In a new biography on sale Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh calls fellow conservative talk show host Bill O’Reilly a “Ted Baxter” — after the fictional character on the “The Mary Tyler Moore Show” who was portrayed as a vain, shallow, buffoonish TV newsman.
“Sorry but somebody’s gotta say it,” Limbaugh is quoted as saying in Rush Limbaugh: An Army of One by Zev Chafets. At press time, O’Reilly had yet to respond to the comment.
But it wasn’t just Bill-O who took grief from Big Rush. Limbaugh said he doesn’t consider any of his fellow conservative talk show hosts to be in his league.
“Sean Hannity and Mark Levin are protégés,” writes Chafets, “and [Limbaugh] has defended Glenn Beck.”
But Limbaugh “doesn’t really consider them, or anyone else, in his league.”
Also on Limbaugh’s hit list is CNN’s Larry King, whom Limbaugh “really doesn’t like.”
“He has never had nice things to say about me,” Limbaugh says about King in the book. “He was working midnights [on the radio] when I started and demanded that his syndicator move him to afternoon drive when my success was obvious. He bombed and quit radio for CNN exclusively.”
The book also divulges how Limbaugh spends his multimillion-dollar earnings: The radio host owns five houses on an oceanfront estate north of Palm Beach, as well as a garage full of Maybach 57Ss (all black) and a $56 million Gulfstream G550 jet.
Limbaugh’s main home on the estate is 24,000 square feet, while the remaining homes are for guests.
The décor includes a massive chandelier just like the one that hangs in the lobby of New York’s Plaza Hotel, as well as a full suit of armor and a “life-size oil portrait of El Rushbo.”
And according to Chafets, “fragrant candles” burn throughout the place. The main guest suite is “an exact replica of the Presidential Suite of the Hotel George V in Paris.”
The publisher notes that the biography is unauthorized, but Limbaugh gave Chafets extensive interviews for it. Chafets first wrote about Limbaugh in a 2008 New York Times Magazine cover story.
APRIL 23, 2010
Liberals and the Violence Card
Conservative protest is motivated by a love of what America stands for
The latest liberal meme is to equate skepticism of the Obama administration with a tendency toward violence. That takes me back 15 years ago to the time President Bill Clinton accused "loud and angry voices" on the airwaves (i.e., radio talk-show hosts like me) of having incited Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. What self-serving nonsense. Liberals are perfectly comfortable with antigovernment protest when they're not in power.
From the halls of the Ivy League to the halls of Congress, from the antiwar protests during the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq to the anticapitalist protests during International Monetary Fund and World Bank meetings, we're used to seeing leftist malcontents take to the streets. Sometimes they're violent, breaking shop windows with bricks and throwing rocks at police. Sometimes there are arrests. Not all leftists are violent, of course. But most are angry. It's in their DNA. They view the culture as corrupt and capitalism as unjust.
Former President Bill Clinton smiles as he receives a medallion from Cathy Keating, wife of former Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating, as a part of the Reflections of Hope Award ceremony in Oklahoma City.
Now the liberals run the government and they're using their power to implement their radical agenda. Mr. Obama and his party believe that the election of November 2008 entitled them to make permanent, "transformational" changes to our society. In just 16 months they've added more than $2 trillion to the national debt, essentially nationalized the health-care system, the student-loan industry, and have their sights set on draconian cap-and-trade regulations on carbon emissions and amnesty for illegal aliens.
Had President Obama campaigned on this agenda, he wouldn't have garnered 30% of the popular vote.
Like the millions of citizens who've peacefully risen up and attended thousands of rallies in protest, I seek nothing more than the preservation of the social contract that undergirds our society. I do not hate the government, as the left does when it is not running it. I love this country. And because I do, I insist that the temporary inhabitants of high political office comply with the Constitution, honor our God-given unalienable rights, and respect our hard-earned private property. For this I am called seditious, among other things, by some of the very people who've condemned this society?
I reject the notion that America is in a well-deserved decline, that she and her citizens are unexceptional. I do not believe America is the problem in the world. I believe America is the solution to the world's problems. I reject a foreign policy that treats our allies like our enemies and our enemies like our allies. I condemn the president traveling the world apologizing for America's great contributions to mankind. And I condemn his soft-pedaling the dangers we face from terrorism. For this I am inciting violence?
Few presidents have sunk so low as Mr. Clinton did with his accusations about Oklahoma City. Last week—on the very day I was contributing to and raising more than $3 million to fight leukemia and lymphoma on my radio program—Mr. Clinton used the 15th anniversary of that horrific day to regurgitate his claims about talk radio.
At a speech delivered last Friday at the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C., the former president said: [T]here were a lot of people who were in the business back then of saying that the biggest threat to our liberty and the cause of our domestic economic problem was the federal government itself. And we have to realize that there were others who fueled this both because they agreed with it and because it was in their advantage to do so. . . . We didn't have blog sites back then so the instrument of carrying this forward was basically the right-wing radio talk show hosts and they understand clearly that emotion was more powerful than reason most of the time."
Timothy McVeigh was incensed by the Clinton administration's 1993 siege on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. It's no coincidence that the bombing took place two years to the day of the Waco siege. McVeigh was not inspired by anything I said or believe and to say otherwise is outright slander. In the aftermath of the bombing, I raised millions of dollars for the children of federal employees killed in that cowardly attack through my association with the Marine Corp Law Enforcement Foundation.
Let me just say it. The Obama/Clinton/media left are comfortable with the unrest in our society today. It allows them to blame and demonize their opponents (doctors, insurance companies, Wall Street, talk radio, Fox News) in order to portray their regime as the great healer of all our ills, thus expanding their power and control over our society.
A clear majority of the American people want no part of this. They instinctively know that the Obama way is not how things get done in this country. They are motivated by love. Not hate, not sedition. They love their country and want to save it from those who do not.
Mr. Limbaugh is a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host.
RUSH: Let's go back, April 24th, 1995, Mississippi, Minnesota.
CLINTON 1995: We hear so many loud and angry voices in America today whose sole goal seems to be to try to keep some people as paranoid as possible and the rest of us all torn up and upset with each other. They spread hate. They leave the impression that -- by their very words, that -- violence is a acceptable. You ought to see -- I'm sure you are now seeing the reports of some things that are regularly said over the airwaves in America today. It is time we all stood up and spoke against that kind of (pounding podium) reckless speech and behavior.
FOLLOWERS: (applause)
RUSH: That was Bill Clinton, blaming me for the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19th, 1995. Yesterday we had the tea parties, and the Drive-By Media (I'm sure to its great chagrin) is filled with stories about how festive and how peaceful and how unthreatening all of the tea parties were. The effort to infiltrate these tea parties fizzled. They have stories on that that they probably do not like having to report. And, ladies and gentlemen, it's very clear that these citizen uprisings -- genuine grassroots citizen's uprisings -- are far more powerful than an attempt to drum up fake opposition to them from the White House. Yet, Bill Clinton is back in the game, expanding that threat via this sound bite.
CLINTON 2010: There was this rising movement in the early nineties that was basically not just a carefully orchestrated plot by people of extreme right-wing views but one that fell into fertile soil because there were so many people for whom the world no longer made sense. They wanted a simple, clear explanation of what was an inherently complex, mixed picture full of challenges that required not only changes in public policy, but personnel conduct and imagination about the world we were living in. So demonizing the government and the people that work for it sort of fit that -- and there were a lot of people who were in the business back then of saying that the biggest threat to our liberty and the cause of our economic problems was the federal government itself.
RUSH: So there you have it: Bill Clinton once again trying to rebirth his empty threat from 1995. He starts out tracing the plot that started in the eighties to "demonize government." I have a question. We have two more sound bites of the president here specifying right-wing talk radio, but I have a question: How come we're supposed to draw (on the basis of no evidence), a connection between conservatism and terrorism, conservative ideology and terrorism? Where is that connection? Yet we are told we must reject, despite tons of evidence, the connection between Islamist ideology and terrorism. So we can't call Islamist fundamentalists "terrorists." We can't even use the word. But we can have ex-presidents and current presidents running around trying to associate conservatives with nonexistent terrorism at peaceful tea parties. Somebody needs to explain this to me.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Bill Clinton. By the way, these statements were this morning at the big left-wing think tank, The Center for American Progress. So we played the sound bite where he starts out tracing the "plot" that started in the eighties to demonize government. Next sound bite, Clinton says that right-wing talk radio has made money off of anger, aided by the Internet.
CLINTON 2010: When I became president, it's hard to remember this, there were only 50 sites on the World Wide Web. Among those who first saw its potential and made use of it were those who used the Internet to do all kinds of interesting things, including share information on how to make bombs. We didn't have blog sites back then, so the instrument of carrying this forward was basically the right-wing radio talk show hosts. They understood that emotion was more powerful than reason. They got much bigger listenership and more advertisers and more commercial success if they kept people in the white heat. For 99% of them, it was just that: Turn on the radio, listen to somebody say something you agree with, vent your anger.
RUSH: They just can't get away from it. We are living in their heads rent free. We are in their heads and on their minds. They -- and I'm going to throw they in there -- are out to destroy Western civilization, folks. Why do you think the tea party people are so reviled? Why is it that we can sit there and accuse nonviolent tea party people of committing terrorist acts? I mean that's what Clinton's doing. He's predicting that tea party people are going to blow up a federal building again, and in the process.... I'm going to state right now: If there is a future incident such as Oklahoma City, the blame is squarely Clinton's on the shoulders of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, who I'm sure is coordinating Clinton's appearance on this.
Bill Clinton, with the sound bite you just heard just gave the kooks out there an excuse to be violent. He just offered them an opportunity to be violent -- and lest we forget, the politics of the militia members that the FBI took down recently: One was a registered Democrat; the rest were not affiliated by party. Of course the New York Times has reported national security secrets. They are responsible for any terror attack on this country. They have published all kinds of battle plans. They have given up our military secrets in Iraq and Afghanistan and yet they sit here, Clinton and Obama, and try to blame me and us on the radio for something that has not happened, while setting the stage for it to happen? And let's not forget this. It's very important.
This is the president who pardoned and released a bunch of Puerto Rican terrorists on his last week in office. The FALN gang. He also pardoned the Weather Underground terrorists -- and he's now lecturing us on violence that hasn't happened, a peaceful tea party movement. We cannot even say "Islamic" and "terrorists" in the same sentence! We cannot associate radical Islam with terrorism but the president can go out and Obama can go out and try to associate the tea party -- genuine, peace-loving, middle-American citizens of this country -- with future acts of terrorism? The tea parties, you know why they're hated? I'll tell you why they're hated. If you're a member of a tea party, if you participated in one yesterday, why you're hated, why you're feared: This regime and the Clintons, everybody else knows that all you want to do is defend what's left of this country and try to rebuild it.
That's what they know you want to do. Frank Rich of the New York Times, he put it this way: "The America that is no more." The tea party people want to revise the America that is no more. Now, we know that militant Islamists hate Western civilization -- and by the virtue of some of the policies of this regime, we can figure that some aspects of Western civilization are not too pleasing to the people running the country right now. So here you have Clinton predicting something, ignoring violence that has happened and not being able to categorize it properly or identify the people engage in it but now trying to impugn the terrorist bunch, the tea party people with future acts of domestic terrorism. This is really sick. It is despicable, and it's indicative of a bunch of people who know that they are in the minority and can only hang on by virtue of authoritarian control over people. We have one more sound bite from our esteemed, distinguished former president.
CLINTON 2010: Doing things when you are mad is, by and large, a prescription for error. The only thing I can say is, "Have at it! Go fight. Do whatever you want! You don't have to be nice but you've got to be very careful not to advocate violence or cross the line." The Boston Tea Party involved the seizure of tea in a ship because it was taxation without representation. Because even the Massachusetts Bay Colony, which had been largely self-governing, had it stripped from them. This fight is about taxation by duly, honestly elected representatives that you don't happen to agree with that you can vote out at the next election and two years after that and two years after that. That's very different.
RUSH: Somebody tell me: What have I missed? Will somebody explain to me what tea party person has advocated violence? What have I missed here? What tea party has engaged in acts of violence? And, by the way, President Clinton, the fight is about taxation by duly honestly elect representatives that you don't have to...? We have had a number of pieces of legislation including the recent health care bill rammed down our throat. This regime is governing against the will of the people. There's nothing Democratic about what happened here. Bribes and kickbacks to members of Congress in order to get their votes for this thing? Let's go back also to April 28, 2003, in Hartford, Connecticut. The tea party people are peaceful. They are festive. They're described that way even by the regime's media. Festive and good cheer. They're not taunting anybody, they're not menacing anybody; they're not threatening anybody. All they are is dissenting. They disagree with the direction the regime is taking the country. Back in 2003, Mrs. Clinton went nuts at the annual Jefferson Jackson Bailey dinner. It's in Hartford, Connecticut. You remember this.
HILLARY 2003 (screeching): I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!"
RUSH: She sounds angrier than any tea party person I have ever heard. That is shocking. For those of you who can hear -- heh -- I apologize. Now, that's a shock to the system. But that's Mrs. Clinton. "We have a right do disagree! (harpy nagging)." I don't hear any tea party people talking that way. So all this outrage is selective and all of this is being orchestrated by people who know that they are in the minority, attempting to quell opposition to this regime by virtue of intimidation. In the process, Mr. President, Mr. Clinton -- unwittingly or purposely I'll give you the benefit of the doubt -- with this comment, you have just set the stage for violence in this country. Any future acts of violence are on your shoulders, Mr. Clinton. You just gave the kooks in this country an excuse to go be violent. Nobody on the right's doing this. Nobody in talk radio is advocating anything of the sort that you are predicting. You, sir, are predicting it. Maybe the regime wants something like that to happen. I wouldn't doubt it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Ken in Detroit, great to have you here. Hello.
CALLER: Yeah, Rush, I just wanted to let you know I attended a great tea party yesterday in the city of Plymouth, Michigan.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: And the keynote speaker was a black Baptist minister, and his message was overwhelmingly supported, applauded, and we had a great time. And I think all these false accusations of racism and the tea party movement can be shredded, done away with.
RUSH: Oh, they were never accurate in the first place.
CALLER: Well, that's why I said these were all false accusations.
RUSH: But they're not going to stop. They're going to keep on. That's why Clinton is ratcheting it all up because nothing happened yesterday. Nothing that they wanted to happen, none of what they predicted that the tea party was capable of happened yesterday. So what happens? Clinton comes out this morning and has to predict that because of me and others on the radio and now the Internet, and because of these uncontrollable mobs in the tea party, we can look forward to more domestic terrorism. I mean, it's just infuriating to associate peaceful people with acts of terrorism that have not happened. And yet we cannot associate real terrorists with acts that have happened because we might offend them. But we can go ahead and offend decent American citizens who simply are trying to save what's left of their civilization.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Next time you hear the tea party impugned, never forget this from 2003.
HILLARY (screeching): I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic, and we should stand up and say, "WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DEBATE AND DISAGREE WITH ANY ADMINISTRATION!"
END TRANSCRIPT
THE CONTENT OF THIS WEBSITE DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE OPINION OF THE OWNER ... At least that's what my lawyer told me, but he was drinking pretty heavily at the time so...
COPYRIGHT HARDIN REPUBLIC, LLC 2009, 2010. All Rights Reserved.
RUSH: That was Bill Clinton, blaming me for the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19th, 1995. Yesterday we had the tea parties, and the Drive-By Media (I'm sure to its great chagrin) is filled with stories about how festive and how peaceful and how unthreatening all of the tea parties were. The effort to infiltrate these tea parties fizzled. They have stories on that that they probably do not like having to report. And, ladies and gentlemen, it's very clear that these citizen uprisings -- genuine grassroots citizen's uprisings -- are far more powerful than an attempt to drum up fake opposition to them from the White House. Yet, Bill Clinton is back in the game, expanding that threat via this sound bite.