ohio and Texas, or was thought to, and also did much better in Mississippi than she was expected to do.

So this allowed her to stay in with some momentum and some energy and some vigor, which forced Obama to continue to campaign. Up ’til that point, Obama had gotten away with simply being the messianic candidate. He was saying nothing, and nobody demanded anything but nothing. He was attracting young people that didn’t care what he was saying, they just wanted to relate and identify with him because he was young, and he was the candidate that had nothing to do with race. Since Operation Chaos, the Obama campaign has fallen apart. It has totally changed its direction and its identity. Now, we have to credit the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for this as well, but all this was part of Operation Chaos, and now both of these campaigns are in full swing, and the caution that would normally happen in a primary like this where Democrats would not get personal and create advertising opportunities for the eventual Republican nominee, all that’s been cast aside, and we have arguments galore between white women in the Democrat Party and black voters in the Democrat Party. It’s just more than I could possibly have imagined. The Drive-By Media is fully aware of it, and they are talking about it without mentioning Operation Chaos, as the audio sound bites today will clearly illustrate. Speaking of the audio sound bites, let’s go to them now. Yesterday in Washington, Obama addressed the Associated Press luncheon, and here is the board chairman, W. Dean Singleton’s, introduction of Obama.

SINGLETON: Oprah Winfrey has called him ‘The One.’ Pundits call him a rock star. Rush Limbaugh calls him the messiah.

RUSH: Do you believe this? Obama is sitting there, and he’s listening to his introduction, and this guy quotes me as referring to him as the messiah. Now, that is totally taken out of context. I have said that he’s messianic to his lamebrain supporters. I have not said he’s the Second Coming. I wouldn’t dare. But for any of you, I remember back in the early days of this program, and Snerdley can back me up on this, but I was kind of taken aback by this. We started in 1988. The first two or three years when I would do riffs on the left-wing bias in the media we’d get phone calls from people telling me I was wrong and you don’t know what you’re talking about. I persisted because I was right, and the whole process was an informative, educational, while being humorous at the same time, process. You take a look at this whole session yesterday, the Q&A between these AP people, these news junkies and reporters and Obama, there was nothing journalistic about it. It was one giant total fawn. These reporters are so in the tank for Obama, there wasn’t one tough question. In fact, they made it a point when they got to the last question, the moderator, whoever it was, said, ‘Senator Obama, we have time for one last question, which means it will not be on your comments in San Francisco, ‘Bittergate’ it’s being called, the questions will not be about Bittergate.’ And they asked him, threw the biggest softballs they possibly could. Here, listen to this. This is an exchange that took place, Dean Singleton again had this exchange with Obama.

SINGLETON: Can you imagine shifting a substantial number of Afghanistan — a substantial number to Afghanistan where the Taliban has been gaining strength and Obama Bin Laden is still at large?

OBAMA: I think that was Osama Bin Laden. (laughter)

SINGLETON: If I did that; I’m so sorry.

OBAMA: No, no, no. The — this is part of — part of the — part of the exercise that I’ve been going through over the last 15 months, which is why it’s pretty impressive I’m still standing here.

RUSH: (crying) Don’t forget who first mispronounced his name. It was none other than Obama endorser Ted Kennedy at the National Press Club who referred to him as Osama Obama or Obama Osama, go ask Obama, go ask the new guy from Chicago, whatever it was. But it’s just, ‘Oh, he had to put up with this Hussein business and these dyslexic confusions of his name with Osama Bin Laden for 15 years. It is amazing that he is still standing there after 15 years.’ I gotta take a brief time-out. More Operation Chaos sound bites are right around the corner. E.J. Dionne, Jr., he’s just twisted into a pretzel of anger today over what’s happening in the Democrat primaries, as are a lot of other Democrats and liberal media types in the Drive-Bys.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Bob Herbert, New York Times, fed up, angry. He basically says in his column today that Obama shoulda just said that those clingers, those bitter people, those bitter poor people in Pennsylvania in the small towns, those people that cling to guns and cling to religion and don’t like anybody who doesn’t look like them — he shoulda just gone all the way and called ’em racists because that’s what they are, according to Bob Herbert. ‘There is no mystery here. Except for people who have been hiding in caves or living in denial, it’s pretty widely understood that a substantial number of those voters — in Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and elsewhere — will not vote for a black candidate for president. Pennsylvanians themselves will tell you that racial attitudes in some parts of the state are, to be kind, less than enlightened. Gov. Ed Rendell, Hillary Clinton’s most powerful advocate in the state, put it bluntly last February: ‘I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate.’ … He danced all around the truth.

‘Unless you’re Fred Astaire, if your dance steps get too intricate you’re bound to make a misstep. This was a big one. … If I were advising him, I would tell him to confront the matter head-on, meeting as often as possible with skeptical, and even hostile, working people in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. Let the questions rip, and answer them honestly. No one has an obligation to vote for Mr. Obama, and it’s certainly not racist to vote against him. But the senator can make it clear that it is wrong to dismiss a candidacy out of hand solely because of the race or ethnicity or gender of the candidate.’ Mr. Herbert, Obama’s comment about all these bitter people, you know the bitter, angry people in this country are Democrats and the left. They are constantly on edge and enraged. You can read it in Bob Herbert’s column today; you can read it in E.J. Dionne, Jr.’s column today. You’ll hear it in audio sound bites coming up shortly. So Herbert says the senator can make it clear that it’s wrong to dismiss a candidacy out of hand solely because of the race or gender or ethnicity of the candidate. Mr. Herbert, it’s also wrong to dismiss voters out of hand solely because of the race or economic circumstance of the voter, which is what Obama did talking to the trust-funders in San Francisco.

George Will has a great column today on this little transformation of the Democrat Party into a neo-Marxist bunch of socialists, and he points out that the New Dealism and FDR, World War II, can say what you want about FDR, but in those days the Democrat Party was the true champion of the so-called little guy, and the first Democrat presidential candidate that decided to smear the little guy was Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and in 1956. In fact, let me find, rather than paraphrase this because it’s really well crafted. George Will when he’s on, doesn’t write, he crafts, and this is a great one. It’s called, ”Obama on His High Horse’ — Adlai Stevenson, like Obama, energized young, educated professionals for whom, Michael Barone wrote, ‘what was attractive was not his platform but his attitude.” And that’s the same thing that attracted people to Obama. ‘They sought from Stevenson ‘not so much changes in public policy as validation of their own cultural stance.’ They especially rejected ‘American exceptionalism, the notion that the United States was specially good and decent,’ rather than — in Michelle Obama’s words — ‘just downright mean.”

American exceptionalism. I gave a little speech on this Saturday night at dinner in fact in front of my guests at the dinner table and how disappointed I am that nobody on our side is willing — anywhere, I mean you won’t find any politician willing today to talk about American exceptionalism. They all have to beat up the country; have to blame the country. This is what Adlai Stevenson did, and this is what Obama and Hillary are in the process of doing. Now, back to Adlai Stevenson, as Will says, ‘who was the first Democrat candidate to attack the voters.’ And Will points out that Obama may be the fulfillment of modern liberalism. ‘When a supporter told Adlai Stevenson, the losing Democratic presidential nominee in 1952 and 1956, that thinking people supported him, Stevenson said, ‘Yes, but I need to win a majority.” Meaning, a minority of people in this country have brains. So you had an elitist supporter of Stevenson come up and say, ‘Boy, the thinking people support you,’ and Stevenson says, ‘Yeah, but I need to win a majority.’

Another supporter told Stevenson, ‘You educated the people through your campaign,’ Stevenson replied, ‘But a lot of people flunked the course.’ Here’s Obama and the Democrat Party, which has now taken up the step of Adlai Stevenson, and they simply are in the process of ripping their own voters, ripping the American people. Now, this is nothing new. They’ve always thought this. I, ladies and gentlemen, have nearly gone hoarse over the years attempting to explain — I know these things are hard to understand, well, hard to believe, not hard to understand. But I have been trying to inform as many people as possible that the modern day Democrat Party, as liberal as it is, looks out over the landscape of America and sees contempt. They hold contempt for average people. There is an arrogant condescension. They have to look at people that way in order to advance policies and ideas. Those people are too stupid to know what’s good for them, and that’s why they need government running their lives, government managing their affairs.

What’s happening now is, as I mentioned at the top of this riff, is that the Democrats are saying all this for us. They are confirming everything that I have said about them. But they’re doing it in their own words. E.J. Dionne, Jr,: ”Dissecting Bittergate’ — But then there are those two Obama words that shook the campaign: ‘cling’ and ‘bitter.’ Really dumb word choices. The second paragraph, far less empathetic than the first, makes Obama sound like the author of an undergraduate paper, not a candidate for president. At one level, who can blame Hillary Clinton for going after Obama’s mistake? … But something doesn’t parse when a Wellesley and Yale Law School graduate whose family made $109 million since 2001 relentlessly assails a former community organizer on the grounds that he is an elitist. … But here are the two remaining Democratic candidates, Obama by speaking carelessly and Clinton by piling on shamelessly, doing all they can to make it easy for Republicans to pretend one more time that they are the salt of the earth.’ E.J., Obama didn’t speak carelessly, unless you mean by carelessly he said the truth and that’s not what liberals are supposed to do. Clinton didn’t pile on shamelessly. She’s running a campaign trying to beat the guy. We Republicans do stand for the little guy now, E.J.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This