If you receive this and you hate it and you don’t want to ever read it no matter what...that is fine; email me back and you will be deleted from my list (which is almost at the maximum anyway).

I attempt to post a new issue each Sunday by 2 or 3 pm central standard time (I sometimes fail at this attempt).

I try to include factual material only, along with my opinions (it should be clear which is which). I make an attempt to include as much of this week’s news as I possibly can. The first set of columns are intentionally designed for a quick read.

I do not accept any advertising nor do I charge for this publication. I write this principally to blow off steam in a nation where its people seemed have collectively lost their minds.

And if you are a believer in Jesus Christ, always remember: We do not struggle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places (Eph. 6:12).

This week, there was a non-TEA party, non-Beck rally in Washington D.C. According to AP: More than 400 organizations - ranging from labor unions to faith, environmental and gay rights groups - partnered for the event, which comes one month after Beck packed the same space with conservatives and tea party-style activists. Organizers claimed they had as many participants as Beck's rally. But Saturday's crowds were less dense and didn't reach as far to the edges as they did during Beck's rally. The National Park Service stopped providing official crowd estimates in the 1990s.

There was more trash left behind at this left wing gathering than all of the TEA parties around America over the last year and a half.

The liberal San Francisco Chronicle declined to endorse Senator Barbara Boxer, liberal Democrat.

There appears to be a Florida TEA party which is a political organization running a candidate in Alan Grayson’s race (he’s the crazy Democrat), and TEA party organizations have disavowed this candidate, and it appears that Grayson may be supporting this party (because votes to the “TEA party” candidate will take votes away from Grayson’s opponent, who is actually supported by the 130 real TEA parties in Florida.

President Obama, Speaker of the House Pelosi and Senator leader Reid all met privately, but their discussion has not been revealed. A Democratic aide, speaking anonymously, said this would be a discussion of the legislative agenda of the lame duck session of Congress. It is supposed the expiring Bush tax cuts may be voted on in that session.

Somewhere between 900,000 (police estimate) and 2.9 million (union estimate) union members marched in France, protesting, among other things, oppressive anti-union reforms like raising retirement age from 60 to 62.

On the advice of the FBI, cartoonist Molly Norris disappears from view, changing her name and location (and, presumably, her appearance). Miss Norris had the temerity to suggest that we have an “Everybody Draw Mohammad Day.” Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki—the radical who's also been cited as inspiring the Fort Hood, Tex., massacre and the plot by two New Jersey men to kill U.S. soldiers—singled out artist Molly Norris as a "prime target," saying her "proper abode is Hellfire." This woman’s life will never be the same again.

Before leaving, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's met with militant Nation of Islam, minister Louis Farrakhan, and members of the New Black Panther Party.

Obama regulatory czar Cass Sunstein, on helping us make "right choices": "[T]here's a little Homer Simpson in all of us. Sometimes we have self-control problems, sometimes we're impulsive and that in these circumstances, both private and public institutions, without coercing, can make our lives a lot better. Once we know that people are human and have some Homer Simpson in them, then there's a lot that can be done to manipulate them."

President Barack Obama: "I'm a Christian by choice, My family didn't -- frankly, they weren't folks who went to church every week. And my mother was one of the most spiritual people I knew, but she didn't raise me in the church. I came to my Christian faith later in life and it was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead -- being my brothers' and sisters' keeper, treating others as they would treat me. And I think also understanding that Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings, that we're sinful and we're flawed and we make mistakes, and that we achieve salvation through the grace of God. But what we can do, as flawed as we are, is still see God in other people and do our best to help them find their own grace."

Obama: "[Fox News has] a point of view that I disagree with. It's a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world."

Joe Biden: "[I want to] remind our base constituency to stop whining and get out there and look at the alternatives. This president has done an incredible job. He's kept his promises."

More from Joe (who appears to be on message, nowadays): "And so those who don't get - didn't get everything they wanted, it's time to just buck up here, understand that we can make things better, continue to move forward and - but not yield the playing field to those folks who are against everything that we stand for in terms of the initiatives we put forward."

Barack Obama: "What I'm seeing out of the Republican leadership over the last several years has been a set of policies that are just irresponsible, and we saw in their Pledge to America a similar set of irresponsible policies. . [Although GOP leaders] say they want to balance the budget, they propose $4 trillion worth of tax cuts and $16 billion in spending cuts, and then they say we're going to somehow magically balance the budget. That's not a serious approach."

Barack Obama: "People need to shake off this lethargy. People need to buck up. . If people now want to take their ball and go home, that tells me folks weren't serious in the first place. . It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election. . The idea that we've got a lack of enthusiasm in the Democratic base, that people are sitting on their hands complaining, is just irresponsible."

ABC's Christiane Amanpour (whose ratings are tanking): "People don't appreciate some of the amazing legislative agenda that [Barack Obama has] accomplished. Is this a failure of leadership? Has he allowed the opposition to define him?"

Bill Maher in an interview with Bill O’Reilly: “...for example, I mean the teabaggers. They're the ones, who are so upset about the debt. Most of the debt came from Bush. That's just a fact. Under Bush, Cheney said it, ‘Deficits don't matter.’ Nobody was angry about the deficit when it was President Bush.”

Bill Maher: "When it comes to voting, when we only have two choices, you got to grow up and realize there's a big difference between a disappointing friend [Democrats] and a deadly enemy [Republicans]."

White House spokesman Bill Burton: “...somebody like Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow...helps to keep our government honest and pushes and prods to make sure that folks are true to progressive values, then he thinks that those folks provide an invaluable service.”

In the same interview, Bill Maher said: “...at some point in the last 20 years, the left moved to the center and the right moved into a mental institution. I mean, there used to be ideological differences that were understandable and there used to be moderate Republicans. That has gone away. I mean, the Republican Party now is just a bunch of religious lunatics, flat earthers and civil war re-enactors.”

Code Pink activist Cindy Sheehan: "I am a 9/11 Truther. I do think it was an inside job. We just don't know - I don't know - how far inside it went. But, you know, I'm sure Dick Cheney had something to do with it." The week previous had Mahmoud Ahmadinejad suggesting that we look into what really transpired on 9/11.

Joe Madison, making the definitive statement at the D.C. union rally: “I just found out...they sent in a satellite image of the crowd. Somebody go tell Glenn Beck, there are more people here, right now than there was on the 29^th...somebody go and tell that to the TEA party folk.” And somebody go tell Joe Madison that the Beck D.C. honor rally was on the 28^th.

Homemade sign at the D.C. union rally: Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are racists.”

Former California governor Jerry Brown: "I now have a wife; I come home at night. I don't try to close down the bars in Sacramento like I used to do when I was governor of California.”

Osama bin Laden raised the terror warning level to green, saying: "This is a message to the whole world about those responsible for climate change and its repercussions - whether intentionally or unintentionally - and about the action we must take...Speaking about climate change is not a matter of intellectual luxury - the phenomenon is an actual fact”

More from bin Laden: “We should stop dealings with the dollar and get rid of it as soon as possible, I know that this has great consequences and grave ramifications, but it is the only means to liberate humanity from slavery and dependence on America...Noam Chomsky was correct when he compared US policies to those of the Mafia; they are the true terrorists."

Ground Zero Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: "I'm extremely sensitive to the feelings of the families of 9/11."

Senator Mary Landrieu: “"The president's policies right now are doing much more harm than the [BP] spill itself to the economy of the South coast. ... It's just gotten to a point where people in Louisiana ask, `Do they even understand what is going on down here?' They have the entire offshore industry virtually shut down.”

Senator Joe Lieberman: “It is time to retire our ambiguous mantra about all options remaining on the table. Our message to our friends and enemies in the region needs to become clearer: namely, that we will prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability -- by peaceful means if we possibly can, but with military force if we absolutely must.”

Joe Biden again, but off-message: "[I]f we allow this to be a referendum on whether people are happy where they are now, we'll lose."

Bill Clinton: “People have a right to be angry. They have a right to be disappointed. But they still have to be make a choice. An election is not a referendum on their anger. It's a choice between two candidates.” Note the subtlety here; one might apply this easily to anger toward Obama’s policies. This is more of Bill Clinton getting out there and politicking for his wife, but without clearly doing so.

The SF Chronicle: “The incumbent, Democrat Barbara Boxer, has failed to distinguish herself during her 18 years in office. There is no reason to believe that another six-year term would bring anything but more of the same uninspired representation.” (They, of course, did not endorse Republican Carly Fiorina either).

TAPPER: David Axelrod said something that the president has been saying for a long time, which is that Republicans are holding the middle-class tax cuts hostage. I understand it, Democrats haven't introduced a bill in the Senate, and the Republicans have. Wouldn't there have to be a bill that Republicans are threatening to block or blocking before anything is being held hostage?

GIBBS: I don't know what bills have been introduced in the Senate. Obviously, I think the -- the posture of -- I don't think the bill would have to be the existence of -- I mean, I think their rhetoric alone, from Senator McConnell and others, have been that the price of -- there's a $700 billion price tag on moving forward on the tax cuts for the middle class. That's the tax cuts for the wealthy.

TAPPER: So there doesn't have to be an actual...

GIBBS: Well, absolutely. And, you know, look, we -- I've said this -- it's now been a couple of weeks, obviously, but, you know, we -- we -- we agree on -- we agree on the middle-class part of this, or so they say. Their price tag for the middle class was the $700 billion. We could have passed the middle class alone, provided some much needed certainty to -- to the economy and to middle-class families, and had -- still had plenty of time to debate the $700 billion price tag for -- for the other cuts.

TAPPER: Why not do that? Why not introduce the bill...

REPORTER: Why not get Republicans on the record?

TAPPER: ... and -- and force Republicans to filibuster that?

GIBBS: They were unwilling to do that. They were unwilling to...

REPORTER: But who has the power to introduce the bill?

(CROSSTALK)

GIBBS: No, no, guys, what I'm -- my original answer was, I don't think the bill is the existence of the -- of the fight. It is that -- look, John Boehner said...

TAPPER: But you're not -- you're not even fighting --

GIBBS: But -- but John Boehner said quite clearly on Sunday that he would go along with the middle-class stuff, right? Then fury rained down, and quickly we crawfished back over to, well, well, wait,

middle- class, it's going to -- the price for doing middle-class is tax cuts for the wealthy. And -- and we could have done middle-class.

TAPPER: Isn't the real problem the fact that there are Democrats who agree with the Republicans on the issue? There are 47 --

GIBBS: I think we could have done middle class, but the Republicans weren't interested.

TAPPER: Yeah, but --

REPORTERS: But the Democrats --

TAPPER: -- you don't need the support of the Republicans in the House to pass anything.

GIBBS: No, but to play along with your -- if a bill has to become -- you've got to pass them in both houses. And you were not going to get 60 votes to go and just do middle-class tax cuts, were

you?

TAPPER: Yeah, but I guess my question is, why not try? If you actually think that this is a winning campaign issue --

GIBBS: It wasn't -- because the Republicans were -- the Republicans said they weren't going to do it.

Chris Wallace: “...after Ahmadinejad's statement about 9/11 possibly being an inside job, the State Department called him delusional. We just heard the president calling his remarks hateful. And yet, Brit, the president still talks about diplomacy with Iran. Why is it that Mr. Obama refuses to take no for an answer from the Iranians?”

Brit Hume, Fox News Sr. Political Analyst: “It is a little hard to imagine at this stage that he hasn't gotten the message. It's really sad and worrisome that he can't see that this guy is a crude little thug, that there is no point in having a negotiation with, because you probably can't trust anything he says or agrees to.

He's totally mercurial. He changes from one day to the next on the things he says. But he tends towards saying outrageous and yes, indeed, even delusional things.

There is no indications that the mullahs who run the country behind the scenes are dissatisfied with him and would rather have some other spokesman out there. None whatever.

The public in that country may be dissatisfied with him, but the president has done nothing to discourage that. In my view, he continues to almost legitimize the guy. I think it's very foolish behavior on the president's part.”

Michelle Malkin, speaking of those President Obama has thrown under the bus: “The wheels on the bus go thump, thump, thump in the Obama White House.”

Greta Susteren (who is more of a moderate than a conservative): Democratic Senators and Congressmen “are not out bragging, they’re out defending” their votes.

Dennis Miller: Obama is “not a Muslim; he’s an ineffectual civil servant.”

Ann Coulter: "This week, all we've heard about is how [Christine] O'Donnell once said she went on a date with a guy in high school who claimed to be a witch. (So what? Bill Clinton married one!)"

Comedian Argus Hamilton: "President Obama signaled a change in U.S. policy toward the Third World Thursday in a U.N. speech. He said he intends to promote commerce and free trade with poor nations rather than just give them money. If it works there, he's going to try it here."

Glenn Beck (this is paraphrased from memory): “What progressives want to do first is, take away personal responsibility from us.”

Matthew Dowd: “The public doesn’t judge a president by the legislation he passes.” (From memory)

John Stossel: "Progressives want to raise taxes on individuals who make more than $200,000 a year because they say it's wrong for the rich to be `given' more money. Sunday's New York Times carries a cartoon showing Uncle Sam handing money to a fat cat. They just don't get it. As I've said before, a tax cut is not a handout. It simply means government steals less. What progressives want to do is take money from some - by force - and spend it on others. It sounds less noble when plainly stated."

Austin Hill: "Americans are learning once again that campaign rhetoric is no substitute for sound economics. And any American President who promises to make your life better by vilifying your fellow countryman, is a very dangerous character indeed."

Victor Davis Hanson: "What optimistic Americans used to call a rising tide that lifts all boats is now once again derided as trickle-down economics. In other words, a newly peasant-minded America is willing to become collectively poorer so that some will not become wealthier."

Burt Prelutsky: "Obama and his cronies keep referring to `the last decade' in their sorry attempt to blame the Republicans for the present state of the nation. The truth, however, is that the GOP only ran things for the first six of those 10 years. Once the liberals took control of Congress in 2006, it was Dodd, Frank and Obama, along with their good friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who brought about the housing meltdown and the ensuing financial collapse. Since 2008, it's been the Obama administration that has sent the national deficit soaring through the stratosphere."

Neil Cavuto: “President Obama’s chief-of-staff, jumping ship; President Obama’s economic team jumping ship, his vice president voter the stimulus, jumping jacks.”

James Madison: "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself."

President Calvin Coolidge (1873-1933): "We demand entire freedom of action and then expect the government in some miraculous way to save us from the consequences of our own acts.. Self-government means self-reliance."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Osama bin Laden have been taken up the Democratic party platform.

Glenn Beck’s Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday shows were excellent; if you only watch one, then make it Thursday’s show:

I forgot to mention John Stossel’s excellent special on FoxNews, Battle for the Future:

Here is a short video of how the Washington D.C. grounds looked after the Beck rally and after the One World rally. Who appears to be most interested in the environment?

This video is disturbing and graphic; at first, I thought it was a parody of global warming fanatics; but this is actually put out by those who believe in global warming and everyone doing their part. One commentator says, Here, Eco-fascism jumps the shark. No pressure. You don’t have to watch this one.

Seth Meyer: “In an effort to drum up support for Democratic candidates, President Obama has been traveling the country and engaging voters in backyard chats. He was going to do front yard chats, but then you get the foreclosure signs in the pictures.”

Jodi Miller: “In last week’s speech to the UN, President Obama said that people cannot stand by idly when dissidents are threatened; unless, of course, the dissidents belong to the TEA party.”

Jodi Miller: “58% of Arabs worldwide actually oppose the construction of the Ground Zero Mosque and feel it should be moved to another location. And, of course, the liberal media is now calling these Arabs Islamaphobic.”

This is hilarious, but only if you know who Alan Grayson is. He recently ran an ad against his opponent, Daniel Webster, intentionally taking his opponent’s words out of context. So, this (fake) ad does the same thing back to Grayson. It would have been better if his opponent actually put the ad out, but he didn’t:

1) The law of unintended consequences: McDonald’s, and other fast food restaurants, often allow their part time employees to purchase very inexpensive catastrophic medical insurance for as little as $14/week. Because of the high turnover rate at fast food restaurants, there is a lot of paperwork involved in enrolling these members. Under Obamacare, this kind of insurance goes away. Because there is so much initial paperwork involved to enrolling a new employee, this is a legitimate expense to the insurance company which falls outside of the parameters allowed by Obamacare. Do you recall various politicians giving speeches, and talking about how 35% (or, whatever) of the costs of an insurance policy went into the pockets of the insurance company and how that was a bad thing, because it lined the pockets of the insurance executives? That is exactly what is happening here, except these are simply the costs of enrolling a lot of newly insured employees. It was a great applause line, when a liberal politican stood up and told you how much of your insurance premiums might be going into the pockets of the insurance company; however, when this is codified into law, as it has been, that also means that insurance like this will no longer exist.

2) Speaking of Obamacare, do you recall many Obamacare-apologists saying that there was no torte reform in the bill because, well, you just cannot deal with every issue there is. Turns out that Obamacare actually does deal with torte reform—there are disincentives in Obamacare to states for enacting torte-reform legislation.

3) Several people have lamented about how far right the Republican party has lurched. Not long ago, it was moderate Republican Colin Powell (who, when given the opportunity to vote for the consummate moderate Republican, John McCain, voted for the Democrat instead), and, as of late, Bill Maher, who called the new Republicans a bunch of religious lunatics, flat earthers and civil war re-enactors. You can always tell what the left is doing or has done, by what they accused the right of doing. What has happened is, the Democrats have lurched far to the left, and, despite having the so-called Blue Dog Democrats (the conservative Democrats), they mustered up enough votes for Obamacare (which nationalized the student loan business), the Stimulus package, and so-called Wall Street reform (which bills spend staggering amounts of money, and are so long and complex, that nearly every day, we find out new things which were in these bills). House Democrats even passed a Cap and Trade bill. The amount of significant legislation passed by this Congress in less than 18 months is staggering. The nationalizing of GM, student loans, the partial ban on Gulf oil drilling, and the amount of spending are the marks of an out-of-control far-left government (apart from the drone attacks).

4) The Democratic Socialists, one of the participants in Saturday’s leftist assembly in Washington D.C. are America’s parallel to Europe’s Fabian Socialists, whose symbol is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

5) Speaking of this rally in Washington D.C., I hope you noticed the manufactured signs. There were a lot of personal signs (more than usual for a left-leaning event), but most people carried signs that someone else made for them.

6) Dennis Miller observed that President Obama was doing a lot of campaigning in people’s backyards, and he suggested to the President open his eyes and look around—there is a fence. Now, why do these good people put up a fence. Ponder that concept, Mr. President.

7) The most unknown politician of this upcoming election: Chris Coons. He receives almost no media attention. But his opponent gets all kinds of media attention. Do you know who his opponent is?

8) Communists and socialists discovered the power of primaries a long time ago, and the Democratic party is being stacked with members who are communists, socialists and have socialist tendencies. This explains why such a radical agenda could be passed in Congress over the past 20 months. Republicans just discovered this past year how important primaries are. There was a big wave of “throw the bums out” where maybe a dozen establishment Republicans (some good and some bad) were beaten by TEA party candidates.

9) By the way, in case you don’t understand these backyard meetings which Obama is having; it is much easier to screen those who might speak, so that some Obama supporter doesn’t again actually spill the beans that hope and change means nothing.

Politico and George Washington University asked 1,000 likely voters about the current state of politics and the media in the USA.

45% strongly disapprove of the job President Obama is doing, 35% strongly approve.

47% of likely voters say they strongly approve of the president as a person. 19% strongly disprove.

12% cite MSNBC. Either this is multiple answers or, percentages of those who get their news from cable television.

49% cite Bill O’Reilly as the person with the greatest positive impact on the political debate in America

Glenn Beck is second; with 38% saying he has a positive impact, with a 32% percent negative.

Asked to rate the impact of the tea party movement on "the American political system,"

30% said the tea party movement has had "too much" influence on the Republican Party,

57% of Americans profess little or no trust in this country's mass media to report the news fairly and accurately.

However, 70% of voters support the "main issues the Tea Party has raised" -- calling for lower taxes, less government spending and less government regulation.

The alphabet media went after the TEA party hard, confronting various members at their rallies; or speaking disparagingly of their rallies. How did the media treat the far left rally this past Saturday? With kid gloves.

The median continues to go after Christine O’Donnell, Republican Senator hopeful in Delaware, while completely ignoring her Democratic rival.

I’d love to see the President and his cabinet sitting around and shooting the bull as to how wonderful and successful the Stimulus bill has been, and how well the economy is turning itself around; as individual members praise it highly ,and then excuse themselves to work elsewhere.

First 31 Democrats signed a letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, urging her to schedule a vote to extend all the Bush tax cuts (a measure which would pass easily with bi-partisan support in both houses).

Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu announced Thursday that she will block President Barack Obama's nominee to head the Office of Management and Budget until the administration eliminates or significantly modifies the moratorium on deepwater oil and gas drilling.

You still think the TEA party is your enemy or that Sarah Palin is stupid (unless, of course, you are a hard-left liberal, in which case, that is your basic point of view).

O’Donnell works her magic against Coons (both assuming an O’Donnell victory; she is presently behind in the polls).

The Republicans do not roll back Democratic legislation; and they do not seek to reduce the power of government.

There are a lot of problems with social security, the chief one being, it is going bankrupt. However, there are many secondary problems. I have mentioned on previous occasions that I have had 3 or 4 young tenants (under 40) who all received substantial social security checks (one receives nearly $3000/month). So, you may want to argue that it is your mother or grandmother’s only form of support, and that’s fine, but it is being doled out to a whole lot of people who are not anywhere near retirement age.

The idea is, social security is supposed to be some sort of a stop gap measure for a person at retirement age. It was originally set up as a ponzi scheme, with 16 workers funding 1 retiree (which meant only a small amount of one’s check went to social security). We are getting close to the point where one worker will be funding one retiree.

This money has been taken out and used to bribe a number of small interest groups over the years (and, okay, let’s say it was doled out to other needy people with no political motive). In any case, if any private business did anything like our social security, they would be arrested and easily convicted. I don’t say that for effect; it’s simply a fact.

There are a number of things that we need to do; we need to raise the retirement age, and we need to treat this fund like an actual lockbox or bank account. This needs to be strictly a personal retirement fund; for every dollar I put in, I get a dollar out + interest (obviously, since we want SS retirement to last a lifetime, we simply take the money which has been put into the system, compare that to the actuary tables, and dole out whatever percentage is reasonable and will match whatever the expected age of the recipient will be (if this amount will be inherited by a wife, then her expected age determines the amount that will be received). Obviously, some will live past that age, and continue to receive benefits, some will die 3 minutes after they receive their first check, and their income becomes a part of the SS fund (to balance out those who live past their expected age).

Now, I realize that we are not putting enough into social security to get any sort of real retirement out of social security. I also realize that some conservatives and libertarians out there are reading this, thinking, “Just drop the whole system.”

There are enough liberals and moderates in this country that, social security is not going away unless it simply goes broke, which will indicate that the United States government has defaulted on its loans.

Some conservatives want to privatize social security; some liberals and moderates would never agree to abolishing social security nor would they agree to privatizing it; and social security cannot survive as is; and what conservative wants more of our check put into the social security pool?

Most of us get that we are not putting enough into social security to fund our own retirement, and that brings this discussion almost to a standstill. Therefore, let me offer a real compromise:

About 10% of our income needs to go toward social security, but all we are putting in is about 6.2%. Allow the government to require that, an additional percentage be taken from our checks, apropos to a real retirement at whatever age we determine retirement to be (it needs to be raised). However, we may choose to let the government have this money and put it into the social security pot or we may choose to control this additional amount ourselves. That is, we may put the additional amount into whatever sort of a retirement fund that we choose, subject to similar rules to those for IRA or 401K plans. So, even though more money is being taken from our checks, we have control over where this money goes for investment (if we so choose). For those who believe the government is great, all that they have to invest goes into the social security pot.

This is not a conservative solution. This is a compromise solution. Perhaps we could choose to invest half of what we have to have taken from our checks. Bear in mind, this happens in businesses everyday. They have a retirement plan, their workers must participate in that plan, and the money is taken directly out of their check.

Obviously, there are a ton of details to be worked out. Will there be limitations on where we can invest these funds? Will these limitations become greater as we near retirement age (that is, we, at some point, can we only direct our money toward AAA bonds and money market funds, or whatever?). Can we borrow against these funds? Can we withdraw these funds early (with a penalty, of course? Could we personally direct more than the additional 3.8%? Maybe half of what we put in is available to us to direct into private retirement funds? What if our work already provides a retirement fund for us? Could we set up gold/silver/platinum funds? Could a person who chooses to direct this portion of his retirement simply choose a government investment vehicle (savings bonds)? Details, details.

But the key is, we need to put more from our income into social security to make it viable. Therefore, at the very least, this additional amount ought to be something that we have the option of controlling (and the option of keeping it separate from any government funds).

Liberals and moderates keep social security afloat, and they have the option of letting government handle all of their retirement. Conservatives may not like social security, but we can at least direct where a portion of this investment goes, and have the same sort of control over it as we do over an IRA or a 401K plan. So, no matter what happens to social security, we have money elsewhere in a place that is mostly out of the hands of the government.

There would be one additional benefit to this approach, and this is a biggie: having all of these funds going into a variety of retirement funds is going to drive the stock market sky high. That is, every person who chooses to direct his retirement, opens up a huge amount of investment monies which will be dumped into the stock market every single month. In fact, this approach could possibly almost guarantee an always rising market.

Insofar as I know, this is a new approach to social security; an approach which finds a reasonable middle ground between solvency and privatization.

Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown are the 2 candidates running for governor of California this year. This race epitomizes one of the reasons I am glad not to live in California anymore.

Several years ago, I was driving through Sacramento, listening to the news on Sacto radio, and I recall then candidate for governor Tom McClintock describe his proposals to begin to fiscally turn California around. In about 3 minutes, he laid out his platform, which seemed reasonable, well-thought out, and specific (as specific as 3 minutes allows). It made complete sense. So, I knew then and there that McClintock would not be elected governor of California.

For many Californians, they have their heart strings pulled by liberal causes, their sensibilities stirred by almost hyper-environmentalism, and financial responsibility takes a back seat to these notions. If someone can promise free healthcare for everyone, many Californians will sign onto this, because it is the right thing to do. If you question the fiscal soundness of this, they will point to Europe and Canada, and say, “Well, they do it and we are better than them; so we can do it.”

During that same election, Arnold the Barbarian was up to be elected, and, although he often spoke like a conservative, he is a left-leaning moderate. However, it was clear, in this wide-open election, that he would be elected. He had charisma and star power, and a very liberal wife, and, as most Californians will agree, he has done a lousy job as governor. And personally, there are things which he says and does which embarrass me as a conservative.

This time, the race is down to 2 real candidates: Jerry Brown, the governor of California back in the 70's (if memory serves) and Meg Whitman.

This past week, all of the news has been about the sad-faced illegal immigrant who worked for Whitman, brought to light by Gloria Allred. Nicky Diaz Santillan, the illegal alien, gave teary-eyed public testimony, reading from prepared remarks, as to her suffering as an employee of Whitman. She apparently made $23/hour, at least for a portion of the time that she worked for Whitman.

And it seems to be a wild coincidence that (1) Gloria Allred is a strong supporter of Jerry Brown and (2) this all came to light roughly a week before their scheduled debate on Univision, which was a debate that would target Spanish-speaking people in the United States.

Here is something you need to know about California voters—there will be some to whom this is an issue, and they will cast a vote for Jerry Brown because Meg Whitman may or may not have known that she had an illegal alien working for her (the evidence seems to suggest the opposite, but we really don’t know).

If I was a voter in California, and this became a significant issue, I would be pulling my hair out. California is going broke for several reasons: (1) they have too many state employees; (2) many of these state employees are retiring right now and in the near future (the baby boomers) with extremely generous pensions and nearly free healthcare, negotiated by unions (much of which took place under Governor Brown decades ago); (3) California is taxing its rich people so much, many are leaving (as they have done in New York and New Jersey); and (4) environmental restrictions are so onerous, as to destroy businesses and increase unemployment (there is a small fish whose existence has shut down much of the cental valley for growing crops—something not wide publicized in California).

Here we have 2 candidates, one of whom actually knows how to run a business and how to be fiscally responsible, and one who is not only a lifelong politician, but actually contributed to the mess that California is in—and yet, even though this seems like a simple choice to me, this is a real horse race, where the voters are evenly split.

And one illegal alien is a real, honest-to-goodness issue to some Californian voters—and this one woman, because of her appeal to Hispanic voters, may actually tilt the election toward Jerry Brown. California, you deserve the person you vote for.

Progressives want to raise taxes on individuals who make more than $200,000 a year because they say it's wrong for the rich to be "given" more money. Sunday's New York Times carries a cartoon showing Uncle Sam handing money to a fat cat. They just don't get it.

As I've said before, a tax cut is not a handout. It simply means government steals less. What progressives want to do is take money from some -- by force -- and spend it on others. It sounds less noble when plainly stated.

That's the moral side of the matter. There's a practical side, too. Taxes discourage wealth creation. That hurts everyone, the lower end of the income scale most of all. An economy that, through freedom, encourages the production of wealth raises the living standards of lower-income people as well as everyone else.

A free society is not a zero-sum game in which every gain is offset by someone's loss. As long as government keeps its thumb off the scales, the "makers" who get rich do so by making others better off. (When the government allocates capital or creates barriers to competition, all bets are off.)

Of course, this is not the prevailing view among the intelligentsia. Columbia University Professor Marc Lamont Hill tells me, "Those who have more should pay more."

But the wolf is here. Maryland created a special tax on rich people that was supposed to bring in $106 million. Instead, the state lost $257 million.

Former Gov. Robert Ehrlich, who is running again for his old job, says: "It reminds me of Charlie Brown. Charlie Brown was always surprised when Lucy pulled the football away. And they're always surprised in Washington and state capitals when the dollars never come in."

Some of Maryland's rich left the state. "They're out of here. These people aren't stupid," Ehrlich says.

New York billionaire Tom Golisano isn't stupid, either. With $3,000 and one employee, he started a business that processes paychecks for companies. He created 13,000 jobs.

"It was the straw that broke the camel's back," he says. "Not that I like to throw the number around, but my personal income tax last year would've been $13,800 a day. Would you like to write a check for $13,800 a day to a state government, as opposed to moving to another state where there's no state income tax or very low state income tax?

"We projected that we would get $4 billion, and we actually got well short of it," he says.

Art Laffer, the economist who has a curve illustrating this point named after him, isn't surprised.

"It's just economics," he says. "People don't work to pay taxes. People work to get what they can after tax. They'll change where they earn their income. They'll change how they earn their income. They'll change how much they earn, when they receive the income. They'll change all of those things to minimize taxes."

We can see it in the statistics. In 1960, federal revenues were 18.6 percent of total output. Over the next 50 years, that percentage has rarely exceeded 20 percent or fallen below 17 percent. As Laffer says, people adjust their activities to the tax burden.

Donald Trump, who knows something about making money, says of course the rich will leave when hit with higher taxes. "I know these people," he told me. "They're international people. Whether they live here or live in a place like Switzerland doesn't really matter to them."

"I haven't left yet. ... Look, the rich people are going to leave. And other people are going to leave. You're going to end up with lots of people that don't produce. And then that's the spiral. That's the end."

And that's another good reason for us to get on with reducing the size of government.

Neil was only moderately impressed with the Republican Pledge to America. He suggests these proposals instead:

• Raise retirement age for those 10 years or more away from retirement, then start means testing

• Allow younger workers to put a portion of their retirement money in the markets

No liberal has standing to call any Republican stupid as long as Patty Murray remains in the U.S. Senate.

Soon after being elected to the U.S. Senate in 1992, Murray went on a radio show and said:

"When I was growing up, the big fear in my life was the nuclear war. I remember second- and third-grade teachers giving us skills to deal with it, if that big alarm goes off, which was 'Hide under your desk.' Would that do any good? I don't know. But as a child, that gives you a feeling there's something to do beyond panic. Today the biggest fear our kids live with is whether ... the kid beside them has a gun. We have to give them skills so they feel confident to deal with it."

The woman is not sure if ducking under a school desk would help in a nuclear attack. Not only that, but she wants to do something similarly pointless to help children "deal with" school shootings. Maybe imaginary bullet-proof vests!

With amazing understatement, one of Murray's Democratic colleagues in the state senate told The Seattle Times in 1992: "She just doesn't strike you as somebody who's been reading The New York Times every day for the past five years." I wonder when Katie Couric is going to ask Murray what newspapers she reads.

After Murray was elected to the U.S. Senate, the Democrats tried to keep her locked in her office to prevent her from saying anything that might end up in a newspaper. But in the confusion after the 9/11 attack, the leadership must have lost the keys and Murray escaped to say this about Osama bin Laden:

"He's been out in these countries for decades, building schools, building roads, building infrastructure, building day-care facilities, building health-care facilities, and the people are extremely grateful. He's made their lives better."

Yes, Osama was out building "day-care facilities" -- and probably sponsoring "Bring Your Daughter to Work" days! I defy anyone to produce something stupider ever uttered by a homo sapiens. Not Barbara Boxer, Joe Biden or even John Edwards can hold their dimly lit candles to her.

Murray, whose college major was "recreation," got her start in politics fighting to save her own useless government job.

The laughably apocryphal story she tells is that she was told by some crusty old male politician, still unnamed decades later: "You're just a mom in tennis shoes -- you can't make a difference!" (You know how politicians love gratuitously insulting their constituents.)

This stuck in Murray's craw and so, filled with righteous anger, she ran for state office and won as a "mom in tennis shoes."

The real story is that Murray was teaching a "parenting" class at a community college, which no one was taking, so the state decided to cut it. Murray's reaction was, "Wait -- I'm a public employee! You have no right to fire me!"

She wasn't a parent upset that her child's school was dropping an art history class. She was a deadbeat public employee who didn't want her job cut. No one was taking her course, but she thought taxpayers should be required to pay her salary anyway.

Fighting to keep your own cushy job isn't a point of principle; it's evidence of a narcissistic personality disorder.

But you have to do a lot of research to find out that the class being eliminated was Murray's own. This deliberate policy on the part of the press to hide Murray's utterly self-serving motive for saving the class proves they know this is a problem for her.

The media's admiration for Murray's tenacious political start is like applauding the pluck of a stalker: "That guy sure has moxie and determination!" You're not supposed to be canonized for fighting to keep your own job.

Murray is the equivalent of a Wall Street fat-cat saying, "I'm going to fight for my $50 million severance package because it's the right thing to do!"

This remarkably unimpressive woman has tried to turn being a flat-footed dork into an advantage by selling herself as a tribune of regular folks. Yes, like most regular folk, she listed no religious affiliation whatsoever in the first few editions of the Congressional Almanac. (She probably couldn't remember she was supposed to say "Catholic.")

Soon after being elected to the Senate in 1992, Murray fought for a federal government jobs program by saying, "The highest-paying job I had before coming to Washington, D.C., paid $23,000 a year. ... I know what it's like to tell my kids they can't buy everything they want."

Is that what Murray thinks a senator should be doing? Ensuring that parents can tell their children they CAN buy everything they want?

True, Murray is a mom. You could also describe Hitler as a "war veteran and painter," but I think the more salient fact is that he was a German dictator.

Similarly, Murray's relevant characteristic is that she is a lifelong public-sector union zealot.

Again, Murray's class was on "parenting" -- the very definition of a pointless government program. Imagine going back in a time machine and trying to explain to someone from 1950 why the government was paying for classes on "parenting." How about classes on "waking up" or "getting dressed"?

Democrats have completely infantilized the populace in order to create jobs for useless social workers like Murray -- and then people wonder why states are going bankrupt under crushing debt burdens.

But I guess we have to fund these idiotic programs in order not to be outshone by Osama's "Partnership With Working Mothers Initiative" in Peshawar.

WASHINGTON - SEPTEMBER 12: A woman dressed as Sarah Palin poses with other activists during a rally on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol Building on September 12, 2010 in Washington, DC. Members of the Tea Party and other activists gathered at the 'Remember In November' Rally to protest large government and rally for conservative principals nearly two months before US midterm elections. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)

A new poll released this week soundly contradicts critics' claims that the tea-party movement is "fringe," "white" and "racist."

PJTV's Tea Party Tracking Poll has monitored nationwide sentiments toward the tea party on a weekly basis since Aug. 2. The poll's most recent reports reveal the following results:

• The number of people who identify as "members" of the tea party has more than tripled over the last month alone, up to 21 percent of likely voters;

• Fifty-five percent of those surveyed said they support the tea parties based on the movement's positions on the issues;

• Among the likely voters who are black, 32 percent said they would vote for a candidate backed by the tea parties.

Just what is the real deal about America's racial obsession? Find out in "Negrophilia," personally autographed by the author

"Questions of racism within the tea party have been raised for months now," said PJTV's Polling Director Vik Rubenfeld in a statement. "Our survey found that more than one in three African-Americans support the movement. Moreover, the data revealed that 32 percent are also likely to vote for a congressional candidate whom the tea party supports."

Joe Hicks, PJTV host and former executive director for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, said the poll "shows that, for many black voters, race no longer serves as a rationale for supporting policies that undermine their economic interests."

"Democrats and leftists have attempted to define the tea-party movement as a collection of angry white bigots," he said. "However, the PJTV poll of black voters shows the wheels on the race-card bus are beginning to fall off."

PJTV's Tea Party Tracking Poll uses Pulse Opinion Research - which conducts automated polls for businesses, media outlets and even Rasmussen Reports - to monitor opinions toward the tea parties from sample groups of 1,000 respondents, including a special analysis of 543 likely voters who identify as African-American.

In the Aug. 8 poll, while 24 percent of respondents claimed to have friends and family who were members of tea parties, only 6 percent took the title for themselves.

But the number of self-identifying "members" grew, such that by Sept. 12, barely more than one month later, 21 percent claimed to be a member of the tea parties.

On Aug. 8, of the likely voters who identified as tea-party members, only 34 percent said they supported the movement publicly, while 53 percent admitted they only supported the movement privately.

In the last month, however, proportion of tea partiers who support the movement publicly has risen to 44 percent

We may have just found the outer edge of the Hollywood taste envelope, all thanks to Andy and Larry Wachowski, the creators of The Matrix. Formerly known as the Wachowski Brothers - that is, until Larry decided after making zillions of dollars and gaining millions of slobbering fans that the only thing standing between him and true happiness was his penis - this pair's latest project, Cobalt Neural 9, appears to be repelling even the jaded mandarins of Hollywood.

Oh, it's not because the content of CN9 will be vacuous, foul and outright evil, though it is. It's because no one in Tinseltown thinks the movie will make any money.

So what is CN9 about? Well, it appears to mix condemnation of the Iraq War, a healthy dose of gay sex, naturally, a plot to assassinate George W. Bush. Sounds less like a hit movie than the agenda for a Daily Kos staff meeting.

One Nation Working Together and their supporters (unions, left wing groups and the Communist Party USA, and about 10 socialist organizations):

Compare aerial photos of One Nation Working Together and Glenn Becks Restoring Honor rally, both in D.C. Remember the words of Ed Schultz: “I could organize every progressive group in this country, the main bloggers. This could be The Ed March. Folks, 300,000 people on the heels of six months' promotion, that ain't no big shakes!” This rally was in the planning stages before Beck announced his rally.

Brit Hume and Juan Williams joust over why extending the Bush tax cuts was not voted on:

Suffering from a ratings problem, Christiane Amanpour had a townhall style show today, with moderate and radical Muslims. The views expressed by some of the radicals ought to cause even the most bleeding-heart liberal to pause for a moment:

Dems gain with young voters and lose Hispanics (remember, liberals spend 10–16 years brainwashing our young people in school):

The official position of the White House: “The Stimulus Plan is good and it worked.”

From the NY Times: Republicans are better informed about political issues than blacks, Hispanics, and young people.

Test yourself on basic religious facts (32 questions total, which Americans have done very poorly on; you will be asked 5, what I found to be, very simple questions). This article also tells how various groups did, which surprised me (Atheist and agnostics scored highest, averaging 21 out of 32 correct):

So everybody's known that Rahm Emanuel's gonna leave the White House today. They've known it for a week. They know he's going to go back to Chicago; they've known who his replacement is. There's nothing new today, not one bit of news was going to be made today. This press conference to announce Rahm splitting the scene was scheduled at 10:30. So CNN and MSNBC almost did a countdown type thing with a clock in the corner. They didn't have it there but were acting like it nevertheless. These people were orgasming over the fact that there was going to be a big announcement in the East Room of the White House with Obama and Rahm Emanuel and his replacement. The graphic: "Special Announcement at the White House Just Minutes Away." They were 50 minutes late. They didn't get to this 'til 20 minutes after 11, supposed to happen at 10:30. I'm watching these people on the media, and it just cements in my -- I don't quite know how to express it. It's like groupies. The president and a bunch of groupies waiting for this thing to happen and there's no news in it. The ruling class is making something happen today, so they all want to be in on it. They're making fools of themselves each and every day acting like this is some big deal, acting like people care.

I guess that's the real point of it. Nobody out there in flyover country cares who the chief of staff is or that he's leaving or that his replacement doesn't say much. It's irrelevant. The country's in the process of being destroyed and the media is all excited about a staff shakeup in the White House. And then Obama last night, I'll tell you, weird stuff is coming out of this guy's mouth. "It took time to free the slaves," he said? Obama says, "People are impatient, but now is not the time to quit." He's trying to rally young people to his base, to his cause, trying to get Democrats excited about the election on November 2nd. Everybody on the Democrat side is apathetic about it. So he goes to a couple of different events and says, "It took time to free the slaves. Ultimately we'll make progress." It took time to free the slaves. It also took a civil war to free the slaves and 500,000 dead Americans to free the slaves. It took time to free the slaves? You know, the streets are gonna burn in this country if something doesn't happen. People are not just sitting out there tepidly taking all of this. People's livelihoods are affected by this man's policies, and he tells everybody, hey, be patient. You know, we didn't free the slaves overnight either. What a reference.

They hired some rapper to excite the crowd, a rapper by the name of B.o.B, and this guy, I mean we can't play a B.o.B tune on this program. We'd have to bleep every other word. Every other word is the N-word or some other form of slang or obscenity and we'd have to bleep it. In fact, we put it together to show you how much that we have to bleep it. But here's what he said, "People are frustrated, they're anxious, they're scared about the future. And they have a right to be impatient about the pace of change. I'm impatient, but I also know this. Now is not the time to quit. Now is not the time to give up. We've been through worse as a nation and we've come out stronger from war to depression to the great struggles for equal rights and civil rights. It took time to free the slaves. It took time for women to get the vote. It took time for workers to get the right to organize." I mean to exhort a crowd, to whip 'em into a frenzy to support economic policies that have led to Depression-level unemployment rates for minorities and young Americans, I mean this is sick. Adults are supposed to look out for the younger generation. Obama is ripping 'em off and telling them to thank him for it. (imitating Obama) "Be patient while I destroy your future, be patient. It took a while to free the slaves."

Let me tell you something, folks. It will only take a few minutes to vote. It might have taken a while to free the slaves and it might take a while for Obama to finish in the job of destroying the private sector out there, but it will only take you a relative few minutes to vote on November 2nd. Now is the time to begin diffusing the time bomb known as Obamanomics. You know, Lincoln, who Obama thinks he's like, Lincoln often remarked on how it was right of every man to enjoy the bread he earned by the sweat of his own brow. The only thing I can think, "It took time to free the slaves"? You know, actually, some people might think we are in the middle of a civil war. The only thing not happening are bullets flying. But we are in the middle of a civil war. I mean one of the political parties in this country certainly does want to secede from what this country was founded to be, the Democrat Party. But I mean to run out and exhort people into a frenzy to support your destructive policies by saying it took time to free the slaves?

Then we move to other news items. "Osama bin Laden has expressed concern about global climate change and flooding in Pakistan, in an audiotape aired on the Internet [today] ... 'The number of victims caused by climate change is very big . bigger than the victims of wars.'" So here's Osama Bin Laden again joining the talking points of the Democrat Party and the American left agreeing with Algore. Osama bin Laden: Climate change worse than wars.

RUSH: Now, I had a bunch of e-mails regarding my monologue opening the third hour yesterday. Do you remember that monologue, Snerdley? You remember what it was? It was me pointing out, Obama's not unhappy at all with himself or what has happened here, that he's very happy, he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. And I also pointed out how Obama's looking forward to Republicans winning the House and maybe even the Senate so that he can run against them in 2012 instead of having to run against his open party. Listen to these two e-mails, both from subscribers to the website, RushLimbaugh.com.

Assuming what you said on today's program's true, why vote in November? I mean, what's the point? I mean, if we have no prayer, if our side winning is what Obama wants, why even vote?

Your third-hour monologue today I found to be very depressing. I've always felt that elections were all we had to right the wrongs and make changes and because of that I was enthused about the upcoming elections. You seem to indicate that our winning these elections are really part of the Obama strategy because it will give him an issue to run against in 2012. Essentially I heard your comments to say he's already won, we have very little we can do about it, including winning elections. I found this to be very depressing. I'm beginning to lose my enthusiasm. Do you really believe that all is lost or am I misreading your comments? I think Obama is a punk and I can't believe you think that he's whipped us by nature of winning the election two years ago and that there's no way to turn this thing back around.

Now, I had not stopped to consider that anybody would react to my monologue that way, and there were more than these two, but when I read e-mails like this, "Okay, now, what did I say that made them think it was a wash?" All I was trying to do was to keep it in context, the discussion. There was a Rolling Stone interview that's now out today, and the discussion was about how things are falling apart for the Democrats, how things are falling apart for Obama left and right. I was simply trying to disagree with people who were trying to make the point that Obama's reeling. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to know just who we're dealing with, just what we're dealing with. I have a belief that it's still tough for a lot of people to get their arms around the fact that they elected a guy who has a grudge against the country. I think it's still difficult for people to accept the fact that the president of the United States doesn't like the country and is hell-bent on changing it and making it a lesser nation and destroying the whole concept and notion of American exceptionalism. So my monologue yesterday was nothing more than an attempt to further inform and educate. I was not in any way suggesting he can't be beat. I was not in any way suggesting it's pointless to win the November elections.

I guess what I assumed people would understand was that the only way to defeat this guy is not with Republican Party wins and Republican Party triumphs, but with conservatism. The man's ideas must be stopped. Now, I can understand if you get panicked when I say Obama's going to relish his ideas being brought to a screeching halt because he'll blame us for them. My point here was he's gotta be stopped politically. The victory in November's gotta stand for something, it has gotta mean something issue-wise. After we win this, the people who do win are going to have to stand against this guy and buck up against the criticism that's coming. I was just warning of the kind of criticism that's coming. You know, our people tend to cave in at the first sign of criticism, the notion of bipartisanship, walking across the aisle, get along with everybody. Obama is counting on the Republicans caving to the criticism against them, mounted by himself and the media. I was simply delivering a monologue that was designed to get people to not chicken out and to not falter or waver after the victory. This is just the first of many of these elections that are going to have to go this way in order to stop this ship and the direction it's going and then eventually turn it around.

RUSH: Here's the point that I'm really trying to make, and I'm gonna expand on this, because I'm trying to inspire people here, not trying to depress anybody. The real battle is going to start when and if the Republicans take the House of Representatives. All I'm trying to tell you is, if you think the Republicans have been ripped to shreds in your life up to now, wait 'til this victory happens. It is going to be a daily avalanche. You have no idea what's coming. The lies, the distortions. Once the Republican Congress is sworn in, if it happens next January, then Obama's going to submit a flurry of proposals designed to save the economy and get us out of the recession/depression. And, of course, it's going to be stuff that no Republican, no conservative, could ever support, so they're gonna oppose it, and then the caterwauling of obstruction -- it's going to be right out of the playbook. It isn't going to be anything new, but it is going to be oppressive. You're not going to be able to get away from it, and it's the kind of stuff in the past that Republicans have not stood up to very well. They've run away from it, they don't want to hear it, they don't want to be criticized this way. I'm simply predicting to you what the future holds. This win, if it happens, is going to intensify the battle. And it's going to be, if it means anything, the first of many such victories and elections. And, as I say, the real battle is gonna start after all of this happens. It's gonna take a lot of energy, it's gonna take a lot of stick-to-itveness. It's going to require a lot of commitment, because the effort to get the Republican majority to break and to cave is going to be intense and unlike anything you've ever seen.

Speaking of Bin Laden, the scary thing is, Osama Bin Laden could shave his beard, shave his beard, get rid of the imam cap, and run around -- now, I'm dead serious about this -- he could run as a Democrat anywhere in this country and get elected. Well, look at his agenda! America's the problem in the world. Ditto. Democrats believe that. Global warming destroying the planet; America's responsible. Ditto. Democrats believe that. Global warming, killing more people than wars. Right. And the second greatest killer of people is wars, and who's responsible for those? America and Republicans. You take that imam cap off his head, you shave his beard, and Osama could get elected anywhere in this country as a Democrat. In fact, he wouldn't have to shave the beard if he ran in Michigan. He wouldn't have to get rid of the imam cap and he wouldn't have to get rid of the beard. He could still get elected as a Democrat in most places in Michigan.

RUSH: By the way, one of the places that Obama went to rally the troops last night talking about "it took a while to free the slaves," was at the home of John Phillips and Linda Douglass. Now, Linda Douglass is a former reporter and commentator for CBS News and ABC News. In other words, Linda Douglass is a journalist. She used to be a regular panelist on the Brinkley Sunday show, This Week with David Brinkley on ABC. She quit journalism to join the Obama White House, to become the national spokesman for Obamacare, because she said, I'm paraphrasing: You know, I just can't get enough done as a journalist. I need to go where I have even more power. So Linda Douglass admitting that journalism is activism she wasn't able to get enough done, she had to go right into the belly of the beast. So it's at her house with her husband, a guy named John Phillips, that they had this little deal for Obama, $30,000-a-head fundraiser for Obama.

These people are very wealthy. Linda Douglass and her husband John Phillips, they have a vacation home in Italy, in Tuscany, and Obama actually said to them, kinda chided them because he'd never been invited. He'd never been invited to their Italian place, said he needs a break, would love a little Tuscan sun, maybe a little pasta. So this is incestuous. It's a revolving door. Linda Douglass was always a spokeswoman for the Democrat Party. Wherever she lived and worked, be it ABC, be it CBS, she just didn't have the title until Obama hired her to be the official spokeswoman for health care. She and her husband very, very wealthy, home in Italy, $30,400 fundraiser. Obama says, "I've never been invited, I need a break." I know he's trying to be funny, but that is who these people are. Time to free the slaves.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. What a pleasure to talk to you, sir. Thanks for all you do. Just one quick point, you were talking about the strategy with the Democrats and things like that. I personally believe that Rahm Emanuel is gonna go be mayor in Chicago to get him experience in running government and he'll probably be the next candidate after Obama if they rig the election and put him in office again.

RUSH: Well, how do you feel about it, 'cause, frankly, I couldn't care less what Rahm Emanuel does, but how do you feel about him running for president? See, I'm not enamored. Rahm Emanuel is five foot four, he was a ballerina, I don't care. I don't give a rat's rear end. Okay, so the media is gonna spend two hours today on Rahm Emanuel resigning and everybody knew it was gonna happen. I don't care. Let him go be mayor of Chicago. Why should we care about Rahm Emanuel? I'm not getting mad at you, Jay, for caring about Rahm Emanuel. I just don't. I don't care what any of these people do except lose. I want them to lose. Now, he's not going to lose running for mayor of Chicago probably. Well, some Democrat's going to be mayor of Chicago. If it's not Rahm, it's going to be somebody. Let him run for president, fine and dandy with me.

RUSH: Now, one more thing on this business of people being embarrassed over Tea Party people and candidates. Of all the irritating aspects of it, the thing that grates on me the most is that the people that come up to me and say they're embarrassed of Palin, don't even know her. They're simply reacting to what the media is saying about her, and these are people who claim to also hate the media. These are people who understand the media makes things up, especially about conservatives. These are people that understand the media lies about conservatives, does their best to destroy the reputations of conservatives, to impugn them, and yet some, they forgot all that, media comes out and does a little hit piece on Carl Paladino or Christine O'Donnell and for some reason all of a sudden the media is right: "Yeah, yeah, these people really embarrass --" you know, I had somebody ask me the other day, "Rush, what do you think of Christine O'Donnell?" I said, "We gotta reduce Obamacare is what I think of Christine O'Donnell. We gotta stop this. We gotta get people back to work. We gotta cut taxes and we have got to reverse Obamanomics. We have got to get rid of this administration, the people running this country. That's what I think of Christine O'Donnell."

"We have got to overturn Obamacare. We gotta repeal it. We have gotta stop these massive tax increases that are coming. We have got to once again invest in the growth sector of this country. That's what I think of Sarah Palin."

"I think we've got to repeal health care. I think we have got to lower taxes. I think we've gotta do something to inspire people to once again believe their country is great. That's what I think of Carl Paladino. That's what it boils down to, to me."

"What does it matter what I think of John Edwards? He's a liberal. They lie. Every one of them are hypocritical crooks and frauds, the vast majority of them. We know this. I don't see where the choice is. I don't see where it's debatable." We can't have people sit there and agree that the country is going to hell in a handbasket being driven there on purpose and then get into the fine points on whether or not somebody who disagrees on stopping this disaster from happening embarrasses us.

"What do you think of Pelosi, for crying out loud? Why don't you turn around and ask the Democrats if they're not embarrassed of Harry Reid or John Edwards? I mean how many Tea Party people have driven a car off a bridge and a woman died? How many Tea Party people go out and buy a $7 million yacht in Australia and try to register it in another state that they don't live in to save half a million dollars in taxes? Tell me the Tea Party people doing this. When I realize that people asking me and criticizing all of these Tea Party people are simply reacting to what the media is saying about 'em, that's like the icing on the cake to me. Do you really want to believe the media? That probably is the most frustrating thing to me right now. Everybody knows the media is simply the Democrat Party. So wouldn't you expect the Democrats, Katie Couric and the rest are trying to embarrass all these Tea Party people? So what does it matter what they say about our people? What does it matter? Let me turn it around. Why are you insistent that Katie Couric like our candidates? Why is that the deciding factor? Why are you hoping and praying that Chris Matthews says good things about our guys? Why are you hoping and praying that Christiane Amanpour, take your pick, Bob Schieffer, Diane Sawyer, why does it matter what they say about us when in the normal course of events you don't like them either and you get mad at what they say about others. It's, as the phrase goes, time to man up. Now, let me illustrate this with some audio sound bites. Last night on NBC Nightly News, Brian Williams was reporting this about the New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino.

WILLIAMS: Opponents of the GOP nominee for governor of New York are saying he behaved like a thug.

RUSH: Okay. So here we have the State-Controlled Media saying opponents of Paladino are saying he behaved like a thug. What happened? Well, somebody in the media took a camera to his house and poked the lens into the window to catch his ten-year-old daughter doing something. They're constantly asking Carl Paladino about his so-called private life, extracurricular activities. He said, (paraphrasing) "Why aren't you asking Andrew Cuomo about his?" and that ended up being Carl Paladino accusing Andrew Cuomo of having affairs, which Paladino said, "I didn't accuse him of that, that's not what I'm saying. But where's the equal treatment? You gonna ask me about all the baggage in my life; what about his? Why don't you go ask him?" He's damn right about it. Okay, so, NBC Nightly News: "Opponents the GOP nominee for governor of New York say he behaved like a thug." Let's go back to me, this program, November 5th, 2008, talking about the incoming Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

RUSH ARCHIVE: He is a good old-fashioned Chicago thug just like Obama is a good old-fashioned Chicago thug. On the night of the Clinton election Rahm Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, Rahm Emanuel grabbed a steak knife and he began rattling off a list of betrayers. And as he listed their names, he shouted, dead, dead, dead. And he plunged the steak knife into the table after every name. This is not a bunch of people that are going to govern from the center. These are left-wing extremists, they are radicals.

RUSH: Now, we have just had Brian Williams say opponents of Paladino are calling him a thug. And here's a sound bite of me calling Rahm Emanuel a thug. That's November 2008, November 5th. Four days later, CNN's Reliable Sources, NPR's Tell Me More host Michel Martin said this about media coverage of Obama.

MARTIN: For every Chris Matthews there's a Rush Limbaugh who called the new incoming Chief of Staff and the president-elect "thugs."

RUSH: Right. So it's okay for Brian Williams to quote people calling Carl Paladino a thug. That makes him a thug. "Carl Paladino's a thug," they

said so at NBC, and of course opponents of Paladino said he's a thug and that makes him a thug, that makes it right. I call Emanuel a thug and they're offended, and they're outraged, how dare this be said about the clean and pure as the wind-driven snow Rahm Emanuel. Same month, same year, November 6th, November 7, 2008, we have a montage of media people talking about Rahm Emanuel in a positive, laudatory way.

CHETRY: Rahm Emanuel, a Washington veteran known for sharp elbows.

REID: A masterful politician with very sharp elbows.

SCARBOROUGH: Sharp political elbows.

CARD: I hope he takes his partisan elbows and keeps them close by to his body.

BROWNSTEIN: He has sharp political instincts and sharp elbows.

BROWN: You mentioned sharp elbows.

YELLIN: A reputation for sharp elbows.

RUSH: Carl Paladino does not have sharp elbows; he's a thug. But Rahm Emanuel plunging a steak knife into a table after mentioning every name, "dead, dead, dead," he's got sharp elbows. He's a brilliant political tactician, sharp elbows, yet they're all upset when I call Rahm Emanuel thug. Last night and this morning we have a montage of various media people talking about a shakeup at the White House.

RUSH: They're shaking things up. What are they talking about? Rahm Emanuel leaving, going back to Chicago to run for mayor. So they're shaking things up at the Obama White House. March 28, 2006, media montage talking about Bush, changes in his administration.

RUSH: So a little shakeup when they get rid of Rahm Emanuel, rearranging the deck chairs, that means on the Titanic when discussing changes at the Bush administration. So thug Carl Paladino, definitely, Brian Williams said so because opponents of Carl Paladino call him a thug. I call Emanuel a thug, and he really is one, and they're shocked and outraged, how dare this be said, he's only got sharp elbows. And this is just, you know, a shakeup at the White House, no big deal. When Bush gets rid of his chief of staff it's rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Imagine, ladies and gentlemen, Sarah Palin had done one of the things Charlie Rangel has done. Imagine. Imagine that Christine O'Donnell had done or said just one of the things Maxine Waters has done. Say what you want about Rahm Emanuel, he had the sense to call his fellow liberals F-ing retarded, used the R-word, F-ing retards talking about his own people. Nobody was really upset about that. Then he had the good grace to apologize to the mentally handicapped for the comparison. Didn't want to insult the mentally handicapped by saying they were just like Democrats. Never mind that the guy replacing Rahm Emanuel as Obama's chief of staff when he was a US senator, Peter Rouse, also a thug, even bigger thug, he works behind the scenes, he doesn't care for publicity like Rahm does. So you see, folks, as far as the media is concerned, everything the Democrats do, brilliant, forward thinking, very strategic. Not so when the Republicans do it.

So when the media wants to sit out there and impugn people on our side that's why I get a little frustrated when people on our side all of a sudden start believing the media. One of my biggest pet peeves is throwing something in the trash can and missing it, especially when it's just two feet away. I'm trying to throw something away and to have to do it twice is, to me, the biggest waste of time. I get so mad at myself if I miss the trash can. The second pet peeve that I have is people obsessed with what other people think of them, especially people obsessed with what the media think of us or what the Democrats think of us. I can barely maintain my composure when people tell me things like that. Okay, you want their respect, go do what it's gonna take to get it. What do you think that is? What do you think it's gonna take to have the media say good things about us? I'll tell you, McCain. And how many of you liked him?

RUSH: We said earlier today that Osama Bin Laden, who, if he would shave his beard and get rid of the imam cap, could run as a Democrat and get elected anywhere in this country. If he ran in Michigan he wouldn't have to shave the beard. He'd get elected in Michigan with the imam cap and with the beard. He's out there saying global warming is killing more people than wars, global warming the single issue of our time. Last night in Tampa at a Kendrick Meek for Senate campaign rally here is vice perpetrator Algore.

ALGORE: Have you noticed what happened in Pakistan with those big downpours? Nothing like that's ever happened there before. Before that happened, one of their cities had a temperature of 129 degrees, all-time record.

RUSH: How come the way Algore speaks doesn't embarrass anybody? Did you hear that? (imitating Algore) "Before that happened, one of their cities had a temperature, 129 degrees, all-time record." He sounds like an absolute hick. How come you're not embarrassed of Algore? How come you're not embarrassed of Algore 'cause he's dead wrong, dangerously so, as a blithering idiot? And now he's parroting Osama Bin Laden: global warming, Pakistan.

To the phones, Rick in Chicago. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello, sir.

CALLER: Rush, what an honor. I'm trapped halfway between the People's Republic of Chicago and the boyhood home of the only true Illinois president, Ronaldus Magnus, so people remember Illinois for that as well. I am on the same page with you today. I had to respond to a friend who sent me a leftover Palin joke from the 2008 election, which I won't even bear going into. I wrote him a scathing four-paragraph response because I think he's smarter than that and that he shouldn't even be disseminating such garbage, but I just essentially told him this should be a Biden joke, that the misconception that Palin is challenged was, as you said, Katie Couric and the Saturday Night Live bunch who you didn't mention.

RUSH: Yeah, you know, tell your buddy that what makes the Palin joke fashionable is the media that he probably doesn't even like.

RUSH: If it weren't for the media making fun of her these people wouldn't be. If the media were lauding her as something brilliant to come down the pike, everybody would love her. And the people on our side who are suspicious of the media anyway falling prey to the media, I can't tell you how frustrating, that ticks me off. Sometimes I want to reach out and choke people into reality. I want to grab them by the throat and say, "Would you please wake up and stop this arrogant condescension? Who the hell are you? Go do one thing she's done. Let me see your background. Let me see how many illegitimate kids you got. I wanna see all of your DUIs. I wanna see the media following you around every day, un-turning every rock in your life. I want to see how you like it. I want to see how you deal with it. I want to see how you deal when people tell you that you embarrass them."

CALLER: Palin was hit with questions during the campaign that were far more penetrating than what they thought to ask Biden or far worse than what they thought to even ask Obama. And that's why we're in the condition we're in. If you ask Obama --

RUSH: Sarah Palin has never told a guy in a wheelchair, "Stand up, Chuck. Oh, go, oh, my God, Chuck, God bless you, Chuck, well, stand up for Chuck." Sarah Palin has never looked at a poor guy in a wheelchair and said, "Stand up." Joe Biden did. Joe Biden is a walking gaffe, a funny gaffe.

RUSH: That's right, Abraham Imam Obama, "It took a while to free the slaves out there." You know, maybe Obama can make Bin Laden his climate czar. Well, he's spouting the Obama tune on all of this.

RUSH: I just got an e-mail from someone in the subscriber e-mail inbox: "Why are you so mad at us today?" I'm not mad at you, unless you are running around telling people you're embarrassed of all these Tea Party people. I'm not mad at you all. I'm mad at the phony conservatives. I'm mad at these phony inside-the-Beltway media conservatives all embarrassed of Carl Paladino and Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell. I mean no need to repeat this, but I'm not mad at you all. The e-mail came from a Darwinite, by the way.

RUSH: Wall Street Journal: "Federal Agency Flexible on McDonald's Plan -- The Obama administration said Thursday that its top health official will 'exercise her discretion' in enforcing a new health-law requirement, a move that could help McDonald's Corp. and other employers from disrupting their health-care policies for hourly workers." Now, doesn't this kind of put the lie to all the denials issued yesterday by the White House and McDonald's? McDonald's even issued a statement calling media reports about it's health care coverage speculative and misleading. And yet the regime said yesterday its top health official will exercise her discretion in enforcing a new health law requirement. Folks, this is the mini-med plan. To me this is an example of the health care bill unraveling, because apparently now what Kathleen Sebelius -- and this is in the law, at the secretary's discretion, I don't know in the bill it's in there "at the secretary's discretion" so she can choose to exempt some people from the law and hold others to it.

"The announcement Thursday followed a report in The Wall Street Journal that McDonald's warned federal regulators it could drop its health-insurance plan for nearly 30,000 restaurant workers unless regulators waive a new requirement of the health overhaul. ... On Thursday, administration officials indicated they are hopeful that HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will be able to allow certain waivers to the requirement, but that it was too early to confirm they will. She must wait for guidance from state insurance commissioners, and the administration doesn't expect to release the agency's final guidance until December." Now, this is funny. Ms. Sebelius has no problem issuing dictates about health insurance rates which are in fact approved by state insurance commissioners, but now when she needs somebody to hide behind, she conveniently remembers that they are the ones who actually call the shots. So everything yesterday was true. McDonald's was gonna cancel, and they can't afford it. They're the first of many, by the way, who aren't going to be able to afford it.

What is supposed to happen, the design here is down the road, not just McDonald's, but a whole lot of companies are gonna end their health care plans because they can't afford it. And down the road these 30,000 McDonald employees then go on the federal exchange, single payer, public option. This is the design. It's just not supposed to be happening this fast. So the thing is unraveling here right before our very eyes. That's what you have to know about this. This is the design, just not now. This is supposed to happen after Obama's election in 2012. That's when all of this is supposed to hit the fan, not now. So now they're running for the tall grass, and Sebelius is gonna hide behind the state insurance experts, regulators, and let them make the decision here so it doesn't fall on the regime. But, you know, Allah forbid, that any of this would have happened before Obamacare was rammed through Congress. Allah forbid that this happened before the 2012 election. But it's happening: "Federal Agency Flexible on McDonald's Plan." So the denial yesterday I guess doesn't mean anything.

John Hood, a little post at The Corner on National Review Online: "Well, it's official: President Obama has destroyed my health plan and those of two dozen of my employees. Several media outlets are reporting this morning that Principal Financial, which sells health plans to the John Locke Foundation and nearly a million Americans, will exit the health-insurance marketplace. The company is responding to the new costs and incentives created by Obamacare, which (of course) favor large firms over smaller competitors, as the New York Times explains: 'At the Principal Financial Group, the company's decision reflected its assessment of its ability to compete in the environment created by the new law. "Now scale really matters," said Daniel J. Houston, a senior executive at Principal, which is headquartered in Des Moines. "We don't have a significant concentration in any one market."'"

Can I translate this for you? At Principal Financial, which has just canceled the health insurance for the John Locke Foundation employees, this decision reflected its own assessment of its ability to compete in the environment created by the new law. In other words, Principal Financial said, "Uh, we can't afford to stay in business under Obamacare. So we're canceling these little plans here because we can't afford it." So the employees at the John Locke Foundation are without health insurance. Now, United Health Care is reportedly gonna offer health plans to these former subscribers, including John Hood, but Hood says, "We have no idea what those plans will look like. As competition shrinks, they'll certainly be more expensive and less flexible. At JLF, we had carefully designed two consumer-driven options -- one based around health savings accounts and the other around health reimbursement accounts -- and experienced excellent results, including several years of nearly level premiums. Now, we'll just have to see what administration ideologues and federal bureaucrats will permit us to purchase."

So the McDonald's story in the Wall Street Journal yesterday and today, now John Hood's post at The Corner, it's unraveling. I don't mean that it's going away. I mean that its promises, its promises of lower cost, you get to keep your insurance, you get to keep your doctor, lower premium, it's all unraveling a lot of sooner than it was supposed to. See, this is all supposed to happen in 2012 and after that, actually 2014 was when the bulk of this was supposed to happen. But, you see, these idiots in the Democrat Party who write these pieces of legislation have no idea about the dynamic aspects of what they do. They think everything's very static. Okay, so you pass a law that says in 2012 and 2014 X is going to happen. Well, companies say, "I'm not going to wait 'til 2012 or 2014," and the insurers are going to say, "I'm gonna lose money if I do it this way, if it's all going to be canceled on me anyway." So they're just getting a head start to avoid taking any losses. And now the Democrats are running around, "You can't do that." Kathleen Sebelius is running around, "You can't opt out of the program now, you're not supposed to do that 'til 2012 or 2014." They're not saying that, but that's unwritten.

So once again, the whole premise is unraveling here. And this is going to happen to more and more people who are gonna end up losing their health insurance, and there isn't a public option right now for them to go to, the federal exchanges have not been created. That's supposed to happen down the line. You see, the original plan is when this kind of thing happens, then the Obama regime is going to have a representative, maybe the president himself, "This is so unfortunate, we feel so bad, these rotten companies, we knew, we knew and we told you that these private sector companies would not continue to provide you health care at an affordable price or insurance. We knew it, that's why we did this. So now we are gonna gladly step in, and we, the federal government, will insure you." That was the plan, set themselves up as the knights on the white horse saving the day. The problem is it's happening two to three years sooner than it was supposed to. So now you're gonna have a lot of people lose their health insurance, don't know where to go to get it because there is no wonderful public option yet. The federal exchanges aren't up and running. The regime might have to ramp up the speed at which they do this.

But it's just frustrating, because all of this was predictable. Those of us who understand economics, free market, understand liberals and socialism and how they screw up the free market, this was all predictable. And couple that with the fact that liberals lie. So Obama says, "Yeah, you're gonna keep your doctor and your premiums are gonna go down and if you like your policy you get to keep it." Smart money says it's all a lie. Why? Because a Democrat said it, B, the Democrat was Obama, and C, everything he said defies economic and market reality no matter how much you wish it could be true.

RUSH: Here's Laura in Erie, Pennsylvania, on Open Line Friday. Great to have you with us.

CALLER: Well, especially with the last caller, I'm a retired veteran, and I would like to contribute $5 up front to her cause. I think a lot of your listeners might do that if you put her information --

CALLER: I just wanted to call and give you an update on how that health care bill that nobody knows what's in it, how it's affecting people in our local area.

CALLER: But Representative Kathy Dahlkemper is one of the 40 that signed this health care bill --

CALLER: -- with Stupak and they were the ones who were supposed to get assurances from President Obama with the executive order he signed that none of this new funding would go toward abortion.

CALLER: Well, the provision that kids under 26 can get on their parents' health care --

CALLER: -- my husband works at a local school district so I'm covered under him and we can add our 25-year-old son for another year, and I called the Blue Cross policy, and they said, "Well, abortion is covered, too." So I said, "Well, if I had a daughter then she would be covered with abortion?" And she said, "Yes." And I said, "Well, would she have to pay anything extra, you know, because you're supposed to separate it out with a new provision," and she said no, that abortion is covered and --

CALLER: The point is these girls are now going to have abortion coverage with this new mandate. And I'm upset because I didn't know that abortion was even covered under our bill, so I'm having the local newspaper look into it because I think a lot of taxpayers --

RUSH: The Democrats, they lie. I mean everybody knew abortion was going to be covered. (sigh)

RUSH: Lynn in Troy, Ohio, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program. Great to have you here.

CALLER: Great to talk to you, Rush. The one major blunder I think Obama has made other than all the failed policies and so forth is I think he underestimated the American people and the spirit of America. I think, you know, he just thought there wouldn't be any repercussions or people just go along and he shoulda remembered as a result of 9/11 how the people in our country, you know, got together and became stronger --

RUSH: Do you think Obama's sitting there thinking that America still looks at him as The Messiah?

CALLER: Well, I don't know, probably, but I don't think he thought the people would react and be as strong as the Tea Party and realizing that we need to get our country back. I think he underestimated us. I think he thought we wouldn't really pay that much attention or that he was for us and all these good things.

RUSH: You may be right. I believe Obama thinks that everybody hates America as much he does. When you have a characteristic, a personality as narcissistic as Obama, believe me, if you're not a narcissist, you have to study the concept to understand narcissists, and they are living in a dream world, they live and construct their own reality that's devoid of common sense and true reality. One of the reasons Obama behaves as he does is because he thinks that everybody feels the same way as he does about things. This country is guilty, that it has been racist and sexist and bigoted and homophobic and it's been colonial, imperialistic, that it's immoral and unjust, and the thing is, he's correct in the sense that 30% of the country does agree with him within the Democrat Party. The hard left do look at America that way, maybe even more. The enemies of America have successfully infiltrated many of our institutions. I mean we don't breed communists and Marxists here. They're taught. They're educated, or they are imported.

This country throughout its history did not teach communism. It did not teach Marxism in the sense that they try to convert people to it. I mean people were educated about Marx, communism and so forth, but it was bad. It was a rotten thing. Communism was horrible. It used to be if you were a communist, you had to live in the shadows. There used to be a House Un-American Activities Committee. The House un-American activities now takes place on Fox News, according to Obama. But we've never taught Marxism or communism. That was imported. People were instructed in that 'cause it doesn't make sense, it doesn't logically compute. So Obama is of the belief there are a lot of people that look at the country the way he does, and he's right.

RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, let me try to say it this way, responding to our last caller about Obama. We all have to strive to comprehend it. Obama is pleased with himself. He has succeeded. He loves what he's accomplished here. Read the Rolling Stone interview. That interview was a chance for him to go through his victories. He sees the last 20 months as a triumph. He does not see this as a debacle. He is doing exactly what he intended to do.

RUSH: No, Snerdley, I meant every word of it. And even more. I've read the excerpts of the Rolling Stone article, that big piece comes out tomorrow. And I'm telling you, Obama is pleased with himself. This is what's hideous about this. I don't know how else to say it. I have been warning of this. This is why I wanted the guy to fail. This guy is on a mission to fundamentally reform or transform this country. He doesn't like it the way it was founded. He's got the same view of this country that Reverend Wright has, that his father had, that communists have of it. Now he's got his leadership position over it. This stuff is not accidental. The job loss? The economic destruction? Drilling moratoriums in the Gulf of Mexico for no reason whatsoever? Nationalizing businesses?

We think this is altruistic? We think Obama is just misguided but he's actually trying to help things? This is crazy. My whole point is? Nobody with a modicum of intelligence who really is trying to improve employment and economics in this country would do anything that Obama's done. And if they were serious, they would realize their mistake and do the opposite now. Rather than compound this with more bailouts and more deficits, more stimulus plan. I know it's fun to sit around and speculate how they're all gonna feel the day after the election, some of the rank-and-file Democrats. But when it comes to Obama -- as much as you might not want to do it, as much as it might be very uncomfortable to think this way -- you have to try to comprehend this.

He is pleased with himself. You would be, too. If you believed what Obama believed about this nation, if you thought this country needed a comeuppance, if you thought this country needed to be shown what-for -- if you thought this country was guilty, unjust, immoral and it needed to be put in its place -- and after a year and a half I had been able to accomplish all this destruction, you'd be damn happy and pleased with yourself, too. This interview with Rolling Stone magazine was a chance for him to go through all of his victories. He sees the last 20 months as a triumph. He's accomplished 70% of his goals, and he hasn't even had to go to Cloward-Piven yet. He's got six years to get the remaining 30% of his agenda done.

This guy is walking on air, folks! People think his ego is all out of whack because people don't love him and he's got this big narcissistic ego and people are rejecting him and so forth. He thinks they're stupid. Who do you think that Obama thinks needs to be taught a lesson? The very people who are unhappy! This is exactly what he wants. The fact that you don't like him, that's exactly right. He doesn't think you ought to like him. He's happy. He has a small cadre of people he wants to think he's doing a good job, and I guarantee you they do. Well, the people he surrounds himself with, his cadre of friends, they're giving him attaboys. They know what's going on here. Obama keeps a list of his goals in his pocket. The trouble for him is that the voters are starting to keep a list, too.

And they're gonna start settling up in November. But even that... Obama is looking at this as an opportunity. I mean let's try to look at this rationally, which is a problem, but let's do. The rational person will say of Obama, "My God, this guy is destroying his own party. His party doesn't have a chance at holding power." That's right. Do you see a president who cares about that? Do you see anybody in the administration trying to do anything to change that? No. They must be content, then. It's more than they're resigned to it. They're content. Now, why? Well, my friends, it is as I have said. Obama needs his next four years. He's gonna need his next four years to get this done. Now, to get those next six years, he's gotta get elected in 2012.

That's what he's thinking about, and he knows damn well he's going to have a much tougher time getting elected running against his own party than running against Republicans. He knows damn well the country is going to be up in arms. He knows damn well people are going to be fed up that there aren't any jobs, that there's no opportunity for prosperity. Wait 'til these tax increases he's got planned hit. Whew! Folks, we're looking at a bloodbath, an economic national bloodbath if all this stuff happens. Now, he knows damn well that if the Democrats are the only party in power for the first four years of his term, why, who's going to be blamed totally? Democrats, of which he is one. Okay, so comes the midterm elections and the Republicans win big, and they now have control of the House.

All Obama's gotta do is go back to the typical Democrat narrative and playbook: "Republicans are standing in the way of progress! Republicans created the problems! I'm faced with these problems they created, so are you, and now these people are back in charge and they're obstructing every decent thing I want to do." He's relishing the chance to blame Republicans the next two years, for the excrement that we're all facing. He can't wait to blame them. He's not going to get anywhere blaming Nancy Pelosi. He's not gonna get anywhere blaming Harry Reid. But Boehner? Mitch McConnell? The thing is McConnell and the boys don't even see this coming. They're more concerned about keeping people like Christine O'Donnell out of their ranks. I mean, they're lining up against Jim DeMint!

Jim DeMint has vocally criticized the Republicans for keeping Lisa Murkowski in her committee chairmanship, or her seniority seat, even though she was defeated. And the Republican leadership's piling on DeMint for his behavior. DeMint is simply saying, "Look, she lost." DeMint is one of us, he's conservative, he's trying to get like-minded people in there. The Republican leadership is down on DeMint. I guarantee you, Obama's relishing running against Mitch McConnell and whoever else is in the Senate leadership and he's relishing running against Boehner -- and me. The Democrats' experience -- what they believe -- is start blaming Republicans and the media will join 'em and the public will believe it. Look what they were able to do to Bush. They almost single-handedly brought about defeat in Iraq.

Their experience is they'll have profound success blaming all of the future problems about to come down the pike on Republicans once they're in power, because that's the narrative, that's the template. Obama is not distressed at anything that's happened. He's not distressed that his party is gonna get shellacked in November. He's not distressed. He is pleased with himself. Put yourself in his shoes and imagine yourself a conservative. And in a year and a half, you have closed the Department of Education, you've shut down the National Endowment for the Arts, you have instituted a flat tax (or FairTax), you have successfully wiped out as many Al-Qaeda installations as possible, every enemy is still in prison, and we're nowhere talking about a mosque.

If, as a conservative president, you had accomplished all that, and the media hates you and the Democrats hate you and you think you're going to be unhappy? Okay, so why should Obama be unhappy? Don't assign to Obama the normal human characteristics that you and I have, the normal human characteristic of wanting to be loved. We think presidents want high approval numbers in the polls. We think presidents want to be universally loved. We think presidents want to be approved and appreciated for what they do. Obama is smart enough to know (chuckles) that the vast majority of the American people are not approving of what he's done. That makes him even happier! He's not looking to be loved. Not by us.

He's looking to be respected by the people like Castro, Hugo Chavez, Hollywood actors and producers, the Oprah Winfreys of the world, and he's got that. People in Martha's Vineyard, people on Cape Cod, people in Hollywood, he's happy to have that. So if you put yourself in his position, give yourself a conservative agenda, take whatever five or six things are most important to you -- whatever you would do as a conservative president with a totally supportive Congress, nobody could stop you -- and in a year and a half you had accomplished as much for your side as he's done for his, you'd be ecstatic! Why, you wouldn't be able to contain your joy, despite how angry the left would be at you, despite how angry the media would be at you. Obama wants to be admired by his peers, not peons. He doesn't care about peons, and we are the peons. He's ecstatic, folks, and he's got six more years.

All this stuff about Obama doesn't like the job; Michelle doesn't like the job; Michelle doesn't like being first lady, it's horrible. That's all meant for our consumption because that's what we would think. "How could they possibly be happy? The country is going to hell in a handbasket because of their ideas, American people are upset." Well, that's the plan. This is why I said, "I hope he fails." I didn't want any of this to happen. I didn't want General Motors to be nationalized, the banks to be nationalized. I didn't want tax increases down the pike. I didn't want health care to be nationalized or student loan program to be nationalized. I didn't want 14% unemployment, 17 to 18% real unemployment. I didn't want any of that. I didn't want generational theft and debt. I didn't want massive tax increases.

I didn't want any of that. That's why I wanted him to fail. The only reason Obama would be unhappy is if he wasn't serious about wanting to accomplish all this. Some of you say, "But, Rush! But, Rush! Look, all these people leaving. Rahm's leaving." Yeah, Rahm's leaving on Friday. Christina Romer got out of there. Larry Summers got out of there. A lot of people are leaving. We're supposed to think this means an administration in disarray, people unhappy with Obama. We're supposed to think people do not want their names tied to all this destruction. Maybe. Could it also mean mission accomplished? Could it also mean, "My God, we never thought we'd have this much success. We knew a crisis was a terrible thing to waste, but my gosh, we had no idea we'd be this successful.

"Now I can go back and be mayor of Chicago. I don't have to wait four years to be mayor; I can do it now! I don't have to wait four years to go back to Berkeley; I can do it now. I don't have to wait four years to go back to Harvard; I can do it now. I don't have to wait four years to get married and leave; I can do it now." Orszag. The only little schlub who's stuck is Geithner. And that's 'cause he's not through. (interruption) See? Snerdley says, "Some of them want their reputations." They wouldn't have been in this administration in the first place. If they cared about their reputations, they wouldn't have advanced these ideas in the first place. But, if they care about their reputations, again, with whom? Their peers, not the peons.

Do you think people at Berkeley are unhappy with Romer or are they happy? "Well done, Christina." Do you think the people at Harvard are unhappy with Summers? If they are it's 'cause he botched up this president stuff with the women. Think they're unhappy with Orszag? They might be unhappy with Orszag because he ripped 'em on a newspaper column, then he backtracked on that. My only point here is that we've not dealt with this kind of thing before. We cannot plug these people into our usual template. We cannot plug Obama and his administration in the usual template. They're not Richard Nixon. They're not obsessed with being loved by everybody. They're not obsessed with being loved by their enemies. Nixon was.

Nixon gave 'em everything and it still didn't matter. Nixon gave 'em OSHA, EPA, affirmative action, whatever. He begged them to love him. Obama doesn't want to be loved by Fox. He doesn't want... Clinton does. Clinton's the guy who walks in a room, 99 people out of a hundred love him but one hates him, he'll focus on the one that hates him and try to convert him. Obama doesn't care. You can't plug him into the normal template that we always have that presidents and everybody else want to be universally loved in politics and care about their approval numbers and so forth. Bill Ayers is happy, Jeremiah Wright's happy, that's enough. Calypso Louie is happy, Ground Zero mosque is on track, he's happy. It's okay. (interruption) Well, don't laugh. Look at the stuff that he's championing.

RUSH: Check this quote from Obama: "When I talk to Democrats around the country, I tell 'em, 'Guys, wake up here, we've accomplished an incredible amount in the most adverse circumstances imaginable.'" He's trying to buck the Democrats up into thinking they've got a lot done. He's pleased with himself. And he's got enough self-love he doesn't need much more from anybody else. Let me put it this way. We don't need a birth certificate to know that Obama is a foreigner, in this sense: He's born in the United States, but he doesn't think like most of us think. He doesn't look at this country and its people, its history, its accomplishments the way most of us do. He doesn't look at our history with pride. There's no American exceptionalism as far as Obama's concerned. Obama looks at America the way Reverend Wright looks at it, the way Minister Farrakhan looks at it. Obama looks at America, sees the country the way the rest of the hardcore left sees it, and you know who the hardcore left are: Ayers and that crowd. He's one of them. This has been the thing I've been trying to convince people of ever since just before the election.

RUSH: There's a story in the Wall Street Journal today that's got everybody in a tizzy, and the story is that McDonald's is gonna drop its health care coverage because of Obamacare. Now, McDonald's is issuing a halfhearted denial of this. The White House is issuing a halfhearted denial of this. But that's not the point. The point that this is even a possibility, I mean we're discussing it; the story is out there. McDonald's may drop health care plan because of Obama. Now there are all kinds of denials. This is the United States of America. We have a major American corporation with a story in the Big Media suggesting, because of our president, they may drop their health care coverage. Whether or not the Wall Street Journal got the story right, the fact that McDonald's has to ask the federal government for permission to continue with their health care plan for their employees is the problem. We need to get Obama out of our businesses. We need to get Obama out of our backyards, out of our light sockets, out of the gasoline pump. We need to get him out of the oil business and we need to get him out of our backyards and our lives, primarily. And the first stage of that process occurs on November 2nd.

It's looking bad for the Democrats out there. All kinds of stories now suggest that there is no good news for Democrats, that it's the Drive-By Media simply trying to suggest there might be good news for Democrats, but there doesn't seem to be any at all. The Congress left town not voting on tax cuts, and it was a bipartisan desire to vote on tax cuts. Everybody's always clamoring: "We need bipartisanship. We need the parties getting along. We need to bridge the divide," and it was said that Imam Obama was going to be the guy to do this, and, no, now he's out there bashing Fox News again; he's out there bashing talk show hosts again. He's all for the First Amendment when it comes to the Ground Zero mosque but not when it comes to Fox News and not when it comes to me or certain other practitioners of the broadcast arts.

Arnold Ahlert has a piece today that's a good summary of why the Democrats are gonna take it on the chin. The reason I like it is because it goes issue by issue by issue and explains it and there's a great summary to it. You've heard it all before because you've heard me, but it's still good to summarize it, and we will do it.

Now, one more thing about the McDonald's business. Nobody's denied that the memo was authentic. Nobody's denied that the internal memo at McDonald's about having to drop their health care plan for their employees -- this is, by the way, exactly what the regime wants. They just don't want it before an election. McDonald's needs a waiver. That's right. They need a waiver. Now, the regime wants companies like McDonald's to drop health care coverage for their employees, but not until 2014, certainly not a month before an election and certainly not before Bam's reelection effort in 2012. That's why most of this stuff doesn't kick in 'til 2014, but these companies have to be forward thinking and they have to look at the impact of this health care on their business. They're already asking for a waiver. Nobody is denying the memo was authentic. We know -- and we didn't need the McDonald's story -- we know that companies are worried about this and we know that the facts are the facts.

RUSH: Now, this McDonald's story. Who works at McDonald's? Who are they? They're "hamburger flippers," right? And those jobs are genuinely derided by the left. "Hamburger flippers? Why, people are consigned to hamburger-flipper jobs, people who have gone to college! Why, what a tragedy. Hamburger-flipper jobs!" People that do that kind of work are laughed at, made fun of, and impugned by the Democrats -- and we're also told that a hamburger-flipper job is minimum wage, you can't support a family on it and there's no health care. Well, if there's no health care for a hamburger flipper then how the hell can 30,000 McDonald employees be facing the possible loss of health care?

Somebody needs to explain this to me 'cause I thought they were awful jobs that nobody wanted, that were somehow demeaning. Hamburger flippers. You notice that no Republicans ripped the jobs created under the Obama regime as "all hamburger-flipper jobs" the way they did under Republicans. Every new job during Bush, the Democrats said, "That's just a hamburger flipper job!" During Reagan it was the same thing. When the job creation was booming under Republican administrations the Democrats were out there deriding the kind of jobs, "They are just hamburger flipper jobs." Of course, right now no jobs are being created at all. To tens of millions of Americans, a nice job with benefits at McDonald's sounds pretty good!

It's more of a job than Obama's ever had in his life, when you get right down to it. Flipping burgers is more than Obama's ever done. Flipping burgers will teach you more about economic reality than anything Obama's ever done. But still somebody explain to me how it is that you deride a job with hamburger flippers and McDonald's talks about maybe having to get rid of their health care plan, and all of a sudden we learn that those people have health care? So we've been lied to all these years by the media, by the Democrats. "No benefits, no nothing. They're exploited! Hamburger flippers are exploited. Evil, mean McDonald's is paying people virtually nothing." Same thing with Walmart. So all kinds of things popping up.

CALLER: Thank you for taking my call, Rush. Pleasure to talk to you on my 53rd birthday.

CALLER: Thank you. About the McDonald's, I can fully believe that. Word just came down to us. I live in California. The four largest insurers in this state have all got increases in premiums of approximately 20% recently.

CALLER: Our company informed us that they fought and fought and fought but specifically because of the Obama health care plan --

CALLER: Yes. Our pharmacy copays are going to skyrocket. And if we were to go to the emergency room now, instead of the hundred dollars that we have to pay now, it's going to be a thousand dollars a trip. Now, my wife, her medical costs are approximately $200 a month for right now, just for medicine as well as doctor visits. When those premiums go up, I'm in the construction industry, supply, and there's no construction going on really out here.

CALLER: So when those costs go up as well as the costs that are passed on to myself and my wife --

RUSH: Given all this, what's your reaction to the so-called controversy that Meg Whitman hired an illegal maid?

CALLER: You know what? I am fully behind Meg Whitman on that. If the person was deceptive, she deserved to be fired. And I've got a friend that says, "Oh, but she shoulda helped her." I'm sorry. You don't break the law to help somebody breaking the law.

RUSH: The bottom line is, when you're faced with all these skyrocketing insurance premiums, whether or not Gloria Allred's got the goods on Meg Whitman's illegal maid kind of doesn't matter, does it?

RUSH: And to the extent that it does matter you're suspecting a rat on the Democrat side cause that's how they play this game. Meg Whitman is saying the maid lied to me. But in the big scheme of things, you're facing a hundred-dollar payment at the emergency room now going up to a thousand dollars and the Democrats hit you with news that Meg Whitman has an illegal maid, or did. Yeah, so? We got bigger problems in this country than whether Meg Whitman's maid was legal or illegal, in terms of whether or not it matters to me about Meg Whitman. At any rate, I'm glad you called out there, Dale. Thanks much.

RUSH: I want to go back to this McDonald's business for just a second. We went back to our archives for a brilliant audio sound bite. Fort Myers, Florida, February 10th, 2009, not long after Obama had been immaculated. He had a town meeting in Fort Myers. Now, the news today is that McDonald's may drop their health insurance for 30,000 hourly employees. Who knew? Who knew that McDonald's hourly employees had health care? McDonald's is denying it. The White House is denying it. But it's still being talked about. And McDonald's has never, ever talked about dropping their health care prior to Obama. Nobody talked about dropping health care coverage to this extent, anywhere near this extent, prior to Obamacare being passed. So at this town meeting in Fort Myers in 2009, February 10th, here's an exchange between Julio, who worked at McDonald's, and he was thrilled to have Obama in town.

OSEGUEDA: Oh, this is such a blessing to see you, Mr. President! Thank you for taking time outta your DAY! (gasping) Ohhhhhhh, gracious god! Thank you so much! Oh! (gasping for air)

OSEGUEDA: All right, Mr. President -- heh, heh, heh -- my name is Julio Osegueda. I'm currently a student at Edison State College in my second semester, and... Okay, I've been at the same job, which is McDonald's for four and a half years because of the fact that I can't find another job. Now, with the fact that I've been there as long as I've been there, do you have any plan or any idea of making one that has been there for a long time receive any better benefits than what they've already received?

RUSH: All right, is this not great? So February 2009 Julio shows up, "Oh, my god! Oh, oh, oh, gracious god, thank you so much for showing up! Do you have a plan to help me get more benefits? I've been at McDonald's. I can't get a job anywhere else. Do you have a plan to get me more benefits?" and less than a year and a half later, poor Julio, if he's still there, because of his "oh, gracious god, I'm so glad you're here!" he now faces possibly the loss of one of his benefits at McDonald's, and that would be health care. This is the same town hall meeting where Henrietta Hughes asked Obama for a kitchen. Henrietta Hughes asked Obama for a kitchen, a new kitchen. And it turns out, I guess, Obama's not so gracious after all 'cause poor Julio, Julio Osegueda been at McDonald's four and a half years because he can't find a job anywhere else asks Obama to do something about the benefits, and Obama came through.

RUSH: You know what Obama said to Julio Osegueda? (imitating Julio) "What are you going to do, oh, gracious God, oh, gracious God, I'm working at McDonald's, can't get a job anywhere else, oh, gracious God." Obama said, "I assume that you're getting health care through your job, so one of the things we want to do is reform the health care system so you'll have access to health care in your job." That's what Obama said to Julio Osegueda, and now Julio, if he's still there is facing the possibility after a year and a half of Obama of no health care at his job. Obama said he was going to improve the guy's health care.

RUSH: Bob in Colorado Springs. It's great to have you on the program. Glad you waited. Hello, sir.

CALLER: Good. Hey, I agree with Ann Coulter that give the Republicans a chance to blow an election, after Rove and everybody else is going after Christine O'Donnell. I got a question for you, Rush. Government jobs --

CALLER: -- the Republicans haven't been able to distinguish, at least most people that I know, why are government jobs so inferior to the private sector? And you're a numbers guy, right?

CALLER: Yeah, you're a literal numbers guy. Okay. Say, for instance, a government job, somebody was making $60,000 a year. Let's just hypothetically say that. Okay, and they're in the 20% bracket. That means the government is still on the hook for $48,000. Wouldn't that be correct?

CALLER: Okay, well, the private sector job, if they made that same -- or the job is worth $60,000, the government makes, we're just talking about the federal income tax here --

CALLER: -- the government clears $12,000. Now, nobody in the media or Republicans or any of the sort have come out and said that.

RUSH: Well, I don't know that the Republicans, but a lot of people are talking about it, Bob. There are a lot of people talking about the fact that government doesn't create wealth, it only consumes it. This is what you're saying. What Bob's example is saying is, a government worker 60 grand, hypothetical number, the government pays somebody 60, meaning we pay 60, the government takes 20 of it back, whatever the tax rate is, but the government is still out, using the example 40, meaning us, meaning it costs all kinds of money to hire government workers, much more than the private sector doing it because the tax revenue they collect from government workers is blown away by how much they pay government workers. That's what Bob's saying, and Bob is exactly right here. But it's worse than what you said, Bob, because the average government worker makes twice what the private sector worker makes and aside from the Chevrolet Volt, doesn't make anything.

Look, this is not a slight to government workers, don't take this personally but there's nothing produced. Government does not create wealth. It confiscates it. That's all it does. Doesn't produce wealth, doesn't create wealth, and people who voted for Obama are starting to figure this out. That's what Velma Hart was essentially saying to Obama. "I'm exhausted defending you. When's all this magic supposed to happen? Is this my lot in life? Is this my new reality?" You know, where's the new car, where's the new kitchen? You know, where's the vacation to Port-au-Prince? Where's my cruise ship food that I can throw away? Where is it? Not out there. No, but Bob, the Republicans, your expectations here -- nobody's gonna run for office bashing government jobs. Those are voters and there are more and more of them, there are millions of them out there, Bob. And, you know, the more government workers there are the less work each of them has to do.

Anyway, Castro has figured out what the caller is saying. That's why he's firing 500,000 of them. Castro's finally figured out after all these years that his government's gone broke paying all these people. He tried to buy 'em off with rice cookers. Do you know I finally saw my first rice cooker? I didn't even know what a rice cooker was, until they have a rally on Washington about rice cookers I guess I wouldn't know what one is. But Team Vodka, golf team tournament out in Hawaii, Hartley's place, he hired a woman to come in and cook breakfast every morning and she had a rice cooker there, and fried rice was part of breakfast every morning. I had never seen one. It's sitting there on the counter, I said, "What is that?" "That's a right cooker." I said, "Oh, that's what Castro gave --" (interruption) Snerdley is rolling his eyes, you can't believe I'm admitting this. Mr. Snerdley, see, I'm perfectly comfortable admitting this. I live in Literalville. We don't have a rice cooker at my house. Well, yeah, the rice is cooked the old-fashioned way. We either get simple rice in the bag, put it in there and heat it up and let it evaporate. The way I make rice, get a kettle of water and chicken broth, brown rice, bring it to a boil, let the rice soak that up, it's delicious. Yeah, I love rice. I know how to make rice, fried rice. Yes, I know how to cook it, but I do not have a rice cooker. I've never seen one. What's the dig deal I've never even seen a rice cooker? You know, I've never seen a bamboo steamer except on TV.

The median salary among all 15 of the highest-paid Big Green environmental officials (the nonprofits like Environmental Defense Fund, Nature Conservancy, etc.) is $261,295, while the median total compensation for the 15 is $308,465.

Since there are some links you may want to go back to from time-to-time, I am going to begin a list of them here. This will be a list to which I will add links each week.

PA Pundits, whose motto is, “the relentless pursuit of common sense” (I used many of the quotations which they gathered)

The anti-Jihad resistence (which appears to be a set of links to similar websites):

Mostly a liberal blogger, who says vicious things about most conservatives; and yet, says something sensible, e.g. posting many of the things which the healthcare bill does to us.

News Organization (I mention them because I have seen 2 honest stories on their website, which shocked and surprised me):

Even though this group leans left, if you need to know what happened each day, and you are a busy person, here is where you can find the day’s news given in 100 seconds:

Weatherman Underground 1969 “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”

Janine Turner’s website (I’m serious; and the website is serious too). This is if you have an interest in real American history:

Judith Miller is one of the moderate and fairly level-headed voices for FoxNews:

This is an odd blog; conservativism, bikinis and whatever else posted by either a P.I. or the brother of a P.I.:

Info Wars, because there is a war on for your mind (this site may be a little crazy??):

The Magic Negro Watch (this is peppered with obscenities and angry conservative rhetoric):

Do you want to watch what is happening on our border? These are actual videos of observations cams along the border:

No matter what your political stripe, you will like this; evaluate your Congressman or Senator on the issues:

AC/DC economics (start with the oldest lessons first; economics in 60 second bites):

The Freedom Project (most a conservative news and opinion site which appears to concentrate on matters financial)

This appears to be a daily pork report, apparently as pork in Washington bills is discovered, it gets posted at Tom Coburg’s website:

Weekly poll, asking you to identify what we ought to cut in governmental spending:

This is an interesting site; it seems to be devoted to the debate of climate change:

This is indispensable: the Wall Street Journal’s guide to Obama-care (all of their pertinent articles arranged by date—send one a day to your liberal friends):

Obamacare class action suit (as of today, joining in on the suit costs you whatever you want to donate, if I understand the form correctly):

A Muslim apologetic site (they will write out letters to express your feelings, and all you have to do is sign them, and they will send them on):

Since this will be with us for a long time, the timeline of the BP gulf oil spill:

This is cool: a continuous timeline of the spill, with the daily info and the expansion of the oil, and the response:

Army Ranger Michael Behenna sentenced to 25 years in prison for 25 years for shooting Al Qaeda operative

Maybe the White House does not need to hold press conferences? It releases exclusive articles daily right here:

This is quite helpful; it is a list of all leftist groups, with links to background information on each of these groups (when I checked, 879 groups were listed). This is a fantastic resource.

In case you need to reference this, here are the photos of all those on the JournoList:

Are you tired of all the unfocused news and lame talking heads yelling at one another? Just grab a cup of coffee, sit back, and see what is really going on in the world:

Conservative New Media (it is so-so; I must admit to getting tired of seeing the interviewer high-fiving Carly Fiorina 3 or 4 times during an interview):

One of the more radical people from the right, calling for the impeachment of Obama:

The Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a free enterprise site (there are several videos on the flat tax):

This is a pretty radical site which alleges that Obama is a Marxist hell-bent in taking over our country:

1982 interview with Larry Grathwohl on Ayers' plan for American re-education camps and the need to kill millions

This is a news site which I just discovered; they gave 3 minute coverage to Obama’s healthcare summit and seemed to give a pretty decent overall view of it, without slanting one way or the other:

I have glanced through their website and it seems to be quite professional and reasonable. They have apparently been around since 1942.

This is fantastic; Florida (the Sunshine State) is now putting its state budget online:

Suzanne Somers s supposed to be older than Bill O’Reilly? He interviewed her this week, and she looked, well, hot. She is big into vitamins and human growth hormones.

The National Journal, which is a political journal (which, at first glance, seems to be pretty even-handed):

And I am hoping that most people see this as non-partisan: Citizens Against Government Waste:

This website reveals a lot of information about politicians and their relationship to money. You can find out, among other things, how many earmarks that Harry Reid has been responsible for in any given year; or how much an individual Congressman’s wealth has increased or decreased since taking office.

This is an outstanding website which tells the truth about Obama-care and about what the mainstream media is hiding from you:

Politico.com is a fairly neutral site (or, at the very worst, just a little left of center). They have very good informative videos at:

On Obama (if you have not visited this site, you need to check it out). He is selling a DVD on this site as well called Media Malpractice; I have not viewed it yet, except pieces which I have seen played on tv and on the internet. It looks pretty good to me.

We watch FOX so you don't have to). Be clear on this; they do not want you to watch FoxNews.

Conservative Review
Issue #146	Kukis Digests and Opines on this Week’s News and Views	October 3, 2010