an african-american, for a black man or woman to get elected president because of the residual of racism in this country. rush thinks it's just the opposite, that it's impossible for a black man not to win the presidency because we have so much white guilt. it's total trash, which is mostly what you hear from rush limbaugh every day. and rush limbaugh also called president obama a -- not a jerk. i've got my book there. at any rate, the names -- he is one of the biggest name callers against president obama. called him a jackass on the radio, called him a jackass. but as you know, he has been called marxist, fascist, communist, socialist, liar, traitor, terrorist. they're the kind of personal attacks that i'm talking about in the book that have nothing to do with his policy assessments. you don't like the way he wants to fix the economy? fine. go after him. you don't like his approach on health care, fine.

put another approach on the table. you don't like his approach to education or whatever, that's what we ought to be doing as americans, not calling him a jackass. >> but if you look at what has been written about president washington in partisan newspapers back in the late 1700s, is there any difference what they said about our first president and what people like rush limbaugh may say on radio today about our current president, or what a democratic radio talk show host like you may say about george w. bush on the airwaves? >> i never said anything like that about george w. bush. i defy anybody to find it. i disagree with a lot of george bush's policies, starting with the war in iraq. >> so what is different? >> let me tell you. i know that george w. bush loves this country and i know he was trying to do what he thought was best for this country. i just think he went in the wrong direction. i don't touch on something very important. and that is politics -- and i talk about this last night. politics and pros, local bookstore here with a big crowd. in the early days of this country, if there had been talk

shows in those days, yeah, george washington would have been reviled. politics was not pretty in the days of the founding fathers. probably the ugliest presidential election we ever had was 1800 between thomas jefferson and john adams. now they didn't do it so much as their supporters did. but after lincoln's assassination, particularly i think, things got to the point where okay, we disagree with their policies, but we don't attack them personally. we've come full circle. now we're back today where anything goes. and i don't think it's good for our -- healthy for our democracy. >> you have a fan from one of our tweeters, rock dots who is a frequent tweeter here at the network saying i love this guy. he is driving the conservatives crazy. let's get to your phone calls. katrina joining us, staten island, new york independent line with bill press, radio talk show host, columnist and now out with a new book, "the obama hate machine." good morning. >>. >> caller: yes, good morning. you know, i'm so angry. you democrats, i don't know why

you call yourself first of all progressives, okay. progressive on what? >> i don't. i just want to tell you i call myself a liberal, katrina. i think a progressive is a liberal who is afraid of being truthful about who they really are. a chicken liberal is a progressive. >> caller: to be elected as united, not a divided. and look what is going on in this country right now. okay? >> thank you, katrina. she hung up. do you want to respond? >> i would say that the president has gone out of his way with these republican members of congress to try to work together. he has been shot down at every attempt. on the debt ceiling, on the jobs bill, on immigration. i mean look, sean hannity last week even said that if president

obama had his way, osama bin laden would still be alive. now where is that coming from? who gave the orders to go get him? who gave the orders to find him? who approved the plan, even though it was very risky plan with only a 60% certainty that he was there? who did that? it wasn't george w. bush who said he is only one guy and i don't care if we find him or not, basically. so give the man credit for something. >> you broaden this out to the tea party. we had a call in the last segment, linda, who is very critical of you and of me and of this network, basically saying you came on after gabby giffords was shot, blamed it on the tea party movement. >> no i didn't. i don't know where she got that from. no. but in the book i do talk about the fact that part of the problem with the violent rhetoric that we see today is violent rhetoric can lead to violent actions. and we have seen that in many

cases. certainly the political atmosphere in tucson was very, very poisonous. and i think whoever -- the guy that killed the nine people there and shot gabby giffords was caught up in that. but i never pointed to the tea party. but words have consequences. that's important to know. >> because of that, let me go back to your book. several democratic members of congress were verbally abused by tea partiers. you write congressman john lewis was called the n word. barney frank was called a faggot and cleaver was spat upon. >> walking into the house of representatives by tea party ralliers outside of the congress. totally unacceptable in american politics. i mean, again, john lewis is an icon. let's face it, i believe. and what he has done, he should get the respect of all americans. that doesn't mean you have to worship the ground he walks on. that doesn't mean you have to agree with everything he says. but you should certainly treat

him with respect. i'm friends with a lot of these republicans on the hill. i did crossfire for six years. you name it. john boehner, john mccain, all of them, i'm on good terms with all of them. and they know i disagree with their policies. but i treat them with respect, and they treat me with respect. and that's the way it ought to be. and i think some of these people in the political system today just think that anything goes. as one who has been around politics a long time, i don't think anything goes. >> wayne is joining us, shelby township, michigan, with bill press, good morning. republican line. >> caller: yeah, good morning, guys. >> hi. >> caller: i think this guy is completely disillusional and he just loves to sell these books to obama lovers. how can you say that rush and sean hate president obama because they vehemently disagree with him? you know, and then everybody is always after me, well, you watch fox news. well, i put up with the one-sided left media for 50

years, and fox finally comes along and we get both sides and everybody whines and cries about fox all the time. so listen, everything that obama does, if it's -- you know, if it were a republican, they would be all over him. they give him a pass on everything. so you tell me where this hate machine is. i just don't see it. >> wayne, thanks for the call. >> well, obviously, if you're watching fox, you're watching the hate machine a good part of it. you ought to recognize that. take your blinders off. but i would just say look, you know, i'm a talk show host, right. when george bush was in the white house, there are many times that i agreed with george bush on policies and said so. and there are times when i have disagreed with barack obama on policies and i say so. i think george bush was absolutely right on immigration, and it was his conservative right wing talk show hosts that killed his immigration plan. i defy you, wayne, to tell me

one good thing ever, ever, ever that rush limbaugh or sean hannity have said about president obama. again, when rush limbaugh says that he only got -- rush limbaugh has said that if he were not -- this is what he said about president obama. if he were not black, he would be a tour guide in hawaii today. that's despicable. he called him a jackass on the air. that's disgusting. sean hannity says that barack obama wouldn't -- he would still like osama bin laden to be alive. what is that based on? nothing. >> bill says don't worry, bill. ed schultz of msnbc called out hannity over the remarks about bin laden. >> he did, and the president with video clips. >> he did. he did a very good job. the other thing about hannity is, and i've got the tape to prove it, well, he didn't show any tape. he throws that out there. reminded me during the campaign when hannity, particularly, talked about michelle obama. there was a tape where she said we hate whitey and we're going to go after whitey. the tape never existed.

it was a total fabrication. and fox news spent hours on. ed shuttle did a really good job on that, by the way. >> is rush limbaugh a hateful person? >> he says hateful things. let me put it that way. he is a very successful broadcaster. he is a number one broadcaster. everybody thought glenn beck was going to overtake him. rush is king. but he says a lot of hateful things. >> why? >> about -- i think it's because that's his shtick and it works and it brings people to his radio show and they buy his products. and he is very successful at it. he is most of all very successful businessman. and i take my hat off to him as a radio talk show host. i mean he is -- nobody is as good as he is. >> don is joining us from vermilion, ohio. good morning, democrats line. >> caller: good morning. >> hi. >> caller: the answer is yes, rush limbaugh is very bad guy. he changes everything around and lies about it. but what i want to talk about was the energy commission the

other day passed a bill that eric cantor put a bill in that said that he was going to give line itemized veto power to the president. and the democrats was jumping all over it because they've been wanting that. but what it said was that if they sent the bills to him and they added that pipeline, for example, and he knocked down the pipeline, did it come back to them. and once they decided we still want the pipeline, it never went back to him. they changed the whole bill. and the democrats, i can't believe they're not reading this stuff. it doesn't go back to the president. it makes it automatic law and with vetoes and stuff, just because he is getting a veto, they're not reading the bills. they've got another one from the energy commission. and they said right in the meeting and said that they were going to put -- add that oil,

shell oil from canada. they were going to put our oil in it all the way down through there instead of using water from california and from alaska. >> don, thanks for the call. we'll get a response. >> i must admit. i've been traveling a lot with the book. i don't know the details of this particular line-item veto. it's been an issue that's been around for a long time. i don't know whether it's a liberal or a conservative position, to tell the truth, but i support a line-item veto and i always have. i remember when i was working in the california legislature and ronald reagan was governor, we were talking about a line-item veto. it seems to me the chief executive should be able to take a big budget, whether it's president or governor and go through it before he or she signs it and says these are things that i disagree with and veto those without having to veto the entire budget. i think it could make sense from a governing point of view. i don't know if that makes me a liberal or conservative, i just

think it's good government. >> rescission as we heard from congressman eric cantor, it doesn't allow the president to take the item out of the budget that was overturned by that 6-3 supreme court decision, but it allows the president to highlight those areas that he wants cut from the budget, sends it back to congress with that specific item. >> which is maybe another way of achieving the same goal. it sounds like it. if it works that way, i think that would work. >> from keenan weeks. mr. press, what would you suggest to help create common ground and help reduce the rhetoric in both parties? >> i think we need some new people. by the way, i think in washington, neil abercrombie who is a good friend, the governor of hawaii, i heard him speak about a month ago in los angeles where he said this whole thing turned around and got personal and nasty and by the way, 24-hour, even in between elections attack mode in the part of members of congress, the two parties against each other, it started in 1994 when newt

gingrich became speaker, that he is the one who really turned the corner. and that's the -- and he came out -- if you recall, we talked about this on the show with a list of words. here are the words you use if you're talking about republicans. newt put this out as speaker, right. trustworthy, loyal, patriotic. and here is a list of words that you use if you're talking about democrats. lazy, traitors, all that. so i think we got to get back to the way it used to be when i first got involved in politics. you fight like hell with each other during the campaign to get elected. and then after the campaign, the winners and the losers, the winners of both parties i should say get together and say okay, what are the problems we've got in front of us and how are we going to fix them? are they willing to reach across the aisle and do that? right now it is full-time 24-hour campaign there is no letting up on the campaign mode in between elections. and that's why you don't see this congress getting anything done. and to a certain extent, that's

true of both sides. but it's particularly true with the republican house caucus. >> the book is titled "the obama hate machine: the lies. >> distortions and personal attacks on the president and who is behind them." you're heard on how many radio stations around the country? >> well, we're heard of sirius xm, which means everywhere in the country, and about 60 stations terrestrial, or ground stations around the country -- seattle, portland, san francisco, los angeles, asheville. go down the list. >> you're up early in the morning. how do you prepare for the program? >> i don't. no! well, it's three hours of radio. and three hours is a lot to fill. >> tell me about it. >> yeah, right. i'm always preparing, like you are, steve. really. i don't mean to duck your question. right after each show, we sit down and talk about what we -- things we probably want to talk about the next day, the kind of guests we want to get for the next day.

and peter and dan henning, our two producers start lining them up. we have a conference call at 5:00 that afternoon where we look at the guests that we already have and what the day's news has brought and sort of decide on those topics. and then we get in the next morning at 5:00, an hour before show time, and sit down and put the show together. in the meantime, i'm reading -- i'm on line all the time, checking all the important news websites. in the morning i read whatever papers i can get any hands on. and by that time, what we try to do is go to the most important issues of the day, what people are talking about. give people the up-to-date information from the capital, here in the capital, around the country, around the globe. and my spin on it, if it's a topic that i care strongly about. and then take calls. and then interview our guests. so it's a -- 24-hour cycle. we're always in the process of

preparing that next day's show. thinking week you're going to be talking about the new budget plan that the white house will unveil tomorrow. and it's going to have some familiar themes. more money and spending on infrastructure, raising taxes on wealthier americans and corporations, the republicans offering an alternative vision, saying no new taxes. we've seen this before, and we're going to see it again this year. will anything change? >> i don't think so. i don't think -- i think it's pretty clear that until after november 2012, there is not going to be any -- i don't see how there is any resolution of this because the republicans have really -- i don't understand it, have really dug in their heels that the temporary tax that george bush put in place, a temporary relief for the wealthiest of americans, they believe that that should be a permanent relief for people who are millionaires and billionaires while -- i don't have to tell you about the buffett rule there are a lot of people who are paying a higher rate of taxes than warren buffett or bill gates or donald trump. it's just not right. >> so if the president is

re-elected, and that is an if. if the republicans have the house and possibly the senate, will anything be different in january 2013? will republican leaders negotiate with this president over the next four years on some of the issues that barack obama is talking about in 2012? >> well, first of all, i don't accept your premise. i believe that the economy is getting better. president obama is getting stronger. the republicans, whoever they put up, is going to be a weak candidate. if it's one of the ones that is out there right now, romney, santorum, ron paul or newt gingrich, none of the four can beat president obama. and i think that means that president obama is going to get re-elected and bring the democrats back in control of the house and pick up couple of seats in the senate. >> but even in 1984, a landslide year for ronald reagan, he won 49 states. even when he won a huge mandate, he only brought in 15 house seats. and the democrats need at least

25 in 2012. >> right. i think obama is a better campaigner than ronald reagan. >> back to your calls. frank, hartford, connecticut. good morning. >> by the way, quickly, if i may, excuse me, caller, one second. if the republicans do have the house and the senate, i don't think things are going to change. i think they'll double down. they're not going to cooperate with this president. they're not going to say oh, well, we tried to defeat him, but he got re-elected. so now let's sing kumbahyah and we'll work together with him. no, it's not going to happen. it will be holy -- it will be really ugly. sorry. >> go ahead, frank. >> caller: yes, hi. good morning. >> hi, frank. >> caller: i'm an independent. my motto is one party stinks, the other one don't smell so good. because it doesn't matter who we elect, obviously. both parties have gotten us to where we are today. now i used to consider myself a republican, part of the member of the republicanic party.

but i -- the democrat party is not what it used to be 40, 50 years ago. >> democratic. >> caller: i'm sorry. it's democrat. >> no it's not. it's democratic is actually the word. look it up in the dictionary. let's just talk the english language. >> caller: okay, okay, okay. excuse me. but, you know, first off, you're not partisan. i know that. secondly, if there is a republican president, it's not the prime directive of the democratic party or democrat party to unseat him. maybe just those on the right are being a little bit more honest. it's all partisan. the real problems we have here is that the office of the president has become monarchial. both parties -- i used to be, like i said, i'm not a neo conservative. i'm a conservative. 30 years ago, that was a -- when there were primaries in the

republican party, they used to demonize candidates who neoconservative. but then today we have the neodemocrat party. >> he touched on so many things i don't know where to start. two quick points. number one, i hear that all the time. it doesn't matter whom we elect. yes, it does. oh, yes, it does. just think of the supreme court. that's the number one reason it makes a big difference, who gets elected president of the united states. do you want more clarence thomass, sonia sotomayors or ruth bader ginsburgs or steve breyer? on the second point, i think frank and i agree on one thing. i wrote a couple of books ago called "train wreck" in that the presidency has assumed greater and greater power -- the office of the presidency has gotten stronger and stronger. and dick cheney, that was his

driving goal to bring back what he thought they had given away under jerry ford and richard nixon. and he started that with george w. bush. and in many ways the obama presidency has continued some of those -- almost super powers of the presidency in terms of when we go to war, the use of drones, without getting any approval from congress. i think they're very, very troubling questions about super powers of the presidency under this president and the last president that all americans ought to be concerned about. >> and one of our tweeters, it is the democratic party. not the democrat party. >> it is. you know, that's such a silly thing to hang on to. but republicans think they're being so cute, following rush limbaugh's lead by saying democrat party. i mean, it's childish. >> did you see the cpac conference over the weekend? >> i didn't go down there, but i saw certainly a lot of clips of

it. you know what surprised me about that? is that mitt romney won the straw poll. the last two years, ron paul won the straw poll at cpac. these are the true believers. they really are. this is the 38th year they've come to washington. and they always have -- and the fact that santorum went in, i thought maybe he would get it from ron paul. the fact that mitt romney won that straw poll i find pretty impressive. >> and yet ron paul didn't even speak this year. >> he didn't even speak. he spent his time in maine. and he came in second in maine. again, romney winning the caucuses in maine. so it was a good day yesterday for romney. he's not done yet. >> some highlights from our weekend coverage of the cpac conference which got under way thursday and wrapped up yesterday. ann coulter among those speaking at the gathering. >> but even with all this, obama is going to be very difficult to beat this year. number one, he's an incumbent. number two, americans keep telling pollsters they like him

personally, don't like his policies, but they like him personally. he's our first black president. and the nfm, the non-faux immedia non-fox media, is gaga about him. he's not sleazy like clinton. he'd probably make a lovely next-door neighbor as long as you're not chinese. then he'd be constantly borrowing stuff. voters with 40 years of politically correct education are ecstatic to have the first black president. they just love the idea of it. even if we did get flava flav instead of thomas soul. when is it going to be okay in this country to admit we elected a man based on the color of his skin? >> first of all, reaction to ann coulter. she actually is a friend.

she's probably the most colorful person still out there that's not running for office. in politics today. and her whole shtick is just making outrageous statements in front of a crowd like that. that's how she sells a lot of books. she's very good at it. and she had her moment. but no impact on the political process, i don't think. again, she picks up that line that the only reason he got elected is because he's black. i mean, that, to me, is so low. >> let me go to the book because you say barack obama was the first black president of the harvard law review, only the fifth black men ever elected to the u.s. senate, and the first black u.s. president, but many critics question his real ethnicity. >> yeah, yeah. people say he's not black enough because his mother was white. i mean, again, they can't just accept him for who he is. he's a man -- agree or disagree with his policies -- he's a man who has made remarkable achievements under some very difficult circumstances.

raised by his grandparents. grew up in indonesia. split family. saw his father twice in his entire lifetime. didn't have a dime. you know, got to occidental, was able to get to harvard. why? based on his academic skills and his drive and his push in chicago as an -- i mean, a community organizer. and then gets elected to the state senate. and then gets elected to the u.s. senate. then becomes president of the united states. he didn't do that just because he's some black guy from the streets. you know. so you know what this is? i noticed that david bossy in the last hour referred to david horowi horowitz. he used to be a real lefty who is now as right wing as you can get. he calls this the obama derangement syndrome. that's what you hear from ann coulter and rush limbaugh. that they hate the man so much, they can't help themselves. and so they'll say anything to just go over the line the whole

time. i know i'm rambling on here, but i have one other thing. cpac, wayne lapierre, head of the national rifle association, said yesterday at cpac, i'm going to paraphrase here. that it's true. president obama in four years hasn't done anything at all to take our rights away under the second amendment. but if he gets re-elected, he's going to come after every one of our guns. what is that based on? your paranoia and stoking fear in the american people. the president, i say, is a liberal. notice not progressive. i wish he had done something about gun control. he gave a speech in tucson after gabby giffords was shot. he's done squat, nothing. i'm disappointed he hasn't. wayne lapierre is telling people that that's his secret intention. that's as bad as sean hannity. >> steve, ask him why the liberals could not find someone

better than barack obama? >> i think obviously we found the best candidate that we could, and that's why he's president of the united states. i personally supported hillary clinton, as she's a friend of mine. i think she would have made a great president. i think she's made a phenomenal secretary of state, but i think obama is making a good president and will be even better in the second term. >> do you think she'll rn in 2016? >> no. >> why? >> i think she's tired of it. i would hope that -- i mean, her career's not over. i would hope she might be head of the world bank or one of these major os or secretary-general of the united nations. but i think running a national campaign again, i just don't -- i think she's had it, you know, after her husband's two campaigns and her campaign and running for senate twice. give the woman a break. >> on the republican line, barclay on the line from florida, good morning. welcome to the conversation. >> caller: hi. >> hi.

i've heard you for years. you're a good proponent, but i have to say you're totally wrong today. you say everybody's against obama in a fashion that's very different from everything else in your lifetime. i remember how the press and liberals went after ronald reagan who had been a union president. and look how they treated him. a fine man. look how they treated the first george bush who was fi bphi bet capita. you look at obama and you want to know why we're against him? we're scared of obama. he's the one who was raised by a socialist mother. read his book. he's the one that stated in his autobiography that he wished he had done better in high school and in other schools. but he partied too much. he drank and did drugs. he talks all about that in his book. he follows saul alynn sialinski. everything he wants to do is

radical, and he says everybody he hung out with in college was a radical. >> you have just heard the obama hate machine. it's just based on -- that's total nonsense. oh, yeah, we're supposed to love happy bush because he was on the yale baseball team. whoopty do. that's how we pick our presidents? by the way, i liked daddy bush. he's a reasonable guy. i liked ronald reagan. i respected ronald reagan. i disagreed with his policies. this is the obama derangement syndrome. that you just heard. word for word. the idea that president obama admits that he experimented with drugs, the only difference between him and george w. bush is he admits him and george w. bush denied it and the media let him get away with it. look what obama has accomplished in his lifetime and look at his policies as president and tell me where you disagree with him rather than, which this guy just did. that's the book. go after him personally. they can't -- they cannot help themselves.