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 deleted from my list (which is almost at the maximum anyway).

I attempt to post a new issue each Sunday by 2 or 3 pm central standard time (I sometimes fail at this attempt).

I try to include factual material only, along with my opinions (it should be clear which is which). I make an attempt to include as much of this week’s news as I possibly can. The first set of columns are intentionally designed for a quick read.

I do not accept any advertising nor do I charge for this publication. I write this principally to blow off steam in a nation where its people seemed have collectively lost their minds.

President Obama continues to give speeches; one in Cairo and another on Omaha Beach.

It comes to light that Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor’s comments about a wise Latina making better decisions that some white guy is not just a isolated comment in one speech in Berkeley.

Obama puts a 31 year old, almost-graduate from Yale in charge of dismantling GM. This young man has no business experience and no car experience (I assume that he has driven one). This person was involved with the Obama campaign.

President Obama admits that he is months away from a plan to close Guantanamo Bay Prison.

Abortion doctor, George Tiller, infamous for late-term abortions, is slain in church. Many prominent pro-life organizations immediately condemn his murder. Tiller practiced in one of the 3 abortion clinics which did late term abortions, charging approximately $5000 for a late term abortion. His abortion practice made him a millionaire. The number I heard is, he had done 250 late term abortions in 2003. That, in itself, is over $1 million in revenue.

Several bloggers on the DailyKos blame O’Reilly for inciting violence against abortion doctors.

Chris Christie was elected on the Republican ticket for governor in New Jersey, despite record levels of spending by the Democrats attacking him.

Walter Kendall Myers and his wife, Gwendolyn Steingraber Myers were arrested this week in Washington D.C. and accused of spying for Fidel Castro.

Snow falls in North Dakota in June. It is the first time in 60 years snow has fallen in Dickinson, ND beyond the month of May (although other parts of the state have seen a June snow in the past 10 years).

Cal Thomas: “If you think that you are better because of your race or your gender, then you are a racist.”

Harry Reid, Senate head, on Sotomayor, candidate for the Supreme Court: “Everyone in America should understand that we have the whole package here [referring to Sotomayor].” Later, Reid proclaimed: “I understand that during her career, she has written hundreds and hundreds of opinions; I haven’t read a single one of them, and if I am fortunate, before we end this, I won’t have to read a single one of them.”

Michael Moore on Obama’s takeover of GM: “Now there’s a chance to correct the things GM did wrong.”

Sarah Palin, this week, from Alaska: “Friends, we need to be aware of the creation of a fearful population and of fearful lawmakers being led to believe that big government is the answer. To bail out the private sector because then, government gets to get in there and control it and, mark my words, this is going to happen next, I fear -- bail out next, debt-ridden states, then government gets to get in there and control the people. Since when can you get outta huge national debt by creating trillions of dollars of new debt? It all really is so backwards and skewed as to sound like absolute nonsense.”

Judith Miller: “It was a great speech. He reads the teleprompter really well.”

"We have been the recipients of the choicest blessings of heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown, but we have forgotten God ... we have vainly imagined in the deceitfulness of our own hearts, that all blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us, then, to humble ourselves to the offended power, to confess our national sins and to pray for ..... forgiveness." You may think that this is an old quote from Billy Graham, but it is actually an older quote from Abraham Lincoln.

Another blast from the past; Joe Biden on Clarence Thomas: "I think that the only reason Clarence Thomas is on the Court is because he is black. I don't believe he could have won had he been white. And the reason is, I think it was a cynical ploy by President Bush."

Iran test fires defense missile. Obama has proposed cuts in our missile defense system.

Sean Hannity interviews Rush Limbaugh, and it is an excellent interview, even though Hannity may have a man-crush on Rush (or, you can find the text in the Rush section):

http://www.foxnews.com/yourworld/index.html You must click on Watch Neil Cavuto’s Common Sense and then choose 6/2/09). There is a commercial, and this vid is followed by a commercial and then by Cavuto and the trick of financial prosperity, also worth watching. If you have not listened to Neil Cavuto before, it is time you started.

I almost did not watch this...it is entitled The Fox Nation, and it is quite good, even though it is a promo:

Harry Reid, apparently proud that he has not read any of Sotomayor’s opinions, whom he wholeheartedly supports.

A blast from the past; Ronald Reagan’s speech on the 40^th anniversary of D-Day.

Dennis Miller on O’Reilly, and the part which made me laugh out loud was the video of Borat and Eminem and then Dennis’ remark.

1) The big problem with Sotomayor’s wise Latina comments is, somehow being a woman and/or a Latina is going to allow someone to interpret the law more accurately than a white male. An appellant court ought to rule in 1 of 3 ways: (1) established U.S. law supports the decision of the lower court; (2) established U.S. law does not support the decision of the lower court; and (3) this particular situation is not covered by state or federal law, so that the Supreme Court cannot make a ruling. I have added the 3^rd situation, which the court ought to employ when the law is insufficient to make a ruling (a temporary non-binding, individual ruling could be issued). However, when it comes to interpreting the law, this is something which someone well-versed in the law ought to be able to handle better than someone without this education. The idea that gender or race gives someone an edge is ridiculous.

2) Apparently, I must be on the right track. Last issue, I suggested that Sotomayor may be pro-life, and, for that reason, might be okay, since Obama is going to appoint liberals anyway. If it turns out that she cannot control her temper or says some things which are really goofy, this will, at worst, reflect on Obama’s judgment, and reduce her influence on the rest of the court. Rush, this week, came out in favor of Sotomayor, provided that she was pro-life. Although I do not judge everything based upon Limbaugh or Krauthammer, these white males reveal a great deal of wisdom in their opinions; so I am glad to hear that Rush and I agree on this point.

3) If you did not like the government takeover of GM (which most people did not like), why do you think the government takeover of the health care system is any different? It is the same thing—the government gets involved in something which involves a lot of money, a lot of power, and in which they have little or no expertise.

4) If you did not know this, there are many doctors in Congress, who ran specifically because health care was going to be an issue. Guess which party they belong to?

5) Bear in mind that, if government-run health care comes to pass, the only way supply can keep up with demand is, health care will be rationed by government officials (as it is everywhere where government health care exists), and the losers will be the elderly. If you are at all teetering on this issue, then simply google “rationing (or rationed) government health care” and see what happens all over the world.

6) The NY Times put the murder of George Tiller on page 1. It put the murder of William Long, Little Rock Army recruiter, on page 16. Quite obviously, Tiller’s name is more recognizable, but one ought to think that the alleged murderer of Long (who has confessed to this murder) and his ties to radical Islam would be of some interest. However, reporters do not appear to be all that interested in how Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad was able to go to Yemen, what sort of training he had there, and how he got back. Who paid for this trip? Who was instrumental in getting Muhammad (aka Carlos Bledsoe) involved in terrorist training? I will guarantee you that every effort was made by the news media to tie Tiller’s killer to the Pro-Life movement.

7) Why are Obama’s favorability ratings so high and yet, his policies are very unfavorable? Obama’s ratings are about average for any president after the first 3 months in office. Most Americans are not political junkies. They vote for the best person, and then they return to their normal life, not giving much thought to politics. Furthermore, the news coverage of Obama is quite favorable. So, political junkies like you and I know what Obama’s policies are, and we generally like or do not like both Obama and his policies. However, for most Americans there is a disconnect between Obama and his policies. Within the year, even though the mainstream media will do everything to obscure the relationship between Obama and his policies (and more importantly, their results), people will begin to get it, and his favorable ratings will suddenly sink.

8) When Geithner reassured Chinese students in Beijing that the dollar was in good shape, they laughed. I don’t think they were intentionally being derisive, but I think it was a normal response (obviously, my opinion).

9) Greta Van Susteren interviewed Hillary Clinton this past week and it was a fairly good interview. Although Greta did not concentrate on gotcha questions, she did not do a softball question interview either. It is nice to see someone who can think on their feet without requiring a teleprompter.

10) It was actually Joe Biden, heading the judicial review board, who has made judicial philosophy a part of examining judicial nominees. In the past, any person who had a good record (i.e., some real judicial experience) and lacked serious problems from their personal past, then they were confirmed. Barack Obama himself, when opposing both Roberts and Alito, cited differences in judicial philosophy as a reason for rejecting a judicial candidate.

11) If you are a liberal, you need to start asking yourself: Is a federal budget so large that, for every $2 spent, $1 will be borrowed or printed? Is bailing out of GM a good idea? Did Obama make the right choice to put a 31 year old almost graduated from Yale guy in charge of dismantling GM? Is adding more and more federal employees to the federal payroll the best way to solve the job losses we are suffering? These are Obama’s policies; there is no equivocation here. You need to think about, is Obama really doing stuff that you think is good for the country? You need to begin to associate Obama the man with Obama’s policies, and begin making some hard judgments. This is your job as a part of the electorate.

CBO estimates that those newly placed into government health care will use the health care system 70% more.

34,000 people were evicted from their homes in April. 2300 were able to salvage their mortgage through Obama’s plan (apparently the constraints are so specific and regulated, that it is quite difficult to qualify).

Al Gore was worth about $1 million when he lost the election to George Bush in 2000. He is worth $100 million today. Do you suppose global warming had anything to do with this new found wealth?

After 3 months in office, Pew research examined news stories on Obama and compared his coverage to that of previous presidents:

65% of Americans do not want to see Gitmo closed. Now, Obama and various Democrats have railed against Gitmo and how terrible it is. What will they do now?

Now, 52% of Americans approve of torture in order to obtain important information. In 2005, this was 38%. This is what happens when people begin to hear both sides of an issue.

51% of adults are more likely to buy a car from Ford because it did not any take bailout funding.

Obama giving his speech in Cairo, with ridiculous equivocation (“We need to understand both sides of the Palestinian issue—on the one hand, the Palestinians have fired hundreds of rockets into Israel, to the point where, Israel has bomb shelters throughout, but, on the other hand Israel finally responded with military action.”). Perhaps Obama could play one of the Wiggles and sing a happy Muslim song.

When someone plays Obama on a tv skit, teleprompters need to be prominently on display.

Will you close down the prisoner-of-war camp in Guantanamo, even if it costs you the next election?

The Obama takeover of GM is going to be his downfall. Just as a government takeover of one part of the rail system and then called it Amtrack has since then been bleeding taxpayers, so will the government takeover of GM. Unfortunately, we will see little mention of this is the most major newspapers or on the 3 networks.

People are not going to buy cars from Government Motors, and it is going to fall further and further into debt.

Here is an easy one: there are two governor races this year in New Jersey and Virginia. These races will be won by Republicans. Democrats will spend a lot of money in these two states—possibly record amounts for those states.

The Supreme Court will dispense with the Ricci case (the 9 white and one Hispanic firemen who were not promoted because there were not enough minorities in the top 10 scores) during the Sotomayor hearing. This will overturn her decision in an appellant court. A prominent Republican will pointedly ask her if the court made the right decision.

I’ve said that the newspapers are heavily invested in Obama’s success, so, even though we have the highest unemployment rates in 26 years, many newspapers are running stories about how our economy is turning around.

Today, an abortion doctor, George Tiller, in Wichita, Kansas was shot dead in his church at the Reformation Lutheran Church and while I abhor Tillers views on abortion and the 1.3 MILLION abortions that are carried out every single year in this country, this is not the way to stop abortions.

My best friend, Michelle, reminded me today that Tiller was excommunicated from the church I used to attend at Holy Cross Lutheran ( I attended but was not a member). Apparently, the church leaders counseled Dr. Tiller on the pro life issue, but Tiller believed he was doing "God's work" in performing abortions.

As pro lifers, what are we to do in this situation? Well, obviously, we must respect the law. And, while there are doctors who do perform late term abortions, we must let the law dictate their own demise such as what occurred with Belkis Gonzalez, the Miami Abortion Doctor who threw away a live baby when she performed a botched abortion procedure. Its my understanding she facing between 1 to 15 years in jail.

It is a tragic day today, not only because a vigilante killed a man in church, but because I am also reminded of the 1.3 million little wonders because abortions that carried out every year in this country. Its astonishing to me that we are now approaching Stalinist numbers. Stalin is responsible for snuffing out 51 million lives, and to date, America is responsible for preventing 49,551,703 lives since 1973. Now, Im not going to debate when life begins, for most of us have probably taken a Biology course and discovered that LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION. That said, lets figure out why abortions are being performed:

Another study, in 1998, revealed 99% of the abortions are for birth control reasons and/or convenience.

Its a tragic day today not only for the Tiller family, but also for the little wonders that were prevented their lives, and to the women who regret abortions as medical studies now show that they are negatively affected emotionally, psychologically, and physically. These women are now speaking about this issue with their "Silent No More" campaigns.

May God help Americans make the right decisions as the Sotomayor confirmation hearings get underway because we know that that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Tiller has killed over 60,000 babies. Its wrong that he was shot, but he didn’t suffer the way his INNOCENT victims did. He took forceps to grab the baby’s legs, then the baby is pulled out, leaving the head inside. An incision is made in the baby’s skull and the brain tissue is removed, causing the skull to collapse. Then it is thrown in the trash! It is RARELY medically necessary. These are the ugly facts many heartless people call a choice. Keep lying to yourselves.

If we choose to remain pro-choice as a country, then every women contemplating an abortion should be required to (1) see a sonogram of her own child; (2) see a short film (say, 10 minutes) showing her what will happen during her abortion, hearing a testimony of 2 or 3 women who have aborted their children, hearing the testimony of 2 or 3 unwanted children given up for adoption (instead of being aborted); and (3) be required to speak to an adoption specialist.

Liberals love education; it is one of the solutions which they offer up for about half of the problems in the world. So, why not educate an expectant mother about abortion? Why not let her have all of the facts? Are you concerned that this might put too much of a burden on an expectant mother? She is about to end the life of her child. Even our President claims not to have any idea as to sort of life a fetus is; so, since this seems to be a area of confusion even for our president, should not such a decision be made having all of the facts?

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum.

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world - tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

There are a lot of problems here. First of all, the attacks of Muslim terrorists occur all over the world, in dozens of nations, on a daily basis. Our news does not report them. So, even though Israel is the Little Satan and we are the Big Satan, radical Islam is a worldwide movement which is hostile to non-Muslim nations and to Muslims which are not the right stripe.

Obama’s reference to colonialism is just wrong. Radical Muslims are attempting to take over nations and pieces of nations all over the globe. We (the United States) have not done that. Is Japan, Germany, or South Korea now a part of the U.S. colonies? Of course not! However, in many of the Arabic nations, they are taught that the U.S. is colonizing the world. Either Obama has an imperfect understanding of history, or he is pandering, or he considers American incursions of any kind (like a Starbucks on the corner in some foreign nation) somehow represents colonialism.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

Although the term algebra is arguably from an Arabic word, algebra was developed by ancient Babylon, centuries before Mohammed. The Chinese were the first to use a magnetic compass, although Arabs are thought to have improved on it for sea navigation (I wonder what the historic context was here?). When printing began is debated. Some attribute the Chinese to developing the first moveable type in the 11^th century. Muslims also used some sort of mass printing, but it is hard to determine which came first. Dr. Geoffrey Roper, an expert in the history of printing in Muslim civilizations, writes that sometime in the late 900s, Muslims had "embraced the Chinese craft of paper making, developed it and adopted it widely in the Muslim lands."

Although Chaucer names several physicians from the Islamic world in the preface of Canterbury Tales, the historicity of what Obama claimed is in doubt.

Every culture has developed great architectural wonders (which include arches and spires) predating Islam by over a Millennium. Every culture has music, poetry, calligraphy and places where one can get away from it all. Although Obama did not say that these things were invented, dramatically improved, or most closely associated with the Muslim world, their contribution in these fields has not been, in any way, extraordinary.

Essentially, Obama appeared to be unable to come up with any clearly extraordinary cultural contribution from ancient Muslims. If Obama wanted to look at what is going on in present-day Arab nations, the almost secular Dubai probably represents the greatest technological advances of our day. What is being done in the oil fields of Saudi Arabia is quite impressive as well.

From Rush’s commentary: RUSH: Okay. I know we're not supposed to criticize Obama's speech here. I know it's going way off the reservation here to do this. But, folks, that is outrageous. This is simply outrageous. It was absurd, in fact. Let's see. Where do we start here? "It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra." No. The origins of algebra trace back to the ancient Babylonians. They were not Muslims. Algebra was temporarily developed by the ancient Greeks and later the English. "Our magnetic compass, tools of navigation," Islam gave us these? No. "Recent research suggests that the compass may have been discovered by Central Americans, but if they didn't do it, the Chinese are then its discoverers. In either case, be it the Chinese or the Central Americans, the compass was discovered centuries before the advent of Islam."

Now, what am I supposed to say? I'm not supposed to say this stuff. Now, let's see, let's see. "Our mastery of pens and printing..." Has anybody ever heard of Gutenberg? I didn't know Gutenberg was a Muslim. "Our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed..."? Are there Nobel Prizes for Medicine awarded to Muslims I have missed? "Islamic has given us some majestic arches and soaring spires..." Well, sorry, folks, but arches and spires predate the arrival of Islam by centuries. I mean, come on, folks. Arches? Anybody heard of Rome? He also talked about the great gift, "timeless poetry and cherished music." The only problem there is that music -- and musical instruments especially -- are forbidden in most Islamic traditions. And it should be unnecessary to have to note Islam's "religious tolerance" has been demonstrated. Okay, I'm... Take it away.

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my

country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers - Thomas Jefferson - kept in his personal library.

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

There are many estimates as to the Muslim population in the United States; 1.8 million is the top end of these estimations. See

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/from-the-fact-check-desk-president-obama-and-muslims-in-america.html

This is a problem, to begin this speech saying, “We need to be honest with one another” and then to fill it with falsehoods.

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

Here is what Obama does not fully recognize: Islam is a part of almost every nation on this earth. They have infiltrated almost every nation, and, depending upon their relative size in that nation, are either a quiet minority, a vocal minority, or an angry, disruptive minority. A few issues back, I gave the link of an excellent YouTube video, where Islamic actions within a nation could be tied directly to their relative size within that nation. My point is, Islam infiltrating the world and infiltrating every nation is a part of their world-wide strategy.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.

That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together.

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.

In Ankara, I made clear that America is not - and never will be - at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

That's why we're partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths - more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace.

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be."

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

...it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

I know some Palestinian Christians. For many years, there was not this animosity between the Palestinians and the Jews. This implacable hostility is chiefly 20–30 years old. If there were only Christians and Jews, they would work it out, I guarantee you. Israel has, on numerous occasions, withdrawn from land, given territory to the Palestinians, and has attempted to implement a 2-state solution. To give you an idea of the response, they gave the Gaza strip to the Palestinians, leaving behind hydroponic greenhouses which could be used to grow an abundance of crops. These greenhouses were destroyed, having been used by Jews, and Palestinians use the Gaza strip and elsewhere from which to launch hundreds of rockets into Israel. Israelis and Palestinians are not simply two sides which need to each give in a little in order to make things work, which is Obama’s mistaken notion (to be fair, the mistaken notion of many people).

The problem is, many Muslim nations refuse to accept Israel’s occupation of 0.2% of the Middle East (Israel is a postage stamp of a country). They use the Jews in order to fuel the hatred of their people and they blame almost everything they can on either the Jews or on the United States. Obama should have made some unequivocal firm statements here—“Israel has occupied this land for the past 3000 years, and you need to get over your hatred. Muslim nations, which share a common religious background with the Jews, need to recognize Israel as a nation and its right to exist. Any aggressive action against Israel is going to provoke the response of the United States military. You make the choice: knowing how much Muslims value peace, I am sure it you will accept Israel as a country with every bit as much right to exists as you.” Okay, I am dreaming here, I know.

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.

The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

What can I say? There are many liberals who really believe that this is possible. We will dismantle our nuclear weapons, so will everyone else in the world, and then we will live in a world of blissful happiness. It is American’s use of nuclear weapons and build-up of nuclear weapons which has helped to keep another world war from breaking out. It is quite simple—most kids are not going to rob the house or store of a gun owner. The ability and willingness to kill your enemy dead is a great deterrent to violence.

I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld - whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence [sic] of liberalism.

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action - whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.

I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations - including my own - this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.

This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.

On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.

On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

At some point, Obama should have gone over the heads of the news services which will broadcast these addresses and tell the young Muslims, “We in the United States are not constraining your future. The small nation of Israel is not constraining your future. Muslims in the United States have prospered here for decades, without persecution and without problems. The key is freedom. You can stay locked into the false notion that blaming the United States or Israel for your lot in life, but your future is in your hands. It is time you seized freedom, repudiated laying blame, and moved forward with your lives.

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort - to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another."

The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace."

The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you.

Anarchy and vigilantism will assure the collapse of any society. Once the rule of law breaks down a country is finished.

Thus, quick-thinking Americans should condemn the murder of late-term abortionist Tiller even though the man terminated thousands of pregnancies; what he did is within Kansas law.

The accused killer, 51-year-old Scott Roeder may have had ties to the Freemen organization, a far-right group which rejects government authority. Roeder is likely to be charged with first degree murder. He has a previous weapons charge conviction.

The 67-year-old Tiller had performed abortions for more than 35 years. The Washington Times estimates he destroyed about 60,000 fetuses — sixty thousand. According to the AP, Tiller performed more than 250 late term abortions in 2003 alone. His income was estimated to be more than $1 million a year.

Right now 36 states restrict late term abortions and there are only three clinics that perform them in the entire country. Medical consensus is that late term abortions are rarely necessary because technology can now pinpoint major pregnancy problems much earlier than 21 weeks. Thus, very few American doctors will perform the operation.

None of that seemed to matter to Tiller — nicknamed "The Baby Killer" by pro-life groups — who stated, "He was helping women."

Now, when I heard about Tiller's murder I knew pro-abortion zealots and FOX News haters would attempt to blame us for the crime and that is exactly what has happened. Writing in the New York Daily News, reporter Helen Kennedy was very, very sympathetic to Tiller and called my reporting on him rants. Now Kennedy has lied about us before so her spin comes as no surprise.

Arianna Huffington immediately let her fanatics loose. Mary Mapes, Dan Rather's former producer who was fired from CBS over a false story on President Bush, wrote on the Huffington Post: "I felt just sick when I saw the bulletin about the murder of Dr. George Tiller. I can already envision the backpedaling and rationalizing that we'll hear from longtime Tiller critic, Bill O'Reilly."

No backpedaling here, madam. Unlike you I report honesty. Every single thing we said about Tiller was true and my analysis was based on those facts. The far-left lunacy continued with Daily Kos editor, Marcos Moulitsas: "Who'll be the next target of O'Reilly's and Beck's ire to get gunned down by a domestic conservative terrorist?"

As the Catholic League pointed out Monday, the hateful Kos is bashing me right above an ad for an upcoming interview with Bill Ayers. Perfect.

Finally, far-left Kansas City Star columnist Mike Hendricks wrote: "The murder accomplices included everyone who has ever called Tiller's late term abortion clinic a murder mill, whoever called Tiller 'Tiller the Killer.'"

Now it is clear that the far left is exploiting the death of the doctor. Those vicious individuals want to stifle any criticism of people like Tiller. That and hating FOX News is the real agenda here.

Finally, if these people were so compassionate, so very compassionate, so concerned for the rights and welfare of others, maybe they might have written something — one thing — about the 60,000 fetuses who will never become American citizens. Or am I wrong?

President Obama's decision to seize General Motors and convert it into Government Motors is as shocking as it is unpopular. Polling shows, like the president's stubborn insistence that Gitmo be closed and its terrorist prisoners brought stateside, the president's insistence that GM be nationalized is appalling to large majorities of Americans. The socialization of America's biggest brand is not the sort of decision that can be cloaked in head-faking rhetoric. What had been a private company on the verge of bankruptcy is now a government actor competing against private sector companies and using the federal treasury as an enormous unfair advantage in the marketplace. Even if the cost itself was not so staggering, the idea of the federal government declaring itself on the side of one of many competitors is as distasteful as it is unprecedented. It must be reversed.

In the two days since the nationalization of GM was announced, the callers and e-mailers to my program have been 10 to 1 against the Obamaization of the American car business. The reasons are many and varied. Some simply hate the naked exercise of federal power. Others see the first undeniable instance of socialism understood as the government's ownership of the means of production. Still others cannot believe that the shareholders and bondholders of a once great company have been stripped of their equity while the unions that helped bring the company down, escape nearly unscathed.

Almost everyone grasps immediately the deep unfairness to Ford and even the offshore carmakers that now compete against the massive subsidies of the federal government. How exactly is Ford supposed to bear its 'legacy costs' while GM is relieved of its past mistakes? How will the UAW negotiate fairly with Ford while realizing that every dollar bled from it is a dollar more likely to go to GM, in which the union now holds a huge equity position? How can every federal official interacting with any car company not know and act with the knowledge that the 'home team' - the president's team - is GM.

Corrupt cronyism has never had quite so large as stage as the new American car business, and the ramifications flowing out from Monday's announcement are just beginning to be glimpsed. On the same day the president announced the seizure and blithely declared that he had no interest in running the company, he called Detroit Mayor David Bing to assure him that GM would be staying put in its downtown Motor City headquarters. When the president himself is decreeing the leasing arrangements for the company, it is well and truly nationalized, no matter what he says for the benefit of the still-seduced MSM.

This is a decision that must be reversed. GM must be denationalized, the federal government divested of not just its controlling interest but all of its interest in the company. The Republican leadership must immediately and loudly demand the sale of the federal share in the company, even if it costs a large part of the $50 billion already invested. If the Administration balks - and it will, for why would Rahm Emmanuel willingly give up such an enormous political cudgel as a great car manufacturing company with its myriad and powerful though indirect tools of reward and punishment? - then every GOP candidate in 2010 must begin almost every speech with a reminder that the Democrats have willingly crossed a line that has never been crossed in American history. This is not a loan, not a subsidy, not even a massive assist, they must argue, but a seizure. This is not a continuation of George W. Bush's emergency aid, but a radical expansion of that crisis-driven intervention of late 2008 into a wholesale takeover five months later.

In the effort to reverse this lurch beyond the farthest left fringe of previous Democratic statist urges, individual Americans have a role to play. They have to say no to GM products and services until such time as the denationalization occurs. This is a painful conclusion for those of us with friends still working for the company, and who had supported aggressive efforts to help the private company restructure.

But there isn't any alternative, every dollar spent with GM is a dollar spent against free enterprise. Every car or truck purchased from Government Motors is one not purchased from a private car company that competes fairly against all other car companies. Many are rightly afraid that the government will do to automobile production what it has done for Amtrack and the Postal Service, but the risk is much greater than a federally mandated lemon.

The real risk is the enormous power of the federal government will so completely subsidize its own cars in so many ways that the private companies will be crippled or driven wholly from the field. What private company would want to compete against the unlimited resources of the feds?

President Obama has made an enormous, unprecedented grab for power, and fair-minded Democrats should join with Republicans to reverse it, and quickly.

A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered her altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him,

"Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degree, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.

"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct. But I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."

"Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are or where you are going. You've risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now it's my fault."

Here is who is now in charge of dismantling GM (there is a video of this young man, and in watching this video, you can see why he was rewarded with this position—he seemed reasonable, convincing and sincere):

Our government posts on the internet a list of US nuclear sites. What is wrong with this administration? Is there no one in charge?

This is an excellent article on compact fluorescent bulbs, and how the media has distorted this issue:

This is a fascinating article; the detainees at Guantanamo are getting a little antsy about their situation, and one even commented about how Bush was letting out more of them than Obama did.

Wasn’t Obama supposed to bring unity between us and our allies in Europe? Well, what are they doing electing and favoring conservatives? Did they not get the memo?

Capitalism is alive and well in North Dakota (don’t they know that we are in a recession?):

The idea that Obama should tell Israelis where they can build their houses is foolish. They have begun to build what they call “Obama huts” where he has told them not to:

This is an important, and under-reported story. Government has the power of eminent domain. That is, they can seize a piece of property belonging to a private individual, compensate that individual, and then use the property for the common good. The idea here is, there may be an expansion of a freeway, or a school, and nearby property is required in order to complete the project. However, as of late, some cities and states have been seizing property by virtue of eminent domain, and then allowing a business to build on that property so that the government can enjoy their tax revenue based upon the improved property. Here is how Sotomayor comes down on this issue:

Welcome to the third annual International Conference on Climate Change, a daylong session of speeches and scientific presentations that took place Tuesday just blocks from the U.S. Capitol. Almost no media covered the event.

There are a couple of Burger Kings with signs on them or near them reading Global warming is baloney. Since this is happening in the United States, why does it take a news source in Britain to tell us this?

Our economy supposedly is improving (one of the headlines is Jobs Report is Good News—in what world is a 26 year high in the unemployment rate good new?):

RUSH: Michelle Obama has weighed in on Sonia Sotomayor. This is yesterday in Washington. At the Mathematics Science Technology High School, First Lady Michelle Obama gave the commencement address, this a part of what she said.

MICHELLE OBAMA: I read the story of Judge Sonia Sotomayor. She went to Princeton, and in the story she said that when she arrived at Princeton as a freshman -- and this was nine years before I would even think about going -- she said when she stepped on that campus, she said -- and this is a quote -- she said she "felt like a visitor landing in an alien country." Despite all her success at Princeton and then she went on to Yale Law School where she was at the top of her class in both schools, and despite all of her professional accomplishments, Judge Sotomayor says she still looks over her shoulder and wonders if she measures up. And when I read her story, I understood exactly how she feels.

RUSH: This is the first lady of the United States of America who admits that Sotomayor is still carrying around a chip on her shoulder, she still feels inferior because the evils of this culture and what it did to her -- letting her into Princeton, finishing the top of the class -- she got a chip on her shoulder, she still feels inferior, still has a guilt complex, and so does Michelle Obama. The first lady of the United States, I understand how mad she is, I understand the chip on her shoulder, I understand her story. I play this sound bite to illustrate to you, in their own words, my theory that the people running this country -- Obama, his wife, Sotomayor -- they're mad. They're angry. They're not cool and calm and collected. I think it was the Hannity interview yesterday that I point this out that will be in the second installment tonight at 9PM ET on the Fox News Channel. They're angry. They're not cool, calm, and collected and there's a lingering anger that they still feel the need for retribution. They gotta show somebody how mad they are, still gotta teach somebody a lesson, they gotta get even.

Victor Davis Hanson writing about this, National Review Online, The Corner today: "Michelle Obama is now weighing in on the Sotomayor nomination, and I think it will prove a serious political mistake, since she is reverting back to her 'me too' campaign mode, in that she emphasizes both race and the anonymous 'they' who are not nice or not sufficiently accommodating to the Other. So Michelle Obama describes the fear that Sotomayor felt at Princeton -- and its lasting effects to this day." I've been fired seven times. I've been told "you can't" I can't tell you how many times, "Forget it, if you go through the rest of your life trying to show those people that they were wrong, you're never going to be happy because they're never going to admit it and you'll never know how they really feel." And that advice was some of the best advice I ever got. Don't use as your motivation the "I'll show them," in a personal sense, because it poisons you, it distracts you from the real reason you're trying to succeed. Well, somebody needs to give this advice to Sonia Sotomayor and Michelle Obama. Get over it. You've overcome it.

You are the first lady of the United States of America. But if you want to run around and still act like you are the victim of a great injustice, because you grew up in America, a country you did say as recently as a year-and-a-half ago that you were never proud of, until a year-and-a-half ago, it really is time to get over it, because this kind of attitude results in the formulation of policy. This kind of attitude results in speeches that you make. This kind of attitude causes you to apologize for your country all over the world. This kind of attitude makes it possible for you to never be happy no matter what you achieve. (interruption) What makes me think they want to be happy? What makes me think they want to be happy is, okay, I want to be happy and I assume that most people aspire to be happy. I stand corrected. I realize that the left in this country is oriented toward being miserable. Misery is their happiness. Rage and anger is their happiness. It is what animates them. I can't relate to it. I understand it, but I cannot relate to it.

Now, Victor Davis Hanson writes about this, and let me continue with what he says here. "So Michelle Obama describes the fear that Sotomayor felt at Princeton -- and its lasting effects to this day -- and then compares it, of course, to Michelle's own ambiguous feelings toward the same Princeton campus --" In fact, Michelle's thesis was all about that "-- that one is willing to put up with for the education and prestige it gave, but does not really like for the presence of apparently so many stuck-up, rich, preppy kids and their ubiquitous exclusive campus culture." You went there, you wanted to go there, but you didn't like it when you got there because of who was there. They didn't treat you well and you're still mad about it. So he makes some observations.

Number one: "Many Americans were terrified about our first year in college. Some left farms for sophisticated urban environments and were lost; others were the first in their families to go to colleges, and so on. The Ivy League is by definition snobbish to all outside its traditional insular orbit, whether white, black, brown, country folk, foreigners, etc. But by predicating such common discomfort on their own race and gender, Ms. Obama and Judge Sotomayor deprecate a universal human experience, and instead claim it as something unique to identity politics," when in fact everybody is scared to death and everybody shunned at some point, everybody is told they're worthless. I take it back, I don't think Obama's been told he's worthless. I don't think he's ever really been criticized. I don't think he's ever really been laughed at. He doesn't deal with it well.

Number two: "Once more we see the schizophrenia of affirmative action, diversity, and identify politics -- the university is both obliged to select students on the basis, at least in part, of race, class, and gender, but then almost immediately faulted for a climate that, in the eye of the recipient, stigmatizes those to whom it gives unusual consideration." Okay, the university has to get people in here, gotta get affirmative action, gotta get race, gotta get gender, gotta have all this. Then those people that get in, get mad that they got in on that basis and blame the country for it, proving a point that many have made over the years that affirmative action doesn't do one thing other than stigmatize the recipient. Sotomayor and Michelle Obama are illustrating that.

Third observation: "The remedy for feeling separate at elite colleges is apparently to reemphasize separatism based on identification with the tribe (e.g., Justice Sotomayor's senior thesis, like that once written by Ms. Obama, is predicated on ethnic and racial grievance)." She harps on and to this day harps on that she is Hispanic, that she's a Latina, that she's a Puerto Rican. She referred in of the things -- maybe it was a thesis or something she wrote -- she refers to the mainland Congress which is how they refer to the US Congress in Puerto Rico. I wonder does she think she's been nominated to the mainland Supreme Court? And she's from the mainland Bronx, by the way, she's not from Puerto Rico. Her parents were.

"All of this should disturb Democrats," Victor Davis Hanson writes, "because it fuels a general and growing perception (cf. Sotomayor's white-male references, Eric Holder's 'cowards' remark, the serial Obama apologies abroad, the confusion about America being an important Muslim nation, etc.) among the public that something very strange is going on -- a sort of generic anger being expressed at the highest levels of government that seems fueled by long past resentments against a perceived establishment that at times apparently is to roughly characterized as white, or white male, or rich, or Christian, or something other than poor, of color, or of female?" Bingo! Bingo! He's exactly right. Anger. It fuels, it propels these people.

RUSH: Turns out, ladies and gentlemen, she made close to an identical "wise Latina" comment in 1994, so it could not be a misspeak. Sonia Sotomayor, 1994 speech: "Justice O'Connor has often been cited as saying that 'a wise old man and a wise old woman reach the same conclusion in dueling cases.' I am not so sure Justice O'Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes the line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, if Professor Martha Minow is correct, there can never be a universal definition of 'wise.' Second, I would hope that a wise woman with the richness of her experience would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion."

So here's two times that she has said it, despite the fact that Obama said, nah, she needs a do-over, she wouldn't phrase it that way. So she said it in 1994, she said essentially the same thing in 2001, seven years later. This is racist. It is bigoted. There is no question about this. There's a lot of stuff in the Sotomayor stack here, there's a little funny story, "Democrats Pivot on Sotomayor." This is in The Politico: "In defusing the controversy over the 'wise Latina' comment, Democrats sought to put the spotlight back on Sotomayor's extensive legal career, assure the public she was committed to following the law and is not an activist judge. Typically senators are largely mum about their private conversations with high-profile nominees. But Democratic senators, after watching Sotomayor get ripped for the past week by conservative commentators, chose to reveal much more of their conversations from Tuesday's closed door meetings." And Patrick Leahy said, "What she said was of course one's life experience shapes who you are. But ultimately and completely ... as a judge you follow the law." No, Senator Leahy, twice she has said that a wise woman, with the richness of her experience, would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male.

And New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez has done a Chuck Schumer. "Democratic Senate campaign chief Robert Menendez (D-NJ) today issued a stern warning to Republicans up for reelection in 2010: Vote against Sonia Sotomayor at your own peril. His blast at vulnerable GOP senators was the most purely political statement from a Democrat yet in a week of Sotomayor visits to Senate offices." That follows on the heels of Chuck Schumer saying basically the same thing. "I think that when all the senators have to cast a vote on Judge Sotomayor, if they select a negative vote, they will have to explain how it is you cast a no vote on someone who has great intellect, on someone who has been committed to the rule of law, who has been committed to precedent, and who has many times decided in ways that are adverse to what her personal experiences would be."

So now we got Democrats out there threatening Republicans. That's okay. Oh, that's fine. In fact, that's worth reporting, that's good stuff. The state-run media cheers Menendez and cheers Schumer. But you let me categorize her statements as racist, all hell breaks loose, oh, my God, we can't have this, you gotta take that back, you gotta retract it. No. Don't retract it in any way, shape, manner, or form. Let me again share this little statement of Sotomayor's that she made in 1994 and again in 2001. "I would hope that a wise woman, with the richness of her experience would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male."

I want to read to you an excerpt of a speech by Justice Clarence Thomas in 1996. "In my mind, impartiality is the very essence of judging and of being a judge. A judge does not look to his or her sex or racial, social, or religious background when deciding a case. It is exactly these factors that a judge must push to one side in order to render a fair, reasoned judgment on the meaning of the law. In order to be a judge, a person must attempt to exorcise himself or herself of the passions, thoughts, and emotions that fill any frail human being. He must become almost pure, in the way that fire purifies metal, before he can decide a case. Otherwise, he is not a judge, but a legislator." Clarence Thomas describing his job, 1996. Compare that to Sotomayor. Well, I would hope a wise woman, with the richness of her experience, would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion. And the Democrats want to tell us that she's devoted to the rule of law? And that if we vote against her, what, what will happen? These Republicans are now going to have no chance to get the Hispanic vote? Really? Are they getting it now?

I'm going to ask this question 'til I'm blue in the face. How can you sponsor, advocate and demand amnesty for 20 million illegal Hispanics and not get their vote? President Bush didn't get their vote. John McCain didn't get their vote. They pushed for illegal alien amnesty. For crying out loud, if that's not going to get you the Hispanic vote, what will? And by the same token, the Democrats destroyed Miguel Estrada, Alberto Gonzales, Janice Rogers Brown, and Clarence Thomas. Did they lose the Hispanic vote when they did? Did they lose the black vote when they did? No. So there must be other explanations for why Hispanics vote the way they do and why African-Americans vote the way they do. But these idiotic Republicans buy into the premise that one negative comment about any Hispanic or black will forever ruin the chance to get votes from Hispanics or blacks. It's as absurd as believing the silly notion that moderates are the great purists of our culture and they don't like acrimony, and those moderates don't like partisanship, they don't like it. One word of mean-spirited criticism from a Republican candidate and those moderates are going to go where? To the Democrat Party, which is the home of the most extremist, mean-spirited, anger, and rage-filled partisanship in our country.

Now, somebody smarter than I am is going to have to explain to me how a normal campaign of criticizing your opponent's policies sends these innocent, waif moderates who can't stand negativity running into the arms of the authors of negativity. It doesn't. It's a total fraud. It's a position that has been put forth, the Republicans buy into it, it's a premise that's deeply flawed, and all of these premises -- Menendez, Schumer, you vote against her at your peril -- this is a threat, and it's a demand that Republicans shut up and don't do one thing that they believe in, don't stand for anything because you're going to pay for it, and you're going to lose. The sad thing is that so many Republicans, "Okay, okay, you're right, you're right, you're right, I won't vote against her, I won't even say anything, you're right, if I say something negative about her, oh, yeah, you're right, okay, okay, okay, okay, by the way, we loved Obama's speech in the Middle East. That was a great speech. We love Obama."

RUSH: Ellen in Essex, Connecticut, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program. How are you?

CALLER: Well, I'm a first-time caller, and haven't been listening to you long, but I've been listening to you these last couple of days talking about why are Michelle and Judge Sotomayor so mad.

CALLER: And I believe part of their problem is they were trained to be that way. Let me tell you why I say that. I grew up around the same time as them, I actually spent some time in the projects with my family. When push came to shove, they were told that you need an edge, and you sit down and you profess your minority status.You push that. So all things being equal, they were trained to be angry about being a minority rather than...

RUSH: Makes total sense. I think that jibes with a theory of mine that Sotomayor and the things that she's written is what she's been taught.

CALLER: Oh, not only taught. They were encouraged. They were counseled to do this.

RUSH: Right. They were at fault the multicultural curriculum. Obama himself, too, I believe, along with Michelle.

CALLER: Right. And so if you believe that, if you -- and I do; I watched it. I grew up and I watched it with my friends. I watched it in the projects I lived in, and so if you're successful -- you know all things being equal -- you got into the best schools, you got the scholarships and you built on that success that way, then when you got your first job, you know, "Remind them that you're a Hispanic, remind them that are an oppressed minority."

RUSH: Right, right. Exactly. I hate to cut you short, but I have no flexibility on time here. Ellen, thanks much.

HANNITY INTRO: Rush Limbaugh has been the focus of the political world in recent months. He has been viciously attacked by the left and even criticized by so-called members of the Republican Party, like Colin Powell. I sat down with Rush earlier today to get his thoughts on all the criticism that he has faced and his reaction to Obama's "Muslim nation" comment and also his thoughts on the country's turn toward socialism. Here is Part One of my exclusive interview with nationally syndicated radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

RUSH: Right. I weighed 290 in February, and it was fun, believe me. It was fun getting there. (laughing)

RUSH: It really was. But it got to be too much, so I've lost 58 pounds now, and I'm at 232. So I figure 32 more to go. I want to look like you.

HANNITY: Listen, you've been commenting a lot on your show about "state-run media." You actually used the phrase, "I have become an American piñata."

HANNITY: "The new game in the Beltway is the 'Bash Rush.'" You're in the news almost every day. What's going on?

RUSH: Well, I think it's primarily because the Republican Party or the -- let's say, whatever, that the opposition to Obama has not surfaced politically in Washington. So it's us. You know, those of us who are consistent on the radio and on television criticizing him, we become the focus. For whatever reason, the Republican Party at any level has chosen not to take Obama on and has chosen not to try to attach him to any of the disastrous things that he's doing. I do. And, of course, liberals need a villain; they need a demon. They can't win a debate in the arena of ideas. They need a demon, and they need somebody to demonize, and I'm it, and I'm happy to be it.

HANNITY: Apparently, it was even focus grouped and it was polled by Greenberg and Carville and the rest of these guys.

RUSH: You know what? Here's the way I look at that. I'm a guy on the radio. I can't raise anybody's taxes; I can't send anybody's kids off to war. I can't take over General Motors. I can't do anything. I can't exert control over one other person's life. I can't. And yet they're polling me!

RUSH: I take this as a major career achievement. They are polling me as though I am a legitimate political figure seeking office. So the result of the poll, whatever the approval number is, is irrelevant to me.

RUSH: Nor... You know, we're not having a recession on our business side, either.

RUSH: So they can do all they want to try to make me this demon and villain, but to me it's a major career achievement to be polled as though I'm a political figure that can change people's lives, with power. I mean, I can change their lives with inspiration or influence, but I have no power over anybody.

HANNITY: All right. So last time I'm here, I asked you this question that ended up, people talked about it for how many months, and the question was: "Obama's and your views, they are the antithesis." And I said, "All right. So do you want him to succeed?" You gave a very long answer that got reduced to, "Rush wants Obama to fail."

RUSH: Well, in a sense it was. It was. I mean, I don't hide from it. I do want and I still want Obama to fail. Let me try it this way. And I've seen your interviews with that great guy from the UK, what's his name?

RUSH: Right. And all these other people and the Republicans are saying, "Well, that's a horrible thing. We don't want the president of the United States to fail! Why, we want our president to succeed." Okay, you want him to succeed. Does that mean you want Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court? Does that mean you want the government running the mortgage business in America, having control over most of the banking system? Do you want the government making automobiles that nobody wants to buy? Because that's Obama succeeding. If you want the president, Barack Obama, to succeed, then you want the government taking over more and more of the average daily life of the American people? I don't want that. I define America succeeding by virtue of Obama failing. I love America. I want everybody to succeed. He's making it harder for that to happen -- particularly, Sean, the middle class. We can talk about what he plans to do to the rich or people that make 250 grand or more. But he's closing off the American dream to people. It's the middle class in this country that historically has made this the greatest country on earth because of their pursuit of the American dream, however they define it. It's their pursuit of excellence, trying to be the best they can be, working hard, and to move themselves up the economic ladder. He's just shut that off.

HANNITY: But it's interesting here. But you were very clear. You had said if he adds Reagan to FDR

HANNITY: -- and to Lincoln. A lot of context and texture now has evolved, a lot of the things you're saying.

HANNITY: He's apologizing for America's arrogance. He's taking over car companies.

RUSH: And fascism. We must not be afraid to use that word, either. It's a combination of the two. No, I don't back away from anything I've said about President Obama and his policies and his plans. I don't know him personally. I don't wish him ill as a human being. But he's my president. He's all of our president. His ideas and his policies matter. I can't remember who said this, but, you know, this is something that I thought long and hard about repeating in this interview with you. "If Al-Qaeda wants to demolish the America we know and love, they better hurry because Obama is beating them to it." He wants to impose his values on America. He's running around apologizing for the country. Sean, I'm telling you, this guy has grown up, he was taught that there is something inherently immoral and unjust about America -- and now that he leads it, he thinks it's great. Finally, America is moral. Finally, America is just, and it's his duty to run around the world and apologize. Because he thinks... He's been taught that everybody around the world hates us and doesn't like us to the degree that he doesn't like the country the way it was constituted.

HANNITY: Well, he said, when he went to France, that's when he first use the term America is "arrogant." He goes to Prague, talks about a vision of a world without nuclear weapons. The morning after, hours after North Korea fires a missile over Japan, Chavez, Ortega sits through a 55-minute --

RUSH: It's okay for Iran to have nuclear power. It's okay for the North Koreans to have nuclear power, as long as neither nation makes a bomb out of it, right? What are we doing? We're going windmills?

RUSH: We're going solar power? We're going to build little lawn mowers with two seats on them that nobody wants to drive, at his direction? We're letting the rest of the world go nuclear and we can't because of a single movie, The China Syndrome? Hugo Chavez. You don't know this today because you got in late last night and you've had to prepare for this interview. Hugo Chavez, a story just broke this morning, made a joke. He said, "Fidel Castro and I, if we're not careful, are going to end up to the right of Obama." This guy has nationalized General Motors. I mean Hugo Chavez is praising Obama as being further left than he, Chavez is! Now, there's a running competition. You could keep a chart here of who's nationalizing more, Obama or Chavez. Now, you could say Chavez has nationalized more businesses, but the ones that Obama is in the process of taking over are probably worth more.

HANNITY: You've been in the middle of this running dialogue, let's say, with Colin Powell. And he's saying, "No. Rush isn't going to get his way." Now, I thought that the Republicans had their moderate candidate in the last election. Conservatives didn't win the nomination. It was John McCain, who was a moderate, who Colin Powell said he liked. And now Colin Powell's mad at you. Colin Powell voted for Obama.

RUSH: Yeah. This is something that somebody smarter than I am is going to have to explain to me. How is it that all of these quasi-conservatives and Republicans are running around saying, "Oh, my gosh! We've gotta keep Colin Powell in our party"? Would somebody tell me what Colin Powell has done for the party? Name an issue that he has championed for the Republican Party. I can't think of one. Name anything Obama is doing that Colin Powell has disagreed with. I can't think of one. You're right. Colin Powell endorsed Obama, strategically at a point in the campaign to destroy the McCain campaign. He endorsed Obama. Why in the world do we need somebody who lovingly voted Democrat, endorsed the Democrat, after the Republican Party nominated the classically moderate candidate Colin Powell says this party needs to nominate? It goes, "Well, we've gotta get the Hispanic vote, Rush. That's why we can't be too harsh on Sotomayor." Right. Well, we had a president and a presidential candidate author amnesty for illegals, and that didn't get us the Hispanic vote, did it? So, pray tell, what in the world has Colin Powell ever done for the Republican Party that makes him so valuable?

HANNITY: How do you go...? My question for him is: How do you go from supporting Reagan, whose values are the antithesis of Obama's -- or even W -- to supporting the socialism, the worldview of Barack Obama?

RUSH: Yeah. I have the answer. I have all the answers, and I'll explain them to you.

RUSH: (laughing) Colin Powell, I think, is trying to -- and he succeeded now -- re-ingratiate himself with the Washington-New York establishment. I think two things were a factor in his endorsement of Obama. First one is race, clearly. Nobody has the guts to say that, but I mean, what else could it be? Because we just discussed, the ideal moderate Republican candidate was nominated, and Powell is off the reservation supporting Obama. So race is clearly a factor. But also, and very close to this, I think Powell is humiliated over the fact he was sent to the United Nations to make the case for weapons of mass destruction and then none were found. And I think he's profoundly embarrassed about that, and his life since has been about rehabilitating himself and his image with the people who hated the Iraq war, who mock Bush on weapons of mass destruction. So this is about a legacy. This is about Powell trying to rehab himself with the people that matter both to him: the DC establishment. So those are the two explanations. It's not about issues.

HANNITY: Sotomayor, about her -- and we all know the quote about what she said about Latina women, "with the richness of their experience, would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white male." You said those comments "absolutely disqualify her." And it made a lot of news, quote, "reverse racism," because you said that's reverse racism. I wanted you to expound on that.

RUSH: Well, you know, I got a little grief from people for saying that there's no such thing as "reverse racism," just call her a "racist" -- and they're right. This is a racist thing to say, and it's bigoted; and she would bring, no question about it, racism and bigotry to the court if she is confirmed. But, Sean, I've been thinking about this, and there's something else going on with Sonia Sotomayor. We don't know what she thinks about Roe v. Wade. She hasn't said. Now, we know that she's Catholic. We know that she's Puerto Rican, Hispanic Catholic. They tend to be devout. She has no record; she hasn't said much about it. If -- now, I'm speaking for me personally -- if I learned, if I could be assured that she is actually a pro-life person and does think that Roe v. Wade is bad constitutional law, and if she would rule on the right side of the life issue, I might look past this racism. You can deal with that. But that's something very, very important to me, and she could be stealth in that regard. And I know that... Well, there's no record. Normally most liberals, they love to tell you how pro-choice they are on abortion. She doesn't have any of that.

RUSH: Absolutely. I think Obama wants his mirror image on the court. He wants a radical on the court. Obama talks about the Constitution in terms of he's constrained by it. In numerous speeches he said, "Al-Qaeda is not constrained by the Constitution." He has referred to the Constitution as "a charter of negative rights." Now, when you and I hear that, "What? How in the world can the Constitution be negative?" To him, the Constitution doesn't spell out what government can do. The Constitution limits government. He doesn't like that. I think he wants -- and he's said on many occasions that the court needs to take more. It hasn't done enough on redistribution. It needs to use empathy and the law. He wants people on the court who will make policy. That's why I think the hearings on Sotomayor ought to be full bore -- whether she gets confirmed or not, full bore. Find out who she is, all about her, because we'll learn and be able to inform the American people who Obama is. That's key.

HANNITY: But it is interesting because that term -- "racist," "racial" -- is radioactive. But Chuck Schumer said, he made the comment that you do so "at your own peril" if you go after Judge Sotomayor. And I found that comment pretty interesting, 'cause I'm thinking, "Well, that didn't stop you and your fellow Democrats from going after Miguel Estrada."

HANNITY: Remember the he's-a-Latino memo. Or Clarence Thomas or even Alberto Gonzales.

RUSH: Well, see, that's another thing. They tell us, "Go easy on her because Republicans...." Our own people said, "We gotta go easy on her because we want the Hispanic vote." Really? The left went after Clarence Thomas, tried to destroy him. Did they lose black votes? No. They went after Estrada, all the Hispanics you mentioned. Did they lose the Hispanic vote? No. They're just trying to shut us up. A racist is a racist!

RUSH: You know, they may think, Sean, it's too shrill to say. They may wish I would tone it down. But nobody has refuted the charge. Nobody has said, "No, she's not a racist." In fact, the White House has said, "If she could do it again, she'd say it differently." So they want a do-over. With Obama saying that --

RUSH: No. That's the point. She'd bring racism and bigotry to the court. There's no other way to describe it.

HANNITY: You came on the air one day, and you said, "I resign as the head of the Republican Party."

RUSH: Because I was not the head of the Republican Party. I was named the head of the Republican Party by the White House, by the Obama White House. What they were trying to do was get Republicans -- elected Republicans -- to throw me overboard, disavow me. What they would love to do, Sean, at the White House level is really marginalize mainstream conservatism and mainstream conservatives because that's the primary opposition to Obama. And if they could have gotten a couple of Republicans to go out and say, "Yeah, Limbaugh is off the reservation. He's a nut. He's a wacko," it would have been a success and a home run. So that's why they named me the titular head. So I decided to resign as the titular head of the Republican Party and anoint Powell as the head, since so many of our brains in the conservative -- quasi-conservative -- media and Republican Party think he's a model Republican. Okay, he's the leader.

HANNITY: Well, if he was so accurate in America's desire for more government, more services, higher taxes, "they're willing to pay for 'em," those are the comments he made. He seems to be out of sync with even the voters in California, of all places.

RUSH: Well, that's another thing. I'm glad you reminded me of that, because he did say Americans want to pay higher taxes and they want bigger government, and then the California vote came. He's clearly... This is my point. He's clearly out of touch, as most people inside the Beltway are. The longer you live in that town, that town becomes your world, and Washington is not America. I mean, it's a great city, and there are great things to do there, I don't want people to misunderstand. But the political and social structure of Washington, DC, bears no resemblance to how life in this country takes place. Government and everything there is number one, two, and three in everybody's lives, and out in the country it ain't.

RUSH: It's their job. It's their kids' future. It's these kinds of things. So the idea that somebody who believes government ought to grow and grow and grow is the ideal candidate or identity factor of the Republican Party, is absurd.

HANNITY: Do you see any leaders emerging, some people that you're watching that you like? You were pretty disposed towards Bobby Jindal for a while.

RUSH: Yeah, you know what I've learned? I'll tell you something. Because of this profile, high profile that --

RUSH: And I think others are going to emerge as Obamaism continues to happen. I think President Obama is an angry man. They say he's cool and calm. I think he's cold. I think he's angry. The people that he ran around with and who mentored him, that matters. You know, you tried to call attention to it.

RUSH: You were the first out of the box with the Reverend Wright and the Bill Ayers stuff.

RUSH: And people didn't want to hear it because they have a cult-like association and attachment to Obama. But fact of the matter is, the way to understand him is, is he wants to return the nation's wealth to its "rightful owners." He comes from a belief that those in America who have succeeded have done so on the backs of the poor and the disadvantaged. They've had their wealth stolen from them. Everybody. That's why he wants to cap CEO pay. That's why he doesn't want them, the achieved, flying their jets to Vegas. He can. He can take two GV's and three helicopters to New York for a date that you and I pay for; but if I pay for it, even myself on my airplane, I get castigated because it's somehow not cool. I think if you want to understand what this man is doing, what his policies are about, it's returning the nation's wealth to its rightful owners. That's how the UAW, the union, ends up with a major ownership stake in Chrysler and GM.

HANNITY: Hang on a second. If Karl Rove is right, and he's arrogant; and Rush Limbaugh is right, and he's angry; and Sean Hannity is right, and he's radical -- and you made the same point as I have --

HANNITY: -- that's frightening for America. If all of that... Because I think it is. I think the America we knew, Rush, I think it is going away, and I don't think people see what's happening. And I think by the time it's all finished, we're going to have trouble.

RUSH: There's still time for this to be stopped. There are the elections in 2010; and there are the elections, of course, in 2012. If you look at polling data, his approval numbers are pretty steady at 63, 64. That is much, I think, guaranteed by the State-Run Media and the way they report. But if you look at polls on the issues -- issue after issue -- you'll find that on most of them the majority of the American people, like, don't want Gitmo closed, they don't want bailouts of General Motors. Most of the American people, a clear majority disagree policy-wise with everything he's doing. Yet, he has this widely high approval rating. He's very charismatic, demagogic, and it's not what he says that has people captivated. It's how he says it.

HANNITY: Obama said to the BBC, "The US can't impose its values on other countries."

HANNITY: You know the quote I'm saying. We cannot impose its values on other countries.

RUSH: Yeah, but see, that's a typical Obama straw man argument. He comes up and says, "America, we can't impose our values!" Well, when do we, and what are our values? The next part of the question is: What are our values? Freedom.

RUSH: Democracy. Those are universal. So after he says we can't impose our values, he then defines our values. You can't "impose" freedom. We liberate people! Somebody's going to have to tell Mrs. Clinton -- who's been marginalized, by the way. She's over at State Department with nothing to do. She's running around the world telling other countries they have to do gay rights the way we do. I think that's imposing our values, his values on the rest of the world -- and there's one other aspect of this.

RUSH: Somebody's going to have to convince me I'm wrong. I think Obama has something against Israel. You know, letting Iran do this and telling Israel it's gotta stop building? Oh, imposing values? "Hey, Mr. Netanyahu, stop doing your settlements. Stop defending yourself." Who's imposing what on whom? It's Obama imposing his view of things around the world.

HANNITY: We saw what happened in California. You see the takeover of GM. They want to monitor CEO pay even for companies that don't get any government money.

HANNITY: They're taking over banks. They're taking over financial institutions. It is the definition of socialism. What does this mean? Let me give you the debt numbers. You know them as well as anybody. We quadruple 'em in a year. We quadruple the deficit in ten years. We'll be paying nearly a trillion in interest of the debt in ten years. What does this mean, as you stand back? You were talking earlier about the middle class and the impact this is going to have on the middle class. What does this Obama economy look like, assuming he doesn't get a second term, after four years of Obama economics?

RUSH: Well, most of the stimulus spending, for example, doesn't go into effect until 2010. There's a chance, with those elections, to dial some of that back. But if this man succeeds, Sean, it's going to be 25 years rolling this stuff back -- and if they get nationalized health care, they are going to be able to control every aspect of our lives because you get in a car the wrong way, it can impact health care costs. If you eat popcorn with coconut oil, it could impact health care costs. If they get that, then people have no idea the control over their lives the government will exert. That's got to be stopped. That is intolerable to go "single-payer," government socialized medicine. I want to say one other thing, even if we go overtime here. People ask me about the Fairness Doctrine all the time, and I've been watching something here. Newspapers are losing money. Advertising revenues are down and circulation. But radio companies, too, Sean, television companies, their advertising revenues are down. Now, individual shows, my show is up.

RUSH: Yours, but radio station ownership groups, advertising as a whole is down.

RUSH: Now, what happens if they have to file Chapter 11? What if all these radio companies can't make their debt payments next year, the year after that, and have to go Chapter 11? If Obama is controlling the banks, and the banks then will or will not lend to the broadcasters and the newspapers to make them solvent, we could reach a point where Obama controls radio and TV, because he will own it. By virtue of the banks he controls owning it. This is a very stealth way. You don't need the Fairness Doctrine. You don't need localism. And people say, "That will never happen." Well, did you ever think that government and Obama would be dictating the kind of cars GM and Chrysler make? Did you ever think Obama would be dictating what people on Wall Street can earn? Did you ever think that the mortgage business would be controlled by a single man, Barack Obama? Nobody ever thought that. So if you think that the media in this country cannot also be owned by Barack Obama, think again.

RUSH: Well, that's the path we're headed down. We have to stop and shout and stop this and oppose it. It's very... This is not the America that you and I grew up in. I said earlier, "If Al-Qaeda wants to demolish the America we know and love, they better hurry, because Obama is beating them to it." I read that in a British column. I think it was the UK Telegraph. Now, it resonated with me because this guy is changing the America we've come to know. See, I think he's got a big chip on his shoulder.

RUSH: And we look out and say, "Where are the American people? The 64 million or whatever who voted for the guy? When are they going to wake up? Did Democrats really, the people that voted for him really, want this kind of America?

HANNITY: But don't you want the Republicans to wake up? You see all the contortions they've been going through about who their head is and whether or not Reagan conservatism needs to be, you know, pushed in the past and this new modern version of a watered-down conservatism or watered-down Republican Party. I think Reagan spelled it out pretty well in March of '75 when he said, you know, "No pale pastels. Bold colors, bold differences." If they can't distinguish themselves now from Barack Obama and socialism and Jimmy Carter national security...

RUSH: It is the greatest opportunity they've had to draw that contrast between what Obama represents and what is traditionally the Republican Party or conservatism.

RUSH: The problem with the Republican Party is the old guard, country club, blue-blood, Rockefeller types are now running it. The Colin Powell types, the Tom Ridge types.

RUSH: And they want to share in the power in Washington. They're content to share it as losers. The Republican Party right now is not led by conservatives. There are plenty of conservative Republicans in the party, but it's hard for them to get noticed. But you can't wait for the Republican Party, Sean.

RUSH: At some point somebody in that party is going to emerge and carry the banner forward. Meanwhile, there's a population out there that has to be told the truth, and if the party is not going to stand up and do it right now, we have to. I think at some point they're going to get over their fear. Right now it's still early. We're just past a hundred days. Republicans are still deathly afraid of being criticized for criticizing Obama. They don't want to attach Obama's policies to him -- and Obama doesn't, either. You know, Obama is still blaming Bush. I think he's a just a sitting-duck target, politically --

RUSH: -- to score major, major points for the traditions and values that made this country great.

HANNITY: Listen, he jokes about the Special Olympics. He gives an iPod to the Queen with speeches of himself. (chuckles) He flies an airplane over New York and spends 300 grand. He goes on a date with his wife to New York, as you mentioned earlier.

RUSH: And he's been to all 57 states, and he said that we need to hoist values. It's clear. I mean, he's got --

RUSH: I know. I know. Well, look, we just have to come to grips. There's a double standard.

RUSH: There's a double standard. He's loved and adored by the State-Run Media. Obama is blaming Bush and his predecessors for all that he inherited.

RUSH: He is escaping, so far, any attachment to the disasters that he's causing. At some point that is going to change, and that, I think -- I'm hopeful -- is when the elected class of conservative and Republicans will rise up and take the baton and run with it.

HANNITY: I don't think there's any way it can't happen. You mentioned earlier, "I'm optimistic." I think there's going to be a lot of damage done in the meantime, but it's gotta happen -- and, you know what? A lot of people, I think, are going to come to you and say, "You know what, Rush? You were kind of right about all this stuff."

RUSH: Yeah, you know, I joked the other day. I told people when I claimed I'm "America's piñata," I said, "You know how people always say, 'Why didn't somebody tell me?' I'm the guy telling you, and I'm going to keep telling you." Sean, I'm optimistic, too. You look at FDR, and what did we get after FDR? We got 40 years of liberalism. We're not going to have 40 years of liberalism after Obama. There is an opposition media. There is an opposition to this kind of destruction that's being done to this country. Whatever he does, we're going to be able to roll it back, and I don't think he's going to be able to get away with as much as he would like to. There's simply too much attention being brought to bear on it. We're in America. We are Americans. We still have the freedom to do what we want and to be who we want to be, and you have to be optimistic when you have that kind of ability.

RUSH: I have here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers an AP story, and the headline of the AP story is amazing: "'Jobless Benefit Rolls Fall, Initial Claims Dip.' -- The number of people on the unemployment insurance rolls fell slightly for the first time in 20 weeks --" cheer, cheer, rah-rah, great news, thank you, Obama, is the implication "-- while the tally of new jobless claims also dipped." Wow! Obama's fabulous. The stimulus is working! The number of people on the unemployment insurance rolls fell slightly, while the tally of new jobless claims also dipped. But wait, you gotta go halfway down this story, more than the average American will spend time on a news story, to find this -- and the way it's written is classic: "The unemployment rate, meanwhile, will rise to 9.2 percent from 8.9 percent in April."

Now, wait a second here. The lead is the number of Americans on the unemployment insurance rolls fell, and the tally of new claims also dipped. Yes, more people are going to work! No, people are not going to work. More people are out of work. Unemployment rate 9.2%, up from 8.9%. Do you realize this is .2% higher than they predicted, and now they're saying it might be 10% by the end of next year. We've lost over two million jobs this year, since January, two million jobs have been lost. There is no way to calculate jobs saved; that is a myth. Some other highlights here of the story: "The total jobless benefit rolls fell by 15,000 to 6.7 million, the first drop since early January. Continuing claims had set record highs every week since the week ending Jan. 24. The continuing claims data lag initial claims by one week. ... The number of initial jobless claims remains stubbornly high, above the 605,000 level reached five weeks ago. That was the lowest level in 14 weeks." They're working so hard, they are twisting themselves into pretzels to take this continuing bad news and try to put a good light on it.

There's one thing missing here. I'm sure you're wondering how in the hell can unemployment go up from 8.9% to 9.2% while AP-Obama reports that the number of Americans on unemployment insurance fell? How can that be? I'll tell you how and there's something they always included when reporting unemployment numbers with George W. Bush that's not in this story. And it is this. I have to paraphrase it because I remember reading this in all the Bush unemployment stories, but it was, "These figures do not include the number of people who have just given up trying to find a job." Or who think it's not worth looking for a job. That's how it's gone up. They're not counting the people who have just given up. They're not counting the people who may have left the unemployment rolls but don't have a job because the state-run media is doing everything it can here, ladies and gentlemen, to prop up a bad economy in the minds of people to make it look like Obama's plans are working.

Then we have another AP story: "US Retailers Report May Sales Decline," except at Walmart, by the way. Walmart sales are through the roof. They've got a big employee meeting in Arkansas coming up soon, and it's important to point out that Walmart is not unionized. And the story crediting Walmart's success, it's just because of the recession, just because their prices are low and people have to turn there because it's the only place they can afford to shop, but Walmart's trick will be holding onto these customers once the economy turns around. I think Walmart's already demonstrated they have a huge customer base, it grows and they hold onto it. At any rate: "U.S. retailers reported same-store sales fell in May below expectations, as pressures like rising unemployment--" wait a minute, AP, you just said unemployment is going down. This is the problem with the state-run media. Not everybody's on the same page. One state-run media story says unemployment's going down, even though they quote the rate going up, and this AP story makes no bones about the fact that unemployment is continuing to rise, which curtails consumer spending.

The question I have, US retailers reported same store sales fell in May, below expectations. What were they expecting, exactly, in this economic climate, what were they expecting? "Notably, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer did not report results this month." They did. I have it here in the stack. Walmart sales are up. They got big meeting coming up.

RUSH: It was mere moments ago -- actually, the beginning of the program I read this incredible story from state-controlled Associated Press. "The number of Americans on the unemployment insurance rolls fell slightly for the first time in 20 weeks while a tally of new jobless claims also dipped," and the clear impression here is that unemployment's going down, more and more people are finding jobs, right? And then you read more than halfway down the story you'll find, the unemployment rate, meanwhile, rose to 9.2% from 8.9% in April. So unemployment's actually going up, despite the state-run AP's attempt to make their readers believe that people are actually finding jobs.

And I pointed out that what's missing in this state-run media report from other media when George W. Bush was president was this line: "The number of people who have given up, who are no longer filing unemployment, can't find work and have stopped trying, is incalculable." The only way you go from 8.9 to 9.2% unemployment if more and more people are losing jobs and if more and more people are not even trying to find one. Lo and behold, the Los Angeles Times today has found those people who have quit looking for jobs. And, you know what? A lot of people love it!

Listen to this: "Michael Van Gorkom was laid off by Yahoo in late April. He didn't panic. He didn't rush off to a therapist. Instead, the 33-year-old Santa Monica resident discovered that being jobless 'kind of settled nicely.' Week one: 'I thought, 'OK ... I need to send out resumes, send some e-mails, need to do networking.' Week two: 'A little less.' Every week since: 'I'm going to go to the beach and enjoy some margaritas.' What most people would call unemployment, Van Gorkom embraced as 'funemployment.' While millions of Americans struggle to find work as they face foreclosures and bankruptcy, others have found a silver lining in the economic meltdown. These happily jobless tend to be single and in their 20s and 30s. Some were laid off. Some quit voluntarily, lured by generous buyouts.

"Buoyed by severance, savings, unemployment checks or their parents, the funemployed do not spend their days poring over job listings. They travel on the cheap for weeks. They head back to school or volunteer at the neighborhood soup kitchen. And at least till the bank account dries up, they're content living for today. 'I feel like I've been given a gift of time and clarity,' said Aubrey Howell, 29, of Franklin, Tenn., who was laid off from her job as a tea shop manager in April. After sleeping in late and visiting family in Florida, she recently mused on Twitter: 'Unemployment or funemployment?' "Never heard of funemployment?" I hadn't. "Here's Urban Dictionary's definition: 'The condition of a person who takes advantage of being out of a job to have the time of their life. ...' It may not have entered our daily lexicon yet, but a small army of social media junkies with a sudden overabundance of time is busy Tweeting..."

Now, it's a long story. It goes on more and more people, more examples of how wonderful it is to be unemployed, to burn up your savings, to feed off your parents, to work at a nonprofit, to work in a soup kitchen, blah, blah, or to travel to Poland or what have you. All of fine and dandy. People can do with their lives what they want. I don't care. I just want to ask you: Did we see any stories like this during the Bush administration? No! We got the pain and suffering of unemployment. Homeless were everywhere. It was dire out there. America was unjust and unfair, and Bush didn't care. And now that we've got 9.2% unemployment, under the leadership of The Messiah, we get stories on what a wonderful experience it can be. Everybody's happy! Whether they have a home or not, whether they have a job or not, everybody's happy. Thank you, state-controlled media, Los Angeles Times.

RUSH: Now, the jobless rate is now official. Yesterday it was 9.2%. Today they've really officialized it. The unemployment rate is 9.4%. This is a 26-year high! How is that hope and change working for you? How is that stimulus working for you? Biden went on television today while Obama's over there wining and dining his wife in Paris and says, "You know what? We're going to speed up the stimulus spending." They're going to speed it up? What, you're just going to do it by fiat or you going to go back to Congress and have legislation for this? These people are autocrats. They're running everything now at the White House on their own initiative without consulting Congress. Of course the Democrats in Congress don't care and the Republicans in Congress may not know. (I'm being charitable.)

But the fact is that government-controlled Associated Press is trying to spin record high -- 26-year record high -- unemployment rate as good news, and so is government-controlled Reuters. "US employers cut 345,000 jobs last month, the fewest since September and far less than forecast according to a government report on Friday that was more evidence the economy's severe weakness was diminishing." Can we put this together and see if it adds up to you? Unemployment, they say, "is slowing" and it has reached "a record high." Now, for those of you under 40 who attended public schools, I'm sure it makes perfect sense to you. Unemployment is slowing, the recession may be ending! Unemployment is now at a 26-year record high. And this, as I say, does not even include numbers of people who have given up. They're not even trying to find work. Those numbers were always reported when the Bush administration ran the show.

But now that it's Lord Obama, they do not report that number or even mention it. The real unemployment number, when you factor those people in, is like 16.9%. When you factor people in who are not trying to work -- we had the story in the Los Angeles Times yesterday (government-run Los Angeles Times) a big story on "funemployment," the people not trying to find work and are enjoying being out of work and they're traveling and they're staying at beds-and-breakfasts and they're living off their mom and dad. And they're working at nonprofits. Oh, whoopee! It's 16.9 or 17% real unemployment when you factor in the people that don't care anymore and are not trying to find work. Here's how the government-controlled media -- we have a montage of government-controlled reporters, this is how they played it yesterday and today.

RICH EDSON: You put it in context, 345,000 jobs lost last month, not all that bad.

CHRISTINE ROMANS: The mass layoffs are slowing. We know it's tough out there but there are indications that maybe the worst is bottoming here.

CONTESSA BREWER: 9.4%, it's a grim number. I understand there's a silver lining to this report.

HAMPTON PEARSON: A bit of a silver lining in that we are finally beginning to slow the rate of job losses.

ALAN KNUCKMAN: We've got this unemployment number. Not great numbers, but the market's reacted to a positive, that they weren't surprised.

RUSH: So there you have it. I mean, no matter where you go in the government-run media, a record high unemployment rate equals a bottoming out. It's not that bad. Silver lining! A silver lining. If you've wondered what State-Run Media, state-run controlled media is government-run media, government-controlled media -- this is what you get. This is no different than Pravda back in the days of the Soviet Union. This is no different than Granma down in Cuba reporting on Fidel Castro. This is no different than a Hugo Chavez media. This is no different than Iranian media. This is no different than the media Saddam controlled. Government-run media. I mean we've got record unemployment, the highest rate since 1983 and it's good news! So good that Biden is going to go out there and speed up the stimulus spending. You want some more good news? Goldman Sachs is predicting that by the end of the year oil will be at $85 a barrel. Today it spiked at over $70 a barrel. Let me just check. Let me just check where it is right now. It is at 69 bucks a barrel. It peaked at over $70 today. They say $85 by the end of the year. So, my friends, the meaning of this is, if -- and I mean if, capital "I," capital "F" -- if there is any recovery, despite Obama's policies, $85-a-barrel gasoline is going to wipe it out.

RUSH: Ellen in Essex, Connecticut. We had Ellen on the phone yesterday, when we ran out of time, and she let us call her back. Ellen, thanks for letting us do that. Great to have you back with us today.

CALLER: Great to you talk with you again, Rush. It's a rainy day here and I'm glad to talk to you about it again.

RUSH: All right. Let's get started from the very beginning of what you were talking about yesterday.

CALLER: Yeah. Well, you were talking on and off over the course of several days about the "anger," and I had a theory. I don't know why you're surprised about the anger.

CALLER: Right. I grew up in New York. I grew up in -- I spent part of my life in -- the projects as well. And, by the way, I wouldn't call Co-op City the dregs of the projects where Judge Sotomayor lived, but that's a separate issue. Michelle is younger than I am. Sotomayor is sort of my age-group. We were brought up to basically, you know... You have bright people. They're going to go on to college. They're going to get great jobs. The difference was, my peers were coached to be angry, you know, "When all things were equal, you know, you're a minority. You know, get angry about it. Don't let the opportunity slip away. You know, build on the anger." So they got the scholarships, they got the internships, they got their first jobs, and so anger became a part of their tool set -- and it's so much a part of their success... You know, like we all do, if you behave in a certain way and it's successful and you get rewarded for it, you know, continue to use it. So we have a whole generation of folks who are sort of coming up that have been coached this way, you know, post the civil rights era to leverage their anger on their mistreated historical status. I don't know why anybody is surprised they continue to behave angry. They've been rewarded for being angry.

RUSH: Well, let me clarify. I'm not surprised that they're angry, and I'm not surprised to hear you say that they're coached. I would say they're taught.

RUSH: They are taught to be angry. They're taught that they've been cheated. They're taught they've been discriminated against. They're taught this country's unfair. They're taught this country is unethical. They are taught that this country is discriminatory. They are taught that this country is immoral and unjust. They're taught this.

CALLER: But, Rush, there's a nuance there. Don't stop at taught. It's been reinforced with success. That's the key here. You can be taught a lot of things but if you try it and it doesn't work...

RUSH: Oh, I remember. I remember, because I did probably say, "Michelle Obama's first lady. What in the world is she angry about?"

RUSH: Okay, so you're saying the success then promotes or confirms the anger, did you say?

CALLER: Yes. In other words, the anger became a viable tool. It worked. It got me to that next step. It got someone's attention. You know, it nudged me into the right spot. So, like I said, if you use a tool like we all do coming up in our professions -- like I learned not to get too pissed off at people, excuse my language --

CALLER: Because in business you can't go around doing that. But, you know, using that as an edge, they became successful. And, like I said, "If you learn to be successful using certain techniques, you're not going to throw them away all of a sudden."

CALLER: I don't think it... Half my friends it was never genuine. It was a tool. You know, most of them are like, "Hey, you know, I got it, I'm going to move on," and grew out of it but some of my friends didn't grow out of it. It actually became part of who they were.

RUSH: Fine. That's all I need to know. Whether the anger is genuine or whether it's a tool, the fact of the matter is, it is still being used. It's why I'm right about Obama being mad. I know I'm right about him being an angry guy; a cold, angry guy. The danger is that even those who are acting angry who really aren't, they're inspiring and encouraging rage and anger in those that support them. And that's why half this country is so bent outta shape all the time about the supposed unjustness and immorality in the country. And that makes everybody else mad.

RUSH: This poll from USA Today and Gallup on closing Guantanamo Bay is interesting because it's part of a pattern. If you look at the polls of where the American people stand on approving or disapproving of various Obama policy initiatives, you find something very interesting. On practically every issue, a clear majority of Americans oppose Obama's policies, and yet his approval numbers remain 63 to 64%, yet they oppose or do not agree with his policy prescriptions for things.

Now, what does this mean for the future? What does it mean? Well, it's interesting to discuss because we have the state-run media, who refuses to highlight any negatives about Obama. They carry the water for him. So you have these people who disagree with his policies, a lot of his voters disagree and disapprove of his policies but in the same poll his approval remains over 63%. This could mean, and it's a wild guess, that at some point the bottom will drop out of the guy's approval ratings. I don't know when and I'm not sure that will happen. But this is the kind of thing that is interesting because it illustrates a point that I have made over the course of many moons, and that is Obama's popularity is not related to his policies, not related to his issues, contrary to Reagan's popularity. Ronald Reagan's popularity was directly correlated to his policy prescriptions: beating the Soviets, building up the US military, cutting taxes, reviving the US economy, and plus Reagan was a likable guy like Obama is. But there is no correlation between Obama and his policies.

Now, at some point something has to give on this, and that is a light of optimism at the end of the tunnel down there that I think is gonna get brighter and brighter and brighter. Last week we had a call to the program, "Mr. Limbaugh, do you really think these Democrats that voted for Obama really wanted all of this?" And I said that's the great unknown. The answer to that question's crucial and we won't know this until some of these policies have been implemented long enough for their impact to affect people. So in light of that -- see, the state-run media knows very well 'cause they're the ones doing the polls, they know very well that this is quite tenuous. When a majority of Americans oppose Obama or disagree with him on practically every issue, and here at Gitmo, closing Gitmo it's two to one.

The American people apparently don't care about the image we have around the world. They don't want these SOB terrorists in their neighborhoods, even in prison, they don't want them here, keep the place open. It is a great prison, it's a great functioning prison. It has worked exactly as it was designed. So that's just one issue. There are other issues. The American people love Obama, but they don't like his policies. The state-run media is well aware that this is tenuous, that this has a breaking point. So what is the state-run media going to do to try to ameliorate or obliterate or blur this conundrum? Well, I discussed this on this program back in January on the 9th. This is 11 days before the Bamster was inaugurated. This is what I said.

RUSH ARCHIVE: We're going to start seeing stories that will not be true, that feature man on the street interviews with people whose lives are starting to get a little bit better, they see the light at the end of the tunnel now, they go on more job interviews and they're doing a little bit better. The Drive-Bys will start setting the stage to create the impression in the minds of people that we're coming back, when we are not. Just as they try to set up this mood that we're going to hell in a handbasket when we're not, notice how that works. That convinces people, the old saw about, "Well, I'm doing fine but I'm hearing on the news my neighbor is about to lose his job, we're in trouble here." So how does it play when you're out of work but you hear that other people are getting jobs? If you are an Obama voter, you think your time is just around the corner, you gotta be patient 'cause he's already working, his plan is already working. If you think a demagogic, flowery spoken candidate or president with an accomplice media can't convince people things are great when they're bad you got another thing coming. If they can convince people things are horrible when they're good, the opposite's also possible. To this day people who are alive and voted for Roosevelt think he's the greatest president we ever had, and not because of World War II. Because of Social Security, because of Medicare, don't doubt me.

RUSH: Don't doubt me. So the state-run media, the state-run Drive-Bys will start doing stories on, "Hey, guess what? The economy is coming back." This will blunt the reality of a sinking economy made worse by Obama policies on people. And, lo and behold, two examples already. MSNBC Morning Joe yesterday morning, the guest Donnie Deutsch. If you've never heard of him it's 'cause he's on MSNBC.

DEUTSCH: The American public is getting tired of negative and angry -- and to show people of character, you know, people want to see those stories now --

DEUTSCH: And I think you're going to see, of course, all media now that positivity is the new black in a sense. Reality TV is going to change now and be a lot more inspirational.

RUSH: Do I know these people or do I know these people? I tell you, I know these people like every square inch of my even more glorious now naked body. There's less of my glorious naked body but it's even more glorious. Now, there's another example from our old buddies here at the Associated Press, official state-run media of the Obama administration. "Fresh signs emerged Monday that the recession is letting up. Manufacturing's slide is slowing. Builders are boosting spending on construction projects -- including homes. And consumers aren't cutting back as much as some had feared. A trio of reports gave Wall Street a big lift on the same day that industrial icon General Motors Corp. filed for bankruptcy protection. The federal government is taking a majority ownership stake in the company, which announced new plant closings. Investors and economists focused instead on the encouraging news about the economy. The Dow rose 221.11, or 2.6 percent. Business inventories shrank, suggesting supplies will soon need to be replenished. That would boost factory production.

"'The data add to mounting evidence of an abatement in the deep factory-sector recession,' said Cliff Waldman, an economist at Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI, a manufacturing research group. 'The worst has clearly passed for US factories," he said. "Nonetheless, a real recovery might be months away. The global economic picture remains difficult.'" So exactly as I predicted on January 9th, it is now starting, "Hey, we may have turned the corner." Obama himself last week, "We're back from the brink." Then yesterday announcing 14 GM factories shut down, three parts suppliers closed, 2200 GM dealerships are going to close. Unemployment numbers are still heading up. The first quarter GDP, 5.1% negative growth, and yet here we have the stories coming, "We gotta go optimistic now, the economy is coming back." So Wall Street goes up a couple hundred points, and all of a sudden it's due to Obama and it's related to what happens on Main Street. When the Dow Jones Industrial Average plummets under Obama, that doesn't mean the economy is bad, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Wall Street, has nothing to do with Main Street when talking about economic trends blah, blah.

So I'm warning you, be on the lookout for positive news, and again, in the midst of all of this economic shrinkage and realignment into a socialist, fascist type economy, if they can convince you during times of plenty that we are in a recession or just around the corner from one, then believe me, they think they can convince people who are unemployed and can't find a job that things are booming and that hope and change are right around the corner from the unemployment office. That takes us back to the polls. A vast majority of Americans on issues disagree with Obama's approach but they love him personally. There's a tipping point in there somewhere where the bottom falls out. The state-run media knows it and so it's time now to get the people's minds right. The economy's coming back, everything is great.

RUSH: I have more state-run news. The state-run media is reporting great state news on the economy, again to buttress my prediction of January 9th. "The number of US home buyers who agreed to purchase a previously occupied home in April posted the largest monthly jump in nearly eight years. This is a sign that sales are finally coming to life after a long and painful slump." Hip hip hooray. The state-run media is reporting great state news on the economy, pending home sales up 6.7% in April.

RUSH: I also had not intended to talk about Barack Obama and GM for two hours today. But I can't get away from it. This is just outrageous what is happening today and what it means. This is from the New York Times today: "It is not every 31-year-old who, in a first government job, finds himself dismantling General Motors and rewriting the rules of American capitalism. But that, in short, is the job description for Brian Deese, a not-quite graduate of Yale Law School who had never set foot in an automotive assembly plant until he took on his nearly unseen role in remaking the American automotive industry." Obama has appointed a 31-year-old young man who has never been in the automobile business and he's responsible for dismantling it and putting it back together as a functioning enterprise under Obama's tutelage. While all the while Obama says he's not running the company, that the board of directors is. But here's a 31-year-old almost Yale Law graduate, even if he had been a full-fledged Yale Law graduate, how does that qualify him to dismantle and put back together General freaking Motors?

Microsoft chief executive Ballmer warns that more taxes will send Microsoft off-shore, and American jobs would be lost:

This is fascinating; Saudi Arabia gives a list of rules for the American press, and it is President Obama who accepts these limitations:

Santelli has wandered off the reservation again; he says that Geithner is lying:

Since there are some links you may want to go back to from time-to-time, I am going to begin a list of them here. This will be a list to which I will add links each week.

Politico.com is a fairly neutral site (or, at the very worst, just a little left of center). They have very good informative videos at:

Conservative Review
Issue #78	Kukis Digests and Opines on this Week’s News and Views	June 7, 2009