Summary Tue 5/24/94
John Switzer
for Tuesday, May 24, 1994
by John Switzer
This unofficial summary is copyright (c) 1994 by John Switzer.
All Rights Reserved. These summaries are distributed on
CompuServe and the Internet, and archived on CompuServe (DL9 of
the ISSUES forum) and Internet (cathouse.org and
grind.isca.uiowa.edu). WWW users can access
http://neptune.corp.harris.com/rush.html The /pub/jrs directory
at ftp.netcom.com contains the summaries for the past 30 days.
Distribution to other electronic forums and bulletin boards is
highly encouraged. Spelling and other corrections gratefully received.
Please read the standard disclaimer which was included with the
first summary for this month. In particular, please note that
this summary is not approved or sanctioned by Rush Limbaugh or
the EIB network, nor do I have any connection with them other
than as a daily listener.
*************************************************************
May 24, 1994
BRIEF SUMMARY OF TOPICS: Rush praises those who have lived for 30
years in America without succumbing to all the "dangers" of
modern life; President Clinton given advice for how to handle
D-Day celebrations; parents outraged over Chicago teacher's
"culturally aware" math test; trust fund for orphaned cub has
more in pledges than trust fund set up for children who were
orphaned when their mother was killed by that cub's mother;
California mountain lions not endangered; Rush attacked for
supporting spanking; Rush called cruel and mean-spirited;
defendant in World Trade Center bombing gets 240 years in prison;
former Republican governor of Michigan accuses Rush and Oliver
North of representing the "intolerant" wing of the Republican
party; caller thinks Rush's humor is broad and crude; James
Carville claims Clinton is responsible for "unprecedented"
economic growth today; Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders likes Eric
Clackner; researchers using 1848 case to investigate whether
ethics are contained in specific area of the brain; caller uses
New Republic article to accuse Rush of being inconsistent and of
lying; caller thinks it's irresponsible for Rush to say spanking
is okay since spanking is no different than violence; Rush
explains when and why his father spanked him, and he doesn't
think he was abused or victimized in any way; parental expert
disagrees with Rush about spanking and discipline; family values
mean parents teaching their kids how to be parents; caller notes
that patriarchal society has worked for 5,000 years.
LIMBAUGH WATCH
May 24, 1994 - It's now (allegedly) day 490 (day 509 for the rich
and the dead) of "America Held Hostage" (aka the "Raw Deal") and
567 days after Bill Clinton's election, but Rush is still on the
air with 640 radio affiliates (with more than 22 million
listeners weekly world-wide), 234 TV affiliates (with a national
rating of 3.7), and a newsletter with over 440,000 subscribers.
His first book was on the NY Times hardback non-fiction
best-seller list for 54 consecutive weeks, with 2.6 million
copies sold, but fell off the list after Simon and Schuster
stopped printing it. The paperback version of "The Way Things
Ought To Be" has been on the NY Times paperback non-fiction
best-seller list for 28 weeks. Rush's second book, "See, I Told
You So," was on the NY Times best-seller list for 16 weeks and
has sold over 2 million copies.
LEST WE FORGET
The following are from the Rush Limbaugh show on Tuesday, May 26,
1992:
o One hundred protestors marched in South Central Los Angeles
demanding amnesty for all of those arrested during the Los
Angeles riots. This protest was covered by all the major networks
as well as the local print and TV media, but the thousands
participating in the Memorial Day parade in downtown Los Angeles
were virtually ignored. Thus, the media decided that 100
protestors were far more important than thousands of law-abiding
citizens who were paying homage to those who had fought and died
for their country.
Rush recalled that right after the riots, he told the rumor that
the riots were planned long before the King beating trial verdict
was announced, and would have occurred regardless of that
verdict. One of the primary reasons for the riots was that gangs
wanted to loot as many gun shops as possible. Initial reports
stated that 1200 guns had been stolen during the riots, but the
Wall Street Journal reported that well over 4000 guns had been
taken.
o Mike from Concord, NC was frustrated at the apathy that the
country seemed to showing towards the Memorial Day celebrations.
He was ashamed that people would rather go to the beach instead
of remembering those who have died to keep America free. Rush
thought people could do both; however, he couldn't deny that the
Memorial Parade in New York was cancelled because of a lack of
interest.
Rush didn't think that there was an inherent, serious decline in
people's concern and recognition of Memorial Day; rather, he
thought people simply didn't have any emotion left at the moment.
Desert Storm was a powerful event that focused people's energies
and attention for almost a year, and the effect of the Los
Angeles riots should also be considered.
Therefore, the celebrations for 1992 were a bit abnormal because
people's emotions had been drained by the Gulf War, Los Angeles
riots, etc. Rush bet that most places in America would get back
to normal celebrations soon, although New York City was probably
doomed to ignore Memorial Day forever.
Union thug, Mo Thacker, came storming into the EIB studios to
tell Rush "you're wrong! you're wrong!" Thacker noted that
Manhattan was the only place in New York that ignored Memorial
Day; his own town of Mineola had a parade with hundreds of people
participating - "the Cub Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the Boy Scouts,
the Fire Department, the veterans!" He added that Manhattan had
no "community - it's just a place where poor people eat Chinese
food."
Rush was pleased to hear that non-Manhattanites were celebrating
Memorial Day, but was a bit worried about Thacker's forceful
invasion of the EIB studios and he wondered if EIB had "lost
security control of this show."
o The Wall Street Journal reported that the US might refuse to
sign the "Biodiversity Treaty" at the Earth Summit; this treaty,
ostensibly intended to slow the extinction of plant and animal
species, also promised transfers of wealth to poorer nations
without requiring them to take sufficient conservation actions
first. Scientists, however, were claiming that this treaty was
essential because half of the world's species, many of which
hadn't yet been discovered, could be extinct by the year 2050.
Meanwhile, the NY Times reported that most of the marine life in
the Persian Gulf was thriving despite the huge oil slicks.
Everything was okay, and the oil did not destroy the Gulf.
o Newsweek reported that there was no scientific consensus and
little fact to justify the conventional wisdom that global
warming was a fact. Greg Easterbrook in his story "No More Hot
Air" reported that all global warming theories were based on
computer models, not actual data, and at their best, these models
were approximations which could not accurately predict either the
past or the present.
In 1991, CFCs were considered to be "potent globe-warming
agents," but one year later it was known that these chemicals
cooled the air as much as they warmed it. Recent measurements
indicated that many glaciers around the poles were growing
instead of melting, with net glaciation perhaps even increasing.
"Over the long term," Easterbrook wrote, "the Earth's climate is
remarkably self-regulating."
Thus, in the space of a few weeks, all of the conventional wisdom
about global warming, the increased dangers of ozone depletion
over North America, and the damage that would result from the
Kuwaiti oil fires had been debunked. Rush therefore hoped his
audience would not accept the "doom-and-gloom apocalyptic
forecasts of these people who are simply trying to rob the US
Treasury." People only had to consider the size of this planet
and how it had survived for billions of years, to realize that
the Earth was not a fragile place.
o The Washington Post reported that homeschooling was taking off
and becoming a major industry. Fundamentalist Christians used to
be the major proponents of homeschooling, but the idea was
branching out among many others who were fed up with the public
schools.
o Rush admitted he was taken in by a lie that put forth by PETA
about how a duck farm was force feeding ducks via metal tubes to
produce foie gras; some ducks were reportedly force-fed to the
point of literally exploded. Rush reported this story as a fact,
but it was nothing but a "pack of lies."
A story in the New York Times by Mitchell Davis explained how
foie gras was really made from the livers of a special
hybrid-duck, and that the production methods were possibly the
most humane in all of animal husbandry. The ducks were cared for
individually and allowed to roam freely.
The duck farmers took good care of the ducks' health because if a
duck was sick, it would stop eating, reducing the value of the
pate that could be made from it. One farmer commented that duck
farm workers were among the most caring in the poultry industry.
Videotapes proved that none of PETA's charges are valid, so the
district attorney in Sullivan County dropped all charges.
o USA Today had a headline saying "Reagan may be final target of
Iran Contra probe," and Rush was amazed that took the paper so
long to come to this rather obvious conclusion. After six years,
Lawrence Walsh was still going strong, trying to find anything
that would tie Reagan to alleged misdeeds, such as a shipment of
Hawk missiles from Israel to Iran in 1985.
Walsh reportedly believed that Caspar Weinberger was involved
with this shipment, which supposedly violated US sanctions
against Iran as well as arms export laws. Reagan reportedly
authorized the shipment but did not put it in written form until
after the sale. Rush couldn't believe, though, that Walsh had
spent a minimum of $40 million in an investigation, only to end
up with one shipment of Hawk missiles - this might have been bad
foreign policy, but could it possibly be considered criminal
behavior?
o It was reported that the Soviets helped the PLO with terrorist
attacks against the US, even when Gorbachev was President of the
Soviet Union. Rush noted that there had been warnings and
indications for years about the Soviets' training and financing
of world-wide terrorism, but liberals dismissed them all as the
result of conservative paranoia. However, Boris Yeltsin's
government released documents confirming these suspicions, so
Rush wondered if liberals would apologize to Reagan for making
fun of his "evil empire" remarks.
o The NY Post reported that there was "a growing epidemic -
pedophilia." Rush didn't doubt that pedophilia occurred, but he
asked if it could be considered an epidemic or a crisis? As
usual, this story was an exaggeration.
********
MORNING UPDATE
As the nation prepares to honor those Americans who fought on the
beaches of Normandy on D-Day 50 years ago, Rush would like to
praise another group of brave Americans: those who have reached
the age of 30, without dying. As the strains of "America the
Beautiful" play in the background, Rush wonders how these people
could have lived for 30 years, on a planet filled with
second-hand smoke, attending theaters and eating popcorn made
with coconut oil, not to mention all the oleo they have consumed.
These Americans have survived decades while eating meat, while
risking exposure to the ozone layer, and enduring insensitive
attacks against them, on the basis of gender, sex, heritage,
race, and background. These Americans have even survived abuse by
their parents.
"What is your secret?" Rush asks these Americans, who have
survived all of this, without the Clinton health care plan being
around to take care of them. How could these people have been so
heroic and noble, even to the point of surviving the deadly Alar
on their apples. These people have survived America during the
past 30 years, so they have a debt to repay: to tell the rest of
society how they managed to do such a thing.
FIRST HOUR
Items
o Rush has previously praised the WWII generation, and has even
written a chapter in homage of them in his second book, because
they were the last generation of Americans which knew true
sacrifice and hardships and because they made the prosperity of
current generations possible. Granted, every generation has its
own problems, and certain lessons learned by previous generations
aren't applicable to later ones. However, the sacrifices made by
the WWII generation are responsible for what is a much better
life today than 50 years ago, especially in terms of economics
and standards of living.
The WWII generation learned at age 17 that there were things
larger than themselves, as they faced enemies who wanted to
destroy America, freedom, and democracy. They matured long before
current generations have had to face reality.
Thus, it's understandable why many people would be upset at the
prospect of Clinton presiding over the 50th anniversary of D-Day,
and even the NY Post has recognized this with its front page
story headlined "Vietnam War will Haunt Prez at Ceremony." The
story reports that Clinton, as Commander-in-Chief, will face a
"few problems" when he honors "larger than life heroes"; Stephen
Hess of the Brookings Institute notes that "every time he says
something about patriotism and heroism, every article will
add `on the other hand, he avoided military service'."
Hess adds that this reflects the "general feeling of angst" that
America has as a nation which will never see Camelot again. Hess
thinks Clinton's best bet is to make a gracious speech, one in
which he "pays tribute to his father's generation - those who
lived through the Depression and won the war, and acknowledge
that by contrast, his own generation really didn't have it so
bad."
Rush notes that Hess is echoing his own words, but the problem
with Clinton doing what Hess suggests is that Bill Clinton's
entire existence and political ideological base is built upon the
notion that his generation had it worse than other generations,
that things today are worse than in any other era. This is why
these 60s activists think they are the moral leaders who can and
must save America from the decline caused by their parents'
generation.
Rush thus thinks that Clinton will sound very hollow if he tries
to pull off Hess's advice, although the President could probably
pull it off if he wanted. However, it would be ironic if Bill
Clinton ended up sounding like Rush Limbaugh while celebrating
D-Day.
Yet, Clinton didn't just dodge the draft, but also wrote a letter
in 1969 thanking his ROTC commander for helping him get out of
the draft. He also told that commander that he loathed the
military.
o Parents in Chicago have called for the firing of a math teacher
whose tests included questions about drug dealers, prostitutes,
and drive-by shootings. Rush notes that this story is ironic
because a long-standing complaint about standardized tests is
that they're culturally biased towards minorities. So, this
teacher evidently tried to address those concerns by asking
questions like the following:
"Rufus is pimping three girls. If the price is $65 for each
trick, how many tricks will each girl have to turn before Rufus
can afford his $800 a day crack habit?"
Parents are naturally upset about this, but Rush thinks the
question by itself is stupid for more than the obvious reason.
The teacher obviously does not understand market economics
because the question does not consider Rufus's profit margin; it
assumes, rather, that Rufus's girls turn over all their money to
Rufus, but in reality the girls will keep some of the money for
themselves.
Rush points out that he understands this only because he
understands market economics and the concept of working on a
percentage, which is how he earns his own money. The EIB staff
say they've figured out that the girls will have to turn 4.1
tricks each to fund Rufus's crack habit, but Rush says that this
proves his point - his staff hasn't factored in how much the
girls keep versus what they give to Rufus.
All the other things aside about this test, Rush would like to
know how well the students did on it.
*BREAK*
Update Animal Rights (Andy Williams, "Born Free" with gratuitous
animal sound effects)
Rush notes that for the entire five years of his show, his Animal
Rights updates have had the purpose of refuting those who would
elevate animals to the status of mankind, giving them "rights."
However, animals cannot be granted rights, as Rush has explained
countless times on his show and in his books. Unfortunately, the
animal rights movement is full of extremists who are trying to
elevate animals to a level at or even above that of man,
degrading the value of human life at the same time.
In sad testimony to this, a few weeks ago, a California jogger,
Barbara Schoener, was attacked and killed by a mountain lion,
which then partially devoured her. Mountain lions in California
are a protected species, and as they've learned that they don't
have to fear man, they are moving into more populated areas.
Since this lion had already killed one human, it was tracked down
and killed; shortly thereafter, one cub of the lion was
discovered.
Not surprisingly, a trust fund was set up for this orphaned lion
cub, and more than twice as much money has been pledged for it
than for the one established for the two children of the woman
killed by the lion. More people evidently feel sorry and pity for
this cub than they do for the two human children whose mother has
been taken from them by this lion.
Friends and family members of the woman were shocked by this, but
Rush wasn't because he knew this was where the country was
heading, thanks to the animal rights insanity. However, he is a
bit angry about it, so he gives out the address for those who
might want to contribute to the trust fund for the two kids who
no longer have a mother, thanks to the wacko policies of the
animal rights extremists: U.S. Bank, 3075 Sacramento Street,
Placerville, CA 95667.
*BREAK*
Items
o Rush reads another question from the Chicago math test:
"If the Crips are driving a car at 65 m.p.h. towards the Bloods,
who are driving a car in the opposite direction at 40 m.p.h., how
many shots will the Crips and Bloods exchange before their
assault weapons jam?"
o Going back to the Animal Rights Update, Rush notes that $21,000
has been pledged to help build a new home at a nearby zoo for the
lion kitten that was orphaned. Only $9,000 has been sent to the
Placerville bank for the two children. Rush finds it amazing that
people feel sorrier for an orphaned cub in a zoo than for two
orphaned kids whose mother was killed by the mountain lion while
she was out jogging.
This has happened because people have gone along with the notion
that man is not a part of nature, and Rush notes that former
Senator Allen Cranston of California, along with his "friend"
Morgan Fairchild, had a lot to do with elevating these animals
above the worth of humanity.
Phone Thaddeus from Bishop, CA
Last November Thaddeus's wife saw a mountain lion pass by her
window while she was ironing. Their county has the densest
mountain lion population ever recorded, all thanks to the large
deer herds and how the lion is now protected from hunting.
Thaddeus thinks the decision to hunt these lions was made in
Santa Monica, but people like him have to live with the danger
from these lions, especially how they destroy farmers' livestock.
Thaddeus adds that the lion is not endangered; when the survey of
lions was done in the 70s, the White Mountains were conveniently
ignored, even though there are as many mountain lions there as in
the entire rest of the state. And these animals are difficult to
count anyway, so the count was very low.
However, hunting these lions gets very bad press, so that's why
hunting was outlawed; these animals, though, are not only not
endangered, but they are in danger of overpopulating their
terrain. Rush agrees, and notes that these animals can figure out
when they're no longer in danger from humans, which means that
it's now humans in California who are imperiled.
Thaddeus agrees, and adds that he's worried about his daughter,
9, especially when lions are moving down right to the area's
homes. These animals, by the way, are also devastating the wild
mustang herds in the area; it's thus ironic how these protected
mountain lions are destroying the "protected" mustang herds, and
Thaddeus doubts that the Hollywood left would approve of what
they've allowed to let happen.
Rush wonders where the rights of the mustang have gone, and
suggests that someone should inform the mountain lions of the
mustangs' "rights." Thaddeus doubts that the mountain lions will
care since they are "more entrepreneurial."
Rush bets, though, that many animal rights people were made happy
when they heard about how the lion cub is getting more money than
two human children. After all, there are animal rights wackos who
truly believe that in order to save the planet, humanity itself
has to be eliminated.
Phone Ruthann from Gibsland, LA
Ruthann listens to Rush every day because she believes in
"keeping your friends close and keeping your enemies closer." She
thinks that Rush's stand on gun control is okay, but she
disagrees with him on nearly everything else.
Rush is curious as to what Ruthann specifically disagrees with
him about, and she replies that the attitude of Rush's program is
harsh and cruel, especially towards women, children, animals,
poor people, etc. Rush asks for specific examples of these
things, and she thinks Rush wants to "grind everyone down." For
example, Rush has said "punish the children and if they're not
afraid of you yet, punish them some more."
Rush notes he has long said that punishment is discipline, borne
of love, and meant to teach children right from wrong at an early
age. This is not cruelty, and one of the problems in America is
that proper punishment is deemed to be cruel,; also, he's never
said that people should punish kids so as to grind them down.
Ruthann specifically remembers this statement, but Rush says he's
never used those words; however, perhaps Ruthann is thinking of
how he's often talked about how he thinks kids should be pushed
at times. This is not punishment, though, but rather helping kids
get the most out of themselves. It's proper for kids to respect
their elders, and this respect does not come from beating them.
Rush, though, doesn't think spanking kids is beating them; he was
spanked as a kid and it didn't harm him. Ruthann, as a mother of
three, disagrees; she doesn't think "hitting a tiny, little
person teaches them anything except that they can be hit because
they're little." Rush asks Ruthann to hold on through the break,
but asks her to think during the break of an example of how he
has been cruel and mean-spirited towards women.
*BREAK*
Phone Ruthann from Gibsland, LA (continued)
Rush asks for an example of his cruelty and mean-spiritedness,
and Ruthann says that mean-spiritedness is the word she'd use;
she thinks Rush subscribes to an old patriarchal view of society.
For example, Rush had a "high time" at Lorena Bobbitt's expense,
being very insensitive; "you don't know a thing about how a woman
feels, yet you judge her," Ruthann states.
Rush says that he merely pointed out that Lorena Bobbitt had
become the latest feminist icon, yet Bobbitt had to plead
insanity and say she was nuts to get away with what she did. Rush
has never defended John Bobbitt, yet by the same point were
Lorena's actions justified? Rush finds it interesting that he is
portrayed as being meanspirited just because he disagrees with
any particular woman.
Ruthann thinks Rush's patriarchal attitude shows through in
everything he says. Rush says even if he had such an attitude, it
has nothing to do with a desire to subjugate or dominate women.
Ruthann thinks Rush believes only in a male-run and
male-dominated society.
Rush points out he has said he would vote for Margaret Thatcher,
Jeanne Kirkpatrick, and many other women should he ever get the
chance. He has also castigated the feminists for not supporting
strong women such as these. Rush has said these things all the
time, and even puts it in print in his books and newsletter.
Rush notes that Ruthann seems to think he is meanspirited because
he disagrees with her; obviously, she is not listening to what he
is really saying. Ruthann says she makes her own decisions on the
basis of the evidence, which is why she thinks 5,000 years of
male-run societies have ruined things.
Rush points out that women have ruled in societies through the
ages as well. However, he acknowledges that women have not had
the same amount of power over the years as men have had, but he
suspects Ruthann is not as open-minded as she thinks she is.
Rush, however, is guided by his principles, not by any
"open-mindedness" which typically is used as an excuse for not
saying anything definitive about an issue. He holds Ruthann over
the break.
*BREAK*
The first defendant convicted in the World Trade Center bombing
has been sentenced to 240 years in prison, which means that in
NY, he'll probably be out in about two weeks.
Phone Ruthann from Gibsland, LA (continued)
Ruthann also wants to say something about animal rights; she
lives closely with animals and has observed them. She knows
animals have as many feelings as humans do, and they have a
"spirit" just as humans do, and it's totally wrong for humans to
destroy their habitats and lives "just because we can."
Rush says he's not advocating this, but notes that animals are
adaptable, as proven by how Spotted Owls are now living in an
abandoned K-Mart sign. But while Americans shouldn't go out
destroying animals just because "we can," neither should we be
turning over our backyards to them, which is what is happening in
California right now.
*BREAK*
SECOND HOUR
The Macomb Coalition of Republicans sent Rush a fax of a May 17th
column by Bob Talbot in the Detroit Free Press, which highlights
how the Republican party's main problem is the division within
its ranks. All the Republican party has going for it right now is
a platform that tells people to vote against Bill Clinton, but it
doesn't have a leader or a set of core beliefs which the people
can vote for.
Bob Talbot's column quotes excerpts from a speech made by former
Michigan governor William Milliken, who left office in 1982. He
spoke to a state GOP fund-raiser last Thursday, telling them that
he was concerned "that in some places within our party, the
voices of zealots are given undeserved credence and discredit the
party founded by Abraham Lincoln. In these troubled times of
enormous social upheaval and imperiled human rights, it is wrong
to ignore the cost of associating ourselves with the extremism
disguised as humor of a Rush Limbaugh or the mendacity of an
Oliver North. To remain silent about such people is to suggest we
find their views acceptable or normal or fair."
Thus, a liberal Republican governor who expanded the state budget
and government has decided that Rush's views are unacceptable,
abnormal, and unfair. Milliken also called public service "an
opportunity to inspire, to illuminate, to educate, to improve in
so many ways the lives of many people they will never meet."
He added that the "surest way to political oblivion for a party
is through intolerance - intolerance of women, intolerance of
minorities, intolerance from people who deviate from one narrowly
defined point of view." Furthermore, he added, "in diversity
there is strength for us as a party, community, and as a nation."
Milliken went on, but the above is the best illustration that
Rush has yet found of the quandary that the Republican party is
in. The Macomb Republicans, fortunately, has issued a press
release denouncing Milliken's remarks and calling upon other
state Republicans, including Governor John Engler, to do the
same. The Macomb Republicans also have put on a TV ad which call
Milliken a "washed-up liberal" who changed Michigan's state
budget surplus to a deficit; they demand that Milliken apologize
both to Rush and his listeners.
Rush notes that Republicans have long had their own disagreements
with each other, but for one faction of the party to label
another as "intolerant," simply because that second faction
disagrees with the first, is to do the work of the Democrats for
free. Rush has long noted that the liberals define racism as
disagreeing with them, and Milliken is doing the same thing by
calling disagreement a sign of intolerance.
Milliken, of course, didn't even give any specifics of how
"extremists" in his party (i.e. Rush) are intolerant towards
women, minorities, etc. Instead, he simply put forth a broad
accusation, citing Abraham Lincoln to give some sort of moral
weight to his arguments. Rush admits he is intolerant of
liberals, but that still doesn't mean he wants to shut them down
as Milliken evidently wants to shut down Rush.
Milliken's mention of Lincoln is interesting because according to
the way Milliken defines intolerance, Lincoln would have been
called intolerant because of how he acted during the
Lincoln/Douglas debates. Lincoln had profound disagreements with
Douglas, and he made those disagreements quite clear during that
famous series of debates. However, this disagreement was not
intolerance.
Rather, these debates are called great because they put forth
contrasting points of view from which the people could decide.
Therefore, with his use of the term "intolerant," Milliken is
just name-calling, using the spectre of intolerance as a
substitute for making any substantive complaints or remarks about
his disagreements with Rush and those who side with him.
Rush therefore would warn all Republicans that it's only been
when the GOP has had bright, bold, and clear differences with the
Democrats that the party has shone the brightest. It was during
the 1980s that the Republicans were at their best, yet there are
patrician Republicans who want to return to those pre-Reagan days
when the GOP was impotent, carrying only about country clubs, old
money, and "getting along" with their political opponents. In
fact, this is what the Republican party is today, which is why
it's mired in quicksand and heading down fast.
Those who stand for principles are being shown the door to the
GOP, and this has got to change. Rush notes, though, that he is
not any official representative or standard-bearer for the
Republican party, nor has he ever claimed to be. He has never
attended official national gatherings as a participant nor has he
been consulted by party officials in any "official" manner.
Yet, Rush still has to be concerned about how the Republicans
seem more concerned about getting along with liberals; liberalism
has to be opposed by Republicans, and if this doesn't happen,
then the GOP is worthless. But even worse than this, though, is
the notion that Republicans can't disagree with themselves; this
is a short-sighted and cowardly and itself an intolerant notion -
disagreement does not equal intolerance.
Rush would therefore love to see Milliken, or anyone else, to
prove to him that intolerance, cruelty, hatred, or
mean-spiritedness exist on his show. He doubts anyone can prove
anything of the sort comes from his show, although people will
indeed find a spirited discussion of the issues. Rush never
forces anything on anyone, but rather tries to put forth his
opinions so as to change hearts and minds.
Rush doesn't care whether he becomes a favorite of the Republican
party, nor is he on the radio to be a Republican mouthpiece.
However, he would warn those who are active members of the GOP
that disagreement is a healthy thing, and that the Republican
party is at its best when there are clear, bright, and easily
seen differences between Republicans and Democrats. Those who
think that success depends on agreeing with liberals will only
guarantee a second Bill Clinton inauguration in January, 1997.
*BREAK*
Rush points out that the truly intolerant are mainstream
liberals, both Republican and Democrat, who attack those who want
to hold onto American traditions. American society is tearing
itself apart, with many people about at their wit's end, having
watched the greatness of America be destroyed by new definitions
of "greatness."
These people worried about their country aren't intolerant, but
desperate for what they see as an attack on the opportunities
that have existed for decades and centuries. What has made
America great is not diversity, which by itself means nothing;
what have made America great are two things: a Freedom that
allows people to be the best they can be, and a strong moral
foundation on which this Freedom has been built.
After all, a freedom for a dictator means no freedom for anyone
else, which is why a strong moral foundation is needed. And today
in America freedom is being eroded, bit by bit, slowly and
inexorably, by those who think Americans can no longer take care
of themselves or live their own lives. And the moral foundation
is being chipped away, as it's being redefined.
Those who oppose these trends, and who want to hold onto their
freedoms and moral foundation, are now being called intolerant,
simply because they don't want to let these erosions and decay
occur. It's become the conventional wisdom that to be tolerant,
you have to be willing to just sit by and let freedoms be
destroyed and morality totally redefined from that which made
America great.
What's troubling about all this is that this idea has no longer
infested just the Democrats and liberals, but has now creeped
into the Republican party. Rush therefore has clue who will lead
the party in 1996 because the party is in so much disarray now.
*BREAK*
Phone Rosalie from Stuart, FL
Rosalie heard the caller at the end of yesterday's program who
said he was going to be offended at Clinton's appearance at the
50th anniversary of the D-Day ceremonies. Rosalie notes that
Clinton, as Commander-in-Chief, has a right to appear at these
functions, and Americans should realize that they voted this guy
in office, with the full knowledge that he didn't serve in the
military.
Rush says he understands why people would be upset and offended
by Clinton's appearance at such events, but the fact, as Rosalie
has noted, is that he is President, so it's absurd to insist he
shouldn't go to them. Rosalie is glad to hear that, and adds that
she once felt like Ruthann; however, after listening to Rush for
several years, she's changed her mind. However, she also thinks
Rush has "mellowed" a bit, but it can't be denied that Rush has
strong opinions and that he presents them with some levity. She
thus thinks Americans should allow for disagreement, as well as
develop a better sense of humor.
Rosalie also appreciates Rush's comments about Jackie Kennedy and
her funeral; she's glad that Rush was positive and didn't take
the opportunity for any cheap shots or attacks. Rosalie doesn't
see how anyone could think Rush was anti-woman; he attacks
Hillary, but Rosalie thinks that there are times the First Lady
should be criticized.
Rush remarks that he's often been accused of attacking Hillary
only because he's afraid of "powerful women," which is why the
latest issue of the Limbaugh Letter had a cover story about how
it's the feminists who are afraid of strong women. Rush disagrees
with Hillary because of her ideas.
Rosalie agrees with this, and adds that she also loved Rush's
appearance on "Hearts Afire"; Rush looked like a big teddy bear,
which was when Rosalie realized that Rush wasn't such a bad guy
after all. And, of course, Rush's ads for Florida orange juice
show his good sense, too.
Phone Kyle from Raleigh, NC
Kyle enjoys listening to Rush's show, although he agrees at most
with only 40% of Rush's show. Kyle is "always amused" at how Rush
accuses liberals of painting issues with a broad brush, yet Rush
just did that himself with his comments about Governor Milliken.
Kyle didn't glean from this speech the same things that Rush
obviously did.
Rush says that Milliken was warning Republicans that they had
best stop aligning themselves with "intolerant" people like Rush
Limbaugh and Oliver North. Kyle says that Rush quoted that part
of the speech but then went on a "tirade" about how those who
wanted to change America were intolerant.
Kyle, though, thinks that Rush does promote intolerance,
specifically intolerance of animal rights groups, feminists,
environmentalists, etc. Rush asks how his disagreements with
these people could be considered intolerance.
Kyle says Rush doesn't tolerate what these groups say or stand
for. Rush notes that he hasn't done anything to stop these people
from speaking, raising money, or otherwise operating. Rush will
disagree with them publicly, but that is not intolerance.
Kyle thinks intolerance means alienating and humiliating these
groups, and while Kyle sometimes agrees with what Rush says, the
way Rush does things is antagonistic towards his enemies. For
example, Rush last week ate a steak to "dominate" women.
Rush points out he did this to illustrate the absurdity of the
feminist professor's claim that eating meat oppresses women.
Kyle, though, thinks Rush's bit about vegetarian restaurants was
intolerant towards animal rights people and vegetarians.
Rush says that he was not being intolerant, but rather was making
a joke about vegetarian drive-thrus allowing patrons to ride
bikes and wear sandals. The point Rush was making was that the
vegetarians are not content to live and let live, but rather are
trying to force their way on everyone else, as proven by how they
want to force Burger King to offer meatless patties. If the
vegetarians want fast food and vegetarian convenience, they
should just build their own restaurants, as opposed to getting
government involved in trying to force Burger King to offer
vegetarian things.
The vegetarians are the intolerant ones, given how they're trying
to force meat-eaters into doing things their way; the meat-eaters
aren't trying to force vegetarians into Burger Kings, so why
can't each group just live and let live?
Kyle agrees with that as far as it goes, but he thinks Rush's
humor is far too crude to make these points; rather, Rush should
explain them just as he has. He doesn't think Rush is the
"doomsday machine" that his liberal friends think he is, but he
does think Rush's humor is alienating others.
Rush disagrees - liberals for the longest time have had their own
comedians who regularly ridiculed and made fun of all things
conservative and traditional. Now that Rush has started
lampooning their sacred cows, though, the liberals can't deal
with it or laugh at themselves.
Rush thinks it's funny to think of a bicycle drive-thru for a
vegetarian restaurant, yet this is what is being called "hate" in
some circles. In reality, though, these people can't laugh at
themselves, although they are more than willing to laugh at
anyone and anything else.
Kyle agrees this is a good point, and Rush thanks him for
calling.
*BREAK*
Phone Anthony from Hartford, CT
Anthony first says that people should focus on the true
definition of tolerance, which means acknowledging and respecting
others' beliefs, without having to share them. Rush agrees,
noting that the First Amendment gives people the right to speak,
but not the right to be heard or to have others agree with them.
Anthony saw James Carville on David Letterman last week, and
Letterman didn't pull any punches with his questions. For
example, Letterman said he asked Carville what Clinton had going
for him, and Carville replied saying that if it weren't for
Clinton, the country wouldn't have its three years of
"unprecedented economic growth."
Rush notes that it's debatable whether the country is in a period
of "unprecedented economic growth"; in fact, California has
nearly double-digit unemployment and massive state deficits which
means that telling Californians that they're living the good life
right now will probably result in Californians sicking a mountain
lion on you.
However, this is Carville's job - he is supposed to be singing
the praises of the President, which isn't hard given that Clinton
will take credit for anything good, even if it happened before he
became President. Similarly, he blames every problem on someone
else, especially his predecessors; for example, he blamed Somalia
on Bush.
However, Clinton will take credit for low interest rates that he
had nothing to do with, and of course interest rates are higher
now than they were when Clinton took office. The point is,
though, that putting the best face on the President is what
Carville is supposed to do.
*BREAK*
Rush notes that people's ability to be ethical and responsibility
may be totally out of one's control; he'll explain more during
the third hour.
Phone John from Brooklyn Park, MN
John likes Rush a lot, but thinks he sometimes gets carried away,
such as overplaying the Joycelyn Elders' "Eric Clapner" deal.
Rush says he thinks this bit is funny, especially since Elders is
a national embarrassment to begin with.
John, though, didn't hear Rush replay his Morning Update
repeatedly when he mispronounced the name of Minnesota's
governor. Rush also hasn't replayed the show that he opened with
a belch. John doesn't think that Rush is willing to make too much
fun of himself.
Rush would disagree about that, but first points out that the
left went to extraordinary lengths to ridicule Dan Quayle. And if
someone tried to ridicule him by replaying over and over again a
tape that had him mispronouncing someone's name, Rush wouldn't
care. However, the point with Elders is that she is a national
disgrace and embarrassment, which is why Rush replays things such
as the following:
"I've heard Eric Clackner, but I was . . . I think it was a
wonderful thing that Eric Clackner the musician is putting on
this event for the Martelle Foundation in support of Leukemia,
AIDS, and cancer. So I think that's really the wonderful part
about it, but listen . . . I like Eric Clapner!"
*BREAK*
THIRD HOUR
In 1848, Phinneas P. Gauge, a 25-year-old foreman for a railroad
company, was working in Vermont, drilling holes in rock in which
blasting powder was poured. Gauge would tamp the powder with a
long rod, and one day he tamped the powder without first putting
on the necessary protective layer of sand coating. An explosion
resulted, and it drove the three and a half feet tamping road
through his head, under his left cheek, destroying his left eye,
exiting from his skull at the top.
Gauge was momentarily stunned, but was able to walk away on his
own power. He recovered in a couple of months, but seemed
incapable of making ethical decisions any longer. Before the
accident, he was a likable, socially responsible person, but
afterwards began lying and breaking his commitments. His memory
and intelligence were intact, but he had lost all ability to
judge ethical questions.
Scientists today are trying to recreate this accident, to
determine which parts of Gauge's brain were destroyed, believing
that the ability to be ethical resides in certain portions of the
brain. Thus, it is "highly likely" that those who are dishonest
and unethical might have a problem with that portion of their
brain that's responsible for such things.
However, there are many people who are unethical, dishonest,
untrustworthy who have not had a three-foot rod blasted through
their skull. So, Rush concludes, it's only a matter of time
before someone decides that people who are not trustworthy or
ethical are not responsible for that condition because it's only
a reflection of something physically wrong with their brain.
People can therefore be intelligent and brilliant, but ethics is
not something that's taught or learned, but rather a function of
a "healthy" brain. Rush admits that this might be true, and if it
is, then the country has the best excuse ever for not being
ethical. And it would mean that all attempts to teach ethics are
worthless and without meaning.
The country has already blazed new trails for excusing people's
misbehavior, but this news could take the idea to new vistas, if
not the Twilight Zone. Now people can be excused, not because of
their skin color or upbringing, but because of "something wrong"
with their brain.
Of course, Phinneas Gauge had a rod blasted through his brain,
but that doesn't necessarily have to be the only way the brain
could be damaged. Jogging might damage the brain, after all, as
could banging one's head against the wall. Thus, the world
breathlessly awaits the scientists to complete their studies, but
Rush hopes that people don't start using this idea to start
excusing everyone of any problems with their behavior.
*BREAK*
Phone Joan from Ft. Wayne, IN
Joan and her friends are avid listeners, but are bothered by
inconsistencies in Rush's opinions. For example, on April 14th,
Rush was outraged at the gradual encroachments and taxes on
Social Security benefits, but then on April 19th he opposed
Social Security altogether. Rush says that last month he pointed
out how Dan Rostenkowski's proposal to cut the Social Security
cost of living increases illustrated how pointless it was to
expect the government to provide a decent stipend, much less any
prosperity.
For example, a $17 increase per month in SSN checks will cost the
country billions of more dollars a year; if it cost that much to
give people nothing, people should realize that SSN has grown
beyond any ability to provide for people's welfare.
Unfortunately, SSN is all some people have, but it's far too
little for it to be conscionable that this is all they have.
Rush therefore urged those who had not yet retired that they
should make their own plans for retirement, and not expect the
government to do it all for them. And as for taxing Social
Security, the fact is that contrary to Clinton's insistence that
his tax increases would affect only the "rich," SSN recipients
making $44,000 a year are paying more since their benefits had
begun to be taxed.
Joan also says that Rush has often argued that the U.S. has no
role in Bosnia, but he's also berated Clinton for not taking any
action. Rush says this isn't what he's said; when he's talked
about Bosnia, it's been to make the point that any U.S. action
there has to be done only after the mission is clearly spelled
out and explained to the American people, with the vital U.S.
interests defined, and with victory clearly stated. The country
also has to have a clearly defined exit strategy.
Clinton, though, has not done this, but rather has taken a
piecemeal approach, in the hope that some ineffectual bombing
runs would be enough. However, they haven't. Rush has also said
that the arms embargo on Bosnia should be lifted so that the
Muslims could get the arms they need to defend themselves. Rush,
though, has never once urged U.S. military invention into Bosnia,
especially since the experts have been saying that only a
full-fledged ground operation would have any hope of stopping the
Serbian aggressors. Air power cannot win this battle alone.
Rush doesn't know how anyone could think he wants the U.S. to
move into Bosnia, especially since this is what the liberals are
encouraging Clinton to do. Joan says that Rush said this on the
April 18th show, and she knows this because she and her neighbors
made some notes about it. Rush asks for a more exact quote, and
Joan says that on April 18th Rush argued that the U.S. had no
reason to go into Bosnia, but on April 20th he berated Clinton
for "standing by" and not doing anything about the "slaughter."
Rush notes that this is not what he's said, although Margaret
Thatcher has complained about how the West is allowing the
slaughter to continue. Rush suspects that on April 18th he was
commenting on how Clinton was giving one worthless ultimatum
after another to the Serbs, and then when they left a town (after
having totally destroyed it), Clinton took credit for making them
leave.
Rush finds it interesting that Joan and her friends think he is
"waffling" about the issues, as he's never been before accused of
being a waffler. Joan adds that Rush is also being a bit harsh,
joining in on the "constant bashing" that's going on now against
the President, and she fears that it will only get worse for the
next President, no matter who that is. "We will not be able to
govern," she warns.
Rush "agrees" - soon the country will get to the point where the
only people elected to political office will be "goody two
shoes." Joan doesn't think there such people and fears that if
the country is going to get "that petty" as it is with Clinton,
then the country will never have any decent Presidents anymore.
Rush says that Joan should be able to remember the treatment that
Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Nixon got. Joan says she remembers
those administrations, but her point is that this criticism is
only getting worse.
Rush notes he is not "bashing" the President; his criticisms of
Clinton are founded in opposition to his policies, and he thinks
that those who do have standards must speak up for those
standards and against those things which would destroy them. Joan
thanks Rush for clearing this up.
Phone Sharon from St. Louis, MO
Sharon heard Rush talk earlier about punishing children, and she
thinks that with all the violence going on in society today that
it's irresponsible for Rush to advocate spanking as a way to
correct a child's behavior. She definitely does not think that if
spanking doesn't work that it should be made more severe.
Rush says that he's never said this; it was a former caller who
accused him of advocating harsh punishments. Rush, though,
doesn't think spanking can be called violence, and he doesn't
believe how his own father punished him to be anything
approaching violence.
Sharon says that it was punishment, and Rush agrees. He was very
properly punished by his father when he did things like throwing
his baseball mitt through a window. He asks Sharon to hang on
through the break.
*BREAK*
Rush just figured it out - Joan from Indiana was actually reading
from a piece that appeared in the New Republic; this piece,
titled "Limbaugh Lies," takes everything Rush says out of
context, so as to portray him as a liar, waffler, etc. Rush
wonders if perhaps he should set the record straight on what this
article says, especially if people are going to read this and
then call in saying that they are reading from their own notes.
Rush sighs because he knew this sort of thing would happen.
Phone Sharon from St. Louis, MO (continued)
Rush notes that he was about seven when he threw his baseball
glove through the glass part of a screen door; his father didn't
try to "explain" why this was wrong or "understand" why Rush did
it, but rather spanked him. This embarrassed Rush and let him
know that he did something very wrong.
Sharon asks if Rush cried about this, and he replies that he
tried not to, given that he didn't want to give his father the
satisfaction of seeing his tears. Rush was scared to death,
though, but the spanking was the end of the incident. He was
embarrassed, however, that he disappointed his father and did
something this dumb.
There was another incident in which Rush's father sent him out in
the backyard to cut his own switch. Rush cut the smallest one he
could find, so his father sent him back out again, to cut another
one. However, Rush wasn't the victim of "violence" here, given
that he committed actions that deserved this punishment.
Sharon asks why Rush was so mad that he threw his baseball glove
through the window, and Rush doesn't see why this matters; he,
though, wasn't mad at his father. Sharon asks what would have
been wrong with Rush's father lecturing him and trying to explain
why breaking the window was a bad thing; the father could then
have asked Rush how he was going to fix it.
Rush notes that his father knew that his seven-year-old son
couldn't do anything to fix or repair the window, nor did he have
the money to hire someone to do so. Instead, Rush's father wanted
to teach a lesson to his son.
Sharon says she understands this, but thinks Rush's father should
have engaged Rush in a discussion to find out how he would "fix"
the window, perhaps by doing extra chores. Rush notes he was
doing chores anyway, so there wasn't much more he could have
done, except maybe mow the yard when it didn't need it.
Sharon says she thinks this is all about teaching children the
consequences of their mistakes. Rush says that this is what
happened - his father's actions worked, and Rush was not harmed;
in fact, the turned out just fine, without developing any
syndromes such as Attention Deficit Syndrome. What his father did
worked, which was the whole point of his actions.
Sharon says that she is a parent educator who teaches a course
called "Positive Parenting Discipline: Redirecting Children's
Behavior." Rush points out that Sharon couldn't have taught his
father anything since he performed his fatherly duties correctly,
and both his sons have turned out just fine. This is what
matters.
Sharon thinks that since Rush supports the idea of personal
responsibility, he should realize that spanking a child "their
whole childhood" won't teach them right from wrong or that there
are consequences to their actions. Sharon believes that the
proper consequences of breaking a window would be something like
not playing baseball for a week and earning money to have it
repaired.
Rush notes that Sharon has just basically said that how his
father raised him was incorrect and that his interpretation of
his father's behavior is wrong. However, Rush knows that
everything is fine and that his father's methods worked - there
is no problem with them. His father was not abusive, and his
treatment of his sons was not harmful in any way, shape, or form.
Sharon thinks that they should talk about different children but
Rush notes that this is rather pointless since it's easy to
create extreme situations. Sharon finds Rush's logic
"convenient," saying "if you hit, uh, spank the child and that
doesn't work, then what do you do?" Rush notes there is a
difference between hitting and spanking, and he recalls that when
he was 17 he hosted some older friends at his house.
The friends wanted something to drink, so Rush stole a bottle of
his father's Scotch. His mother saw him, though, so he lamely
pretended he had the wrong bottle in his hand. His mother didn't
believe him, of course, and she told his father, who didn't spank
him; rather, the two of them sat down and his father explained
how disappointed he was with Rush that he had lied to his mother.
This meant that his father couldn't trust Rush ever again, and he
didn't speak to Rush for about a month.
This devastated Rush, and the result was that Rush never lied to
his father again; fortunately, the lesson having been learned,
his father did trust him after this point. Rush thinks Sharon is
totally mischaracterizing spanking and those who use it as a form
of discipline, which is something borne of love, not a desire to
hurt.
Rush points out that it's not possible to reason with a
three-year-old, and Sharon agrees, but she thinks that young kids
can be told the consequences of their behavior. Rush asks,
however, why Sharon is so insistent on discounting the
possibility that what happened to him was valid and that it
worked. She has criticized what his father has done, telling him
that his father should have chosen a different path; however,
Rush is well-adjusted and normal, and he doesn't have those
things that supposedly happen to those that have been spanked.
Sharon says that "supposedly" is a poor choice of words; her
mother spanked Sharon and the rest of the kids, and it worked for
everyone but one of Sharon's brother. As this brother got older,
Sharon's mother used brooms and baseball bats against him. Thus,
what do people do if spanking doesn't work?
Rush says that this is not normal and it's not a natural
consequence of spanking one's kids; most parents do not resort to
baseball bats when their kids continually misbehave. Sharon,
though, insists that this does happen, and Rush admits this is
probably true, but these rare instances of abusive parents do not
happen as often as Sharon evidently would like to believe. And
using a baseball bat is not spanking.
To lump an abusive parent using a baseball bat with spanking is
absurd. Sharon, though, wonders where the line should be drawn,
and besides, Rush doesn't even have children. How can Rush have
any opinion on this if he doesn't routinely deal with it on a
daily basis?
Rush points out by this same logic, Sharon hasn't raised every
type of child possible, so she shouldn't act as if she were an
expert on the subject. Sharon says she is not an expert, so Rush
asks why she's teaching parents how to raise their kids, so that
must mean she knows more than parents and is some kind of expert.
"Listen, bub," Sharon shouts, "I'm a parent, I'm in the trenches
every day like a million other parents, and it's grossly
irresponsible for you to sit on the radio and say that if the
punishment doesn't work, then up the ante and make it more!" Rush
asks when he ever said this; Sharon says that Rush said this in
the previous hour and that a direct quote would be "if the
punishment doesn't work, make it more severe."
Rush disagrees, but Sharon insists "you said that! That's what
you said - `children need to be punished!'" Rush says that kids
do need to be punished if they did something wrong, but Sharon
insists Rush also said "if the punishment doesn't work, make it
more severe, that's what you said!"
Rush notes that he has watched some ne'er-do-wells grow up, and
some of the steps that were taken to discipline them worked.
However, this strict discipline didn't constitute beating them,
and Rush has never suggested that parents beat kids as a form of
punishment. There are many kinds of discipline. He thanks Sharon
for calling.
*BREAK*
Rush remarks that before parents had the help of "experts" to
teach them how to be parents, parents drew on the experience of
their childhood and that of their own parents to learn how to be
parents. Rush, not surprisingly was once a kid, and when he
became a teenager, he paid close attention to how his parents
were raising him.
Rush is amazed at the conclusions some people draw about him,
such as insisting that he equates punishment with beatings.
Punishment can be a number of things, and Rush is amazed at how
some people assume he advocates the beating of kids. He notes
that his father's refusal to speak with him because he lied was
more devastating than any spanking, but it wouldn't have worked
on a six-year-old Rush.
Family values is so important in part because a "side-effect" of
being a good parent is that you teach your kids how to be good
parents later on. America has had fine families long before there
were any experts around to teach them how to do this.
In Great Britain, parents spank their youngsters a lot more than
Americans do, but Britons are less violent than Americans. Thus,
equating violence with spanking is foolish.
*BREAK*
Phone Bonnie from St. Louis, MO
Bonnie says that people shouldn't be defensive about having a
patriarchal society, given that this idea has worked for 5,000
years. It's only been when this idea has been abandoned that
society has taken a drastic turn for the worse.
Bonnie also thinks that Rush is popular with the public because
he is a real man who comes out with a strong, masculine presence
that cannot be denied. She thinks this gives people hope,
especially since Rush is the sunshine in her and many other
people's lives. She therefore hopes Rush doesn't take some of the
calls today to heart.
Rush thanks Bonnie for her succinct comments.
--
John Switzer | Bumper sticker that's most unlikely
| to show on up a car belonging to
CompuServe: 74076,1250 | Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA):
Internet: j...@netcom.com | "No Jesus, No Peace"