If you receive this and you hate it and you don’t want to ever read it no matter what...that is fine; email me back and you will be quickly deleted from my list (which is almost at the maximum anyway).

Last year’s Nobel Peace prize went to Al Gore, and the only other person in that race who I knew about was Rush Limbaugh, who I was, of course, rooting for.

Today, I found out about Irene Sendler, one of the there nominees. If you look at nothing else in this paper, click on this link:

Right now, there is a majority of Senators and Representatives who would vote for any bill which favored drilling in the US (off shore and in ANWR) and which puts into place legislation which will allow us to go nuclear (for energy, that is).

Furthermore, George Bush is an 8 years president, and I can guarantee you that he will not be a lame duck. Although I do not know this to be a fact, I can almost guarantee you that he is reviewing several bills and proposals for offshore drilling, drilling in ANWR and nuclear power. These will be submitted to Congress before the upcoming election.

There is one person who is standing in the way of this, and that is Nancy Pelosi. She will not let any energy legislation come to the floor because she can and because she does not fully understand the need for cheap energy. She comes from a city with excellent, subsidized public transportation, and from a climate where all the AC and heat could be shut down tomorrow without deleterious effects (she’s from the San Francisco area). She has no true appreciation for how hot it is down here in Texas or in flyover country or even in Sacramento, California. This is not a crisis to her. The support of ecology groups is important the Pelosi, and she wants to hold onto that. I get regular emails from ecological groups myself, and they do not want to drill in ANWR nor do they want states to drill offshore nor do they want nuclear energy.

Any bill with these 3 components will pass right now, today, if Pelosi lets it come to the floor. Congress has a 9% approval rating. People are calling their local Congressmen every single day saying, “Fix the energy problem.” Whereas, both Bush and the Republicans have proposed and supported such legislation in the past, now there are more than enough Democrats willing to vote for this legislation.

The Democrats finally buckled in their opposition to FISA (as I told you they would several months ago); they will buckle to public pressure here as well, and before the election. No Democrat wants to go into November with $5/gallon gas and with no end in sight and no proposals.

Remember immigration? I had a friend of mine that told me, the fix is in; this immigration bill will pass; nothing we can do about it. I told him he was wrong. The people made their voices heard. Our Congressmen want to be reelected; Nancy wants to remain the Congressional boss. It won’t happen if gas is $5/gallon and some of them are beginning to realize that.

Do you remember the stand taken by the Democrats at first? “We can’t drill our way out of this” and Senator Reid’s foolish “Oil makes us sick” statement. Do you hear those battle cries anymore?

All it takes is the same approach that the people took during the immigration bill: call, write, or email your Senator or Congressman (especially if he is a Democrat) and tell him it is time to build a few nuclear plants and it is time to start drilling offshore, reclaiming portions of the ocean which our enemies want to drill.

So what if Barack Obama is flipping and flopping on certain issues, McCain has flip-flopped on the Bush tax cuts, on drilling and on immigration. It’s a wash. Every candidate runs for the middle after the primaries. Right? Wrong.

First of all, it is okay for any politician to change his mind. Every politician who is not an ideologue is going to change his mind now and again.

McCain has changed his mind in 3 specific areas. He first objected to the Bush tax cuts, and I have heard him say that it was because these cuts would go mostly to the rich; and I have heard that he also wanted to have accompanying budget cuts. It is also McCain’s general philosophy not to raise taxes, and a repeal of the Bush tax cuts would be a tax raise (the largest in US history). Personally, I am for any tax cuts, as long as the poor continue to pay some taxes.

McCain is accused of flip-flopping on immigration. His immigration bill required first that the border be closed, and then for the citizenship clauses to begin to kick in. The public did not trust the government to close the border, and the public shut down this bill, by making themselves known (surprising a liberal friend of mine who told me the fix is in and that the bill would be passed). McCain said he got the message and that they would concentrate on closing the border. There is no actual flip-flopping here. He does want to deal with the 15 million or so illegal immigrants who are in the United States, and he does not have a position here which is radically different from many Democrats. However, his bill mandated for the border to be closed first, and that is his approach because of public pressure; so there is no real flip flop here.

Finally, McCain changed his mind about drilling for oil offshore. This reflects a normal change of mind as circumstances change. At $2/gallon gas, McCain said no to offshore drilling. At $4/gallon gas, McCain favors drilling. This is not a difficult thing to understand, as many Americans have changed their minds on this as well.

FISA passed, which include 1 Obama vote in favor of it (remember, several months ago, I told you that the Dems would cave on this—I am surprised that it took them so long). Obama was originally going to be part of a filibuster to stop this bill from moving forward. However, he voted for FISA, this past week. I have two liberal friends who were up in arms about Bush listening to Americans without a warrant; I hope the appreciate that Obama is making this possible.

Obama, on 5 occasions, publically said that he supported public campaign financing...until he found out that he could raise a buttload of money (during such hard economic times, no less!). So, now he is going to take the money and run, justifying his new position by saying, “Well, those Republicans are going to run a bunch of 527 ads” (not an exact quote). He said this simultaneous to a buttload of pro-Obama, anti-McCain being made and released. I can guarantee you, the Democrats will spend more money as the 527 groups than Republicans will.

Obama publically acknowledged that the DC gun legislation was constitutional (in his opinion); yet, he agrees with the Supreme Court which ruled this legislation as unconstitutional.

For most of his life, Obama has been very pro-choice, even agreeing with and supporting a despicable piece of legislation which allows a doctor to kill a baby accidentally born during a botched abortion. Recently, Obama has come out against partial-birth abortion.

Now, what seems to be the most incredible coincidence of all, all of these changes have occurred within weeks of Obama clinching the Democratic nomination.

These all seem like changes to m, and far left wing bloggers are throwing hissy fits as well over these changes. Yet, Obama has assured his backers that he has not changed any of his policies or views, and that he is not running to the center.

So, the non-politician chooses the most typical political approaches: he changes his positions after the primary and then he lies about it.

I’ve become sort of a political junkie, but most people are not like me. Most people know very little about the candidates, apart from who they are and that Obama is clearly a more attractive man.

What Obama is doing is a calculated risk. Most of the primary media is not going to expose him for changing his positions. FoxNews and YouTube will have tape of him talking out of both sides of his mouth, but the major media will not.

The deal is, millions of people are going to start paying attention around Labor Day. Obama is going to appear to be a very attractive, moderate candidate. By that time, he will modify his position on Iraq and he will support drilling off shore and possibly even drilling in ANWR. His positions are not going to seem to be too far from McCain’s at that point.

How about the far left? Well, some of them are going to throw a fit, as they are doing now. But where can they go? There was not a more left-wing candidate than Obama (apart from Gravel and Kucinich). They can’t vote Republican. They just won’t. Many will take it on faith (as I do) that Obama is really and truly hard-core left (with some family values), but is pretending to be a moderate in order to win the election.

It puts McCain in a precarious position. Negative ads generally affect people negatively, especially if they are not done well. Romney looked quite presidential, he had lots of money, but he went negative and distorted the positions of the other Republicans in the primary and he lost big time.

I must admit, I did not foresee Obama moving so quickly and deliberately to the middle. For the first time, I can envision him actually winning the presidency.

Name 3 key issues that you will hold fast to, without equivocation, without presenting a nuanced position, without having to do more investigation on, which form the core of your political and social beliefs. These must be issues which are so close to your core essence that you will hold to them, even if popular opinion is against you, and even though holding fast to such an issue may cost you the election. Please answer with more specificity than, "I'm for the environment." or "I'm against the war in Iraq."

Although John McCain has changed his position on several things, there are certain positions from which he has never wavered: (1) lower taxes; (2) a more responsible use of taxpayer's money, which will involve cutting from our budget so many federal programs; (3) the sanctity of human life; (4) victory in Iraq as one key step in victory against radical Islam. McCain held to that final issue without wavering and without equivocation, even though American opinion appeared to be against him.

Can you name 3 issues, with specifics, where Obama has not waved on his position? These should not be peripheral issues, but form the core of his run for the presidency.

Calling for change does not qualify as an issue. Saying that we need to turn the page is not an issue. He should have a readily identifiable moral or political core which we can depend upon, no matter which way the wind blows.

I’ve mentioned Obama’s move to the middle; this can be shown on almost every major issue. How many newspapers, network news and news services report this? Most news services are in the tank for Obama. Therefore, when you get your news from the networks or from your newspaper, be aware that, the underlying story is, “Obama is new, he is good; he is going to make a great president.”

Let me give you one example: Obama's spiritual journey was covered by the Washington Post. Obama spent over 20 years in the church headed by Reverend Wright; he used Wright’s sermons as titles for his books as well as for his talking points within these books. He and Michelle have given in excess of $40,000 to Wright’s church (more than they have given to any other charity or church). Obama has credited the Reverend Wright with leading him to Christ and as his spiritual mentor. Wright, for awhile, had a place in Obama’s campaign.

Here is the story on Obama’s spiritual journey. How man times was Wright mentioned in this story?

0 times. There was no mention of Reverend Wright. Do not expect the truth and do not expect a fair, unbiased approach in this election. It is not going to happen with most news outlets.

McCain’s campaign has made some major missteps, although it is unclear whether these are going to affect the final election.

Obama ran an ad taking credit for welfare reform; the McCain camp should have countered it with documentation that Obama was against welfare reform.

2^nd problem is that McCain needs to come on strong with regards to drilling for oil and nuclear power. He needs to explain why these are viable solutions for today’s world and how they will help the average American. He needs to do this before Obama takes this issue and makes it his own (which he will).

Also, speaking of being derailed, Phil Graham gave some straight talk quite similar to an article I wrote several weeks ago—he accused Americans of whining—but it did not go over too well (both McCain and Obama validated whining as a result of Graham’s straight talk). It is sad that we have reached a point where there are a significant number of people in the US who want the government to hold their hand and feel their pain.

The more money that government takes up, the more control that government has over social life and economic life, the less freedom that we have as individuals. Do not be confused: economic freedom is true freedom. The more we want our government to do, the less freedom we will have.

Canada is becoming more and more a nanny state. Recently, a 12 year old girl disobeyed her father with regards to use of the internet, and he grounded her from going on a school trip.

The girl took her case to court, and, as surprising as it may seem, a Quebec Superior Court believed that her case had merit.

The court, by the way, decided in the girl’s favor, determining in its infinite wisdom that the father was being too strict and had imposed punishment too severe.

31,000 scientists sign a petition urging the United States not to sign the Kyoto Global Warming Accord, which includes the verbiage that There is no convincing scientific evidence that the human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.

Glaciers on Mount Shasta in California are growing because of global warming. That, ladies and gentlemen, is dedication to a cause.

UN is sure that man is causing global warming, but that it is too late to prevent many of the deleterious effects. That’s a bummer!

And I know that this is going to be quite a shocker, but increased CO₂ concentration increases plant growth. Who would have thought?

Recently, Obama told his audience that, we ought not to be concerned about requiring aliens to learn the English language, but that we ought to be embarrassed that we cannot speak French, German or Spanish (I believe it is phrased more that Obama is embarrassed for America in general because of this).

English is almost a universal language. You can step onto any place from any nation, and several of the crew members can speak English. You can go to almost any country in the world to visit or to do business, and you can find people there who speak English. English has become almost the international language because the United States is a great nation with a great economy.

Would it be nice if Americans could speak other languages? Sure. It would be even better if they could speak and read English; and if they knew their times tables and other basic arithmetic.

I was an educator; because of educational system being in the crapper, despite all of the money we throw at it and despite all of the governmental meddling, there are huge numbers of Americans who cannot speak proper English. There are huge numbers of Americans who cannot do simple math. The next time you are in a grocery store, and your groceries cost $49.12, try giving the cashier a fifty collar bill and 12 cents change. One out of four times, they’ll return the 12¢ to you, because they already have enough money with the $50. They don’t need any more.

Will Obama’s solution be to throw more money at public education? Of course it is. Might he push to add foreign language as a graduation requirement? Probably; after all, Obama knows best.

“Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation. That's why I've fought successfully in the Senate to increase our investment in renewable fuels. That's why I reached across the aisle to come up with a plan to raise our fuel standards& And I didn't just give a speech about it in front of some environmental audience in California. I went to Detroit, I stood in front of a group of automakers, and I told them that when I am president, there will be no more excuses - we will help them retool their factories, but they will have to make cars that use less oil.” — Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA, October 14, 2007 from

Cap and Trade: Obama supports implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Obama's cap-and-trade system will require all pollution credits to be auctioned. A 100 percent auction ensures that all polluters pay for every ton of emissions they release, rather than giving these emission rights away to coal and oil companies. Some of the revenue generated by auctioning allowances will be used to support the development of clean energy, to invest in energy efficiency improvements, and to address transition costs, including helping American workers affected by this economic transition.

Confront Deforestation and Promote Carbon Sequestration: Obama will develop domestic incentives that reward forest owners, farmers, and ranchers when they plant trees, restore grasslands, or undertake farming practices that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Invest $150 Billion over 10 Years in Clean Energy: Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid. A principal focus of this fund will be devoted to ensuring that technologies that are developed in the U.S. are rapidly commercialized in the U.S. and deployed around the globe.

Double Energy Research and Development Funding: Obama will double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources.

Invest in a Skilled Clean Technologies Workforce: Obama will use proceeds from the cap-and-trade auction program to invest in job training and transition programs to help workers and industries adapt to clean technology development and production. Obama will also create an energy-focused Green Jobs Corps to connect disconnected and disadvantaged youth with job skills for a high-growth industry.

Convert our Manufacturing Centers into Clean Technology Leaders: Obama will establish a federal investment program to help manufacturing centers modernize and Americans learn the new skills they need to produce green products.

Clean Technologies Deployment Venture Capital Fund: Obama will create a Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund to fill a critical gap in U.S. technology development. Obama will invest $10 billion per year into this fund for five years. The fund will partner with existing investment funds and our National Laboratories to ensure that promising technologies move beyond the lab and are commercialized in the U.S

Require 25 Percent of Renewable Electricity by 2025: Obama will establish a 25 percent federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to require that 25 percent of electricity consumed in the U.S. is derived from clean, sustainable energy sources, like solar, wind and geothermal by 2025.

Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology: Obama will significantly increase the resources devoted to the commercialization and deployment of low-carbon coal technologies. Obama will consider whatever policy tools are necessary, including standards that ban new traditional coal facilities, to ensure that we move quickly to commercialize and deploy low carbon coal technology.

Deploy Cellulosic Ethanol: Obama will invest federal resources, including tax incentives, cash prizes and government contracts into developing the most promising technologies with the goal of getting the first two billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol into the system by 2013.

Expand Locally-Owned Biofuel Refineries: Less than 10 percent of new ethanol production today is from farmer-owned refineries. New ethanol refineries help jumpstart rural economies. Obama will create a number of incentives for local communities to invest in their biofuels refineries.

Establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard: Barack Obama will establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard to speed the introduction of low-carbon non-petroleum fuels. The standard requires fuels suppliers to reduce the carbon their fuel emits by ten percent by 2020.

Increase Renewable Fuel Standard: Obama will require 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels to be included in the fuel supply by 2022 and will increase that to at least 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol by 2030.

Obama's plan will reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels per day, by 2030. This will more than offset the equivalent of the oil we would import from OPEC nations in 2030.

Increase Fuel Economy Standards: Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years. His plan will provide retooling tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so that they can build new fuel-efficient cars rather than overseas companies. Obama will also invest in advanced vehicle technology such as advanced lightweight materials and new engines.

Set National Building Efficiency Goals: Barack Obama will establish a goal of making all new buildings carbon neutral, or produce zero emissions, by 2030. He'll also establish a national goal of improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade to help us meet the 2030 goal.

Establish a Grant Program for Early Adopters: Obama will create a competitive grant program to award those states and localities that take the first steps to implement new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency.

Invest in a Digital Smart Grid: Obama will pursue a major investment in our utility grid to enable a tremendous increase in renewable generation and accommodate modern energy requirements, such as reliability, smart metering, and distributed storage.

Create New Forum of Largest Greenhouse Gas Emitters: Obama will create a Global Energy Forum — that includes all G-8 members plus Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa –the largest energy consuming nations from both the developed and developing world. The forum would focus exclusively on global energy and environmental issues.

Re-Engage with the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change: The UNFCCC process is the main international forum dedicated to addressing the climate problem and an Obama administration will work constructively within it.

Renewable Fuels: Obama has worked on numerous efforts in the Senate to increase access to and use of renewable fuels. Obama passed legislation with Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend. Obama also sponsored an amendment that became law providing $40 million for commercialization of a combined flexible fuel vehicle/hybrid car within five years.

CAFE: Obama introduced a bold new plan that brought Republicans and Democrats, CAFE supporters and long-time opponents together in support of legislation that will gradually increase fuel economy standards and offer what the New York Times editorial page called "real as opposed to hypothetical results."

Again, Obama’s proposals here require a huge amount of money, a huge increase in government, and that means more taxes. You may think that this is all going to come from an extra few percent taken from the rich, but you are deluding yourself. Almost every problem which is real or imagined, Obama has a solution for, and that solution involves more taxes and more government. More taxes and more government means less freedom. If Obama does even a third of what he is proposing, and even if he can stick to his estimates of the cost, his hand is going to be in your pocket.

SNERDLEY: This is Bo Snerdley, Official Barack Criticizer for the EIB Network, black enough to criticize and with medically certified slave blood. I have a special announcement. Senator Obama, the recent threat from Reverend Jackson to surgically remove your testes presented you with a rare opportunity and sadly, sir, you let that opportunity slip by. Mr. Jackson stated his reasons for wanting your castration, sir. That was that you talk down to black people. What have you said exactly that inspired those comments? You've said that blacks, particularly black men, should take more responsibility for themselves and for their families. Unlike every other thing you say these days, Mr. Obama, that represents a fairly consistent point of view from you. You respond to this by sending a campaign spokesman out to accept reverend Jackson's dubious apology? That's that? This was your moment, sir, to claim the mantle of civil rights leadership from Jackson, who, by the way, has had his own family values problems awhile back. You let it go. Shame on you, sir, for not standing up to this civil rights bully and for not forcing him off of the national stage.

And now, a translation for our EIB brothers and sisters in the 'hood. Yo, B, strap in, yo, this is going to take a minute. What up with you letting Jackson pose you like that, yo? Homey goes on Fox, says you're dissing black people, talking down to the brothers, says he wants to cut off your baby makers, yo, and all you do is send some punk spokesman out to accept his apology? Yo, here's the 411, yo. You could have stepped out on that OG Jesse. For those of you in the 'hood out there in Rio, that OG, that's old gangster. Okay, check it out, yo. Jesse's yappy with you because you dissed him? Come on, yo, when you say brothers need to step up and give their families their props, the brother goes ill on you? Man, brother man, thought you were talking about him, right? That's what's really what's up here. He thought you were telling him he need to step up with his baby mama, that girl who he got jiggy with back a few years ago, yo. He got her off the news quick, yo, didn't he? Now Jesse wants to break you off downstairs 'cause you actually talking about black men stepping it up? What's Jesse done anyway, yo? He gets paid by a bunch of scared Wall Street ice people, yo, any time he talks about a boycott? Yo, my brutha, this was your moment, man, you the HBIC, you the head brother in charge, and you let OG step off on you like that? What's up with you, lo? You lost your mind, man, and yo baby makers. Then, you got the nerve to send out little Jesse to take out OG daddy Jesse? Come on, yo. Instead of handling your business yourself, man, you letting your flunkies run the show, man. You need to get a set, bro. That concludes our statement.

This is a good rant here, but Rush is all over the map in this 10-15 minute piece.

RUSH: We have Obama -- and, by the way, folks, on this flip-flop business, let's not use the word flip-flop. I don't think it's going to persuade anybody. It worked with Kerry because Kerry was such an idiot. I mean, his flip-flops were just funny. "I voted for it before I voted against it." You gotta remember one thing about these flip-flops, and I'm going to stop using the term here in just a second. Most people are not really paying close attention right now to all this, despite what might be record levels of attention, those of us who are involved in this on a day-to-day basis, we are absorbed, and we are detail-oriented; we know Obama upwards and forwards and backwards and hindwards and all that.

By the time most people start tuning in, his centrist positions, his so-called flip-flops, are actually going to be the things about him that they know. So we have to portray this guy as inexperienced, far leftist, despite what he's saying about moving to the center. You know what I find most irritating about this, all these moves to the center here, be it abortion, be it Iraq, by the way, did I not tell you a year ago -- I hate doing See, I Told You So's, folks, because it sounds like I've got a big ego and I don't have a big ego. My ego is totally a hundred percent in check. But I told you a year ago, that the Democrats, there's not one of these candidates running for the White House, that if they win are going to pull us out of Iraq if it means we lose. They are not going to saddle themselves with a military defeat, mark my words, and I said that the far-left fringe kooks that define the left wing of the Democrat Party today are going to outraged when this happens, and they're going to say things like, "Hey, you know, Bush was not honest with us. He didn't tell us everything going on and now we find out what's going on, it would be a mistake to pull out now." There was no way this was ever going to happen, and, in fact, Obama now suggesting that he would be pragmatic about this and talk to the commanders -- I knew it. This is just common sense.

I don't care how anti-America some of their fringe is, they, as a political party, are not going to saddle themselves with defeat. They might be happy to try to claim victory on this, because there's a story in the BBC or UK Telegraph or something I have here in the stack -- it's all coming up -- about the amazing success that is taking place over there. The word "victory" is being used consistently in much of the foreign media. But here's what bugs me most about these so-called flip-flops. Every national election, every one of them the liberal Democrats know full well they cannot win. Can you imagine how Hillary Clinton feels today? Obama is now campaigning like Hillary was in the remaining primaries. After Texas, and after Ohio, Obama has now totally taken her campaign, just seized it. She was going after the white working class that was very much upset and disabused of the whole notion of Obama. So now he's moving in that direction. They do this 'cause they know that far-left-wingism will not win national elections.

They may lie to themselves and say that conservatism is cracking up. They may lie to themselves and say that the era of Reagan or the era of conservatism is over, and that we're getting ready to usher in a new, far-left agenda. They're gonna do that if they win, but they're not going to campaign on it, because it loses. Here's what's frustrating. All of these people on our side of the aisle, our so-called media intelligentsia and a number of the country club blue-blood Republicans, the Rockefeller bunch, they think they can't win as conservatives. They think the Republican Party cannot triumph with a conservative identity, so they go moving left. They move to the Democrats and they move to independents and they try to come up with all these policy shifts that deemphasize the Republican Party base, try to attract the Democrat Party base and get the favorable treatment from the media. In the meanwhile, what are the Democrats doing?

The Democrats are moving in our direction. Obama is moving right. Now, they may say he's stopped his move right in the middle and in the center, but when he starts flip-flopping on victory in Iraq, when he starts flip-flopping on abortion, when he starts doing a number of these things, gun control, you tell me conservatism -- this is maddening. This is maddening. So what could happen here is that as we head into August, when we get to the Democrat National Convention, and Obama starts giving his speech, and if he keeps this stuff up, he may end up sounding just as, quote, unquote, conservative on many things as McCain does. You couple that with his mantra for change and so forth, it may be attractive. The Republican Party is going to have a big job to portray Obama as he really is. He is The Messiah, also known as Senator Obama. He's not Senator Obama also known as The Messiah. He's The Messiah also known as Obama.

I was working all weekend. Even though I was not behind the Golden EIB Microphone I'm watching all this stuff Obama is doing and saying, and he's embraced the flag, he's holding the flag now. I got in my chair and chilled out, but I also paid attention because I have a responsibility to my country here.

Obama, from the Los Angeles Times on July the 5th, this little blurb here: "He's not president yet, but Barack Obama has already given some thought to White House decor. Asked at a town hall-style meeting in Fargo, ND, about any decorating plans for the Lincoln Bedroom, Obama described a visit to the White House after he became a US senator. 'You have all these mementos of Abraham Lincoln, but you have this flat-screen TV in there,' Obama told the crowd at the outdoor event. 'I thought to myself, "Now, who stays in the Lincoln Bedroom and watches [ESPN's] 'Sports Center'?" You've got your clicker. . . . That didn't seem to me to be appropriate. So I might take out the TV, I don't know. You should read when you're in the Lincoln Bedroom! Reread the Gettysburg Address. Don't watch TV.'"

I also read a speech, it dovetails with this that Abraham Lincoln gave during predebate with Stephen Douglas on the meaning of the Declaration of Independence, and it is just brilliant, and this attitude of Obama's, you must, we're going to make you do service to your country, we're going to make you do this, you must do that, you must stop driving your car for this or you must stop changing your car, you must change your car, whatever, Lincoln said that's the attitude of kings. That's the attitude of kings and tyrants, that nobody's capable of doing the right thing on their own, they're just a bunch of little victims, we'll give 'em what they need to stay mollified and happy. We're gonna make 'em do things they wouldn't otherwise do because they're not good people. He was accusing Stephen Douglas of this by leaving certain people out from the tenet from the declaration that Thomas Jefferson wrote, that all men are created equal. Douglas, no, they're not. The Germans are not included here. We are a country of English people who came here, the Germans don't count, the Swedes don't count, they don't get the same protections, that was Douglas' position. And Lincoln said, it's impossible, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence says just the exact opposite.

The whole point was, to me, when I was reading this, they say The Messiah, also known as Obama, transcends politics. He transcends nothing. He's not new. He's not unique. There's nothing special about him in terms of, "Gee, we've never had this kind of countenance and presence among us in American politics." Lincoln didn't transcend anything. The Declaration of Independence does not get transcended. You can't transcend it, but they want to transcend the Constitution, they want to transcend the Declaration. Anyway, it was a great piece. This business about flat-screen TV in the Lincoln Bedroom, as you people may remember, I, El Rushbo, have been in the Lincoln Bedroom. By the way, I wonder if Obama even knows what the Lincoln Bedroom was. When Lincoln was in the White House, that was his office, and it's upstairs in the second floor in the residence. Tight across the hall is what's called the Queen's Room. It's another bedroom, but it was an office. That's where Lincoln and his buds ran the civil war. It was not a bedroom. I don't think there was a West Wing then. I don't think there was an East Wing then. And I wonder if Obama even knows this.

Now, when I was there, there wasn't a flat panel there but there was a television, and I didn't turn it on and watch it, I was too busy calling my mom saying, "Hey, guess where I am? You won't believe this." She didn't believe me, so I called her again with the White House switchboard placing the call. But it's like a hotel room, you set the alarm, you get a wake-up call, the White House steward comes and brings you coffee and newspapers in the morning. It's just down the hall from the main living area. I mean, it's a long distance, but it's on the second floor of the residence.

RUSH: I got a quick question for Obama. Obama, how long does it take, The Messiah also known as Obama, how long does it take to read the living, breathing Constitution in the Lincoln Bedroom? How long does it take to read the Gettysburg Address while in the Lincoln Bedroom? How long does it take to read the Declaration of Independence while in the Lincoln Bedroom? Did you see where The Messiah, also known as Obama, is pondering a major address at the Brandenburg Gate, the spot that once marked the Berlin Wall? Obama is going to go over there, he's going to go to the Brandenburg Gate where the Berlin Wall once stood. I'm wondering what side he'll be on? On what side will Obama make the speech? Just kidding, folks. But I do have a serious question. If he is going, if The Messiah also known as Obama is going to go to the site of the Berlin Wall and make a speech, where is he scheduling the Sermon on the Mount? Is he going to give a Sermon on the Mount, and if so, when? (interruption)Yes, I saw it, Mr. Snerdley. I don't understand it. Obama's plane, his campaign plane was on the way from Chicago down to North Carolina for a campaign appearance, and they had a detour to St. Louis because they had a problem in there; they couldn't control the pitch of the airplane, the elevation of the nose, so they had to touchdown for a maintenance fix, and I was watching this, he gets off the airplane and he's on a cheap MD-80. I wouldn't be caught dead on one of those regardless, and his campaign plane is an MD-80? Nothing against Midwest Airlines, but it's like flying in a sardine can. I don't know how old these things are, but gee whiz, I mean that was disappointing. I mean not even an Obama logo on the side of the thing.

[Obama does not want to travel with members of the press who ask him a lot of questions; therefore, he uses a small plane]

Anyway, let's go to the audio sound bites. I want to add some things to this so-called flip-flop business of Obama. Let's go back on March 19th, 2008, this year, Fayetteville, North Carolina, at a campaign event, here is what Obama said.

OBAMA: In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove one to two combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them in 16 months.

RUSH: Right, 16 months is going to get everybody out of there, start immediately when he was inaugurated, said that back March 19th in Fayetteville, North Carolina. I knew this was a lie. They're not going to pull these people out of there immediately. They're not going to secure themselves with defeat, no Democrat would. Hillary wouldn't do it, either. Then last Thursday in Fargo, North Dakota.

OBAMA: When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.

RUSH: Continue to refine my policies? I guess these are policy pirouettes. I guess these are recalibrations. But people did not react to this well. His kook fringe base does not like this. So he had to go out there and do a second reference to this, and he's out there not only wearing the American flag lapel pin, he's out there clutching a flag as he makes these speeches. Here is John Kerry, the haughty John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, from Face the Nation yesterday. Bob Schieffer said, "So, is this a change in policy? Some in the McCain campaign go so far as to say it's a flip-flop, Senator Kerry. Explain this for us."

KERRY: Barack Obama has a plan for ending the war. John McCain has a plan for continuing the war, and he has said so very clearly dozens and dozens of times. What the McCain campaign is trying to do is take the normal statement of anybody smart enough to be president of the United States and is ready to be president, he says he'll refine -- may refine tactically what you might decide to do over the course of that withdrawal and how you protect American troops and how you in fact get the Iraqi army to stand up faster, but it is no change whatsoever in his fundamental determination to end the war.

RUSH: (laughing) I can't take these people seriously. Yes, it is Senator Kerry. He now wants to win the war. McCain doesn't want to continue this thing, either. But I mean here's Mr. Flip-flop himself, John Kerry (laughing) defending (laughing) I thought Obama had all these new things that nobody had ever done before.

RUSH: Poor old DNCTV up there, some poor supporter is questioning whether Obama is shifting policies. That's the point. He is not shifting policies. He is shifting statements. He is a leftist. He is going to remain a leftist. He is going to grow the government as fast and as large as he can, all of this, all these new positions and so forth. You people on the left ought to just cool down, just chill out. If I were you, I'd be asking a different question. Why does Obama hate the environment? Flying around on a junk airplane burns a whole lot of fuel, not efficient at all, cramming all the press people in there in sardine-like conditions. I got nothing against the MD-80, but I wouldn't be on one. I mean, of all the planes out there, and, by the way, speaking of all of this, we keep hearing in California, you know what they're going to make you do? They're going to make you put a sticker or there's going to be some requirement that on your car, the car you drive has to have a score in terms of how much pollution it's causing and how much global warming it's causing and how much destruction to the climate it's causing.

Meanwhile, Big Sur is half gone. Look at the carbon footprint that these fires are causing, and I don't hear one complaint from the environmentalist wackos. I don't hear one complaint from the global warming fools led by Algore. I do not hear it. There's a much bigger carbon footprint with these fires going on than people driving their automobiles around. I can imagine what their reaction will be. "That's right, Mr. Limbaugh, you're exactly right, but the difference is those fires are natural. Those fires were started by lightning." This is the voice of the new castrati, by the way. "We can't stop that, Mr. Limbaugh, those are natural, but cars are manmade, and the fires are not manmade. Mr. Limbaugh, manmade things are destroying the planet." That would be their reaction to this. I got another question: Why is John Kerry, the haughty John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, why is he dumping all over his buddy, John McCain, a man that Senator Kerry, who served in Vietnam, considered making his vice presidential candidate back in 2004? Also on Face the Nation, Bob Schieffer talking to the haughty John Kerry. "I remember back in 2004 you were thinking seriously about adding McCain to your ticket. Now you're being very hard, it seems to me. This is not the first time you've said that McCain didn't understand the lessons of 9/11. You've said he didn't understand them in the least. What's happened here? Has John McCain changed or have you changed?"

KERRY: John McCain has changed in profound and fundamental ways that I find personally really surprising and, frankly, upsetting. He is not the John McCain as the senator who defined himself, quote, as a maverick, unquote. This is a different John McCain. This is, you know, not the "Senator" John McCain, this is "nomination" John McCain, this is "wannabe president" John McCain, and the result is that John McCain has flip-flopped on more issues than, you know, I was even ever accused possibly of thinking approximate. I mean this is extraordinary what he's done. He's changed on taxes. He's now in favor of the Bush tax cut. If you like the Bush economy, if you like the Bush tax cut and what it's done to our economy, making wealthier people wealthier and the average middle class struggle harder, then John McCain's going to give you a third term of George Bush and Karl Rove.

RUSH: This is -- (laughing) -- I don't know. I just have to laugh at these people. I don't even feel like parsing this. It's just difficult to -- I mean, John Kerry, loser? All of these Democrats that lose end up rising to the top of their chart, their depth chart, it's just a resume enhancement, because they become victims, they have been victims of the evil Republican machine. They were denied what was rightfully theirs. As such, they are to be honored as great soldiers who have gone down in a great fight, trying to improve America, ahem, while getting savaged and lied about by the evil Republicans. Right. Just another incompetent United States senator, John Kerry, who wrote the definition. I mean you look up the term "flip-flop" anywhere, you're going to see this giant picture of Lurch standing there, because he's the guy that popularized this. Now, listen to this. This is last Wednesday. This is on CNN's Election Center. This happened after we left the broadcast complex. CNN correspondent Michael Ware talking about Obama. Michael Ware is the guy that had the one-day fling with Lara Logan of CBS.

WARE: And one thing I'd like to hear from Senator Obama. It's fine to have this notion to pull the troops out. Who isn't tired, who doesn't want the troops to come home? But I want to hear Senator Obama say he's prepared to pull those troops out while listing all the costs to American power, interests, and status, not to mention the slaughter that almost certainly will follow. Then he can say that he's ready to pull the troops out. Let's hear him say he knows what it's really going to cost.

RUSH: That's right. You heard it, a CNN reporter, who had an affair with Lara Logan of CBS, wanting to know from Obama, "Hey, do you understand what's going to happen here if we pull out? I want to hear from you, sir." But he's not going to pull out. That's what this is all about. I think what's happened here, to sum all this up, what's happening here is that Obama is now campaigning like Hillary Clinton. He has basically taken charge of her campaign in the remaining months when she was still trying -- during the Operation Chaos phase. He's basically campaigning like Hillary. These reports that he has moved to the center are infuriating because he hasn't moved anywhere. He is talking center, but he's not going to govern center if he wins. But, again, the Democrats have to do this in order to win. Amidst all the arguments that conservatism has seen its better days, that the era of Reagan is over and all of this, what are the Democrats showing once again? That in order to win national elections, they have to be more like us. And what are we doing this time around? For some damn fool reason, we're campaigning like we think we have to be more like them. So we have a meeting here in the center going on as we stand now between Obama and McCain, and on some things, you know, this is a little bit of a stretch, but Obama, just by virtue of what he's saying, may end up occupying a position or two further to the right than McCain.

RUSH: Last Thursday on C-SPAN's Washington Journal. We put together a montage of unidentified C-SPAN callers about the extension of my partnership agreement with Clear Channel.

C-SPAN CALLER #1: I couldn't be happier. I listened to Rush for 20 years. I feel like he's a friend. He deserves it. Rush is entertainment. He's fun, he's upbeat. Rush brings out the best of our country, what the United States really stands for, what it means to be an American, and it's so important for people to understand that the United States of America is the greatest country in the world.

C-SPAN CALLER #2: We like him, and we're glad he's on. We're sick of the constant negativity from the so-called mainstream media, and I am so glad that Rush is here to stay.

RUSH: I should take this occasion to thank all of you who have sent me similar messages in the e-mail, just thousands and thousands and thousands of them since last Wednesday when this whole thing became public. It's been very, very gratifying. One aspect of the new arrangement was discussed last Thursday on Kudlow & Company, Larry Kudlow's show on CNBC. He had University of Virginia's political scientist, Larry Sabato, and Jonah Goldberg from the National Review discussing it.

KUDLOW: Rush Limbaugh, you saw the headlines today: $400 million contract, out to, what, 2016? He's still the king of radio. He's still an influential guy, isn't he, Larry?

SABATO: Well, sure, with his audience, but obviously that's -- compared to the national electorate, that's a -- that's a small piece of the action.

KUDLOW: How many people does he reach, Jonah? I thought he reaches a hundred million or something.

GOLDBERG: I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, but I seem to recall it's something like 10 or 20 million people a week, something like that. I mean, it's a big, big bunch of people.

SABATO: Yeah, but you're going to have 130 million people vote, all right? So, yeah, you could do some damage, or you can encourage that segment to get out and vote, but it's a small piece of the action.

RUSH: Hey, Mr. Sabato, what's the audience size of an average classroom of yours? What's the audience size of the average cable show that you attend and appear on? (interruption) I know, Snerdley. You can't take these snarky little things personally. You just can't do it. You just know it's eating them up, Snerdley.

RUSH: A quick question for the University of Virginia's Larry Sabato. Dr. Sabato, why bother writing books when only a few thousand people, maybe a hundred thousand people, are going to read them? Why bother teaching in a classroom when so very few people, even over a course of years, are going to show up there? Why bother wasting your time, Dr. Sabato, on cable television programs that reach a paltry number of people? It's such a waste of your time to engage in media that has such small audiences.

RUSH: This is the Denver Post. The New York Times has a story as well. The Pepsi Center is getting a makeover for Democrat National Committee. Folks, wait 'til you hear this. "The Pepsi Center hands over the keys to construction teams for the Democratic National Convention Committee at 8 a.m. Monday, and the on-the-ground, multimillion-dollar race to transform the arena into a convention hall by Aug. 25 begins. Standing inside the Pepsi Center not long after Denver won the bid, the facility's general manager, Dave Jolette, waved his hand at the vast space in something like awe, or maybe fear. 'The transformation,' he said, 'will be enormous.' For the past two weeks, Jolette has been overseeing a wholesale clearance of equipment and furnishings from the building's retail stores, all its storage areas, the locker rooms for the Denver Nuggets and the Colorado Avalanche. 'There are weights up there that are bigger than you or I,' Jolette said."

I mean, they're cleaning out all of the luxury suites because that's where the TV wise men's booths will be. So they're taking down ceilings, they're putting up walls. They're ripping this whole building apart. "It's details like this that mesmerize him: The Pepsi Center is outfitted with 576 miles of phone lines, computer lines and high-speed cable. But that's not enough. The DNCC's needs, due in part to security, create a system 'so massive it exceeds the Pepsi Center's.' So the DNCC contractors will overlay all those cables with their own. Qwest has donated several million dollars' worth of telecommunications equipment to outfit the convention hall and the media city that will go up outside it with approximately 3,000 data lines and 2,500 voice-grade circuits. Based on past conventions, Qwest estimates the project will require about 160 miles of copper and coaxial cable in and around the Pepsi Center, and more than a dozen miles of fiber-optic. Xcel Energy is donating the extra transformers needed to electrify the thousands of computers, cameras, microphones. Several other high-tech firms are donating goods and services. Many of the 95 suites will be stripped of their furnishings," and restocked and furnished for the wise men on TV. Now, the Pepsi Center has its own lighting. Are you thinking carbon footprint here? Good. Good. (interruption) Well, Qwest, yeah, they donate to the Republicans, too. It goes back and forth. Snerdley, don't tell me you're shocked that corporate entities would pay protection racket money to either party.

Anyway, "And though the Pepsi Center has its own lighting -- good enough for professional sports and top-name entertainment acts -- the Democrats will bring in their own. They will bring so many lights and speakers -- as many as 300,000 pounds' worth -- the ceiling will have to be reinforced to hold them. 'It's kind of like a house party at your house that you're not hosting,' Jolette said. ... Leasing the Pepsi Center for the seven weeks of construction, the week of the convention and the remaining two weeks of reconstruction, means $6.5 million for Kroenke." Kroenke Arena Company owns the arena. Kroenke, by the way, is a Republican and he's in the Wal-Mart family, so the Democrats are paying Wal-Mart. I'm not kidding you. Kroenke's owner is Stan Kroenke, and he's allowed exclusive access to one of the skyboxes for his own use even though he's a staunch Republican. He's married to Sam Walton's brother's daughter, and they live, I think, in Columbia, Missouri. Mega bucks. So the Democrats are paying this guy $6.5 million for all of this stuff. Now, here's the point. What is the carbon footprint of this?

This is the party that's telling us to change our lightbulbs. This is the party telling us to turn off our lights and to raise or lower our thermostats. This is the party that wants to take us back to the Stone Age. But you see the hypocrisy: For their own event, they're bringing in so much junk, it might have been more efficient just to build their own arena rather than go in there and tear this one apart, then have to rebuild it after they leave for the upcoming basketball and hockey season. And all that copper? How much energy to mine all that copper? How about transporting all this stuff? You can't put this stuff on Obama's little airplane. I guarantee you none of this stuff would fit on his airplane. You gotta take this over the road, with diesel prices what they are now. All this wasted fuel for transportation. Anyway, that's the Democrats, and that's their big time convention. The Times story is about delays and rising costs for the convention, raising worries for Democrats. This story was so bad that Howard Dean actually put out a press release reacting to it.

CALLER: My question for you is why more Republicans aren't, you know, staying on the mountaintops, screaming about all the yellowcake that we successfully removed from Iraq. This goes a lot deeper than that. It appears Joe Wilson was wrong when he went to Niger. It appears Barack Obama was wrong in his reasoning behind voting against the war in Iraq, and it appears that this does, if not exonerate the Bush administration, certainly goes a long way to at least dismissing a lot of the reports that have been coming out about how he lied to go to Iraq.

RUSH: Right. There's a simple answer for this that's not satisfying, but one of the reasons that Republicans aren't standing up and shouting from the mountaintops is that the White House isn't, and the White House happens to be leading the Republican Party. The White House doesn't -- you know, when there were chemicals and other weapons of mass destruction found, they didn't want a big deal made of it, and back then (now, this was just a rumor) one of the explanations was that we didn't want to announce it, the White House didn't want to make a big deal out of it because some of the weapons of mass destruction had been spirited out of there by the Russians, and we were trying to normalize or improve our diplomatic relations with the Russians. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I think these 550 tons of yellowcake are from the Gulf War One back in the early nineties. Now, that's still big news, and the stuff's outta there. It's either in Canada or it's on its way to Canada, but it proves that Saddam was trying to nuke up. You're exactly right. Now, yellowcake by itself is worthless, you need centrifuges, but he was trying to buy those, too.

RUSH: Joe Wilson was proclaimed a liar by the Senate Intelligence Committee. The number of people in the Senate and in the media said that Wilson's report from Niger actually confirmed what Saddam was doing. This whole Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame thing with the yellowcake and the leaking of his wife's name, that was one of the biggest travesties of the American legal system, and it was a giant, giant media hoax, because Joe Wilson was carrying the water for "Bush lied. People died." They didn't care about the truth of it, and today they're not going to care about it. It's over. It's old news. The war in Iraq is being won. The surge is working. They're not talking about that. I'll tell you where this stuff that you want to hear -- that we all want to hear -- needs to come from is the McCain campaign. Now.

CALLER: The silence is deafening. It almost seems like he's not trying to win, the way he's campaigning. This goes right to Barack Obama's credibility on key issues, and his experience is showing through that he didn't know what he was talking about, and McCain is silent. I can understand why George Bush is silent. He's never been one to answer to his critics, but McCain is actually supposed to be trying to win.

RUSH: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I have a different theory here about McCain on all this. I'll explain it very briefly. You know, we jokingly call Obama The Messiah, and I actually think that's how he thinks of himself. His campaign pictures always have him in a halo of light. But I think there's a part of Senator McCain that is similar to that, that he thinks the power of his being there, the power of his existence -- coupled with everybody, in his mind, the fact that everybody -- knows his story, it leads to valor and honor and integrity. I think

he expects a lot of that to carry the day. I think Senator McCain might be running around thinking that America loves him just as much as they did three or four years ago when he was on Hardball every night playing the maverick role. I don't want to get into psychology. I'm not a shrink. But I think people's attitudes are interesting to me, because their attitudes can lead you to discover motivation. Now, clearly, Obama has no experience. He's got limited experience. He's incompetent. Things that he has said about crucial national issues are dead wrong. He doesn't understand the economy. Now, it's still early. I hope that the Republicans are loading both barrels to go after this at the appropriate time. There's no time like the present, when Obama's here trying to shift his image with all these moves to the center. They're just phony, fake moves. He's still going to be the leftist that he actually espoused during the primaries.

So it's a frustrating thing. The war in Iraq is demonstrably now a success. I had dinner with some people last night and they always bring up politics when we talk. I don't understand, like I said last Wednesday before I got outta here, I just don't understand how the Democrats have a chance. In a sane political environment, they ought not be able to carry but two states, maybe three -- New York, Massachusetts, and California, because there are just as many kooks in those three states as there are anybody else. But everything they've done they've botched. They are actively promoting the decline of America. They are actively promoting economic disaster. They are actively promoting and sought to secure defeat of the United States military in Iraq, and throughout the war on terror. They have impugned the reputations and intentions of the US military and Armed Services personnel all over the world. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. They've made it very clear that they wish the Constitution were not in their way. In a sane political world (which we don't live in, of course) they wouldn't stand a chance. They would be a laughingstock, they would be a joke, and they would be in the process of rebuilding themselves.

So, the next time someone says, “Bush lied, people died...” or “Sadam never had any WMD’s and was not looking to get any” mention this 550 tons of yellowcake, which yellowcake today is being used for peaceful purposes in Canada.

RUSH: Let's go to the audio sound bites. Yesterday in St. Louis this is where of course Fort Marcy Airlines was forced down due to a mechanical -- was on their way to North Carolina, didn't make it there. So Obama had to go out there and do a conference call, I think, with the supporters that were supposed to be there in the North Carolina. But there's no audience here. See what you think.

OBAMA: The first step is to offer immediate relief to families who are struggling right now while helping to jump-start economic growth and create jobs.

RUSH: Wait a minute, stop the tape. See, this is exactly what I was talking about. You have no intention of doing this. Immediate relief to families who are struggling right now while helping to jump-start economic growth? Where are you on lowering the price of gasoline? Where are you on oil drilling way offshore? That's another thing. We need to change the lexicon here. All these politicians say, "We're not going to drill offshore." What does offshore mean to people? Offshore means the little kiddies right there on the sand on the beach and they've got their little buckets and they're building sand castles and they're looking for sea shells, and their little toes and feet are in the water, and they're having a fun time, skipping around, and within 30 yards will be an oil well. That's not what offshore means. It's way offshore. Most of these derricks will not even be seen by families at the beach. But this idea that he wants to help struggling families, the Democrat Party precisely does not want to do that, precisely at this time he's talking about it. Here's the rest of the bite.

OBAMA: Between a sluggish economy and four-dollar-a-gallon gas at the pump, the American people can't wait another six months for help.

RUSH: Wait a minute. Whoa, whoa. Another six months -- July, August, September, October -- six months is close to the inauguration, what do you mean, they can't wait? Can't wait, what's six months? Six months is his inauguration. Well, damn it, Obama, do something. Change your position on this, both sides of this issue or maybe more than two sides. Here's the rest of the bite.

OBAMA: Instead of Washington gimmicks like a three-month gas tax holiday that will only pad oil company profits. We need to do what I called for months ago and pass a second stimulus package that provides energy rebate checks for working families, a fund to help families avoid foreclosure, and increased assistance for states that have been hard hit by the economic downturn.

RUSH: States that have been hard hit by the economic downturn, the governments. This is all total flummery, 100% BS. "Do what I called for months ago, pass a second stimulus package that provides energy rebate checks." No, sir. That's as silly you say as lowering the federal gas tax. What's the difference? Yesterday in St. Louis, after Fort Marcy Airlines forced down at Lambert Field, Obama said this.

OBAMA: If Senator McCain wants a debate about taxes in this campaign, then it is a debate I am happy to have, because if you're a family making less than $250,000 a year, my plan will not raise your taxes.

MCCAIN: American workers and families pay their bills and balance their budgets, and I'll demand the same thing of our government, which you're not getting now. Congress and this administration have failed to meet their responsibilities to manage the government.

MCCAIN: Government has grown by 60% in the last eight years. When I'm president, I'll order a stem-to-stern review of government, modernize how it does business, and save billions of dollars. I'll veto every single bill with wasteful pork barrel spending on it, you can count on it.

RUSH: Right on, right on, right on. He will do that. He is a budget buster. But did you hear him say that government's grown 60% in the last eight years? I mean, it's believable, but that's huge. What is our budget at, three trillion? Three trillion and the Democrats still say there are cuts. But the piece de resistance of the McCain town meeting in Denver yesterday occurred during the Q&A, citizen Georgette Haddad had this to say to Senator McCain.

HADDAD: Well, I want to tell you, I want to speak for everyone here, and I collaborate with every statement they say. And don't you ever, once you become a president and say, "Well, I was forced to raise taxes and I did this and I did that." You tax us when we're born. You tax us when we're dead. You tax us when we eat. You tax us when we sleep. You tax us every which way. Get off of my back!

RUSH: All right, Georgette! All right! See, if the Republican Party would just realize that's the emotion that's out there just waiting to be tapped into. This woman is frustrated like everybody is over the rising -- everybody is going to be taxed. They're now taxing, as we've talked about earlier today, making toll roads out of interstate highways because state revenue is down because people are driving less. They're gonna tax everything they can, and they're going to call most of it new fees or what have you. And she's fed up with it. And so are a lot of other people. If Senator McCain would realize, keep talking about the Reagan tax cuts and the Bush tax cuts and making them permanent. This is what Senator McCain said following Georgette Haddad.

CALLER: I got something to report to you, if you will, if you'll allow me, just a quick observation at the very end. First, the report. Yesterday during one of the news breaks there was something, something like a five-minute news break, top of the hour, the report was out of Colorado that the legislature is considering raising tolls on roads that previously didn't have tolls because of the revenue drop with people driving less. I did a little more research on that because you don't catch all the details on those quick news bites at the top of the hour and Reuters had reported back on June 20th the amount of Americans that are driving less and in the Rocky Mountain News it reported that between I-70, the main road going out to all the ski areas from Denver, were considering major tolls coming up in the future, things that didn't previously exist.

CALLER: I'm going to encourage all my fellow Coloradans to go out and buy more sport utility vehicles and trucks and any kind of gas-guzzling vehicle they can get because if we continue buying the higher mileage vehicles they're going to impose tolls on places to keep those revenues up in the coffers of the state. So basically an imposed tax, a shoot-from-the-hip tax because we're driving less, and I just think that's right in line with everything you were saying before in the way that the --

RUSH: Let me take the occasion of your news item to point out that this is happening in many states all across the fruited plain. The first place that I am aware that this happened was in the great state of California. What happened was that in California, Governor Schwarzenegger and all of the glittering jewels of colossal ignorance in the assembly out there, started demanding people, "Hey, you need to clean up this state. This state's got smog, pollution, you need to drive smaller cars and get more miles to the gallon. You need to do it for yourself, it'll reduce your travel budget," all these great things. So a lot of people went out and did it because of course people are loyal to their governments and if they believe their trusted elected officials, then of course they'll do what they can to help, which is why so many doofuses buy the stupid manmade global warming hoax. Anyway, it didn't take long for the state of California to realize out there, Jeff, that with all these new little lawn mowers disguised as automobiles getting a lot more mileage that the fuel tax was not producing as much revenue because people weren't buying as much. The gasoline tax out there was not generating what it had been projected to be in the budget, and California is like 76 gazillion billion in debt out there, and so guess what?

They raised the tax, wiping out every saving that the dutifully patriotic citizens of California had matched and enjoyed by following instructions. In North Carolina, they put water restrictions on because of the drought. So people, by law, could not water their lawns as much. And guess what? The municipal water supply was not used as often, and thus sales of water and tax revenue declined and so local communities decided to raise water rates, while less was being used. Everything in government happens the exact opposite of supply and demand, and the reason for it, Jeff, is that there is not one government and there's not one media person who understands the concept that government can do with less, too. Where did this notion come from that government can never do with less, that government by fiat has to have more every year? You and I need more every year, but we don't just by fiat wave a magic wand and get it. They can, and do. It's an interesting explanation, too, in terms of how they sell it. Something similar happened here in Florida. I forget what it was. It might be changes in property tax revenue proposals or what have you, but all these local communities here in the county in which we survive, Palm Beach County, these local communities all said, "We're going to have to cut basic services! We're going to have to close some child care centers. We may have to close a couple fire departments and fire some cops," and that's how they do it.

Any time a state bureaucracy faces a cut, they caterwaul, they moan, they cry like babies, and then they tell people, "Well, if your house is going to burn down, too bad, our budget's been cut and I don't have enough money to get the fire truck to your house where you live," and of course the citizens go, (crying) "You can't do that!" What they never do is lop off the top-heavy bureaucracies. They never get rid of useless policies; never get rid of useless people; they never get rid of redundant things. They always seem to go out with their PR offensive where they gotta cancel, quote, unquote, "essential services," and hence they rope in people with fear. "Yeah, we're going to have to cut a couple fire departments out there. We're going to maybe even close one of the police stations." "You mean if my house gets robbed, I got burglar in there, you're not gonna come?" "That's exactly right because of budget cuts."

Now, who in their right mind who is a genuine public servant, state or federal or local, when budget cuts come along, would have the audacity and the mean-spiritedness to tell citizens, "Guess what? We're cutting the essential services that you need," rather than look for places other than that to cut, and there are plenty of them. They don't need to build the panda exhibit at the Wayward Zoo 25 miles out of town. They don't need to build the latest art expo with the latest liberal cultural rot on display for $5 million. They don't need to build a testament to some wacko liberal politician, some honorary monument somewhere. They never cut the junk. They always claim to have to cut essentials, so that you caterwaul and moan to higher authorities canceling out the budget cut.

Rush: I've got a graph here sent to me by my Official EIB Climatologist, Dr. Roy Spencer. He has a graph that he prepares. It's tough to describe this on the radio. I'll send this graph up to Koko, Jr., because Koko, Sr., is on vacation. So I'll send this up to Koko, Jr. But it is a chart of the global average temperatures from NOAA and NASA satellites beginning in 2006. The chart runs all the way out through 2015. On the left side, the temperature departure from normal in Celsius degrees, Algore is predicting that by 2015, we will have increased the global average temperature by .8 degree Celsius. However, the actual temperatures, the global average temperatures since the middle of 2006 have fallen and in fact in June of this year, just a few short days ago, the readings for that month came out, and the global average temperature in June, in May, fell almost two-tenths of a degree Celsius. After a high in about mid-2006 of the global average temperature being .6 degrees Celsius above mean, or above the norm, it's fallen from .6 above to .2 below since 2006. It is cooling while we're pumping all these gases out there, it is cooling off around the world.

I have another chart here. By the way, these are actually graphs from many, many moons ago, on a science website that depict arctic ice. Do you know the amount of ice in the arctic this month versus this month 20 years ago is identical? There's not less ice now than there was then, and there's not more ice than there was then. They say it's all going to disappear, which is nonsense. Total, 100% hoax. Meanwhile, while all this is going on, while the Australian government is telling its citizens, "Pay more or die," which is about what we're being told here, in fact, this poor kid in Australia thinks if he drinks the world's going to die so he's killing himself by not drinking. They had to put him in a psycho ward. Your kid could be next, folks. Now, in China, the ChiComs released their own global warming strategy a year ago, its own Garnaut report -- this is Rudd's guru in Australia -- "which bluntly refused to cut its total emissions. Said Ma Kai, head of China's powerful State Council: 'China does not commit to any quantified emissions-reduction commitments ... our efforts to fight climate change must not come at the expense of economic growth.'" The ChiComs, of all people, get it! The ChiComs!

If anybody ought to be leading the charge on this, it would be socialist communists, but the ChiComs know full well the disaster that awaits anybody who buys into the delusion and the requirements to fulfill the delusion as advanced by Algore. Mr. Bolt writes, "In fact, we had to get used to more gas from China, not less: 'It is quite inevitable that during this (industrialisation) stage, China's energy consumption and CO2 emissions will be quite high.'" Damn straight. They're growing. They're going to expand. Here's another instance. India. India has said that it will not stop its per capita emissions from growing "until they match those of countries such as the US." Right now the emissions per capita in India are 1.02 tons. We are at 20 tons. So the nation of India says, screw you, we're going to keep growing and we're going to keep emitting until we equal the United States. Now, "Given it has one billion people, that's a promise to gas the world like it's never been gassed before. ... What makes the Indian report so interesting is that unlike our Ross Garnaut, who just accepted the word of those scientists wailing we faced doom, the Indian experts went to the trouble to check what the climate was actually doing and why. Their conclusion? They couldn't actually find anything bad in India that was caused by man-made warming: 'No firm link between the documented (climate) changes described below and warming due to anthropogenic climate change has yet been established.' In fact, they couldn't find much change in the climate at all." As their emissions are growing, they found no change in the climate in India whatsoever. And this is because there isn't any.

There isn't any change in the climate of the United States. There's no change in the climate of China, other than it's more polluted. There's no change in the climate of Australia. The temperature is going down worldwide. It's the forecasts of the apocalypse. Oh, yes. Going to happen ten years from now, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50 years from now, they say. This is just the lull before the storm. And don't forget, a bunch of these doomsayers actually admitted six months or so ago that ocean patterns in the Pacific were responsible for this cooling, and they were going to delay the onset of warming for nine years, but, boy, after those nine years, Katie, bar the door, batten down the hatches because we are gonna cook. Meanwhile, with all these emissions, somehow the earth is finding a way to cool things. I don't believe the emissions warm the planet in the first place. I don't buy any of it. But your kids are being sold this bill of goods, folks. They are eating it up. Keep a sharp eye on them. They might soon qualify for Climate Change Delusion Syndrome.

RUSH: Finally, before we go back to the phones, Obama allowed his two daughters to be interviewed by Access Hollywood on one of the daughters' birthdays. It was Malia Obama, who celebrated her tenth birthday, the four-part interview began airing yesterday. Today Obama said they had second thoughts and they wouldn't be doing any more interviews, the kids aren't going to be doing any more interviews (paraphrasing): "It was an exception. It was Malia's birthday, we were in Montana, everybody was having a good time," Obama told Good Morning America, but "I think we got carried away a little bit. Generally, what makes them so charming is the fact that they're not spending a lot of time worrying about TV cameras or politics, and we want to keep it that way." Now, you have to go to the last line to find out why these kids are not going to be interviewed anymore. "In the Access Hollywood interview, Malia Obama says she sometimes finds her father embarrassing, such as when he shook a friend's hand instead of waiving to her or saying hi. Asked what makes their parents angry, Sasha Obama said whining, and Malia cited arguing with each other."

So apparently the environment inside The Messiah's home is as normal as everybody else. The kids argue with each other, Obama shakes hands with other women rather than just wave at them, and Obama just can't have this kind of an image if you're The Messiah. I didn't see it. H.R. said he saw it, the kids came off great. Okay, they're fabulous, wonderful. They ought to be, they're the offspring of The Messiah.

RUSH: I mentioned this earlier. The Wall Street Journal has an editorial today about Barney Frank, and this dovetails with our discussion here about the Democrats and their supposed change of mind on plentiful domestic energy. The editorial is entitled, "Mr. Frank's Wild River," and they have a picture of the area in question here. "Behold the Taunton River in Fall River, Massachusetts, pictured nearby. Congressman Barney Frank thinks your family would love to visit this scenic wilderness. Among its attractions are the fuel-storage tanks along the eastern shore. The container ships and piers are always a hit with the children looking for a place to romp. This could be America's next 'wild and scenic river,' if Mr. Frank gets his way. Last month the powerful Congressman pushed a bill through the House Natural Resources Committee that would give the Taunton River that designation under federal law. The bill could come up for a vote on the House floor soon. If you're beginning to sense that there may be more going on here than love of nature, keep reading. The 40-year-old Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed to protect certain rivers from development. To qualify, says the law, a river should 'possess outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other similar values.' If they are designated under the act, the rivers and their 'immediate environment' are then protected from development or industrial uses. We've got nothing against container docks, but the Taunton River would not seem to qualify as wild, much less scenic, under any of the law's descriptive qualities."

So what's this about? Well, it turns out that this particular site that he wants claimed a wildlife refuge-type area happens to be the site for a proposed terminal for importing liquefied natural gas. The terminal would be located right on the river, and if you look at the picture, they've got five big storage tanks up on the upper right-hand corner of the picture. Anyway, somebody wants to put a terminal for the importation of liquefied natural gas rather than having to pipe it all the way up the Gulf of Mexico. Right now the liquefied natural gas either is driven or trucked or piped up. They want to put a terminal there to make it cheaper for Barney Frank's constituents. Barney Frank doesn't want it there, even though there are all other kinds of fuel container dumps and tanks all over this area.

"With energy prices as high as they are, you'd think Mr. Frank and his Capitol Hill mates would have some sympathy for constituents who are squeezed at the pump, and on their heating and electrical bills. New England relies heavily on natural gas for both of the latter. Most of the LNG terminals for importing foreign natural gas are down in the Gulf of Mexico. So foreign or domestic natural gas for New England has to be piped all the way from the Gulf, adding to already high fuel costs." So Barney Frank wants that not to happen. It's a policy that is hostile to the greater supplies of carbon energy that would keep prices lower. And so once again a Democrat has demonstrated what their real agenda is: Do not help the lowering of prices; do not help increase supply, even for your own constituents.

Rush: After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan. 143 days -- I keep leftovers in my refrigerator longer than that. In contrast, John McCain's 26 years in Congress, 22 years of military service including 1,966 days in captivity as a POW in Hanoi now seem more impressive than ever." So there you go, 143 days. So this is the key. All of these so-called flip-flops, all these changes in position, they are due to his inexperience. His inexperience and his incompetence lead him to make goofs, to lie, to flounder around. I think if people see Obama as dangerously incompetent and floundering, it might lessen his appeal. Calling him a flip-flopper, you know, been there, done that with John Kerry. He owns that. As I say, you look at Kerry and you see a sandal, a flip-flop. Birkenstock, no. I'm talking about beach flip-flop, you just see it when you look at his face, either that or Lurch. So you can't tag that to Obama. It's gotta be incompetence, it's got to be inexperience.

Print media continues to bemoan its dwindling audience, Rush’s influence continues strong:

Maybe there is a reason that every solution that Obama has involved more taxes and larger government:

We even have complete idiots here in Texas. Dallas county official disparaged for his racial insensitivity for using the term black hole.

On a similar racist theme, a British government-sponsored organization (can’t get enough of these) suggest that if a young child does not like a foreign food, that this could mean that child is racist.

RUSH: From Washington: "Schools should educate teenagers and even children as young as 11 about abusive dating situations, say experts." How about teaching them how to read? How about teaching them how to do math, just once?

For those of you in California, hold on to your pocketbooks; Arnold and your legislature is going to take even more of your money.

When Arnold was running for office, there was an excellent, conservative alternative who also ran. You in California wanted a middle-of-the-road Republican; you got him.

I did not have time to write a story on it, but goodbye, Tony Snow; we’ll miss you!

Conservative Review
Issue #33	Kukis Digests and Opines on this Week’s News and Views	July 13, 2008