RUSH: I'm really thinking of changing "obscene profit time-out" to "the holy prophet time-out," just to be safe. I mean, these are very tense times out there, folks.
So if you hear me say, "We've got another holy prophet time-out," you'll understand. It's just to avoid causing myself problems. I don't want to end up in jail with the filmmaker. By the way, do you know what the regime is doing to try to explain this? Look, they lied for eight days after Benghazi. They lied through their teeth. CNN... Get this! CNN is saying the only conclusion is the White House tried to cover something up. CNN said that. And, of course, they're right. There was a cover-up.
What were they covering up? They were covering up the fact that Obama... See, here's the thing, folks. If you want to boil this down, if you really want to understand this, Obama and the Democrats, what do you think the point was of their convention? "Osama's dead and GM's alive!" The point of that is, "We have vanquished Al-Qaeda." If you go back to when Bush was president, we were in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We got the War on Terror being waged. The Democrats are running around saying, "The only way that we'll let you get away with defining victory in the War on Terror is killing Osama." Well, they set that bar pretty high so that they would, along with their media buddies, be able to say that Bush could never win as long as Osama was still alive.
Okay, so here comes Obama and they pull him off the golf course after three times to say, "Look, we've got the guy in our sites. You gotta come here. We gotta do this!" They finally drag Obama in off the golf course, and have him put on a presidential military jacket to hide the golf shirt. They set him down to the Situation Room and they say, "Just look at that TV screen while we take your picture."
(Obama impression) "What's gonna be on that screen?"
"That's where we're gonna kill bin Laden."
"Oh. Okay. And you want me to look at that monitor?"
"Yes. You just look at that."
They took that picture and they put it out. They made it look like Obama was in on this, and in fact gave the kill order himself, and that was the story. Along with that, folks, was the idea that Al-Qaeda was vanquished as well. Not only did our courageous young leader wipe out and assassinate Osama Bin Laden, but he took Al-Qaeda with him! What a victory. (Obama impression) "Bush didn't do that. Clinton didn't do that. I did it. I did it all by myself. Nobody else made that happen!"
So he wipes out bin Laden, and then Al-Qaeda -- and then here comes Benghazi, and who did Benghazi? Al-Qaeda! Uh-oh, got a problem. Because as far as the White House is concerned, there is no more Al-Qaeda. Obama took 'em out when they killed Osama. So they have to start an immediate cover-up. Then we find out there was no security. The Marines were not armed; they weren't allowed to carry live ammo. We learn that there was advance knowledge of it.
Of course, it's the 9/11 anniversary.
We know that for eight days the White House lied through their teeth about this being the responsibility of a video, that it was a spontaneous attack. For eight days the media carried the water and covered that up, and they've broken from it now -- at least on CNN, and to a certain extent the Washington Post. So now the regime is trying to lay the blame off on the CIA. A guy named Eli Lake writing for the Daily Beast -- which is Newsweek, which is Tina Brown, which is big-time social liberal territory.
Eli Lake has written two pieces that rip the cover off of this story that it was the CIA. That's the latest talking points. The regime first found out about this from the CIA, and CIA is who got it wrong. "We were simply following the CIA." So this president has no compunction whatsoever blaming anybody else, including in his own administration, for his own errors. But the big problem was, there wasn't supposed to be an Al-Qaeda anymore, and it was Al-Qaeda who killed our ambassador.
We're in the middle of an incompetent mess like I've never seen.
RUSH: Now, back to Libya for just a second. The regime is trying to blame the CIA. The CIA put some talking points out that this whole thing in Benghazi was spontaneous at first, and it was only later we figured out that it had nothing to do with the videotape and that it was Al-Qaeda. But this was all known by Obama. Well, there's a question of when Obama knew. There's even really a question of when he was told by people. I don't know what to believe in that regard. There's a piece in the Wall Street Journal today that basically says Benghazi was Obama's three a.m. phone call that he got at five o'clock in the afternoon and he hung up. A couple pull quotes from the Wall Street Journal piece.
"No doubt the administration would now like to shift blame to Mr. Clapper." The national security guy, Clapper, they're always gonna need a fall guy. "But what happened in Benghazi was not a failure of intelligence." And this next is key. "It was a failure of policy, stemming from a flawed worldview and the political needs of an election season.
Let's review: The US ignores warnings of a parlous security situation in Benghazi. Nothing happens because nobody is really paying attention, especially in an election year, and because Libya is supposed to be a foreign-policy success." Just as Egypt. Just as the Arab Spring.
"When something does happen, the administration's concerns for the safety of Americans are subordinated to considerations of Libyan 'sovereignty' and the need for 'permission.' After the attack the administration blames a video, perhaps because it would be politically inconvenient to note that al Qaeda is far from defeated, and that we are no more popular under Mr. Obama than we were under George W. Bush." And this is what has to be covered up. You have to cover up that Al-Qaeda is still alive and thriving and growing and that this country is still as unpopular there as it was under Bush. Got to cover that up.
"Denouncing the video also appeals to the administration's reflexive habits of blaming America first. Once that story falls apart, it's time to blame the intel munchkins," over at the CIA, which they're now doing, "and move on. It was five in the afternoon when Mr. Obama took his 3 a.m. call. He still flubbed it." And now there are reports that we supplied the weapons to the Libyan rebels, but we didn't vet them to see if terrorists were among them, because Obama had vanquished the terrorists, and the terrorists liked us now because Obama was president. That's the flawed worldview, and it is the flawed liberal worldview. The flawed liberal worldview.
For those of you Atlanta, this is our second day on the big blowtorch WSB. I feel like some of you in Atlanta have never heard this program before when I knew that's not the case. But it never hurts sometimes to go back to the ground floor, to basics, and build the foundation. The liberal worldview starts out with an overriding truth in their mind: America is to blame, America is unjust and immoral as founded. We never deserved superpower status because we didn't do it on our own. We actually stole resources and other things from people around the world. We're the reason that there are poor people in the world because we essentially took their stuff. We waltzed in under the pretense of doing good, but we took their stuff. We take their oil, we take their diamonds, whatever we do, and we make ourselves rich -- well, 1% of us get rich. And we don't deserve the superpower status. And it's time, by the way, in Obama's worldview, that the US finds out what it's like to live in the rest of the world.
So there is no such thing as American exceptionalism. There's no desire to keep America number one in economic output, in education, or any of that stuff. Number 34 is fine. We're no better than anybody else. You start talking about American exceptionalism, Obama will say, (imitating Obama) "Well, I'm pretty sure that they think they're exceptional in Sweden, too. What right do we have to say we're exceptional?" Of course it's our Constitution and our history and our freedom and our liberty and all of that. So you have the Benghazi situation, the Libyan situation, the Arab Spring.
Do you realize 20 months ago what we were going through? If you look back, 20 months ago, Tahrir Square in Cairo, we are being told it is an outbreak of freedom, and it is directly tied to Obama's presidency, that the election of Obama and the world's love and respect for this man has caused an outbreak of democracy and freedom all over the world, including the Middle East. Oh, hallelujah. And so CNN sent reporters over to talk to people in Tahrir Square who were protesting again Mubarak. There was no democratic uprising. It was the Muslim Brotherhood uprising. It was an Islamic supremacist uprising. There was nothing democratic about it. There was no democracy. There was no liberty and freedom as we understand it. But Obama and the media nevertheless building that false narrative, and they send reporters over to interview the people in Tahrir Square to find out how much they love Obama, how much they appreciate Obama.
So the worldview is, "The Americans are loved again! The United States is loved and adored and respected again 'cause Bush is gone and Obama's president." Then we kill bin Laden, and that takes out Al-Qaeda, and therefore there can't be any more terrorism against us because we've wiped 'em out. "Besides, they don't dislike us anymore. We supported the Arab Spring.
"Yeah, we took out Osama, but he wasn't really anything more than a figurehead anyway. We supported the rebels in Libya. We supported the rebels in Egypt. We made it clear that we're not that crazy about Israel ourselves anymore," from the administration's viewpoint, anyway, "and so we're loved and adored." Then this happens, our ambassador gets killed, our embassy in Cairo gets trashed, and the leftists in the White House are scratching their heads.
"Oh, my God, how can this happen? I thought they loved us. We've gone out of our way to make them love us." So they have to immediately start a cover-up, a new narrative. "It's that filmmaker! You know, it's that video." Again, America's to blame. America's responsible. "Some extremist, right-wing Christian made a movie that insults Mohammed," and that justifies, by the way, what happened.
It's totally understandable!
And then Obama begins another world apology tour culminating at the UN.
Apologizing for our First Amendment.
Apologizing for the concept of free speech.
He actually says at the United Nations, or makes some reference to the fact that the days of being able to control speech are long gone. As though that's something he would be interested in being able to do: Controlling speech, controlling thought, what have you. So our ambassador gets killed and we find out that the Marines were not armed. We find out that we were in no way prepared, even though the ambassador -- in his own diary discovered by CNN -- had expressed fears for his life and for his security.
It's the anniversary of 9/11.
On that day, our embassy in Egypt puts out a pre-apology for the video, and they still riot at our embassy. They still kill the ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi. And for eight days, the regime has to engage in a cover-up because their worldview makes the policy. The policy is: "America is at fault." That's the first place you look to assign blame. "You gotta protect Obama." That's Phase II.
Whatever happens, it can't be because of Obama's incompetence or a mistake in policy or what have you. So you blame the video. You get the media to go along and you blame the video. And maybe if that doesn't fly after a while, you blame the CIA. Everybody hates the CIA. If that doesn't work? "Well, we'll get rid of our national security guy named after a toilet: Clapper. Who could oppose that?"
The whole point, though -- and the Wall Street Journal piece is right on the money -- is all of this happens because of liberalism. It is flawed. It is corrupt. It is not an ideology that celebrates America, it blames America, and that's where we are. Fast and Furious, same thing: Death and destruction made possible by virtue of American policy. The plan there was to get American-made assault weapons in the hands of drug cartels knowing full well what they would do with those weapons.
They'd pull the trigger.
People would die.
A compliant news media was then supposed to report with outrage this senseless death brought on by drug cartels in Mexico easily obtaining American weapons. "We've got to do something about guns, finally once and for all," and the media, of course picks that up. And all the social liberals at their dinner parties start talking about guns, wringing their hands. "We've got to get rid of guns," and then we find out that the only reason the drug cartel guys had the guns is that it was an administration policy that put them there!
But the US media covers that up, doesn't talk about that.
"Nothing to see here!"
That would hurt Obama. Can't have that.
Univision can take it no more. It finally does an expose in late September and October of this year on the eve of an election, with details that not even we knew of the death and destruction. I mean, the full scope of this scandalous -- and that's exactly what it is -- program. And still no mention of it in the mainstream American media. But the Hispanic vote (said to be a deadlock for Obama) is hearing all about this, and others are hearing about the failure in Libya in the proper context for the first time.
RUSH: A quick question, folks: Are they holding back the medical examiner's report on the death of the ambassador, Chris Stevens? Are they holding that back? You know, the media is so curious about Romney's 1994 tax returns. The media's so curious about what Romney did in prep school in 1965. But are they curious about the medical report on the death of our ambassador? No! No curiosity whatsoever.