Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

Listen to it Button

RUSH: We got Cliff back from Baton Rouge.  We had to suspend our call for the rotten cell connection.  Welcome back, Cliff.  How are you doing?

CALLER:  I’m doing pretty good, Rush.

RUSH:  Okay.  Have at it.  You are back with us now. Your turn.

CALLER:  Most of the agitators during the dimensions here, the ones that wanted to block traffic, which is a no-no in Baton Rouge.

RUSH:  Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.  Hold it, hold it, hold it.  Are we talking about what happened in Baton Rouge or are we talking about the convention?

CALLER:  No, I’m talking about what happened in Baton Rouge.

RUSH: Okay. So you’re switching gears here.  I just wanted to make sure people knew.

CALLER:  Yeah.  During the protest, most of the people — the vast majority of them — were arrested for doing silly things like blocking traffic, which, you can’t do that in Baton Rouge.  There’s no loop around the town.  They went to jail.  The vast majority of them were from out of town.  And this shooter is apparently was from out of town as well.  So to me, the dominant media have blood on their hands.  They whipped this thing into a frenzy. We’ve had a false narrative for, what, two years now with Ferguson? “Hands up, don’t shoot” is a lie.

RUSH:  Okay.  I’m lost.  You talked about your focus the media how they whip people into a frenzy and yet it was not Baton Rouge.

CALLER:  Right.

RUSH:  It was outsiders who are responsible for all the things that went wrong?

CALLER:  Right.  Well, there were protests in downtown Baton Rouge, and they shut down one surface street in downtown, Government Street.  They wanted to shut down I-10.  And Baton Rouge is… I don’t care who you are, Baton Rougens would hate that. I don’t care what side of the issue you’re on, this town becomes… If you slow one point of traffic in this town in the right place, you virtually bring the whole town to a standstill.

You got I-10, US 61, US 90 the all come together in Baton Rouge, and I-12 does as well, and there’s no loop around the city.  And there’s also no surface loop around the city.  You know, the city’s built around lakes, swamps, and rivers.  And there’s just nowhere to go.  So if you snarl traffic in one place, you virtually shut the city down.  So the people that got arrested for trying to do that, they weren’t getting any love from anybody.  And then this out-of-town shooter, this guy comes from Missouri or wherever he is, and kills these three police officers. He’s not from here, either.  So, no matter what they do, it’s not gonna tear this town apart.  We’re together.  And I believe the dominant press has some of the blame for this, that they have blood on their hands.  Also for the officers that were killed in Dallas.

RUSH:  Oh, I see what you’re saying now.  I see.  Okay.

CALLER:  They’ve driven a false narrative.  For what?  Ever since Ferguson?

RUSH:  Well, what’s the false narrative that you’re referring to?

CALLER:  Well, the false narrative is that the police target and kill black people at random, almost, and it’s a lie.

RUSH:  Well, it certainly is. (sigh) Try… Well, you’re right.  The episode in Baton Rouge didn’t have anything to do with anything that happened in Baton Rouge, although they would say Alton Sterling is why they were doing what they were doing.  But who’s whipping them into a frenzy is your point.  Look, I’ll repeat this again.  I guess it takes it.  The beginning of a lot of this, some people think it’s Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, and you can’t leave that out. But I’m telling you.

I saw Malik Zulu Shabazz last night with Megyn Kelly on Fox News, and all he wanted to talk about was “hands up, don’t shoot” out of St. Louis, out of Ferguson. That’s all it was.  That was the justification for everything they’re doing.  A lie.  And he was last night trying to make everybody believe that Michael Brown was an innocent guy walking down the street and he was shot in the back — with his hands up — by a cop! Megyn threw all the facts at him. He didn’t care. It does not matter.

He just accused her of making up stuff and lying about the facts. And then the grand jury? They lied too. Everybody else lied. Everybody knew that that cop went headhunting. So they’re using a lie.  My whole point is, what if Obama had gone on television and instead of sustaining the life of that lie had called that out for what it was and what it is? He could have taken the ammunition away, and he didn’t do it.  And these incidents keep happening based on that and this frenzy that’s continue to be worked on by Black Lives Matter.


RUSH: Since I mentioned it I’m gonna play you these sound bites of Malik Zulu Shabazz.  Now, this is not the name he was born with.  I know what the name he was born with is and I can’t remember.  This guy goes way, way back.  I mean, he was a youth in New York when I arrived there in 1988.

He shows up at all the Republican conventions and starts rabble-rousing on racism and the Klan and Newt Gingrich was his old target.  But this is just to show you how this utter lie of “hands up, don’t shoot” is still the fuel for all of this destruction that’s happening.  It’s sick.

Paris Lewis.  That’s his name.  He changed his name to Malik Zulu Shabazz because Shabazz, is that a Malcolm X family name or — I think it is.  (interruption) So it’s on Headline News.  Let me get it back, what channel is it, 202?  Yeah, there we go.  So here it is.

This is last night on The Kelly File.  They broke away from what was happening on the convention.  It wasn’t the Rudy speech, but they broke away.  It might have been Jeff Sessions.  Jeff Sessions was giving a stem-winder and Fox broke away to interview Malik Zulu Shabazz, and the first question here has to do with comments that Malik Shabazz made where he said he could understand how some people see the Dallas cop killer as a hero, Micah X. Johnson.

Oh, yeah, Malik Shabazz, oh, yeah, I can totally understand why the guy is a hero.  And the question was, “Well, what facts do you have that Michael Brown was not the aggressor, that Officer Darren Wilson was the aggressor in that episode?”

SHABAZZ:  Because I lived in St. Louis and I talked to some of the witnesses, and I know that in America, unless you have a videotape, then the word of the officers prevails.

KELLY:  Do you understand that at least five black witnesses came forward in that case to say that Michael Brown was the aggressor?

SHABAZZ:  Michael Brown was an unarmed, and Michael Brown was —

KELLY:  He was unarmed until he tried to steal the cop’s gun.

SHABAZZ:  And see, and see, your attitude is part of the problem.  Your attitude of blame the victim —

KELLY:  I have no attitude —

SHABAZZ:  No, no —

KELLY:  — other than upheld the truth.

SHABAZZ:  — no, no, no, no.

RUSH:  So you see how this goes.  So he is confronted with the fact that the Gentle Giant was the aggressor, and the answer to that, “He was unarmed.  He was unarmed, he was not the aggressor.”  Well, he was unarmed until he tried to take the cop’s gun away from him by lunging into the cop car.  The way they deal with that is, “See?  See?  See?  Your attitude is part of the problem.  Your attitude is blame the victim.  That’s what always happens, blame the victim.”

And the response, “No attitude here, other than to uphold the truth.”  And Shabazz, “No, no, no, your attitude is blame the victim.  He was not the aggressor.  He was innocent, and you are blaming the victim.  He was not the aggressor.”  And Shabazz then continued perpetuating the myth.

SHABAZZ:  That basic position of what we call white supremacy, white privilege, is believing that an unarmed black man, all of us unarmed being killed by armed police officers somehow it’s our fault.  But we don’t see white males in America —

KELLY:  For the record, I’m not a white supremacist.

SHABAZZ:  No, that’s a position —

KELLY:  Okay.

SHABAZZ:  — a position that you believe that your lives are better than ours.

KELLY:  Well, I believe that you are the one who has made the racially insensitive statements.

SHABAZZ:  No, no, mam.  It’s a racial (unintelligible) —

KELLY:  Time and time again.

SHABAZZ:  It’s a racially insensitive country.

KELLY:  That’s why it’s hard to take you seriously when you try to speak out about police and issues of race.

RUSH:  So he says white supremacy, white privilege, believing that an unarmed black man, all of us being unarmed being killed by armed police officers now somehow it’s our fault, but we don’t see unarmed white people being killed by police officers.

Well, the cops kill many more white men than they kill black men.  Are you aware of that?

Do you know that black men kill more black men than cops kill black men?

Somebody the other day said, you know, this is the wrong comparison. Racial comparisons don’t work here because16% of the population is black, and half of that is male. Then you got, what, 40, 50% of the population is white, half of that is male, you don’t have even numbers to compare here.  What you need to look at is men versus women, and the truth is the cops are killing men like 95% of all victims are men, regardless of race, if you wanted to look at it that way.

So men could come along and say that the cops are inherently biased against men, because 95% of all shooting victims by the police are men, but you don’t see men’s groups coming out and saying that.  But that is much more true than anything Malik Zulu Shabazz is saying.  But here’s the point of all this.  This ignorance, this obvious — I’m trying to categorize it here in a powerful way.  It’s more than just lying.  I mean, this purposely carrying forth this false narrative has been given energy by Barack Obama, is my point.

There is no evidence whatsoever to support what Malik Zulu Shabazz is saying.  I don’t know that he actually believes what he’s saying or not.  He’s just into activism here, and he’s into talking about and identifying white privilege and white supremacy.  And he knows he’s got a built-in winner in the narrative that white cops kill innocent black men because they’ve succeeded in making a significant percentage of the black population believe that.  And it’s another one of these things that isn’t anywhere close to being true.

And it’s tearing apart the country.  It’s tearing apart our culture.  It is guaranteeing that it is impossible for there to ever be any unity, and the president of the United States could change all of this if he wanted to.  (interruption) What, you don’t think he could?  My point is the president doesn’t even make the effort.  The president, when he goes out and talks about things like this, always seems to come down on the side of the anti-establishment activists.  And it just fuels all this stuff.

And it’s not so much that it’s Barack Obama saying it, it’s that the president is saying it.  Just the office of the presidency has this built-in authority.  As I said yesterday, it took the media five years to destroy the Bush presidency and everything that’s associated with it.  People instinctively trust, instinctively believe because they want to believe the president.  It’s the closest thing we have to a sense of an infallible leader, sadly.  The president’s just the most powerful political figure in the country anymore.  But isn’t seen that way.  And Barack Obama may be the most partisan political president we have ever had, ever.  I’m including Woodrow Wilson in that, and I’m including FDR.  And he is not seen that way.

The most politically partisan president we have ever had.  Well, I should say in my lifetime.  That is kind of a broad statement.  There are too many other previous presidents back in the old days, pre-Civil War that I really don’t know.  But it’s all so unnecessary.  That’s the frustrating thing.  All of this is built on a lie.  I’m to the point now that I don’t think it would change if the truth were convincingly reported to these people.  I don’t think it would change anything now.  They’re too deep into it.  They’re too committed to the premise.  They have too big a winning issue.

It always comes down to who benefits.  (interruption) How do we get out of this?  Well, would you define for me “coming out of this.” Snerdley said, “How do we get out of this?” Define getting out of this.  Define for me what you think fixing this would be.  What would be the day-to-day existence in the country if we, quote, unquote, fixed this?  Okay.  Deescalation of war on police.  Okay.  Even if that happens, this doesn’t go away.

You deescalate the war on police, but that isn’t gonna deescalate the venom.  That isn’t gonna deescalate or reduce the amount of hatred that exists, because you’re always gonna have people throwing gasoline on it, trying to revive it.  So is it realistic, I’m asking open-ended, is it realistic to think that somebody someday somewhere somehow could come along and convince people that what they believe isn’t true?  You think that could happen?

So in this case, you think it’s possible that there is somebody someday somewhere who could come along and who could convince Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Malik Shabazz, and these kids that run Black Lives Matter that they’re wrong? (interruption) Okay.  So they couldn’t be convinced. But you think there are people who could convince the general public — the black general public, the white general public, the Hispanic general public — that all is a bunch of BS? (interruption) Okay. All right.

So if that happened, if there was somebody someday somewhere who came along and convinced the mass public that all of this is a bunch of lies and “hands up, don’t shoot” didn’t happen — that there is not a preponderance of cops shooting innocent black victims, it’s just not happening. Someday you think we could convince people of this. What, then, would the Al Sharptons and the Jesse Jacksons and the Malik Shabazzes whoever the heck else out there, the Black Lives Matter…? What would they do when that happened?

Do you think they would say, “Well, we gave it our best shot, but I guess we lost and I guess we’re now gonna have to assimilate and get rid of our race-hustling business.”  Do you think they would do that? (interruption)  Okay, so they would not be persuaded.  They would not be convinced to, shall we say, “lay down arms.” They would not be convinced to set aside the grievance and try to get along. What future for them, in that, is there? (interruption)

Right.(interruption)  Right. (interruption)  I know, Jess… (sigh) (interruption) I… (interruption)  Yes, we can… (interruption) All we can… All the Jesse Jack… (interruption) Yeah, Jesse Jackson admitted that he, too… (interruption) He gets scared when he sees being followed by an African-American street at night.  He said it.  I know.  But I disagree.  I don’t think… (interruption)  I don’t think that the circumstance I just described is going to happen any time soon, precisely because of the existence of the Sharptons and the Jacksons and whoever their heirs are, ’cause people come along and pick up the slack when they’re not around.

And the Malik Shabazzes and the Black Lives Matter. Because they’re all part of what?  No matter what they are individually, they are all part of what?  The Democrat Party.  How do they vote, for whom do they vote, and what do they believe?  They exist on the basis of they have a devil as an enemy.  It is white people and the Republican Party — and maybe, if you want to take it deeper, Christianity.  The Democrat Party is who benefits from all this.  Is the Democrat Party ever going to…?

Are we ever gonna see the day where the Democrat Party calls a press conference of powerful people in the party, and tells its various factions, “Look, stop.  You’re tearing the country apart. We’re tearing the country apart. This has to stop. We gotta face the truth here: ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ didn’t happen”? Do you ever see that happening? (interruption) No.  It’s not gonna happen.  So what do we do?  What is our only recourse? (interruption) Well, of course we have to keep telling the truth, but what’s the upshot of that?  What is the result?

We keep telling the truth. We keep standing for right. We keep standing for justice. We keep trying to do what we can to protect people. Wha…? (interruption) They have to lose!  They have to lose political power.  It is the achievement of political power that enables them to carry forth with all of this.  It’s been my argument from day one.  We can’t… There isn’t common ground here between us and liberals, which is why I’ve always smirked at this notion that the future is rooted in, “I’m the guy who could cross the aisle and show the other people that they don’t have to fear us!

“I’m the guy that can cross the aisle and show that we can govern together! We can make Washington work.”  That’s not gonna get us anywhere.  They have to be defeated at the good, old-fashioned ballot box.  They have to become an electoral minority — and that still isn’t gonna shut ’em it! It still isn’t gonna stop all this.  But it’s going to convey moral authority to the winners, and that is what is missing here.  All moral authority has been blown to smithereens, and nobody is permitted to possess it.  And that’s another neat trick of the left.  They have totally destroyed the moral order, on the basis that it was never legitimate because of who created it.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This