RUSH: The 100th anniversary of the birth of Ronaldus Magnus is coming up and we seem to be experiencing the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter. This Egypt thing is an abject mess. It is an utter mess. And people getting on the bandwagon of getting rid of an ally for whatever reasons, I mean they’re not perfect, but we seem to be sidling up now to the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohamed ElBaradei. This is not good.
RUSH: Here’s Reagan, 100th anniversary of his birth coming up. This is October 21st, 1984, in Kansas City. I happened to be there. I happened to live in Kansas City in 1984. I remember that convention and debate. Well, the convention was 1976. That was the last year of my ten-year failure in Kansas City. Well, I mean I didn’t succeed at much of anything I tried there, but it all led to success later on in life. At any rate, this is a presidential debate between Ronaldus Magnus and Walter F. Mondull. The panelist is Morton Kondracke, the executive editor then of The New Republic. Kondracke said, ‘Mr. President, I want to ask you about negotiating with friends. You severely criticized President Carter for helping to undermine two friendly dictators who got into trouble with their own people, the Shah of Iran and President Somoza of Nicaragua. Now there are other such leaders heading for trouble, including President Pinochet of Chile and President Marcos of the Philippines. What should you do and what can you do to prevent the Philippines from becoming another Nicaragua?’
REAGAN: I did criticize the president because of our undercutting of what was a stalwart ally, the Shah of Iran. And I am not at all convinced that he was that far out of line with his people or that they wanted that to happen. The Shah had done our bidding and carried our load in the Middle East for quite some time and I did think that it was a blot on our record that we let him down. Have things gotten better? The Shah, whatever he might have done, was building low-cost housing, had taken land away from the mullahs and was distributing it to the peasants so they could be landowners, things of that kind. But we turned it over to a maniacal fanatic who has slaughtered thousands and thousands of people.
RUSH: I’m playing this for you because it’s great to match this against what’s coming out of the White House today. David Gergen’s going back and forth. He doesn’t know if he should be worried or not worried about what Obama continues to say and do regarding Egypt. But that was Reagan explaining why we shouldn’t always be so quick to trade a friendly dictator for Muslim extremists. The bottom line always remains what’s in the best interests of the United States. And, of course, all during Iraq and during the Bush regime we kept hearing Obama say, ‘We can’t impose our will. We can’t impose our way of life on people. We can’t impose freedom.’ Now we’re gonna impose our way. And, by the way, I am hearing reports that Mubarak has fled Egypt, that he’s not there.
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, it is being breathlessly reported that the Egyptian army… Snerdley, have you heard this? The Egyptian army is rounding up foreign journalists. I mean, even two New York Times reporters were detained. Now, this is supposed to make us feel what, exactly? How we supposed to feel? Are we supposed to feel outrage over this? I don’t feel any outrage over this. Are we supposed to feel anger? I don’t feel any anger over this. Do we feel happy? Do we feel kinda going like, ‘Nah-nah-nah-nah’? I’m sure that your emotions are running the gamut when you hear that two New York Times reporters have been detained along with other journalists in Egypt. Remember, now, we’re supporting the people who are doing this. Obama gave a speech. In fact, he’s made another message to Egyptians. This one has not aired in public in this country because it wasn’t intended to. This message is specifically for Egyptians. We just got it this morning.
(playing of Egyptian spoof)
RUSH: That’s the latest from on the ground in Egypt. You haven’t heard that anywhere else because that’s exclusive to us. If I didn’t know better (and I may know better, I don’t know) you look at this and Obama seems determined to give us Iran on the Nile. I mean, this is… Folks, there’s something about this. I’m seeing so many people get to the bandwagon here claiming that this is a ‘pro-democracy’ movement and that’s what we’re all about. Nobody’s asking the question that I think is really crucial for us, and that is, how does this affect our No. 1 ally in the region, which is Israel? That doesn’t even seem to be a factor out there, and it is somewhat troubling.
RUSH: Anybody familiar with the Seven Stages of Film Production? Now, you people in Hollywood know full well what I’m about to say — and those of you who are film students at UCLA and those of you working the porn shops, you know full well what I’m talking about here. But the Seven Stages of Film Production remind me of the Obama regime’s handling of the Egyptian crisis (in fact, their handling of pretty much every crisis). Here are the Seven Stages of Film Production. In other words, for those of you in Rio Linda ‘when you’re going to make a movie.
The first stage: Wild enthusiasm,’ big press conference, announce that you’ve got your cast and you’ve got your budget and you’re gonna go to town. The next phase, the next stage is ‘total confusion.’ Stage three is ‘utter despair’ because it’s not coming together as you envisioned. You’re way, way, way over budget. A couple of actors have quit. Maybe a couple are having an affair. It’s all bad, the entertainment press not giving you any favors, and your competitors are just ripping you to shreds in the trades. Number four of the Seven Stages of Film Production: Search for the guilty.
All right, who’s responsible for this? Who blew this up? Who’s really to blame for this? Number five, ‘persecution of innocent.’ Once you find out who’s really to blame, you know who not to publicly identify. You search for the innocent and persecute them. Number six, you ‘promote,’ therefore, ‘the incompetent.’ After all of your project has fallen apart, you have identified whose fault it is and you’ve protected them. You’ve blamed it on others and you have thus promoted incompetence. At the end of the day you give away T-shirts. That’s number seven: ‘distribution of T-shirts.’ Those are the Seven Stages of Film Production, and that’s what this regime is reminds me of.
RUSH: Julie in Pittsburgh, hello, and welcome to the EIB Network. Great to have you here.
CALLER: Hi. I just wanted to say, you know, the president had two opportunities to support pro-democracy movements in Iran, once in 2009 and once again in 2010. And he chose not to do so. So what’s different here?
RUSH: It’s a great question. It’s a question that I, El Rushbo, have been asking all week. Why ignore the 2009 freedom protesters? We knew that was about democracy. We knew that was about freedom.
RUSH: We still don’t know that that’s what this is about in Egypt. Contrary to what everybody says, folks, we still don’t know that’s what this is.
CALLER: Well, I mean there are pro-leftist forces in Egypt that are probably — he has a lot in alignment with them.
RUSH: Well, that’s a serious charge. You are claiming that there are leftist groups in Egypt that are aligned with President Obama.
CALLER: Well, I mean, he would have a lot in common with them, wouldn’t he?
RUSH: Well, yeah, looked at it from your prism, yes. But it’s not just Obama. He’s clearly tried to get out in front of this, and he owns this now. And he owns this mob. He purposely got out there and tried to own this mob, but all kinds of people are on the bandwagon praising this thing. We have several on our side. Weekly Standard, I think their official position is this is fabulous. McCain thinks this is fabulous. This is wonderful what’s going on. It’s not just Obama. There are people that are running as fast as they can to get in line behind this thing, this is great for democracy, it’s great for freedom, get rid of Mubarak —
CALLER: Yeah, but they’re not schooled in the Middle East, are they?
RUSH: I don’t know if they’re not schooled in the Middle East or if they have other things more important to them, such as hoping it turns out good but hoping also the way they position themselves now in the media is more important than the end result endgame there. You can’t take that out of the equation.
CALLER: That could be. That could be.
RUSH: Yeah. I don’t think it’s the whole reason, I don’t think it’s the sum total or why certain people are getting on board this thing, but it is a factor. You cannot rule it out.
We have to take a brief time-out. Time, I cannot believe it is zipping by, but it is. We’ll be back. Don’t go anywhere, folks.
RUSH: The more I look at this in Egypt, the less convinced I am that this is a revolution. I really don’t think it’s a revolution. This is more like a civil war of sorts that is happening. But the civil war aspect, mark my words, it’s gonna be dismissed as little more than Mubarak unleashing thugs against the forces of Jeffersonian liberalism. It’s the way this is all shaping up. And the bottom line is nobody really knows yet for sure what’s happening. And jumping the gun getting behind all this is risky and a little bit dangerous.
RUSH: Let me ask everybody a question. Do you really think anybody in this regime, do you think anybody, period, do you think anybody in Washington has any idea exactly what Egypt is supposed to be immediately transitioning to? Here’s Obama out making speeches, ‘You gotta start immediately, immediately transitioning,’ to what? Transition to what? And should that not be the real question here? We’re demanding that they transition starting immediately, but we don’t know to what. Is it a revolution? Is it a civil war? Well, it’s change, yeah, but we don’t know what the end result of the change is gonna be.
RUSH: The Washington Post, Craig Whitlock. Again, my question, what are we transitioning to? We’re demanding Mubarak, ‘You get out of there now. You get out of there. You people in Egypt, just do the transition.’ Well, to what? We don’t know. Could we perhaps be helping to usher in a terrorist group under the guise of the democratic uprising? Washington Post: ‘US Reexamining its Relationship with Muslim Brotherhood Opposition Group — As it braces for the likelihood of a new ruler in Egypt, the U.S. government is rapidly reassessing its tenuous relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, an opposition movement whose fundamentalist ideology has long been a source of distrust in Washington.’
Whoa. Let me read this again.
‘As it braces for the likelihood of a new ruler in Egypt…’ As it braces? It’s cracking the whip, Mr. Whitlock. ‘The U.S. government is rapidly reassessing its tenuous relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood…’ Really? We’re helping to usher in a terrorist group under the guise of democracy. We’re gonna have to change the way we look at the Muslim Brotherhood because they may be running the show. The Muslim Brotherhood did not start this; they are tag-alongs. They saw this happening and they got in line. And they’re trying to claim leadership of it just as Obama is. They tried to get out in front of the mob just as Obama did.
‘On Monday, in what analysts said was a clear reference to the Brotherhood, the White House said a new government in Egypt should ‘include a whole host of important non-secular actors.’ The move drew the skepticism of some U.S. officials who have argued that the White House should embrace opposition groups that are more likely to support a democratic government in Egypt, rather than one dedicated to the establishment of religious law. It also marked a change from previous days, when Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other officials expressed concern that the uprising in Egypt could shift power to an Islamist government much like the one in Iran, where ayatollah-led factions elbowed aside other groups to seize control of the country in 1979.’
That’s why I say this is it, this just has the smell — we’re celebrating the 100th anniversary of Reagan’s birthday this week, and yet this has got the smell of Jimmy Carter, Jimmy Carter’s second term. Iran, now Egypt, being handed over to a bunch of fundamentalists, or taken over, whatever is happening. We’re urging a transition. This is, as much as anything, Obama showing off his power. Obama goes to the cameras, demands a transition. Didn’t quite work out the way he wanted. The violence was supposed to be dialed back. The violence was supposed to subside. It didn’t. It got worse. Supporters of the regime in the State-Controlled Media are openly worried. Now the order has gone out just to transition to something, without caring what it is, just to demonstrate that our man-child president has the power to make it happen.
So we’re now getting the daily drumbeat that the only choice the Egypt leadership of the U.S. have now is to reconcile with the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s what we’re being told. That’s the message of the Washington Post. ‘They’re not so bad. They’re not so bad after all.’ It’s the same tune we heard about Khomeini 30-some years ago. ‘Look at him, cute little old cleric, yeah, been biding his time in Paris. Yeah, wears those funny clothes. What harm could he do? Certainly better than the Shah. Man, the Shah was ripping us off. The Shah was doing all kinds of stuff. The Shah was getting too big for his britches. Mubarak, 83 years old, he’s out of it. He’s got a son he wants to make president. We’re not gonna put up with that. We’re not gonna give him a billion and a half a year to continue this stuff. Muslim Brotherhood, these guys just want democracy. These guys just want freedom. They’re not so bad.’
It’s eerie how things repeat themselves. I hope that’s not what’s going on.
RUSH: Here’s Sue in Detroit. Nice to know the phones are still turned on there. Great to have you on the program. Hello.
CALLER: Hi. Thank you, Rush. From what I’ve seen looking at the media that are covering these Egyptian groups, the anti-government group that’s calling for Mubarak’s immediate ouster is nothing more than a bunch of community activists. They’re based completely on emotion and they’re just not letting a good crisis go to waste.
RUSH: These are the people with their signs printed in English, by the way, too.
CALLER: Yeah, quite a coincidence. It just seems to me that rather than taking Washington’s stance of ramming things through as fast as we can, that Washington needs to take a step back and slow things down to benefit Egyptians, meaning that the public can make more choices and thoughtful choices as to who they’re going to select to be their next president, rather than just running on this wild emotion. And this can be based on rational thought.
RUSH: Well, see, we give ’em one and a half billion dollars, so they’re kinda under our thumb. It’s not as much as we give Israel, but it’s still a billion and a half dollars. So we have some power with them. I’m like you. What’s happening in Egypt looks very familiar the things that have happened on the streets in this country: community organizers, the signs in English, the demands for change now and so forth. When you look at how readily the regime tried to get in front of this and own this, what does it make you think?
CALLER: It just makes me think that Washington is what it is. It acts completely on emotion. They don’t step back and take a look at what would be best. The group that is protesting is just a fraction, not even 1% of their population. There are a lot of groups that are throughout Egypt that, sure, they don’t like Mubarak, but they also do not like what’s happening with this group, ElBaradei just coming in and taking control without them having any input into the process. It’s completely wrong.
RUSH: That is a good point. ElBaradei is being cast by some in our media as a savior here. He is not popular in Egypt. ElBaradei is not the answer to the equation. Mohamed ElBaradei, the nuke guy, the nuclear friend of Iran guy. But the parallels to the Shah of Iran here are eerie. That’s why I keep saying this is Jimmy Carter, second term.
Benjamin in Pittsburgh, you’re next on the EIB Network. Great to have you here, sir.
CALLER: Pleasure to speak with you. I was listening to the hearings on health care last night on, I think it was C-SPAN, and Orrin Hatch asked the panel when the government has ever required anyone to buy anything. Part of the response was that the businesses have been required by the EPA to buy safety equipment. What’s your take on these two examples, the health care bill versus the EPA?
RUSH: Wait a minute. Orrin Hatch asked that question?
RUSH: And somebody said that the similarity of being forced to buy health insurance is the same thing as the EPA requiring safety equipment in automobiles, like seat belts?
CALLER: I think it was more like buying gloves for your worker to be safe in the factory. I think that was more along the lines of the example given.
RUSH: Well, that’s the Occupational Safety and Health Administration if they have work rules there, and they do. But that does not even come close to equaling a mandate that we all buy health insurance. I didn’t hear this, but that doesn’t sound analogous. Now, if somebody wanted to claim, ‘Hey, look, they require every car to have seat belts in it,’ you know, I could talk to you about that. You might be persuaded by that. I would nuke it, but until you heard from me, you might be persuaded by it.
RUSH: Now, apparently, ladies and gentlemen, according to Jacob Tapper of ABC News, Hosni Mubarak has called Obama a very good man but told him he didn’t understand the culture of Egypt and what would happen if he left now. And Hosni Mubarak is probably half right there. He’s told ABC News he would like to leave office immediately but that he can’t because of what would happen if he did.