Michelle Obama was in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and she was meeting with 50 working women who filled a room at a Harrisburg preschool. She swept into the classroom of children ages two to six to read to them and so forth. After all of that, she said ‘Should she become first lady, she said she’d focus on family issues. ‘If we don’t wake up as a nation with a new kind of leadership…for how we want this country to work, then we won’t get universal health care. The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.” This is no different than Mrs. Clinton saying she wants to take ExxonMobil profits, rein in all those all these profits. Doesn’t matter, Hillary or Obama, pure 100% liberal, slash, socialists. To them, everything is a zero-sum game. If somebody gets a dollar more than they had, somebody had to lose a dollar. This is an attack on capitalism. It is a conscious attack on capitalism. It is not that Obama and Hillary don’t understand it. They clearly do. They don’t like it, and they clearly don’t think it’s the way to get elected. They know their constituents and they know that they have created an entitlement mentality among as many people as possible. They know that part of this entitlement mentality is class envy.
They know that there are seething Americans enraged at anybody who has anything more than they have. So the Democrats come along and promise to get even with those people. In the process of that happening, getting even with the job providers, ends up killing jobs, it hurts the little guy, the very constituent the Democrats claim to help by raising everybody’s taxes. So here is Michelle Obama saying if we’re going to get universal health care and a revamped education system, somebody is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that somebody else can have more. And who’s going to be in charge of that? Barack Obama and Michelle and the Democrats in Congress.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: From an account in the Carnegie Mellon University newspaper, the Tartan, of a Michelle Obama event in Pittsburgh: ‘While the crowd was indeed diverse, some students at the event questioned the practices of Mrs. Obama’s event coordinators, who handpicked the crowd sitting behind Mrs. Obama. The Tartan’s correspondents observed one event coordinator say to another, ‘Get me more white people, we need more white people.’ To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, ‘We’re moving you, sorry. It’s going to look so pretty, though.’ ‘I didn’t know they would say, ‘We need a white person here,” said attendee and senior psychology major Shayna Watson, who sat in the crowd behind Mrs. Obama. ‘I understood they would want a show of diversity, but to pick up people and to reseat them, I didn’t know it would be so outright.” I’m not sure there’s any real reason here for this, but still, ‘We need more white people’? We need more white people. Does that jibe with anything the Reverend Jeremiah Wright said? By the way, speaking of that, this is from the Chicago Sun-Times. I gotta tell you something. If it weren’t for newspapers like the Carnegie Mellon Tartan and the Chicago Sun-Times and local newspapers, we wouldn’t know half of what we are learning about Barack Obama, his politics, and his intentions.
Chicago Sun-Times yesterday: ‘Moving to nip in the bud some potential bad press, White House hopeful Barack Obama’s campaign persuaded a delegate to step down after she was ticketed for calling her neighbor’s African-American children ‘monkeys.’ Linda Ramirez-Sliwinski,’ I guess she’s Hispanic-Polish, ‘a Carpentersville village trustee, was elected as an Obama delegate to the Democratic National Convention. She sports an Obama sign in her front yard. On Saturday, two neighbor children were playing in the tree next-door to her house. [She] ‘came outside and told the children to quit playing in the tree like monkeys. The tree was not on Ramirez-Sliwinski’s property,’ Carpentersville Police Commander Michael Kilbourne said. Ramirez-Sliwinski admitted she used the word ‘monkeys,’ but said she did not intend racism. She said she was only trying to protect them from falling out of the tree. … The mother of one of the children did not see it that way, noting she and Ramirez-Sliwinski have clashed before. ‘She felt it was racist because of the fact the children were African-American,’ Kilbourne said. Told of the incident Monday by the Sun-Times, Obama’s campaign called Ramirez-Sliwinski and persuaded her to step aside as a delegate because the campaign felt her remarks were ‘divisive and unacceptable.” Frankly, my friends, I was far more offended when Barack Obama disrespected his grandmother than by this comment. What about the Reverend Jeremiah Wright? This woman was ticketed $75 for calling these two kids monkeys. The police commander said, this is ‘disorderly conduct… when a person does something that alarms or disturbs another.’ Meanwhile, Jeremiah Wright gets a total 100% pass.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Lanny Davis today in the Wall Street Journal. He’s a Clinton operative, a huge liberal Democrat, attacking Jeremiah Wright. You know, all week long I have been saying that the great people of flyover country in this country are not going to forget Jeremiah Wright. They’re not going to let that out of their minds, no matter how much the Drive-By Media tries to sweep it under the rug or sugarcoat it in the coming months. So what’s happening now with Operation Chaos? The Democrats are keeping the issue of Jeremiah Wright alive. Under the rubric of race and religion, the party that supposedly is so tolerant of all of those things — and I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, this would not be happening were it not for Operation Chaos. It is rich. The Drive-By Media has been scared off of the Jeremiah Wright sorry but the Hillary attack machine is alive and well. Lanny Davis is taking his gunner position in the Wall Street Journal op-ed pages today.
He begins by writing, ‘I have tried to get over my unease surrounding Barack Obama’s response to the sermons and writings of his pastor…. But the unanswered questions remain. I am a strong supporter of and a substantial fundraiser for Hillary Clinton for president (though in this column I speak only for myself). I still believe she should and will be the Democratic nominee. But if Sen. Obama wins the nomination, he needs to understand that this issue [of Rev. Wright] goes well beyond Clinton partisans. Now is the time to address these questions, not later. Clearly Mr. Obama does not share the extremist views of Rev. Wright. He is a tolerant and honorable person. But that is not the issue. The questions remain: Why did he stay a member of the congregation? Why didn’t he speak up earlier? And why did he reward Rev. Wright with a campaign position even after knowing of his comments? My concerns were retriggered when I read for the first time three excerpts from Rev. Wright’s sermons published several weeks ago in a national news magazine…’
Now, we’re led to believe here from Lanny Davis, who I also ‘believe is a tolerant and honorable person’… I don’t think there’s anything tolerant about Barack Obama. There’s nothing tolerant about him. Barack Obama is a pure, 100% leftist. He is not tolerant of other views. His objective is as it should be: to wipe us out politically. That’s his objective. That’s his wife’s objective. That’s Mrs. Clinton’s objective. That’s all liberals’ objective: to wipe us out. They’re not tolerant of us. You think they’re tolerant of us? You think they were tolerant of Clarence Thomas, Robert Bork? Take your pick. Think they’re tolerant of Operation Chaos. You think they’re tolerant? They’re not. Honorable? That’s debatable. But I find it awfully strange it’s the first time Lanny Davis has read these comments. See, he needs an excuse to write this piece now. This is not just happenstance. This is not just accidental that this happens. This is part of the Clinton, Inc., Operation Chaos war room. So his hook is (paraphrased), ‘I just read those comments. I had seen them on television as everybody else had, but when I read them, whoa! They were retriggered. My concerns were retriggered when I read it for the first time.’
So he submits an op-ed to some newspapers, and the newspapers say, ‘Well, these quotes are old hat.’ Lanny Davis said (paraphrased), ‘I just read ’em. You know, they have a far different impact when you read ’em than when you just see ’em.’ So he gets the op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, and here are the three excerpts that he says when he read really troubled him, retriggered his concerns about Reverend Wright. ”We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.’ … ‘The government …wants us to sing God Bless America. No, no, no. God (bleep) America; that’s in the bible, for killing innocent people. God (bleep) America for treating our citizens as less than human.’ … ‘The United States of White America.” Those are the three comments that Lanny Davis says that when he reread, everything was retriggered.
‘As I read and reread these words, I keep thinking: If my rabbi ever uttered such hateful words from the pulpit about America and declared all Palestinians to be terrorists, I have no doubt I would have withdrawn immediately from his congregation. In his eloquent Philadelphia speech, Mr. Obama likened Rev. Wright to a beloved, but politically extremist, family member with whom one profoundly disagrees but whose rage one understands. But this comparison just doesn’t work for me,’ writes Mr. Davis. ‘I don’t get a chance to choose my family members. I do get a chance to choose my spiritual or religious leader and my congregation.’ See, these points were made by us on this program on day one! This is not the first time it’s occurred to Mr. Davis. This stuff is just being recycled now as we’re ginning up for the Pennsylvania primary. Make no mistake about it. And the hook here, is (paraphrased) ‘I just read these things! Whoa, it’s even worse than I thought!’ I love this! These Clinton people are not giving up, they’re not going anywhere, and they have been energized by Operation Chaos. Let me cut to the chase here to the end of this piece.
‘Some have suggested that any Clinton supporters who continue to raise this issue are ‘playing the race card’ or taking the ‘low’ road. When I said on CNN recently that concerns about the Wright-Obama issue were ‘appropriate’ to continue to be discussed, my friend Joe Klein of Time Magazine said, ‘Lanny, Lanny, you’re spreading the poison right now’ and that an ‘honorable person’ would ‘stay away from this stuff.” See, that’s the Stalinist-like attempt of the left when there’s anything damaging out there or harmful, ‘Come on, it’s been said! It’s been said. It’s been rerun. It’s on television. You’re just being dishonorable, Lanny, by recycling this. Give it a rest, Lanny! Because it’s hurtful to us. It could harm Obama. Shut up, Lanny! Don’t you know what you’re doing?’ But Lanny does not back down in his counterstrike here in the Wall Street Journal. He says, ‘Attacking the motives of those who feel this discomfort about Senator Obama’s response or nonresponse to Reverend Wright’s comments is not just unfair and wrong.’ By the way, Lanny, welcome to the world of conservatives now. This is how we have always been reacted to when we attempt to do what you are doing today in the Wall Street Journal.
He says, ‘It also misses the important electoral point about winning the general election in November: This issue is not going away.’ Amen, Lanny! As we have been saying all week on this program: It is not going away. ‘If many loyal, progressive Democrats,’ i.e., liberal Democrats ‘remain troubled by this issue, then there must be even more unease among key swing voters — soft ‘Reagan Democrats,’ independents and moderate Republicans… One thing is for sure: If Mr. Obama doesn’t show a willingness to try to answer all the questions now, John McCain and the Republican attack machine…’ Ha ha ha! Lanny, the first mistake you’ve made in your piece. There isn’t a Republican Party attack machine. McCain has laid down the law! There won’t be any of this. In fact, McCain’s running around demanding Obama apologize for what Jay Rockefeller said. In order (doing McCain impression), ‘That’s right, to keep this an honorable, meaningful campaign. I shall not resort to these kinds of tactics,’ and he won’t. So it’s going to be up to surrogates, like I — like me, Rush Limbaugh — C-in-C USOC: Commander-in-Chief US, Operation Chaos. ‘McCain and the Republican attack machine will not waste a minute pressuring him to do so if he is the Democratic Party’s choice in the fall. But by then,’ Lanny Davis writes, ‘it may be too late.’
They are worried. They are worried, and they think that this Reverend Wright stuff is going to give them a chance and when they learn what’s out there next… It’s in the New Republic, and it’s about a year ago. I forget the exact dates, but it’s in March of 2007. It’s a story by Ryan Lizza. Now, I must say at the outset, I went to the New Republic, clicked on the links, and the story is there. The reason I’m a little hesitant about this is I haven’t seen it anywhere else. The New Republic has a pass. They make things up. They’ve planted phony soldiers over in Iraq. So I want to wade into this, ladies and gentlemen, with extreme caution. Extreme caution. Because if the New Republic published this just a year ago and the author is Ryan Lizza, bring it back. Of course, I don’t know in whose camp they’re in, the Obama camp or the Hillary camp. But their story from a year ago in the New Republic, if you print this thing out, it’s nine pages long: Jeremiah Wright is a former Muslim! Now, assuming this is factually correct — and I say ‘assuming,’ because it’s in the New Republic — then Jeremiah Wright’s connection is more a bridge to Barack’s father’s religion and Louis Farrakhan than it is to Martin Luther King, Jr.
Saul Alinsky is referred to in this piece. He’s Hillary’s spiritual leader in terms of creating her own chaos. He was a major influence on Hillary and one of Alinsky’s big suggestions to his ‘flock,’ so to speak, was to get involved in community organization, which is what Obama first did. So March 7th, the New Republic, written by Ryan Lizza, senior editor of The New Republic. It’s a biographical piece. In the article, it explicitly states that Jeremiah Wright is a former Muslim. Here are the excerpts: ‘From Wright and others, Obama learned that part of his problem as an organizer was that he was trying to build a confederation of churches but wasn’t showing up in the pews on Sunday. When pastors asked him the inevitable questions about his own spiritual life, Obama would duck them uncomfortably. A Reverend Philips put the problem to him squarely when he learned that Obama didn’t attend services. ‘It might help your mission if you had a church home,’ he told Obama.
”It doesn’t matter where, really. What you’re asking from pastors requires us to set aside some of our more priestly concerns in favor of prophesy. That requires a good deal of faith on our part. It makes us want to know just where you’re getting yours from.’ After many lectures like this, Obama decided to take a second look at Wright’s church. Older pastors warned him that Trinity was for ‘Buppies’ — black urban professionals — and didn’t have enough street cred. But Wright was a former Muslim and black nationalist who had studied at Howard and Chicago, and Trinity’s guiding principles — what the church calls the ‘Black Value System’ — included a ‘Disavowal of the Pursuit of Middleclassness.” A former Muslim. Now, again, assuming that this is factually correct, wouldn’t it make sense now and explain Obama’s sensitivity about his middle name? Wouldn’t it explain Wright’s fascination with Louis Farrakhan and, of course, Moammar Khadafy? If factually correct, surely, surely, surely here, ladies and gentlemen, Obama had to know that Wright was a former Muslim.
In fact, might that have been part of the attraction? Obama’s father was Muslim. Might that not have been part of the attraction? Now, two things are going to be said. If this proves out to be factually correct, that Jeremiah Wright was a former Muslim, they’re going to say two things. ‘Well, Rush, you bring this up. It’s unfair. You gotta let this die. This is just guilt by association.’ They’ll bring that up again, and then they’ll say, ‘Oh, yeah, well, you must hate Muslims to bring this up.’ No. No, no, no. It was vital and interesting information, particularly if it’s being withheld — and if this news if true is going to cause people to get offended, then whoa. It’s interesting to note that. What we do know is that Obama was a Marxist in college. He was a Saul Alinsky activist in Chicago. To call him a ‘community activist’ is nonsense. Alinsky was a Stalinist, at least in my view, and then Obama ends up being attracted to a church because he likes what the pastor stands for? Lanny Davis is more right than he knows: r-i-g-h-t. He is more right than he knows in his Wall Street Journal piece today.
To me, folks, it is patently obvious that but for these local newspapers like the Tartan at Carnegie Mellon, the Charlotte Observer, the Chicago Sun-Times — even bimonthly or weekly, whatever it is, New Republic — we would know very, very, very little about Obama and his wife. We really don’t know much. This is one of the things that the Wright, the Jeremiah Wright episode spawned. Who are these people? Twenty years with his church, who are these people? So I think the bottom line is this. The public needs to understand that if they elect Obama, they’re going to be choosing to remake their country into a socialist model where taxation will be extreme on individuals and small businesses. That especially will include the middle class. When you start talking small business, you’re talking tax increases on the middle class. The federal government will become massive, almost dictatorial, reaching into medical decisions, the way we live our lives, through environmental and other claims. So we’ll see if this has any traction, if there’s any truth to it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Yeah, so Lanny Davis says that Barack Obama is very tolerant. He’s not even tolerant of his own delegate, has his campaign call up a delegate and say, ‘You’re out, babe, you don’t call your neighbor’s kids monkeys. I can’t handle this.’ Well, what about the Reverend Wright? Well, he’s been dealt with. He has not been dealt with.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I want to go back to something in the first hour. We had the story, at a Michelle Obama event in Pennsylvania there weren’t enough white people sitting in the audience behind her in camera view, and so the organizers are putting out a call for, ‘We need more white people.’ And they were moving people of color to get them out of there and replacing them with more white people. Now, most people have a knee-jerk reaction to that, laugh about it and so forth and so on, but you need to stop and think of something. Why? Why do they need more white people? Hmm? Why should that matter? We’re all colorblind here. I mean, Obama’s a great unifier. Obama is going to bring people together. Why? Why do they need more white people? Hmm? No, I’m just asking. I’m sure somebody’s got the answer. Why do they need more white people? And did they clear this with Reverend Wright? I know they’ve been running ads for Republicans all over the place. What do they tell? Here you’ve got the first black candidate for president, probably the likely nominee, and black people came out, are excited as hell to show up at these Obama rallies, and here comes some organizer, ‘Okay, pal, back to the back of the bus for you.’ ‘What do you mean?’ ‘We need more white people where you’re sitting.’ ‘What? You telling me I got here first and you gonna move me?’ ‘That’s right, we’re going to move you out of camera view so that you can’t even be seen. We need white people where you are.’
Now, what do these enthusiastic, invigorated, all hyped-up black people, Obama supporters, think when Michelle’s organizers show up and say, ‘Back to the end of the line for you, or, you can’t sit here at our lunch counter. You gotta find your own. We need white people here.’ Why? Why? Well, they might be getting white people, but they’re not ending up in the camera shot, so nobody knows there are white people there. They need more white people. I got an idea. If they need more white people, just ask Reverend Wright to go through his new neighborhood in Chicago in Tinley Park and say, ‘Hey, I got a bus coming through here, going to take you to an Obama rally, just get on the bus when we stop at your house.’ (laughing) Right. Why? Why do you need more white people? There is an answer to this.