Obama's Cairo Speech: Outrageous, Absurdm Embarrassing

In God We Trust

Obama's Cairo Speech: Outrageous, Absurd, Embarrassing

RUSH: Now, we're going to move on here to President Obama's speech in Cairo -- and I understand, ladies and gentlemen. I have studied the reaction to the speech as part of my intense show prep today. And I have detected maybe a consensus in all media quarters that this was a surprisingly good

speech, that there's really not a whole lot here to criticize -- and you better not criticize it! If you criticize it, why... Somebody told me -- I didn't hear this, but somebody told me -- that somebody said that this speech is as important, is as powerful, was as important as Reagan's speech, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." (interruption) Who said that? (interruption) Who? Who? Where? Who said it's the equivalent of the "I Have a Dream" speech? (interruption) Well, anyway, doesn't matter who said it. That's the general tenor, the general tenor is it's a brilliant speech. It's better than we could a hoped for. Don't criticize it. It's only going to harm you, if you criticize it. So, with that in mind, let's play the first sound bite I have chosen to share with you from Obama's speech this morning at Cairo University. This is near the end.

OBAMA: As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam at places like Al-Azhar 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 could 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.

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.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

Ladies and gentlemen, I know that the State-Run Media and several people on our side of the aisle are cautioning and counseling patience and restraint in the criticism of the Obama speech. That, of course, I ignore. I ignore conventional wisdom. I resist the tug of popular sentiment. But I tell you this: "If President Obama can give a speech like this about all of the quote-unquote 'contributions to humanity from the ancient Muslim world,' then take heart, my friends. Be optimistic! Because it may be that someday Barack Obama can give one speech about America and all of our accomplishments, too." I'd say it's unlikely, but it's possible, because the old adage is: Something that has happened can more easily happen again than something that has not happened.

So it has happened. Obama has found a way, even though it was a bit exaggerated (I'm being restrained here) to praise all of the ancient contributions of Islam. It means, ladies and gentlemen, that before he leaves office, he might -- it's a long shot, but he might -- also give a speech that documents all of America's accomplishments and contributions to civilization. The traditional wisdom here is, conventional wisdom is, "This was a gutsy speech to go over there and do what he did." My buddy, Erick Erickson at RedState.com has a post here, too, reacting to this particular passage in Obama's speech. "Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. ...

"Six million Jews were killed -- more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. ..." Obama did say that, and that's going to make Ahmadinejad mad because Ahmadinejad, despite the fact Obama has cleared him to go ahead with nuclear power, is trying to say that it never happened. But then he said this. After acknowledging the Holocaust, Obama said, "On the other hand, 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 ..."

So what we have here, we have had the moral equivalence of 60 years of the Palestinians without a homeland to the Holocaust, and we're supposed to sit by and react with restraint and understanding to this! As Erick points out: "The American Heritage Dictionary notes that the idiom 'on the one/other hand' refers to 'two sides of an issue' ..." which is a famous Obama line. Obama does this. That is used to construct an argument that says that there are two sides of the same issue. So there are two sides to the Holocaust. This is new. There are two sides to the Holocaust! "Yes, I will admit graciously, six million Jews were slaughtered. But on the other hand, the Palestinians have been wandering aimlessly seeking a home for 60 years in the desert."

Now, I have to ask: How is what happened to the Jews the same thing as what is happening to the Palestinians? I'm sorry those of you out there who don't want the speech criticized, but I have to ask this 'cause I'm a student of history, and I deal with reality, and I want to know: Where is the similarity here? Have six million Palestinians been slaughtered in camps that I didn't hear about because they're Palestinians, because they're Arabs? The Palestinians, if they are to be pitied at all, it is for how they have been used by Arab states, predominantly the oil-rich states -- the Saddams of the world, the Saudi Arabians -- to keep Arab populations up in arms and angry at Israel. The Palestinians are not wanted by the Jordanians. They are not wanted by the Saudi Arabians. They're not wanted in the United Arab Emirates.

The Palestinians... The Arab world is content for them to wander aimlessly in the world because they know they have a pliant media that will blame Israel for it. What President Obama did today is unconscionable, to draw a moral equivalence between the slaughter of six million Jews and a political circumstance in Palestine that's largely brought on by Palestinian leaders. The six million Jews that were slaughtered were not terrorists. They were innocent, the essence of innocent citizens. The PLO, Yasser Arafat, Hamas, whatever you want to call them, Hezbollah? They spawn terrorism in their own country and in Israel. They have harmed themselves with their own efforts here to wipe Israel off the map. The Jews were not trying to wipe Germany off the map. The moral equivalence here is striking. I do not consider this to be or have been a gutsy speech.

He did not go there. You know what would have been a gutsy speech? I knew it wasn't going to happen. A gutsy speech would have been had Obama gone there and outlined the long list of horrors committed by the militant wing of Islam against their fellow man. He didn't do that. He papered over it and established a moral equivalence for it. Nor did he outline a long list of interventions by our country to save Muslims throughout the world. Afghanistan, the Mujahideen that we gave Stinger missiles that beat the Soviet Red Army? Muslims! Kosovo? Muslims! We have joined forces with Muslims against their oppressors five or six different places in the world. Obama did not outline our interventions on behalf of Muslims around the world.

To me, he threw Israel over the cliff. He acknowledged the Holocaust, and that's some kind of major accomplishment on his part. But we stand against the unleashing of another Holocaust, against anybody, Jewish people or otherwise. Anyway, if there is another Holocaust, if Israel were to be wiped off the map, you would have the same standing ovations in the Arab world that happened after 9/11 happened here. So my question -- and it's a serious question. Can somebody tell me, what is Barack Obama's plan for defending this nation, defending our allies? Can you think of one? Has he articulated, as president of the United States -- in his defense speeches, his foreign policy speeches -- a plan to defend the nation?

He hasn't, and that is the problem. It's as though he believes he can end all strife and end all wars with his words. Remember he told Harry Reid he has a gift. He has a gift. He believes that he has this incredible power, and he believes also that the rest of the world recognizes it and acknowledges it. Israel is in deep trouble, and they know it. Israel is on her own, and they know it. I'm trying to go easy here 'cause I know that the orders have come from on high not to be critical or even analytical of the speech because we're to take it as a whole. It was a wonderful, wonderful thing. It was equivalent to Ronald Reagan, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down the wall." I know that's conventional wisdom, but as I say: I, El Rushbo, have always resisted the tug of conventional wisdom, of popular sentiment, and when I hear what I hear and when I know a lot of it is made up -- untrue -- sorry, I have to point it out.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Mr. Snerdley just asked me what do I think my reaction of the country club blue-blood moderate Republicans to be will this speech? That's easy! That's easy. Here's what you look for. Within 24 hours, the moderate Republican types we're talking about will find their way to the nearest cameras and microphones and they will have big smiles on their faces and almost tears in their eyes, and they will be so happy that finally the United States has been returned to the lofty position of honest broker in the region, meaning honest broker for Middle East peace. That will be what they have said and what they say will have been the major accomplishment of the Obama speech. That's just a prediction. But I'm pretty good on these predictions. Let's listen to another sound bite from Obama's speech in Cairo today. Let's see. Well, I don't need to set this up, just listen to it.

OBAMA: I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail.

RUSH: All right, now, what do you think is the most important line in that sound bite, Mr. Snerdley, as a student here? No, that's not the most important line. I'm sure many Americans find it interesting that a president of the United States considers it his responsibility to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear, but the most interesting line in that bite to me is the last sentence: Any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. Now, he's offering a foundational reason for the redistribution of wealth, not just within a country, but around the world. That is, "Hello, United Nations." This is a call for the end of sovereignty. Somebody would have to mandate this. That line, "Any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail," we all know the concept of American exceptionalism. Nobody appointed us. This has been my point for years.

We are no different DNA-wise than any other human beings on the planet. No central authority appointed us a world superpower. It happened. We created it ourselves. We did it with the distinct features that we in America were born to as a result of our Constitution and our Declaration of Independence. Nobody elevated us. There was no world order which said the United States is elevated as a group above any other nation. And I don't know that anybody in the United States looks at ourselves that way. We don't look at ourselves as better than anybody else. We look at ourselves as an outpost of freedom the rest of the world wants to join, emulate, in many places they want to tear us apart, too, but this whole notion here that any world order that elevates one -- so bye-bye American exceptionalism and hello world order. Somebody has got to come in and cut somebody down to size. And that somebody is us. Now, I firmly believe that Barack Obama has as part of his agenda to cut this nation down to size, and I believe one of the reasons for it, aside from whatever ideological beliefs he has, is that he's angry.

This is a mad guy. He hung around people who were mad all of his life. His wife is angry all the time. Sonia Sotomayor is angry. She's angry at what she thinks was a life of disadvantage because she was Latina. Now, that line, that line scares me. Any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. Freedom will elevate people above tyranny. Nobody assigns it. It just happens. American exceptionalism now fails to exist. And in Obama's mind, American exceptionalism was unjust and immoral anyway. The fact is that free markets, opportunity for everybody, capitalism, competition, liberty, the rule of law and not men, inevitably succeed. Trying to force some kind of world order will inevitably fail. And I see this last line in this speech as a call for a world order. And when you have a world order where nobody is elevated above anybody else either from nation to nation or person to person, what do you have? What do you have?

When everybody's the same, in terms of outcome, what do you have? You have socialism. You have socialism and you have fascism, and you have the president of the United States discussing here the concept of the world order that would bring about that kind of sameness, because it's immoral to elevate -- like we had nothing to do with our greatness, somebody appointed us, somebody anointed us, somebody elevated us. No. It just happened. But now we're gonna get cut down to size and everybody is going to be the same because that's fair. And this is the crux of the problem with Marxists, collectivists, authoritarians. They lay out a flawed premise that everybody seems to applaud. That sounds so wonderful. Nobody is better than anybody else, yes, we're all the same, we're all equal, but that flawed premise that a bunch of noncritical thinkers thus embrace allows the authoritarian to control human beings and their lives, supposedly for their own good, for their own welfare, and for fairness, for everybody else in the world. We all must sacrifice, you see.

Now, the guy talking about how we all must sacrifice to the master. He gets what we sacrifice. He gets to control what we sacrifice. This is a guarantee of worldwide misery with Obama and people like him benefiting from the so-called sacrifice he hopes to be able to impose to cut us down to size.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Basically, ladies and gentlemen, the speeches of President Obama always come down to the same thing. Somebody else must sacrifice to achieve the ends that he seeks. Today, the Israelis must sacrifice. They must sacrifice more than they have in the past and they must do so immediately and as Obama dictates. Yesterday, General Motors workers had to sacrifice. They must sacrifice for future workers. The rest of us must sacrifice. We must drive smaller cars; we must buy smaller homes; we must use less energy; we must give up private health care; we must pay more taxes; we must eat less food; we must sacrifice for Obama to reach his ends. Every day somebody else has to sacrifice. On the other hand, Obama is the one collecting all of the sacrifices. Obama sacrifices nothing. It's all about him; it's all about his ideology; it's all about his worldview. Our lives and our futures revolve around him and his dream. Corporate CEOs, they're admonished, "Don't take the private jet to Vegas. Those days are over." Obama takes two private jets and three helicopters to New York for dinner and a show.

I asked the question earlier today, "Where's Michelle? I don't see Michelle over there." And somebody said, "No, Michelle is gonna meet him with the girls in Paris or France over the weekend for the Normandy thing and they're going to have a rocking good time." Well, now, she's not going to get over there on the Queen Elizabeth II or whatever the ship is, she'll fly over there on one of Obama's 429 airplanes. Do you know that Obama's corporate fleet is 429 airplanes, not to mention the helicopters and other things. And the plane that flies 'em over there is going to have to deadhead back with nobody on it because she'll go back with him on the big corporate jet, Air Force One. Ah, just some casual observations.

This is a bizarre moral equivalency argument from Obama's speech. He said, "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." There it is, the "on the other hand," the moral equivalence. So while they're making great progress on women's rights in the Muslim worlds, we have a country where women's equality is still an ongoing struggle. Women are still being stoned in Iran. Women are being beheaded. I'm sorry, I don't know how here to react to this other than with incredulity. I just don't.

By the way, he did mention seven million American Muslims again today. There are one-and-a-half, 1.6 million American Muslims in America. There are not seven million. Anyway, he said this: "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." Well, who should decide this, then? If no single nation should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons -- this is outrageous. This is Barack Obama saying that there are no good guys and particularly that his country is not a good guy, we're all bad guys. Anybody that's got nukes as weapons are bad guys, and somebody like the United Nations ought to decide these things. So here he goes, he apologizes for our nuclear weapons, he apologizes for our, quote, unquote, dictatorial stand on nuclear weapons determining who gets them and who doesn't, which effectively green lights the Iranians to go ahead, which he's already done in the form of nuclear power.

And something else that the state-run media, state-controlled media has ignored: "On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America. At the same time, we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in online learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a young person in Kansas can communicate instantly with a young person in Cairo." You mean they can't now?

"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. ... 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."

I'll read that to you again here, folks. "All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments, community organizations" -- read ACORN -- "religious leaders" -- Jeremiah Wright -- "and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life." So your pursuit of a better life will now be intertwined with interaction with a Muslim version of ACORN, a Muslim version of Jeremiah Wright, and Muslim businesses to help you pursue a better life. Now, one thing that is not specifically spelled out here, but on education, we're going to expand programs, increase scholarships. On economic development we'll create a new core of business volunteers to partner. On science and technology, we're gonna launch a new fund to support technology. Do you realize the tax increase here, the taxpayer money that he just promised the Muslim Middle East in this speech? That's how you have to analyze this, all of the taxpayer money that's going to be spent.

No wonder this looked like a State of the Union speech. Did you watch it? Whenever he had anything to say about Islam or Palestinians, man, they shot up like jacks-in-the-box, just like the Democrats do in the State of the Union, when they talked about Israel they sat on their hands. And when he talked about all these exchange programs and all of this taxpayer money going to the Middle East -- you know, I asked yesterday, when Lara Logan, CBS, said the hopes of the Muslim world rest on his shoulders, I said, "What hopes? Might that have something to do with Israel? Or do they just want their share of stimulus money?" It appears both.