Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: I want to go to some of the audio sound bites that we have today. I said that we’re gonna mix things up, some things that happened while I was gone, that I do want to comment on that I’m sure you want to hear my comments on, things that are happening at the moment. And even when I’m gone, I am still front-and-center in the Drive-By Media.

Last night CNN Situation Room, Wolf Blitzer speaking with the politics editor at large, Chris Cillizza. Now, Cillizza used to be at the Washington Post. but like many print journalists wants the face time, wants to be on TV ’cause there’s bigger money there, even at CNN. And there’s fame. I’m sure there are other reasons that Cillizza went over there as well.

Blitzer says: “The last 48 hours the president has gone after the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, following the Saturday terror attack. Trump has blamed his own Justice Department for his revised travel ban that he personally signed. What of these actions by Trump, these tweets, what do they tell you about this president of the United States, Chris?”

CILLIZZA: He’s sort of the anti-president. So we always thought of presidential as you wait, in a situation like London, you wait until all the facts are known. You offer condolences. You say, “Whatever we can do,” and that’s about it. He’s more Rush Limbaugh as it relates to this stuff, conservative talk radio, than he is anything like we would call presidential. And I say we shouldn’t be surprised because saying that he liked his war heroes not captured during the campaign, getting in a fight with a Gold Star family, saying that Ted Cruz’s dad may have been involved in the JFK assassination, he is not someone who is reserved, who awaits judgment and for all the people who thought, “Well, when he’s president things will be different.” I think we should probably give up that idea.

RUSH: Give up that idea. (laughing) So you admit you’re trying to shape Trump into what you think is presidential. But you’re gonna fail because he’s more Rush Limbaugh than he is presidential. Now, here’s what this means. Go back to what he said at the beginning of the bite. We’ve always thought of presidential as you wait in a situation like London, you wait until all the facts are known. You offer condolences, you say “whatever we can do to help you out,” that’s about it.

So London gets hit again, as they have been hit over and over, take your pick, what do you think Bill Clinton would do? What do you think George W. Bush would do? What do you think Obama would do? I mean all three of these I would assume that Cillizza and the people at CNN believe acted presidentially. So what did they do? Did they not involve themselves? Did they stay distant? Did they offer any kind of moral support? Did they make phone calls, anything we can do, what have you? Did they bide their time?

When London gets hit, and it is not the first time, after the mayor has told people you’re just gonna have to get used to this. So they get hit again and Trump, who has made a campaign agenda out of stopping this stuff and keeping it from happening in America, goes on the warpath to criticize the mayor of London, and these people are just apoplectic. The political class does not do this to each other in times of terror conflict or military conflict.

But Trump is not one of them. He never has been one of them. He doesn’t come from the cookie cutter school of presidents, and they just can’t get their arms around it. They cannot understand it and, as such, they have to find ways to condemn it. Yet Trump’s fans are all supportive. Trump’s fans are people fed up with doing nothing about it and offering only condolences and no condemnation.

This stuff deserves condemnation. Nobody in the world will condemn it. Nobody will condemn militant Islamic terrorism. Everybody wants to excuse it. Everybody wants to misidentify it. Everybody wants to limit it or to mischaracterize it as no big deal. And Donald Trump sees it an entirely different way, and he doesn’t want these kinds of attacks occurring here.

And he’s going out of his way, he’s doing everything he can to try to protect this country, its borders, and its people. That’s what his voters think. And yet he is considered a greater enemy than these three terrorists in the U.K. He is considered a greater enemy than all of the terrorists in the world, according to the American left and most in the American media.

It’s really striking when you think of it this way, that Donald Trump, who hasn’t blown up anything, who hasn’t threatened anybody with being blown up, who does not tell people who do not agree with him that they must die, Donald Trump is the problem, Donald Trump is who must go. When terrorists attack wherever they attack, they’re not supposed to say a thing. That equals backlash. I think this is actually stunning, what is happening here.

One guy has made it plain that he considers it his job to prevent these kinds of attacks in the United States. So he has wanted travel bans. He’s wanted to increase the vetting of refugees. He’s wanted to close the border or put a wall up to more be readily available to identify who is getting in so as to limit the possibility and the percentage of these kind of attacks against innocent Americans, and he becomes the problem. He becomes the guy we have to get rid of. He becomes the guy who’s shaking everything up.

And the actual perpetrators of these crimes and their sympathizers are excused. Or worse: We’re told that we must take time to understand this, that we must dig deep to understand their rage. And it’s always, what did we do to make them so mad? What did we do to create such hatred in these people? What can we do to show them that we hold no ill feelings for them?

The guy who properly identifies them, the guy who says he wants to do anything and everything to prevent them from succeeding in these attacks here, is the guy we don’t understand, is the guy who doesn’t fit the presidential mold, is the guy who’s crazy, kooky, is the guy we have to get rid of? Trump’s voters haven’t changed their mind on him on these kind of things.

One more bite here. Do you remember Krystal Ball? Do you know why she became famous? Well, not why, but one of the contributing characteristics to her fame, she was one of the first Millennials to have posted nude photos of herself on social media who then ran for office. And the photos got leaked and she got mad that they got leaked.

And we here at the EIB Network said, “Hey, you live by the nude photo, you die by the nude photo.” You young Millennials posting all this stuff so everybody gets to know every nook and cranny of you on social media, you’re not gonna have any sympathy when you start blaming other people for invading your privacy.

So she came out and attacked me as being unsympathetic and insensitive and having no soul and that kind of thing. Anyway, she ran for office somewhere. I don’t know if it was local or ran for Congress, I’m not sure, but she lost. Then she went away. I don’t know what happened to her. But now she’s back. She was on C-SPAN this morning, the Washington Journal. Democrat strategist and People’s House Project founder Krystal Ball, spelled with a K. So she started a think tank. I guess that’s what the People’s House Project is. And she’s a Democrat strategist.

We don’t know who she strategized for. Most of these people you see as Republican or Democrat strategists on TV have never strategized a damn thing with anybody. It’s just what cable news calls them to make them look official. All they are is a bunch of opinionated nerds. And you attach the label “analyst” or “strategist,” and it makes you think, “Wow, who’d they campaign with? Did they advise maybe John Kerry, strategized with who, Trump, maybe?” Nobody.

So the host of this show — it doesn’t say who the host is. They take a call from Ed in Texas talking to Krystal Ball. He says, “You have guys like Rush Limbaugh who got on the radio and told everybody how bad the Democrats are and he made it very clear that the country needs a lot more hate. And so Limbaugh started a hate campaign.” Let me ask you this. Those of you who have been loyal, devoted, lovable listeners for 30 years, you don’t associate this program with hate, you never have.

This program is fun, it’s enlightening, it’s informative, educational, whatever, but it is not hate. It never has been hate. You don’t hate anything or anybody. You know it because you regularly listen. But when the left doesn’t understand something or when they disagree with something or when they’re outclassed or when they are defeated, they always chalk it up to hate. They are the largest hate group.

So, anyway, his question, “So you got guys like Rush Limbaugh who came along, we owned it, there was nobody, then Limbaugh comes along, got on the radio, told everybody how bad the Democrats are, made it very clear that the country needs a lot more hate and he started a hate campaign.” That’s the caller’s comment. Here’s Krystal Ball reacting.

BALL: To the point of the Rush Limbaugh piece, I don’t know whether the population became divided and then the media fed into that or whether the media was divided and then that split the population apart, but I think it’s very hard for us to even have a unified narrative of what’s happening in the country and what’s fact and what’s fiction because we do have these partisan media outlets. The thing that the country really needs is more love, is more love for our neighbor, is more love for the person who lives in the state where we don’t live, for the person who’s struggling in a city or in a small town, a place that we may never even visit.

RUSH: Right. Okay. So we got a chicken and egg argument here, and the chicken or egg argument is, did the people divide and that caused the division, or did the media cause the people to divide? That’s her question. The population became divided and the media fed that or whether the media was — that’s not what happened at all. What happened was that there has never been a nonpartisan media.

The idea that we need a unified narrative? That’s journalism 101. And that’s bad. Narrative is a substitute for news. A narrative is a story. And for the longest time, only one mind-set constructed all the stories, the left, until this program came along in 1988. And this program busted up the left’s ability to have a single narrative every damn day, which they had for years, decades, before this program came along. All that happened was the American people by the millions who rejected the Cronkites and the Edward R. Murrows and the, take your pick of the newscasters of the day, there are plenty of people that didn’t like them, didn’t buy into it, they had no outlet. So they were never known, they were never heard.

This program comes along and that all changes. And that’s why people think, “Whoa. We were unified, had a singular narrative every day, and then and then and then, it all blew up.” And they’ve never been able to put it back together and they’ve always sought blame.

I could not have had a chance at succeeding if I and you all lived with an honest media. Pure and simple, folks. This program wouldn’t have had a prayer if the media was what they’ve always claimed to be. But they never have been.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This