The Limbaugh Institute: TEACH THE FUNDAMENTALS

Professor Extraordinaire: Dr. Limbaugh ^ | September 23, 2005 | Rush Limbaugh

[Yosemitest]

Teach the Fundamentals

September 23, 2005

Download Windows Media Player

Listen to Rush Conduct Broadcast Excellence via Windows Media Player (highly recommended by poster)

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I got an e-mail last night, and I get a few of these but there's so much e-mail, I don't have a systemized response. But something about this e-mail I got yesterday compelled me to reply. It was an e-mail for a college student out in Oregon, and he had been given an assignment by his liberal professor. It's a big essay question related to a theory in some journalist's book, and he asked me for some help -- and I went back and forth with this, because, if I help this guy, am I really helping him? If I essentially write the guy's paper, how much help am I actually giving him? So I said, "I'm not going to write what I would in a paper but I'll just give him a few little ideas to hopefully spur his mind." Well, I got going and I kept going, and when I finished with it, I said, "You know something? This reminds me of something that is sadly missing throughout the conservative movement, and that's a return to fundamentals. I've been doing this program, we're into our 18th year, and for a whole host of reasons we can't go back and do the first year all over again. We can't go back and do the first day. We have to keep moving forward. This is why I've always said, "It takes six weeks of steady listening to have this program really understood by a new audience member because it takes that long or longer for the context of this all to come into place."

We have new people tuning in all the time. We have new readers to the website. We have readers to The Limbaugh Letter all the time who are just now getting interested in this, and our discussion of conservatism here may be over their heads on a learning curve basis. So last night I sent my reply to the editrix of the Limbaugh Letter, Diana Schneider. I said, "Diana, I want to run this in the next issue, and I want to start a new section in the newsletter. We're going to get rid of something in there that's tired. I don't know what yet, but I want to replace it with a fundamentals section. Every week or every month in the newsletter, we're going to go back to the roots of conservatism issue by issue by issue and explain it," sort of along the lines How to Defeat a Liberal, only better. It will be an ongoing series, and I'm going to read to you what I wrote this college student, to give you an idea of what I'm talking about. Because what Harry Belafonte said here is -- he doesn't even know it. He doesn't even know how right he is. He said, "This poverty that our country is witnessing has never gone away. Most of the politicians I know have visited these places of poverty. They make it their business." His point is, they do all these things but it never gets fixed. Well, there is a reason that he doesn't understand, and that formed the basis of my reply to the college student last night.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here's the essence of the e-mail I got from the young college student in Oregon:

"I know how busy you are, but have you read the book by Thomas Frank, 'What's the Matter with Kansas?' [Rush comments on the book] Well, I'm being made to read the book in an ethics class and write an essay response to a question that my professor is asking. Here is the question: 'Economic quality has long been a major theme in American political discourse, especially with the populist policies associated with the Democratic Party. According to Thomas Frank, how is this theme connected with the backlash phenomenon in American culture? How has the backlash led to a change in class definitions and traditional political alignments?' I know you don't have time for this, Rush, but I just thought I would try. It's getting hard to these campuses anymore. Thanks for everything you do."

So I had the time and this is what I wrote back. I said, "This is easy. First, your professor's premise is flawed. Economic equality has not 'long been a major theme in American political discourse.' American economic opportunity is the real theme. The premise of economic equality has long been a theme of liberals who blanch at the sight of any inequality they perceive, which is fine as far as it goes, but it is their attempt at solutions to this problem that have wrought even more inequality. When liberals see haves and have-nots, they attempt to equalize or make fair these imbalances, and they do so by punishing those at the top of the ladder, so to speak, in order to bring them down to be more on par with the have-nots. They never attempt to educate or inspire the have-nots to do better and move up or prosper, and that's because they don't believe it's possible. Their faith in the individual is dwarfed by their belief in and love of government, as the great equalizer -- with themselves in charge of it, of course. The backlash Thomas Frank refers to, I believe, results from the have-nots getting frustrated now because years and years of promises by liberal politicians have failed to improve their lot," and let's hearken back to Harry Belafonte at this point. "The liberal authors of these schemes, which promise to rectify this inequality and poverty are wont to accept the blame themselves for the failure of their own policies. They shift the blame back to the haves. They accuse them of being greedy and unwilling to share.

"That's why we constantly hear liberals demand more tax increases on the wealthy. Somehow that will magically improve the lot of the have-nots but it never works because it can't. Redistributionist policies have never succeeded in all of human civilization in equalizing a society economically. Our own Great Society and war on poverty have transferred over $6 trillion from the haves to the have-nots since 1964, and yet the Thomas Franks of the world still complain. It's time to seriously examine the failure of these policies and your professor's premise. We have the proof it doesn't work. The problem is that liberals refuse to have their results examined. They insist their intentions being credited, which in their minds makes them nicer and more compassionate than people who would rather educate the have-nots to become self-reliant and less dependent on governments. Now, the problem you're going to encounter with this in class is this. Liberals, and maybe your professor, believe that capitalism, the basic economic foundation and architecture of America is flawed precisely because they believe it is to blame for this economic inequality, that capitalism by design is unfair, and so it must be regulated, policed, monitored, eventually punished. This is why the enemies of liberals are small and large businesses. Wal-Mart's the latest example along with Big Oil right now and along with wealthy people, the rich, and the successful. These are the enemies of liberals.

"Liberals think that they're just lucky. They've 'won life's lottery.' They have a duty to give back via high taxes and any other scheme that they can dream up. Now this plays well with the have-nots, because they've been made to believe all these years to resent the successful via the liberals' use of class envy language, and end up feeling satisfied not when they do better because they don't do better. They feel satisfied because they think the rich, who are stealing from them and not sharing with them, are harmed economically and then the cycle conditions as it has for 70 years since the days of Woodrow Wilson and FDR. Thomas Frank in his book now wonders why all of a sudden these have-nots are starting to vote for Republicans because he thinks that these have-nots are voting for the people who have kept them poor, which is absurd. These people are beginning to see that much of America continues to prosper beyond anyone's wildest dreams while they continue to await the fulfillment of all those liberal promises (Hello, Harry Belafonte) and they're also figuring out that 60 years of failed promises just mean more failed promises. They want in on the action as do people who are members of labor unions. This country used to be 35% organized labor. Today it's less than 12%." Now, I told the student, "I believe it's a tragedy that the left in this country has literally destroyed so many of their own voters' futures by lying to them, by telling them they have no chance because the deck is stacked against them, by telling them things will be made more fair if liberals are made in charge so they can punish the rich.

"Capitalism has its problems, and it does require certain regulations, as all societies require laws, but there's no question that liberalism and socialism fail each time they are tried, whereas the capitalist system of this country has produced the richest country in the history of civilization -- and this is not to say that government can't help. It can, and it should. There are lots of people who for one reason or another simply cannot get by without our compassionate assistance, and that compassion has always been there. You could cite the war on poverty and the Great Society and other ongoing, similar programs as evidence. The shame is when liberals control the government and attempt to make as many Americans as possible dependent on them and the government for the sake of cementing their power. That results in millions of people not given the chance to reach their own potential, to be the best they can be but according to own ambitions and desires. To this liberals and maybe your professor will say something that will reflect their belief that many people really have no potential because of the unfairness -- the structural institutional unfairness of American society -- and the cycle will repeat." So, I don't know what this kid is going to write, or what he's going to say, but I can imagine (laughing) when he challenges the premise of the professor (laughing) I would loooove to be there.

END TRANSCRIPT

Rush's Remarks on "What's the Matter with Kansas," During Campaign 2004...

(Snow Job in the Summer: Huge Lib: It's All Phony -07.29.04)

[Yosemitest]

Thank you Dr. Limbaugh. These words should be minted in gold, and placed on a bookmark for a students who care, and not just feel, about the future.

Now ponder this...

Isaiah 3:9-15

9 The shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves. 10 Say ye to the righteous, that it shall be well with him: for they shall eat the fruit of their doings. 11 Woe unto the wicked! it shall be ill with him: for the reward of his hands shall be given ^F18 him. 12 As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead ^F19 thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. 13 The LORD standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people. 14 The LORD will enter into judgment with the ancients of his people, and the princes thereof: for ye have eaten up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses. 15 What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? saith the Lord GOD of hosts.

---

FOOTNOTES:
F18: given...: Heb. done to him
F19: lead...: or, call thee blessed

And ponder this...

Isaiah 32:1-8
1 Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment. 2 And a man shall be as an hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great ^F159 rock in a weary land. 3 And the eyes of them that see shall not be dim, and the ears of them that hear shall hearken. 4 The heart also of the rash ^F160 shall understand knowledge, and the tongue of the stammerers shall be ready to speak plainly. 5 The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said to be bountiful. 6 For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the LORD, to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail. 7 The instruments also of the churl are evil: he deviseth wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words, even when the needy ^F161 speaketh right. 8 But the liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand. ^F162

---

FOOTNOTES:
F159: great: Heb. heavy
F160: rash: Heb. hasty
F161: the needy...: or, he speaketh against the poor in judgment
F162: stand: or, be established

It's time to call liberals... by their proper name... VILE!

[Central Scrutiniser]

Limbaugh is a moron who found a schtick.

If he lived his life like he wants others to live theirs, then he would be worth half a listen.

[Yosemitest]

I strongly disagree!

Ponder this...

John 12:1-11
1 Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. 2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. 3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, 5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? 6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. 7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. 8 For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always. 9 Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was there: and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. 10 But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; 11 Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus.

[nunya bidness]

Limbaugh is a moron who found a schtick.

If he lived his life like he wants others to live theirs, then he would be worth half a listen.

True.

But not everyone can bore a few folks on seldom seen chat-sites with pictures from their dive vacations and pearls of wisdom that reach less than a dozen malcontents.

So I guess he's stuck on AM talk radio with 20 million listeners.

Not bad for a moron.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Aww, nunya is angry.

My photos are on my page, you have to make an effort to go see them, which you did.

LOL

(does that make you a malcontent?)

Pwned

[Central Scrutiniser]

Save the bible quotes for someone who cares.

[Paige]

Limbaugh nailed the Liberal mentality in his brief articulated synopsis. In a way, I wish he that had not given the reason away because some Democrat will come alone and decide they have to act the part until elected. For example, Clinton brags to this day when talking about how he found the answer to winning.... he studied, read and ardently followed President Ronald Wilson Reagan but look at what we got. Clinton learned how to win elections but he certainly did not respect the office of the presidency or truly care about the people of America.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

A lot of us posting here care what the Bible says.

One of these days we'll all be meeting the author. It will be an excellent opportunity for you to convey your contempt directly to the source.

[curtisgardner]

Limbaugh is a moron who found a schtick. If he lived his life like he wants others to live theirs, then he would be worth half a listen.

who is the real moron? just like he always says, he could outsmart you with half his brain tied behind his back. he is a million times smarter than you will ever be.

[leadpenny]

I think most conservatives who listen to Rush do so just to reinforce what they already believe. The problem is that Rush, probably for commercial reasons, "compresses" 15 minutes worth of information into three hours of entertainment.

It's schtick.

[zipper]

Hates Rush, athiest- shouldn't you be over on DU?

[bdfromlv]

No one but Rush says he is perfect, but the man is not the issue and until you can see the problem being discussed you should not enter the conversation just to try to belittle the messenger.

[ALWAYSWELDING]

Hill can't win the primary without moving hard left, and she can't win the general election if she does move to the left.

I hate to admit...I disagree. Unfortunately, I think Hillary could try to give center appearance and still win the primary. She would take some crap, but there would be enough in the MSM that would cover her back by not covering bad press.

Here's the nut though, I don't think she can resist. It is too tempting for a Lib to stroke their loonies now and then because.....deep down she's a loony as well.

[truemiester]

Rush restates the obvious. Most know, and you are right when you say he preaches to the choir, what he is oging to say or where he stands. But it brings the faithful together. We listen and we beleive the same thing. He states it in an elegant fashion. He prioritized. This the left can never do. He can do it and still be enetertaining so that people cant wait until the next broadcast. Most who 'listen' to air america, (where it is playing), go through the motions of listening. In other words it is on as a show of support for their cause, but they dont listen or beleive.

[leadpenny]

I love it that the Left despises Rush Limbaugh but beyond that I have outgrown (not smugly) him. The only time I listen to the radio is when I'm in the car and I've found that listening to C-SPAN Radio (DC area) is more enlightening. Failing that, there is always music.

Talk Radio is a very rough and competivive business and I believe guys like Rush and Hannity are looking over their shoulders at a number smart folks who are coming up. The "15 Minute" theory is real. Some just have a longer 15 minutes.

[Las Vegas Dave]

You forgot to post your photo along with your comment.

[ClidePenbroke]

Rush restates the obvious. Most know, and you are right when you say he preaches to the choir

I think the case is that Rush isn't speaking to the choir so much as he is speaking to people who may be undecided on an issue, or have no particular opinion on a given subject.

[listenhillary]

Rush has brought millions of people to the conservative viewpoint for good. I'm one of them.

[sirchtruth]

The problem for libs is that if they do lie to gain the support of moderates and some few conservatives then they lose their looney-liberal base. Which is why you'll never see another president Clinton. Hill can't win the primary without moving hard left, and she can't win the general election if she does move to the left.

I see your point, but I'm not sure a lib couldn't lie like Clinton to win. Hillary can't do it, but some smary ass just might be able too.

There is no way the looney left is going to vote for a repub.