RUSH: I mean, tell me what to do with this. Let’s do a little exercise. Greta Van Susteren last night was speaking Boston Globe national political reporter Annie Linskey about me and my criticism of the Republican Party on yesterday’s show. Now, to set things up, Van Susteren introduces and plays a clip of me talking about anger in the Republican base.
VAN SUSTEREN: Conservative talk show host and the star of all radio, Rush Limbaugh, ripping the GOP establishment and sending a strong message.
RUSH ARCHIVE: In the case of the anger on the Republican side propelling this primary season, everybody is saying it’s irrational, it’s kooky, it’s irresponsible, it’s insane. Nobody is saying, “Hey, why are they mad? What did we do to make them so mad? Maybe we need a seminar or two over here at some lobbyist’s office to figure out why they’re so mad at us.” … Why don’t you people take a little time-out; instead of mischaracterizing the anger, why don’t you follow your own guidelines and try to learn from it? Why don’t you try to ask yourself what have you done made everybody so mad?
RUSH: Now, this woman had no idea what I was talking about, and it’s not really her fault. You can’t… That’s why I say it takes six weeks listen to this program. You cannot hear — what was this? — you cannot hear a 35-second sound bite from this program most of the time and understand what it’s really about. Do you remember what that’s about? The monolog was this. We’re told that the Republican anger is childish and it is unnecessary and it’s destructive and it’s petulant and it’s childlike and it’s irrational and there shouldn’t be any.
From the same people, when the World Trade Center gets blown up, the same people looking at the militant Islamists who did it say, “Why are they so mad?” We’re told we have to study their rage. We’re told we have to study their anger. We have to find out why they’re mad. And not just them. Any protest group in the country, whoever the protest group is. “We can’t just react. We must dig deep. We must understand the rage, and we must understand why we are responsible for it.”
I mean, how many times have I said that the Pentagon, State Department, had seminars after 9/11 conducted on the premise: “What did we do to make them mad?” As though it was our fault! It was our fault the World Trade Center came down, our fault they hit the Pentagon. “What did we do to make ’em mad?” Okay, we have anger here out in population. The Republican base is mad. Why is nobody saying, “We need to study that rage. We need to find out why they’re mad”?
In other words: “Militant Islamist anger justified; Republican anger not justified.” That was the point I was making yesterday. Now, this Boston Globe reporter I don’t think had a chance because she doesn’t understand the context. So after Greta plays her that comment, she then says, “Now, that’s gonna hit a nerve, what Rush said. Rush Limbaugh is saying, ‘Listen to the people,” and here’s this woman. Her name, again, is Annie Linskey.
LINSKEY: It is a little ironic for Rush Limbaugh to be talking about somebody who has stoked anger in the population. And, you know, I listen to his show, I have to say, especially when I’m driving around. And a lot of what he talks about is the raw anger without the solutions. And I do wonder if he would spend a little bit more time expressing that anger, sure. But looking for solutions too.
RUSH: “This entire program is nothing but a solution, and if you don’t understand that listening to this program…” Now, folks, that’s the way I would defend this. Is there anybody…? I mean, you people get mad at me ’cause there’s not enough defense of Ted Cruz here or there’s not enough defense of Marco Rubio. How much defense of me is there out there anywhere when any of this stuff happens? There is zilch, zero, nada. And I don’t… The point is I’m not complaining about it. It’s just the way it is.
But in answering Ms. Linskey here, this whole program is a solution. This program is a solution to liberalism. It’s a solution to what’s gone wrong in this country. It is a solution to preventing it happening further. Everything on this program is oriented toward informing people why the things that make ’em unhappy exist and who’s responsible for it and how to fix it. This entire program every day is a solution. But what does she hear driving around? She hears me angry? I don’t…
She can’t listen to this program as much as she claims to if she thinks all I do here is stoke anger — and then “never offer solutions”? This whole program is a solution. And the solution is, “Stop liberalism! Stop the Democrats!” That’s the solution. But even in this case, I’m not stoking any anger. I’m explaining the anger that other people feel. And she was unable to get that. So what am I supposed to do, start running around whining that Annie Linskey at the Boston Globe misunderstands, that she doesn’t get it? It doesn’t work that way. Here’s how Greta dealt with it. Greta came back after Linskey had said that, “I wonder if Limbaugh would spend a little bit more time expressing that anger, sure, but looking for solutions, too.”
VAN SUSTEREN: It’s interesting the Republican Party, are you not listening to these people? Maybe you wouldn’t be so baffled why this is happening. Just go talk to them.
LINSKEY: I think that’s right, but I do also think that you need leaders who are gonna do a little bit more than just demagogue. And I think that is what, umm, a number of people on talk radio do.
RUSH: So there you have conventional wisdom. I don’t think she has the slightest idea what she’s talking about specifically related to this program. “I’m on talk radio. I’m a demagogue. I get mad. I shout anger. I have no solutions. I’m on talk radio.” So there’s all kinds of people have cliched beliefs about talk radio, and they’re all wrong. But I’m sorry, I’m not gonna spend all day whining about it. It’s not the way to deal with it anyway.