RUSH: We go to Pittsburgh. This is Pat. I’m glad you waited. Welcome to the program. Hi.

CALLER: Oh, thanks, Rush. It’s an honor to talk with you.

RUSH: Thank you very much.

CALLER: Hey, I’m not a subscriber to People Magazine, but I’m getting subscriptions ’cause I didn’t use my frequent flier miles, and, boy, do they tend to go toward the low-information voters. They have a big article now about Elizabeth Warren. She’s the rock star, even Jon Stewart would want to make out with her. Wall Street is scared to death of her. They used to have a lot of articles about Hillary, but I’ve noticed lately that it’s all turned toward the people that you say are gonna be the potential front-runners in 2016.

RUSH: So People magazine is trumping Elizabeth Warren? Is that what you’re saying?

CALLER: Oh, yeah. Yeah. She connects with people on a visceral level. She’s become the David and Goliath of Wall Street. I mean, they’re just putting her out there that she’s going to —

RUSH: Okay, well, your observation is right. This is low-information central. People magazine, the entertainment media is low-information voter central. I mean, it’s the headquarters. The idea that Elizabeth Warren is a rock star, A, maybe, but not with a majority of people. She may be a rock star with some people, like anybody’s a rock star with some people. And I’m not trying to diminish her. She’s scary if she would ever be elected. She’s just more of Obama with more outward anger. I mean, he’s just as angry as she is. He is able to shield his anger. She just sounds angry every time she stands up and speaks.

The real question is which came first, People magazine or the low-information voter? Did the entertainment media in this country create the low-information voter by feeding them news and entertainment stuff to distract them from other things, or did people always aim for that kind of news and People magazine and Entertainment Tonight just came along to fill the need? It’s probably a little bit of both.

But this is a classic example. Does anybody think Elizabeth Warren’s hip? Elizabeth Warren’s cool? So what is it? What is it about what Elizabeth Warren says or stands for that somehow bonds with people that would read People magazine? Here she’s described as Wall Street’s scared to death of her. Is that why people like her? Is it because she’s out there saying, “You didn’t build that?”

Is it because she’s making little people feel powerful? By little people, I mean the people that wander around thinking their lives have no meaning, and you know who they are. That’s the kind of people this entertainment media is designed to feed. (interruption) Oh, the radicals do. But would you associate People magazine with a radical group, is my point. People magazine is not political. That’s my point. This is how clever the left has been.

They take a radical, I mean, a genuine radical political person, and they plug her into this entertainment genre and make her appear normal and like a celebrity. They never tell everybody she’s a liberal. They never point out Democrat Party politics or whatever. They just paint Elizabeth Warren as normal, the future. And this is how. Whereas, when conservatives think that they’ve gotta get their teeth into the entertainment media, the first thing they think they have to do is identify themselves as a conservative comedian or we are a conservative entertainment magazine.

People doesn’t say, “Hey, we are the left-wing entertainment media.” They never admit to being liberal. They never identify themselves as left wing. They just portray themselves as what is. They’re cool. They’re hip. They’re modern. They are just normal. And Elizabeth Warren is an abject radical. She is as radical as anybody in the Democrat Party. And she would rank at the top of that list of radicals. But here’s People magazine humanizing her, normalizing here. And you could probably find in the same issue, I don’t know, but you could probably find an example of some conservative jokes that somebody’s telling or some slam on conservatives or Republicans or what have you.

This is an element of the media that the Republican Party, conservative, quote, unquote, movement just has no presence in whatsoever. See, Elizabeth Warren isn’t a rock star. They’re trying to make her one, is what’s happening. And, interesting, People magazine is Time Warner. And that means that somebody at People or Time Warner may have thrown in with Elizabeth Warren over Hillary. You have to know how to read this stuff.

At any rate, Pat, you’re right to be concerned that average, ordinary people are gonna think this woman is cool and, “Oh, man, she’s right in there for me. She’s gonna protect me from these Wall Street people.” An honest report on Elizabeth Warren would end up with her being embarrassed and humiliated with what she believes. She wants what we’ve got now times 10. And what we have now is the ruination of the country taking place right before our very eyes. But that’s never gonna be said about her. Certainly not in People magazine. Pat, thanks.