RUSH: Lo and behold, my friends, here’s another one. Another bakery had to shut down, and this is from Indianapolis, all the way back in February, February 15th. USA Today: “A bakery that drew protests for refusing to prepare a cake for a gay couple has closed its doors.”
So you see, ladies and gentlemen, I knew that bakeries had been shut down because of this. I just erred in talking about the bakery in Denver. That one’s still open, and they weathered the storm. But this one is in Indianapolis.
“The 111 Cakery was still profitable, said co-owner Randy McGath. But McGath’s 45-year-old wife, Trish, did most of the baking and wanted more time to spend with the couple’s four grandchildren. The business ‘was wearing her out,’ her husband said. She has been taking a break from working since Dec. 31 when the bakery went out of business, he said. In March the McGaths faced a firestorm of protest after declining a request to bake a cake for a commitment ceremony for two men. Same-sex marriage has been legal in Indiana since Oct. 7.”
What? The hell, you say. You mean to tell me that gay people could get married in this bigoted, racist state? How is that possible? With everything you’re hearing about Indiana, can you believe this hysteria? Can you believe this? All these businesses claiming they’re gonna get out. All of these conventions that were scheduled to take place in Indiana, the sponsors demanding and claiming they’re gonna get out, can you believe this? A 100 percent manufactured hysteria.
If you pay attention to the Drive-By Media, you would think that the state of Indiana has more bigotry, racism, sexism, than your average Middle Eastern Sharia law country. If you paid attention to the American media you would think Indiana was one of the worst spots on earth you could go and live. So many bigots, so many racists, so many homophobes. And yet we find out that gay marriage has been legal in Indiana since last October.
A TV station in Indianapolis broadcast the story of the bakery rejecting the request to bake a cake for a commitment ceremony for two men. The next day Facebook and Twitter blew up with outrage. By the way, that’s all manufactured, too. Take it from one who knows. Take it from one who is a target of some of this stuff. We have done research, folks, we have found out that it’s 10 to 11 people who have found a way, using advanced algorithms, to make themselves appear to be thousands upon thousands of people.
There is on Twitter this thing called StopRush, and it’s people attacking me and this program much the way Indiana is being attacked today, and whatever conservative institution was attacked yesterday. What this group does is they go after local advertisers on local EIB affiliates, and they try to intimidate local businesses. This cake shop is an example, I don’t know if they’re one, but like this little mom-and-pop businesses. They just overwhelm them with complaint tweets, threatening tweets, a bunch of e-mails.
It’s 10 people. We researched it. We know who the people are. We know where they live. Virtually 85% of all the so-called outrage e-mails and tweets are generated by 10 people, made to look as though they are thousands and thousands and thousands. It’s all fake. It’s all phony. It’s all part of a left-wing, massive smear operation. It’s defamation, it’s smear, it’s everything you can imagine. But it’s made to look legit, and it does look legit until you get into it. It just scares the hell out of people. So here’s this bakery shutting down because Twitter hummed with outrage.
We are led to believe, we’re supposed to think that when something like this happens, Okay, a gay couple walk into a bake shop in Indianapolis, they want a cake. The bake shop says, “Sorry, no, we don’t believe in gay marriage. We’re not gonna bake your cake.” Ask yourself, how, then, do thousands upon thousands of people find out about that within hours? How does that happen? How all of a sudden does this bake shop start getting all of these tweets and all of these e-mails, all of them threatening, by the way. Some of them are scary threatening.
But how does anybody know? This gay couple that’s rejected at the bakery, what do they do? Do they go out, tell somebody, it then blows up? How does it happen? It’s all strategized. It’s all organized. It all has, as its objective, being turned down. They target places that they think this is gonna happen, and then they’ve got their response ready to go to make it look like the whole nation.
You know what else we found in our investigation? Let’s just take a state, doesn’t matter which one, take Illinois. Let’s say there’s a mom-and-pop operation that wants to advertise on our station in Illinois, Chicago, WLS, and that local sponsor’s commercial is heard, and the next thing that proprietor knows, he’s got thousands and thousands of tweets threatening him, telling him defamatory things about me, lies and things totally made up about things I’ve supposedly said on the radio.
And the guy gets scared. We found out that not only are only 10 people behind this, but in the vast, I mean vast majority of cases, 90% of the tweets are coming from out of state. They’re not even from people within the listening area of WLS, in the example I gave you. They’re not even people in Chicago. Because that’s not where these 10 people are. They’re in Southern California, they’re in New England, a bunch of places there in the upper Midwest. There’s an active college professor that’s one of these 10 people. The point is that this has become a stratagem that has been conceived by people at Media Matters for America, and it’s all contrived. It’s all made possible by exploiting vulnerabilities that exist in Twitter.
As a result, Twitter has become a cesspool. Twitter has become a sewer for this kind of stuff. But these people at the bake shop, let’s go back to them, the McGaths. Okay, so they refuse to bake a cake, and the next thing they know Twitter has erupted, and they’ve got threats coming in, and it’s made to look like they’re all from the neighborhood. It looks like these threats and these tweets are all from people in Indiana and in Indianapolis and in the suburbs, when they’re not. They’re from out of state. Ten people. I don’t know in this case if it’s 10. I know in my case it is. We’ve researched it. We spent a lot of time finding out about this.
Just to see this all happen is mind-boggling to me. And to look at how effective it is, because it literally — if you’re a mom-and-pop business, and you think thousands of potential customers are sending these. And the message, they’re all, by the way, worded almost identically, almost like form letters. There’s some differences in them, but they’re all threatening, some to a greater degree than others. But the bottom line is, that if you’re a local mom-and-pop business, and you do something in the process of running your business one day, and the next day you’ve got thousands of supposedly angry people breathing down your neck because you’re a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe or you’re supporting racists, sexists, bigots, homophobes, whatever, you get scared.
These people shut down the bakery. In Oregon, the same thing happened and it cost ’em 150 grand in addition to losing the bakery. This is all bought and paid for in one way or another by George Soros and the Democrat Party. Now, the thing about this is, none of what I’ve told you is news to people who’ve investigated this. It’s striking that even though all of this is known — and we’ve taken our research and documented research and we’ve shown it to people. And it’s still, for some reason, showing them the truth, it’s kind of like global warming: You show people the truth about the lies and the totally made-up science of global warming, and they still have are trouble rejecting it because they’re still getting all those threats on their computer from Twitter, from Facebook or wherever else it’s coming from.
No business owner wants to get that kind of stuff routinely thrown at him. The Republican Party, they’re all victimized this way. And it’s just stunning to me that people have not come up with a way to fight back and deal with this. But the take-away, the thing you need to know, the thing you need to understand is that it’s a safe bet in practically every one of these cases, Twitter doesn’t erupt. It’s not thousands upon thousands, tens of thousands, in some case millions of people. It’s a very few, it’s a handful making themselves look like a mob.
And it seems to me that there would be, at least at the Republican Party level, some way of being able to deal with this, since you know exactly what it is, and you know when it’s coming. You know what you say and how you say it, you know what kind of reaction it’s gonna cause from the left. And to continually act shocked and surprised by it is a bit curious to me. I know there’s a term, it’s astroturfing, made famous by David Axelrod who practically invented this whole concept, online astroturfing. The Obama campaign and the radical left have been using this for years to not only mislead the public, but to intimidate people.
My point is, they are not gigantic in numbers. They are not a majority of people. It’s not a majority of people ticked off at the state of Indiana, folks. It’s not the whole country outraged over what’s happening in Indiana. It’s made to look like that. And the media, of course, is part of the game, so they go right along with this. They know this whole thing is ginned up. You can tell them the truth, just like the story on global warming that I just had here: “Scientists Say New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria.” No, it’s not, because it isn’t about global warming.
The global warming proponents are not gonna be stopped by science that disproves their claims ’cause it isn’t about the science in the first place. There isn’t any science. Everything that you think is true about global warming has only been established to exist in a computer model. There isn’t one shred of data anywhere that can conclusively predict what the climate is gonna be next year, much less in the next 50. The only way that they can do that is computer models, and those are only as good as the input data. There is no scientific data. All there is is a so-called consensus of scientists. Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree. Well, science is not a consensus.
But here’s the point. You can respond to all of this with fact after fact after fact after fact that destroys claim after claim after claim after claim, and it’s not going to stop because the agenda is not about global warming. Global warming is the vehicle, just like Obamacare was not really about health care. It’s about something much larger and much more insidious, as is all of the left-wing agenda. And because they still remain a minority, a true minority, a numerical minority because they are not the majority of people in this country, and they are not the majority of thinking, but they have captivated certain elements of pop culture media, and these tricks they play on Twitter and elsewhere to make themselves look like they are so numerous and so large that you and everybody like you ends up thinking you’ve lost your country and there’s only 10 or 20 of you left, and there’s no way to beat ’em back.
It’s a total psychological ploy. They are not a majority. They’re nowhere near a numerical majority, and this is the only way that they can hope to have any success with their agenda is to impugn the opposition, intimidate, and defame, frighten, and paralyze the opposition. That is exactly what they’re engaged in. And that’s how they seek to win, because they can’t win in the arena of ideas. They are nowhere near enough people to win.
RUSH: Another favorite trick in all of this: “Why are you so upset just because of who people love?” You’ve seen that phrase bandied about in this. “It’s discriminatory to care about who people love, and love is a great thing. Why are you objecting to it?” Well, I can tell you right now, I could mention I love somebody, and it wouldn’t be accepted. I would be called a bigot and any number of other bad names. All I would have to do is say, “I love, Jesus Christ.”
That is not permitted.
That makes you a bigot and whatever else, because that’s what the left is scared to death of. All of this, every bit of this is about the left’s visceral fear of religion. So the next time you get caught up in this argument and they accuse you of being a bigot or a discriminator because, “What’s wrong with this? What’s it matter who loves who?” say, “Yeah, you know, I love Jesus Christ,” and that’s like — oh, my! — showing Dracula the cross.
You’re not supposed to say that; that doesn’t count. You are not permitted. That says bad things about you. So it’s not about that, either. That’s just another one of these arguments that’s designed to make you shut up, and to agree with the notion that, “Yeah, I’m a bigot if I have a problem with who people love.” Tell ’em you love Jesus next time and see what they do.
Here’s Sheryl in Newport Beach, California, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hey, Rush. Speaking of Jesus, happy Easter to you.
RUSH: Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
CALLER: I just wanted to bring up a point that I think everybody seems to be missing when they’re screaming about cakes. This law has nothing to do with discriminating against anybody. All it provides for — whether you’re gay, a person of faith, or anybody else — is that you have standing in court to prove your case. Whether you’re the plaintiff or the defendant in the matter. It has nothing to do with somebody… You’ve got to go through people due process on whatever side of the equation you’re on. I think everybody conveniently forgets that, that’s screaming about wedding cakes.
RUSH: Yeah, that’s true, but this argument… See, they don’t accept that, because they say that your refusal to serve a cake, bake a cake for a gay couple getting married, that’s discrimination. To you, you are simply behaving according to your religious beliefs, and you do not want to violate them, and you do not want to behave immorally. But you do not have that right. They call that… Fealty, devotion, loyalty, whatever — devotion to your religion — in this context, equals discrimination. Ergo, religion is bad, and it’s for closed-minded bigots and fruitcakes.
That’s what they want you to believe.
RUSH: I think people have to understand what this is, and only then can you properly object to it and fight back against it. This is being driven by anti-Christianity, essentially. It’s an anti-Christian, anti-religion overall movement that is driving every bit of this.
RUSH: You know, one of the greatest casualties of this whole thing is a public impression that has been created, which is this, that Indiana is filled with businesses that will not serve gay people, will not provide their service, will not provide their product, will not sell their product. Indiana’s just loaded with ’em. That’s why we need to be vigilant.
The fact of the matter is, the media, in order to find some of these businesses practically have to go walking down the street knocking on doors, because it’s not an issue! If there is an issue, it is the other way around. It is the businesses being discriminated against.
But nevertheless, the idea here that Indiana is all of a sudden populated overwhelmingly with anti-gay zealots is a story that is false on its face but is a circumstance and a situation that is being created here right in front of everybody’s eyes. When the absolute truth is that the media is having to work very hard to find any businesses that do refuse to serve gays or gay weddings or whatever is on the table.
Frank in Ewing, New Jersey. Thank you, sir, for waiting, and it’s great to have you on the program. Hi.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks very much. What do you think of this idea? What if service providers, like florists or wedding cake bakers, included a limit of liability agreement as part of contracting for their service, and the agreed to limit is usually the cost or the price that the person paid for your service. So, for example, if you hire a house inspector before you buy a house and he misses something major and then later on you have to pay thousands of dollars to get it fixed, the only thing you can get back from the inspection company is what you paid him for the inspection. So the day before the wedding you call up and say, “Forgot to bake your cake.” The limit of liability says you owe ’em $400 or whatever, and if they refused to sign in the beginning, you have a reason not to do business.
RUSH: Sounds awfully convoluted. Sounds like an incredibly complicated process for people that have to spend all of their waking hours just keeping the business open.
CALLER: Well, I’m sure there must be some form you fill out when you contract for the flowers —
RUSH: Walk me through this. Okay, I’m gonna pretend to be a gay couple.
RUSH: I’ll eat a lot for dinner tonight and I’ll pretend to be two people, okay? I’ll do both parts. I’m gonna be gay couple, and you own a flower shop, okay? I walk in, and I say, “Hi, I am marrying myself a week from Saturday, and I want you to provide the floral display.”
CALLER: So, as part of the floral display undoubtedly there’s like some form to fill out that say you want some petunias, you want some pansies, you want some whatever, in what sizes, what shapes, what arrangement —
RUSH: No, no, don’t assume, you’re the business owner.
CALLER: Right, we’re working on what you want, and we fill out a form, and then I have you sign it that says, this is what I will provide. And on that standard form just is the limitation of liability, saying, “In the event” whatever, that I can’t perform the service, then the limitation that $400 —
RUSH: Okay, so you want me to sign a limited liability agreement that says, if you fail to provide the flowers for my self-wedding, that you are only subject to X-amount of financial penalty and what have you?
CALLER: Right. Those kind of things are in contracts all the time. I think the florist and the customer, you, there would already be some sort of form to sign. This would just be an additional line on there that says, “By the way, limitation of liability,” that you agree to.
RUSH: Okay. Okay. And then the day before — but you’ve known all along you’re not gonna bring flowers to my wedding, that’s —
CALLER: That’s not true. How would you that know? You can’t judge me.
RUSH: Because that’s the example you gave, you said then the day before the wedding you all of a sudden can’t get there.
CALLER: Oh, yeah, that’s right.
RUSH: So you call the customer, say, you know what, the dog died —
RUSH: And I can’t get there today.
RUSH: You can’t do anything to me because you signed a limited liability agreement, and I’m only liable for whatever the cost of the flowers are, and here’s your money?
RUSH: So you want the business owner to actually pay for not providing the flowers?
CALLER: Well, they probably already gave me the $400 for the flowers.
RUSH: Oh, as an advance?
RUSH: As an advance.
CALLER: So I’m just giving it back to ’em. I’m sure there’s already forms that they have them sign anyway. Today, it would just be a little extra —
RUSH: I guarantee you, your limited liability agreement would then qualify as anti-gay discrimination.
RUSH: Whether it was or not.
CALLER: Well, that’s right. The truth doesn’t matter.
RUSH: You’re dealing with hard, cold, rational fact, and you’re up against activists —
RUSH: — who are intent on subverting you no matter what you do, and they know that when they leave and go out to the media and complain about the treatment that you gave them, you are going to all of a sudden be the bad guy. And the fact that you might have a signature on a limited liability agreement isn’t gonna count for anything with Joe Q. low-information voter who hears about this on TMZ.
CALLER: I knew you’d find a hole in it, Rush. That’s why you are El Rushbo.
RUSH: I’m not trying to find a hole in it. God bless you, you’re like everybody else. You’re dealing with this as though truth and fact and common sense matter, and none of those are really relevant in what’s going on here. People are being targeted specifically. You mean to tell me that in Indiana a gay couple getting married can’t find a flower shop that will service them? Of all the potential flower shops in Indianapolis, a gay couple finds one that has a religious objection? How do they even know? And then when they find that out, they go there?
So they’re walking in the door hoping that they will be rejected? They’re not even walking in to really get flowers for their wedding or a cake? They’re hoping to be rejected so that they can then create a news story like this? Why in the world, if there’s 25 bakeries, you’re getting married, you want a cake for your wedding, or birthday, whatever it is, there’s 25 bakeries and one of them is owned and operated by Christians — if you can even figure this out — who are opposed to gay marriage, why would you go to that one?
There’s only one answer. You’re trying to create an issue. You are trying to find somebody to discriminate against you. You’re actually fine with being discriminated against. You want to be discriminated against, so you have an issue. Your feelings aren’t hurt. You’re on the verge of a gigantic success story here. Your feelings are not hurt. You’re not feeling like you’re a second-class citizen. You walked in there hoping that you would be rejected. You walked in there hoping they would discriminate against you.
You were hoping that these Christian zealots would, in fact, continue to be Christian zealots and send you packing. If you really wanted flowers for your wedding, you’d go someplace where you knew they wouldn’t have any problem servicing you. Am I wrong about this? (interruption) I mean, that’s right, there are rainbow stickers is in the door now in some of these places. Yeah, the rainbow stickers mean “come on in.” Front door, back door, whatever, come on in.
RUSH: I did a little research here and our last caller, whose idea was a limited liability claim, it won’t work. The left has already thought of that. (interruption) What? (interruption) It won’t work because under 42 US Code 1983 there is no limit on actual damages in civil rights claims if they can be proven. It’s 42 US Code Section 1983, civil action for deprivation of rights, no limit on damages if the claims can be proven, discrimination claims can be proven. So that idea is out the window. He-he-he-he-he.
RUSH: Here’s Art, Springfield, Oregon, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Thank you. Dittos. I just want to talk about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. I think this is something the Republicans should run towards, not away from. If you look at a lot of minority groups, both African-American and Hispanic, they’re very much pro-religion, and if you look at the Defense of Marriage Act, how many states it passed. This whole homosexual-rights thing I don’t think is a winner for the Democrats at all, and Republicans should force ’em into a corner —
RUSH: Well, they think it is because of the Millennials. They think that it’s a winning issue because young people are totally in favor of gay marriage, totally into anything gay, Millennials love it.
CALLER: They can think that, but when you look at the Defense of Marriage Act, how it passed and if they’re worried about an election or the upcoming presidential election, you gotta look at the public perception and what’s gonna win you the majority. And if you look at the Defense of Marriage Act in every state — they had to get it thrown out through the court system, not via the voting booth.
RUSH: I know what you’re saying. You’re basically looking at numbers and you’re thinking they are far more voters who are going to be sympathetic with something like the Indiana law than not, and they’re only going to be known on Election Day. But I tell you something I am finding out there — and it just happened with this case, in an e-mail I got or a call — what I’m finding is that Republican voters are very quick to abandon Republican candidates who are destroyed by the media.
Even when they know the media is being unfair with them, the media is lying about them, when the media is totally making it up, if the candidate can be destroyed by the media, the voters will give up on the candidate. I’ve seen it happen over and over again, so that’s one thing that could work against your theorem.