Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: This is Hardball last night. Chris Matthews is beside himself with all the truth-telling on this show, all the truth that we are telling about Obama. He had Pat Buchanan on last night. Matthews says, ‘Does this sound right, what Limbaugh is saying, that this is getting even for whites’ success, the white America he hates deep in his soul, the reason he ran for president was to bring it down? Is this a reasonable argument by anybody?’ Now, Matthews is misstating what I’ve said in his question. What I’ve said is I’m simply taking the words of a Department of Justice lawyer who repeated it to a line attorney, J. Christian Adams, who said not prosecuting the New Black Panthers is payback. What can that possibly mean? It’s payback. We’re not going to go after black defendants. It’s payback time. You know, I said the O.J. Simpson verdict was payback time, and everybody on the left is outraged, ‘Why would you say that? How can you possibly say that?’ What do you call it? Jury nullification. How long did that trial take and the jury is out for a couple minutes, and they come back, not guilty?

There’s no question it was jury nullification. They said we’re going to find this guy not guilty for whatever reason so you all can figure out what it’s like. You know, we’ve been falsely convicted and falsely accused ever since this country was founded so how does it feel? And at the time, hardly anybody disputed that analysis of the jury’s verdict in O.J. Jury nullification. The evidence didn’t matter. We’re going to say he didn’t do it so you can find out what it feels like. Well, if you’re intellectually honest with yourself and you look at these policies, there’s no way. Obama said, ‘The days of this country leading the world are over.’ He’s apologized for this country every foreign trip he’s made. He clearly has a chip on his shoulder about this country. He’s redistributing the wealth of this country. He’s returning the wealth of this nation to its, quote, unquote, rightful owners. They are miserable. I mean nobody’s happy with his policies. They’re a miserable failure everywhere.

His preacher, Reverend Wright, maybe my problem is I’m too willing to admit what I hear is what I hear. You people on the left, you heard Jeremiah Wright, you know who Bill Ayers is, you know that Obama was in that church for 20 years, you know he heard what the guy said. You know he gave a half-baked denouncement of the guy during the campaign. You know Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed communist raised him. You know his father was a communist. You know he’s got a bugaboo about this country. You know he doesn’t like the Bill of Rights. We’ve had him on tape, the Constitution’s Bill of Rights is a set of negative liberties. It does not tell the government what it can do to people. They don’t like the first Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Third Amendment, the Fourth Amendment. They want a revised second Bill of Rights that can tell the government what it can do. The Constitution constrains Obama, Chris. He said this. Maybe my problem is I listen. So I listen to him say these things, I listen to what his best friends say, I look at their rage and anger, I look at the anti-capitalist policies of every appointee and every czar, I look at what happens, and then I look at the implementation of his economic policies to create jobs and economic growth, and it’s doing just the opposite.

I listen to all these private sector business titans now starting to say, ‘You know what? These policies are horrible, they’re not working, and they won’t work.’ And I simply connect the dots. Well, then why have they been implemented? They’ve been implemented by somebody who, by the way, is happily presiding over the decline of the United States, and people in the regime have used that term, the decline of the country. This country was wrong in Iraq, it was wrong in Hiroshima, it was wrong everywhere it’s been, to these people. You people on the left, you may not all dislike this country. You have to admit a sizeable contingent of your movement does dislike this country, and some of them actually hate it. All I’m saying is for the first time in my lifetime we have elected a president who does not think anything good of this country, that somehow it’s been unjust and immoral and he’s gotta fix it. Like Krauthammer just said, here’s a guy who believes in his own magnificence but not his country’s. I mean it is what it is. Maybe my flaw is believing it. Maybe my flaw is just not letting it go in one other, out the other. So Matthews asks Buchanan, essentially, ‘Is this the reason the guy ran for president, to bring down the country, is that a viable thing to say?’

BUCHANAN: No, if you say that he ran for president to bring down America, no. But if you say that Barack Obama is really not the type of, if you will, gut patriot say Jack Kennedy was, Ronald Reagan was, who would tear up at stories about American heroism, I think Obama does believe America is guilty of a lot of sins in its history, Chris. I think he is somewhat different than almost all the presidents we have ever had.

RUSH: Well, now, then, Pat, why did you say no, if you say he ran for president to bring down America? And then everything else you say agrees with me. He said, ‘He’s not really the type of gut patriot that Kennedy was or Reagan was, tear up at stories about American heroism. I think Obama does believe America’s guilty of a lot of sins in its history. I think he’s somehow different than almost all the presidents we’ve ever had.’ Yeah. Somehow different than all of the presidents we’ve ever had? Yes, and in what way? Buchanan just described it. So after this Q&A, Matthews then played a montage of Rush comments from the past few weeks. Now, he plays this montage as though what I’m saying is beyond the pale, it’s simply outrageous. But you’ve heard these things because you listen to the program. They aired last night on Mess NBC. Everything I say here is true, and yet those on the left hear this and they think it’s racism or sexism or whatever ism they want to call it.

RUSH ARCHIVE (montage): (June 22,2010) I think Obama loves drilling moratoriums. I think he loves getting even with this country. I think he loves punishing this country. I think he adores the opportunity to cut this country down to size. Obama was part of the Democrat Party cabal hoping for defeat in Iraq. (June 28, 2010) …is appointing people to the Supreme Court to vote down the Constitution. (June 30, 2010) First president in history, to my knowledge anyway, who actually wants his nation to fail. (July 1, 2010) Obama wants to create an illegal alien Bill of Rights. (July 2, 2010) We’re now governed by people who do not like the country. Who is Obama? Why is he doing this? Why? Why? (July 6, 2010) He wouldn’t have been voted president if he weren’t black.

RUSH: And that’s what set them off, and then the line where I said if he weren’t black, he’d be a tour guide in Hawaii. Man, you ought to see the smoldering embers that were Democrat websites over that comment. And as usual what sets ’em off is the truth. What sets them off is the truth. Here’s Eugene Robinson calling all this racist claptrap. Matthews says, ‘Limbaugh clearly has a pattern here of saying just what he said the other day, Gene, which is the president wants America to fail out of revenge.’

ROBINSON: This is racist claptrap. This is nonsense. I don’t believe Rush Limbaugh actually believes half of the stuff that he said. Barack Obama wants to create an illegal alien Bill of Rights, Barack Obama’s proposal for a comprehensive immigration bill falls far short of the amnesty that Ronald Reagan gave to illegal immigrants. If he believes half of this, I would be stunned. I think this is all about Rush Limbaugh’s fat bank account and the fact that by saying increasingly outrageous and inflammatory and, yes, racist things about Barack Obama, it stirs the waters and then makes everybody talk about him and makes people listen to him.

RUSH: Okay, so there is the learned analysis of what I’m saying. I don’t really mean it. That was Eugene Robinson, a columnist for the Washington Post. He said, ‘Barack Obama (gasp) wants to create (gasp) an illegal alien Bill of Rights (gasp).’ Well, yeah. Amnesty is the largest voter registration drive we’ve ever had in this country. If you are going to oppose the enforcement of federal immigration law, why is it incorrect to say that we are creating an illegal alien Bill of Rights? ‘Barack Obama’s proposal for a comprehensive immigration bill falls far short of the amnesty that Reagan gave to illegal immigrants.’ Those two are not even comparable, what Reagan did and what Obama seeks to do? Reagan would never sue a state. Reagan would never encourage a boycott of one state by other states, as this regime has done. So now, in order to deal with this truth that I utter, they now tell themselves I don’t really mean it. It’s just to fatten my bank account. Well, he-he-he-he-he, you don’t see my name listed on all those companies hoarding cash, but, he-he.


RUSH: I’ll tell you something else is patently obvious. Eugene Robinson, Chris Matthews, whoever it is, you guys really need a new talking point. Calling everybody who criticizes or disagrees with Obama a racist is just not cutting it anymore. You’ve try to discredit all of us who disagree with Obama by claiming we’re all racists. It isn’t going to cut it because you have all kinds of people now who are as critical of this regime and its policies as I have been before the regime was immaculated. Now, does anybody ever ask if Hugo Chavez realizes what he’s doing to his country? No, they don’t. They don’t ask that, because everybody knows that Hugo Chavez is a socialist. The media reports I read about Chavez, there’s hardly any criticism. It just, ‘Here’s the facts. Chavez is nationalizing the oil business because there’s an energy shortage. Chavez is rationing food. Chavez, the socialist leader of Venezuela, is doing this, this, and this.’

There’s never any criticism of it. There’s just reporting. Nobody ever asks, ‘Gosh, does this guy know what he’s doing?’ So why would anybody ask, ‘Does Obama know what he’s doing?’ Of course he knows what he’s doing! This is not an accident, and he’s peppered and populated his administration with like-minded zombies. Cut-outs. Rubber stamps. A marvel. You know, Van Jones is being exposed and people ask, ‘How did that guy get in there?’ How did Van Jones…? (snots) He’s handpicked precisely because of what he believes, and say, ‘Ehhhh, Obama, you know, he’s got a immigration plan that’s not nearly as comprehensive as Ronald Reagan’s was.’ Come on. Are we idiots? Do you really think that we’re idiots? Do you want to tell us that Obama’s immigration desires, his ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ is in any way less sweeping than Reagan’s?

You really want us to believe that Reagan was more radical on immigration than Barack Obama? You see, we all know, amnesty or ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ is nothing but voter registration. In fact, more and more people now are starting to see it. Now, I’m reading people who are now beginning to criticize Obama for a ‘political miscalculation.’ They’re saying, ‘Well, it is apparently obvious, Obama is trying to gain support of Hispanic voters for the November elections via his immigration policy.’ Okay, true. There’s no question. But can we complete the sentence and point out how absolutely devious that is, to sell the country and a particular state down the river in order to secure a voting bloc? And you want to compare that to Ronald Reagan?


RUSH: Has there ever, ever been a greater illustration of me being on the cutting edge of societal, political and cultural stuff that happen all of this that’s happening now? Since before Obama was inaugurated, I have been saying X, Y, and Z about what he was going to do and how it wasn’t gonna work because of what and who he is. And now, a year and a half later, here comes the chorus — slowly but surely building — and they’re all agreeing with me. This is exactly what I mean when I say, ‘I’m on the cutting edge of societal, cultural, political evolution.’ You are listening to it, and that’s why you listen to this program.

JOHNNY DONOVAN: And now, from sunny south Florida, it’s Open Line Friday!

RUSH: Same thing with the global warming hoax. For 20 years I was telling people, ‘It’s a bogus hoax.’ Now it’s known that it’s a bogus hoax. I sometimes wonder. Not very often because I don’t dwell on the present. I’m always thinking about tomorrow. But sometimes when the lights are off at night and Kathryn and the dogs have gone up to bed and the cat’s prowling around seeking a little freedom now that the dogs have gone away, I ask myself, ‘I wonder if my audience realizes just how fortunate they are?’ I mean, this is cutting edge of societal evolution. Look, for two and a half years, folks, I’ve said, ‘This is who the guy is. This is what his economic policies are going to deliver,’ ’cause I understand socialists. I understand liberals. I said, ‘I hope he fails,’ and everybody been on my case. Now look. The chorus is building.

By the way, for those of you, the familial audience here (and you know this), when I say, ‘I wonder if my audience realizes how fortunate they are,’ what you know is that that’s a media tweak. I’m saying that ’cause I want the left to say, ‘Do you realize what Limbaugh said? He actually said he wonders if his audience realizes how fortunate they are!’ You and I know what’s going on here. This is the dirty little secret. In fact there’s a guy. P. J. Rednick? J. P. Bladnick? J. R. Ewing? Let me find it. P. J.? It’s in the DC Examiner. Where did I put the…? P. J. Gladnick I think it is. Yeah, here it is. ‘The Rush Limbaugh Challenge,’ P. J. Gladnick. ‘I have found a fascinating phenomenon among liberals. They feel free to harshly criticize Rush Limbaugh yet rarely, if ever, listen to him. And when they do hear him it is in carefully selected brief excerpts or in second- or third-hand accounts. This leads to a lot of misconceptions on their part.

‘I was reminded of this phenomenom [sic] again while reading a column in my local newspaper by Leonard Fein. I enjoy reading Fein’s columns because, although he is a liberal, I consider him a member of the non-moonbat left who occasionally displays brief moments of mental clarity when it comes to current events,’ and he cites a column this guy recently wrote and praises it, and then he says: ‘Okay, so here is an example of Fein thinking outside the standard liberal envelope. Unfortunately he soon suffers a relapse with this gratuitous shot at Rush Limbaugh: ‘We’d hoped that Obama’s even temper and reasonableness might cause Rush Limbaugh to disappear; instead, we now have Glenn Beck as well.’ Leonard, I really have to ask you a question at this point: Do you actually LISTEN to Rush Limbaugh? And I don’t mean in bits and pieces.

‘Have you ever listened to entire Rush Limbaugh broadcasts over a reasonable period of time? If not, then I make this challenge not only to you but to all non-moonbat liberals: Listen to the entire three hours of Rush Limbaugh on a daily basis for a full month and then report back your findings,’ and he goes on to quote William Raspberry of the Raspberry Effect. In 1993, this program was five years old. ‘In 1993, Washington Post columnist William Raspberry wrote a piece blasting Limbaugh for his ‘demagoguery … his gay bashing, his racial putdowns.’ Like the Mississippi segregationists of his youth, Raspberry said, Limbaugh ‘is so good at … tossing the raw meat of bigotry to people. … Limbaugh is a bigot.’ Eleven days later, Raspberry wrote a second column retracting the first. ‘Rush, I’m sorry,’ he began. He confessed, to his great credit, that the earlier piece had been written in ignorance.

”My opinions about [Limbaugh] had come largely from other people — mostly friends who think Rush is a four-letter word. They are certain he is a bigot. Is he?’ Raspberry — who by this point had listened to several hours of Limbaugh’s shows and perused one of his books — went on to answer his own question. Limbaugh might be ‘smart-alecky’ and love ‘to rattle liberal cages,’ he might be ‘unrelenting in his assault on … political correctness.’ But he was no more a bigot or hatemonger than Art Buchwald.” The Raspberry Effect. So here’s P. J. Gladnick urging people to take the ‘Rush Limbaugh Challenge.’ This is in the DC Examiner opinions on yesterday afternoon. It cleared about four o’clock in the afternoon, and the point is that he’s right.

So when I say I sit at home at night after Kathryn and the dogs have gone to bed and the cat’s free to roam the house, sits on my lap purring while I pet the cat, consuming an adult beverage and I say to myself, ‘I wonder if my audience really wonders how damn fortunate they are to have me as their host?’ you know that when I say things like that (laughing) it is to irritate and outrage the left, who just despise confidence in anybody. They don’t like confidence, they don’t like self-assuredness, they don’t like people who are solid in their beliefs, black and white. They like people who can see ‘a lot of gray’ because you can manipulate those people. You can bend, shame, and form their opinions. Now, a couple observations, if you will permit me — because I’m still truck here by Eugene Robinson trying to compare Reagan’s immigration in his second term and saying it was far more sweeping than what Obama wants to do.

Reagan sought no political advantage from this. It was in his second term. It was ’86 when this bill passed, and here’s the thing about it. It was amnesty! It was amnesty for, at the time, three million illegals. In his somewhat surprising to hear the American left bring up Reagan amnesty for several reasons because, first, we know it was a disaster. They told us: Give us this amnesty for three million, and that’s it. There won’t be any further problems. Now where are we? We’re at between 12 and 20 million. So we know that Reagan’s amnesty was a disaster, that it led to an absolute explosion in illegal aliens coming into the country. But doesn’t it also show that Republicans are not racists? I remember back in 1986 when this all happened a lot of people who supported Reagan supported this because they bought the notion, ‘Okay, this will be the end of it,’ kind of like they bought the notion that electing a black president will end racism.

So in 1986, a lot of people — not everybody, but a lot of people — bought into the notion, ‘Okay, let’s try it.’ Now, those of us who bought it… Yeah, Simpson-Mazzoli, the same Alan Simpson. Simpson-Mazzoli was the Reagan amnesty bill. Alan Simpson was the Simpson of Simpson-Mazzoli, and Alan Simpson (who now calls me ‘Rush Babe’) is on Obama’s deficit reduction commission. Simpson-Mazzoli. The point is we all supported it but we’ve learned it didn’t work. It also proves that Republicans were not racist. If we were racist and anti-Hispanic, how in the world did we support it back in 1986? What we have learned is it didn’t work. Everything they told us about it, like they tell us about every government program, turned out to be wrong. Medicare is only going to cost X, Social Security is only gonna X, Medicaid’s only going to cost X.

None of it’s ever true. So we have learned from our errors. If we grant amnesty to three million and we end up 20 years later with 12 to 20 million, somebody tell me why doing it again makes sense. Now, Mr. Robinson and the rest of you, we all know really what Obama’s motivation for this is and the Democrat Party’s motivation — and that is votes. Amnesty is the single largest Democrat voter registration drive known to exist, ever to exist. And, Mr. Robinson, Eugene Robinson here at the Washington Post, one more thing — and I would challenge any honest person on the left to disagree with this. If polling indicated that 70% — hell, 60%; let’s go with 60% — of the illegal alien vote, after amnesty, would vote Republican, do you actually think Barack Obama would be for it?

Isn’t it true, ladies and gentlemen, we know that if 60% of the illegal alien vote would vote Republican after getting citizenship, the Democrats would have built a speed train already from Arizona, New Mexico, and California, not just to Mexico City, but all the way down to Peru to get rid of them. There is no way if 60% of them were going to vote Republican that any Democrat would be talking ‘amnesty’ or ‘comprehensive immigration reform,’ and by the same token, the Republicans who early on were talking about this also were doing it ’cause they wanted the votes, too. So the American people said here are a couple politicians, or political parties putting their own self-interest, Republican and Democrat, ahead of the country’s — and that’s why there was and is opposition to this.

The American people want their elected representatives to stand up for their country, to love their country as they do, to be proud of it, and to seek further greatness and understand American exceptionalism. And what’s happened? We have an administration saying, ‘The border’s too big. We can’t close it. Ah, that hole in the Gulf is too big. We can’t close the hole.’ We got an administration that can’t do anything, can’t fix anything, doesn’t want to fix anything and is presiding over a nation in decline — while the people of this country love it and don’t understand why anybody doesn’t. But they do understand that now people who run the country don’t like it as much as they do and have all kinds of problems with it.

They understand — the American people do, in greater and greater numbers — that the people running this country now think that parts of this country have been unjust and immoral and have to be gotten even with, or punished (which is the whole point of redistribution, is it not?) So how is any of this assailable? How is any of this racist? All of this that I have just encapsulated here, speaking for a clear majority of the American people, is based on love. Love of country. And the vast majority of the American people are asking themselves, ‘Do the people who run the country now have the same love for it we do?’ ’cause they don’t see any evidence of that, and that’s why they’re asking.


RUSH: Another big lie about this whole Democrat push for amnesty is they’re calling it immigration reform. There’s nothing wrong with our immigration policy. They’re not enforcing it. There’s no need for reform. If any reform is necessary, we need to loosen the restrictions on educated, qualified people getting in this country. That’s who we’re keeping out. Our immigration policy is the most liberal in the world. It’s not broken; it doesn’t need to be fixed. It’s the non-legal immigration policy that is broken and needs to be dealt with and we got a law for it; they just don’t enforce it.

Now, let me illustrate this Obama business another way because I said earlier, do you think people ask, ‘Does Hugo Chavez know what he’s doing?’ Of course they don’t ask that because they know what Hugo Chavez is doing. Do you remember when that white Siberian tiger mauled Roy of Siegfried and Roy? That tiger mauled Roy and dragged Roy off the stage and he actually had a stroke when the animal was dragging him off the stage. And Siegfried and Roy said, ‘No, don’t kill the animal, don’t kill the animal.’ The tiger didn’t go crazy. The tiger went tiger. The tiger was a tiger, you know, a lion’s a lion. So Obama’s not stupid or going crazy; he’s just going Obama. Obama’s Obama. And now, ladies and gentlemen, countless thousands who have known it for months are now starting to courageously join the chorus of those of us who have been saying it.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This