RUSH: So I'm minding my own business, bothering no one -- I guess it was about hour before the program or 45 minutes before the program -- and I get this e-mail from Greg Sargent, who is writing at the Washington Post. Now, until a couple months ago, just so you know who Greg Sargent is, he was a blogger at a far-left blog post that calls itself Talking Points Memo. This is the website that is now trying to distort Bobby Jindal's story about Hurricane Katrina in order to make it look like Bobby Jindal lied in his response to Obama a week ago. So that's the place Greg Sargent comes from. Now, it starts out, Sargent wants to know if I agree that what Eric Cantor said on Sunday with George Stephanopoulos was a repudiation of my notion that I want President Obama to fail; and I wrote back and I said, "You've got it wrong. What you need to do is check the misleading information on the ABC website."
I said, "Check the show transcript against what George Stephanopoulos posted on his website and you'll see that on the show itself George did not define my remarks as they appear on the website. Cantor actually agreed with me in his full answer, re: policy." So, in other words, the website for This Week with George Stephanopoulos is where everybody got the news that Eric Cantor had "repudiated" me, and they put the transcript of the show on the website up inaccurately. The transcript of the show leaves out all of the Rush qualifiers about hoping to fail. Cantor's answer was essentially, policy-wise, to agree with me. So I wrote him back I sent him the transcripts. I sent him the website, what it was reported, and the transcript of the show, and I asked him to add this.
I said, "This distortion not surprising given the morning phone calls from Rahm Emanuel to George Stephanopoulos, James Carville, and Paul Begala to coordinate daily White House talking points on ABC and CNN."
Greg Sargent wrote back and said, "Thanks. I'll add. Meanwhile, Rush, what's your reaction to Michael Steele's apology to you? Do you think he needs to declare more clearly whether he wants Obama to fail?"
I wrote back, "No comment on Steele. That's yesterday's news -- and please, Greg, try to stand out from the mainstream media chorus and not distort, as they all are on behalf of the Obama administration, my meaning on wanting him to fail. I want the country to succeed, as I have said until I am blue in the face."
"Rush, could I ask a follow-up question? If Obama's policies are designed to help the economy and those policies fail, as you've said you want, doesn't the economy and by extension the country suffer?"
"Mr. Sargent, Obama's policies are not designed to help the economy, and they won't. That's why I want them to fail. Take a look around, Greg. We've been 'stimulating' and spending for a year now. Wealth is vanishing from Wall Street, people losing jobs and savings. His policies stimulate only government. They attack wealth producers and achievers. Obama's policies are not new. They are not hope; they are not change. They are page one of the standard liberal playbook: tax and spend. They have not generated economic recovery or private sector growth in all of history."
"Many thanks. One more quick follow-up, if I may. I understand that you don't think Obama's policies are destined it succeed. Reasonable people can disagree. However, putting aside that question, is it true..." and he goes on and on and on; and I wrote back, "I reject your premise. I'm not answering the question because the point is precisely what his policies are destined to do."
RUSH: I had to speed through the wrap-up of the e-mail exchange with Greg Sargent at the Washington Post, but he says, "I understand that you don't think Obama's policies are destined to succeed. Reasonable people can disagree about that. However, putting aside the question of what the policies are destined to do, is it true that if they succeed in their stated goal of righting the economy -- however far-fetched that may be to you -- then would that be good for the country?"
I recognized this trap from right off the top. I said, "Mr. Sargent, I reject your premise, especially since you are rejecting my answers. I will not put aside the question of what the policies are destined to do because that is the point. Obama's policies are not destined to cause a private sector economic recovery. By his own admission this morning, he is putting his stamp and remaking this nation from its founding."