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 did not report on this, but Obama lawyers are quietly going after his critics. Don’t look to read about this in the lame-stream media.

There will be no investigation of FNMA or FHLMC with a Democratic Congress and Presidency. None. You can count on that as a certainty. They may find a few Wall St. types or a couple CEO’s to hang out to dry, but Democrats will not go after FNMA or FHLMC.

If there is a Republican that you are willing to vote for, then make certain you make them publically state, unequivocally, that they will push for an investigation of those two entities. They must go on the record clearly and publically.

If you are slightly on the fence in this race, then you ought to vote against the media in protest of their coverage. Most of the media outlets functioned more as an arm of the Obama campaign than they did as bearers of information or as government watchdogs. You knew more about Sarah Palin and Joe the Plummer within 24 hours by the mainstream media than you knew about Obama and his connections to Ayers and ACORN after months and months of knowing that he had some sort of questionable ties to these people. You have probably never seen a newscast where many of Obama’s proposals have been discussed critically (like giving tax cuts to 95% of Americans when Obama has NEVER voted for a tax cut ever). The numbers which he has offered up for his various programs have never been questioned. His ability to come anywhere near fulfilling these promises is never questioned.

We need to have the news dig up as much dirt on John McCain and Sarah Palin as is humanly possible. I am fine with that. It ought to do the same thing when it comes to Obama and Biden.

The news ought to be as critical as it can be of all candidates running for office; however, most of the news simply protects and carries Obama’s water, and that is disgraceful.

You promise to cut taxes to 95% of Americans; so, does this mean that you will send checks to the 35–40% who pay no taxes?

You said 98% of small businesses make less than $250,000; where does this figure come from.

You distributed somewhere between $50–150 million with William Ayers. This was a grant to improve education in Chicago. Which were the top 3 organizations that you gave money to? How successful was this endeavor for raising math and science scores?

In 1995, Obama's first autobiography is released. In it he writes of his years in college, associating with radicals. "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets . . . When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society's stifling constraints. We weren't indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated."

Business failure is just as important as business success. This means that a business is doing things wrong. From FoxNews (I forgot who said it).

Putting government in charge of fixing the economic crisis, which was caused by the government, is like depending upon a arsonist to put out the fire which he started. Some pundit on FoxNews.

The previous 20/20 on October 17, 2008 where John Stossel deals with politics, and skewers both candidates and much of the legislation which has been pass, was outstanding. It was easily the best show I have seen this political season. in case you don’t know, Stossel is not a conservative but he is a libertarian (which persuasion has much more in common with conservatism than with liberalism).

The Wall Street Journal Report, found twice on the FoxNews channel on Saturdays, is excellent. It may sound boring, but it is a fantastic show.

Sarah Palin and Tina Fey from last night’s Saturday Night Live (which will be their highest rated show this year and next...unless Palin returns). I had to admit to laughing a few times, which I normally don’t do during Saturday Night Live.

If I need to entice you to watch this, below the video are links reading: Some liberals not happy with Palin's SNL cameo and Some conservatives not happy with Palin's SNL cameo.

Sal Governale went out into the public in Harlem and asked them who they were voting for. Most of them, of course, are voting for Obama. When Obama is named as the voter’s pick, Sal asks him about Obama’s policies, inserting McCain’s policies instead. Obama voters were solidly behind these policies. Even funnier, is, they were asked, “What do you think about his choice of Palin for VP?” and they all liked Obama’s choice. The lone McCain supporter knew as little as the Obama supporters. This is actually all audio from the Howard Stern show (expect some obscenities):

Pro-McCain march in the Manhattan. Notice the tolerance from the liberal observers.

Do you ever wonder what might happen if you showed up at a unity-Obama rally with a McCain or Palin tee-shirt? Hundreds of anti-McCain and anti-Palin protestors have shown up to McCain/Palin rallies and pretty much, without incident. Which side really practices tolerance?

McCain had two chances to clinch this election, and he would have almost run the table had he availed himself of these two opportunities. He could have opposed the FNMA/FHLMC bailout package and/or he could have promised an investigation into government corruption with regards to FNMA and FHLMC. He has done neither (and there is a reason for this, which I will discuss later). For these reasons, this will be a closer race than I have been predicting, but McCain will still get the nod.

[A disclaimer: I do not have the gift of prophecy—no one does at this time—but these are reasonable predictions based upon the political climate and being able to read the historical trends of the day]

I must admit that I keep making a minor mistake in connecting Obama to Ayers. The argument is not, does Obama think like Ayers. Obama apparently began his political campaign in Ayers house, a man who is highly political and highly radical (this is after he and Obama had a hand in distributing between $50–100 million dollars together). Ayers is not the kind of man to just support a candidate because he is likeable or is Black. Obama had to have opinions and ideas more in line with Ayers’ in order for Ayers to choose him to chair the Annenberg Challenge group and in order for Ayers to kick off his political career. Richard O’Leary makes this excellent point in his article about Ayers.

Americans, in general, do not like the idea of welfare as being a lifetime endowment, or a legacy passed on from generation to generation. We tend to see welfare as something for the helpless and, ideally speaking, something which is temporary.

Obama knows that most Americans do not like the idea of dispensing more welfare, so he now calls welfare tax breaks. 35–40% of Americans pay no income tax. Therefore, if Obama gives a tax break to 95% of American families, this will include a tax break for those who do not pay taxes. That means that the government will collect money from those who are successful and/or work hard and given this money in the form of a check to those who are unsuccessful, who do not work hard, or already receive welfare benefits. This is not a reduction of their taxes, this is a check from the government because they do not have taxes to reduce.

For those who paid any attention to the 2006 congressional elections, you remember about a week of Mark Foley, who sent emails of a sexual nature to various pages (the charges were dropped after the election). He was replaced by Tim Mahoney, who was not just having an affair, but he fired his mistress (we have the audio for this) and paid her about $120,000 of taxpayer dollars in order to keep her quiet. This is the same Tim Mahoney who promised to be a far more moral candidate than Mark Foley (while he was having this affair, apparently).

Mark Foley’s emails to young pages was both gross and scandalous. Mahoney’s actions are far worse. We have a story about taxpayer money, sex, sexism, power, hypocrisy, audio and politics here, so we will hear about this story for the next week, right? Hardly. Mahoney is a Democrat. Most people will not even know this occurred.

Almost every newspaper is printed multiple pro-Obama stories; most of what the AP sends out is pro-Obama or anti-McCain. Almost every television news station, including many non-news shows, are as pro-Obama as any of the Obama supporters. Information which may impact Obama negatively are routinely ignored; any critic of Obama is attacked by the media (like Joe the Plumber). Obama is outspending McCain as much as 5 to 1 in some battleground states. Obama’s writings are even showing up in public school textbooks.

McCain is a real American hero, and he is an honest, if sometimes misguided guy. Sarah Palin is a real person. Obama and Biden are both lawyers. Obama continually lies or, at the least, obfuscates the truth. The media tries to hide this and they rarely look at him critically; but some people are actually paying attention. This is why Joe the Plumber is resonating so much with Americans—he is a normal guy who works hard and is trying to get ahead.

Obama tells Plumber, “[I want] you [to] spread the wealth around.” Obama justifies his system of tax the rich and give it to the poor to a rich plumber.

Obama is Confused about Small Business "I will eliminate capital gains taxes for small business ... that's how we will grow our economy," he said. Does Obama have even a clue about small businesses and in general, how small of an impact that this would have? Many small businesses do not even have capital gains taxes. Far more file like an individual and most of those make over $250,000, making them targets for Obama’s tax hikes. His quote sounds good to anyone who knows nothing about small businesses (like Obama).

Obama outspends McCain 5 to 1 in battleground states, and the election is still close.

This was on FoxNews, and I heard it on a radio program; did it make the mainstream news? There is both video and audio for this exchange:

Obama made the remark, caught on camera, after fielding some tough questions from the plumber Sunday in Ohio, where the Democratic candidate canvassed neighborhoods and encouraged residents to vote early.

"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed "more and more for fulfilling the American dream."

"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded. "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

This is the same Obama who, on several occasions, spoke of being his brother’s keeper as one of the most important concepts out of the Bible. This is the same millionaire Obama who has not sent one dime to his half brother who lives in poverty. His half-brother was worth a few lines in his first book, but not worth sending a few bucks to.

I honestly did not expect the story of Joe the Plummer to get any traction, but I was wrong. Obama slipped up, went off script, and now, the man who asked the question which sent Obama off script needs to be punished. There have been false allegations made, e.g., Joe was a McCain plant and Joe is hiding his real identity. There are been what appear to be true allegations made, that Joe does not have a plumber’s license and that he only makes $90,000/year.

Does Joe deserve this level of scrutiny? Let me remind you of how this came about—Obama was knocking on doors, as a publicity thing, his adoring lap-dog press along, filming him as he beautifully interacted with the common man, healing some, consoling others, feeling everyone’s pain; and then, Obama actually encountered a common man. Joe asked Obama about taxes and then Obama slipped up, and said what he actually plans to do:

"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too. My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Why the mainstream press did not, at that point in time, turn off their cameras, delete their camera’s memory, and kill Joe is something that I cannot explain. However, they have attempted to assassinate Joe’s character rather than Joe himself.

Let me remind you of the problem: it was not anything which Joe said or alleged; the problem is what Obama said; the problem was Obama’s answer. The problem is, the average American does not like the idea of altruistic Obama taking our money and spreading it around to those who are behind us.

So the press has to change the story and emphasize Joe the plumber, and go after him. Make the story about Joe, not about what Obama said. Investigate Joe’s character and background. Say stupid things like, “McCain shout have vetted Joe first” when McCain had nothing to do with Joe.

You might say, “Joe deserves this scrutiny for inserting himself into the political arena and for holding a press conference.” Listen, Joe did not seek out Obama, Obama sought out Joe. Joe’s press conference was no doubt the result of him receiving a dozen calls from the press wanting information about him. Walking out his front door to find literally 100 newsmen (according to him) might cause one to do an impromptu news conference as well. Why go through a full interview with each phone call; why not just say, “Okay, meet me on my front lawn and I will answer your questions.”

I am sure that this was a form email, but, nevertheless, this was his opinion and insight on the bailout package:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding the Financial Stabilization Package. I appreciate the overwhelming input I have received over the past several weeks from constituents like you.

On October 3, 2008, Congress passed the bail-out bill by a vote of 263 - 171. I voted AGAINST this legislation BOTH TIMES because it did not offer any real solutions to the cause of the financial crisis and was loaded with pork. Somehow in the "so-called" effort to improve the bill the House rejected and to help stabilize our financial markets, the Senate sent us a bill four times longer and far worse than the first.

I cannot support legislation that will penalize innocent taxpayers for the mistakes of those on Wall Street. The bill that is supposed to save us all is packed with pork and includes a $49 billion tax increase. The American taxpayers should not be forced to go broke paying for this "so-called" financial rescue.

This bill was rushed through Congress with no public congressional hearings, no opportunity to question witnesses, nor any opportunities to debate legitimate alternatives. The irresponsible elites in New York City who caused this financial mess should bear the blame and the cost - not the American taxpayer.

Thank you again for contacting me with your thoughts. For additional information regarding current legislation and my representation of the Second District, please refer to my website at poe.house.gov. While you are visiting the website, be sure to sign up for my electronic newsletter.Email.beginhide.merge

The emphasis was mine. In case you did not know, Ted Poe was one of the more creative judges in the state of Texas, and his sentences of criminals are legendary.

Jennifer Brunner is the secretary of state for Ohio. Because of ACORN’s most recent activities, which has involved massive voter registration fraud, Republicans (principally) have been pushing Jennifer Brunner to cross-reference voter registrations with the social security data base and the Ohio driver’s license database. Some Democrats in other states are also outraged concerning ACORN’s activities.

Jennifer Brunner, on her on website, answers in the following way (this is an article by the Mansfield News Journal): Voter fraud was a buzz phrase for the Ohio GOP when it pushed voter identification requirements through the state Legislature in 2005. It's now a driving factor behind a flurry of GOP lawsuits leveled against Democratic Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, seeking either to restrict early voting or mandate how voter information should be checked.

But do the arguments come with supporting evidence that voter fraud is prominent, or that the current election system isn't catching it when it does happen? No.

Voter fraud is not a widely studied phenomenon, but the vast majority who have studied allegations say that it's extremely rare.

The article goes on to point out that, actual voter fraud is quite rare, and there are barely a handful of actual instances of voter fraud. It should be emphasized that this is voter fraud which has been uncovered.

For every single voter registration of Mickey Mouse, how many are there which slip by? What happens if there are tens of thousands of illegal registrants sitting around in various polling areas. Is there any chance that such potential ballots might be misused by those at the polling places? If people are so worked up as to turn in thousands and thousands of fraudulent voter registrations, what are the chances that some equally dedicated people may take this one step further? I honestly have no idea whether such illegal action is possible, but Chicago is legend in the area of political machinery which appears to include voter fraud.

One more thing: there has already been voting fraud in Ohio’s early voting system. Since our news services don’t want to investigate anything which may put Obama in a bad light, some voter fraud in Ohio has been uncovered by an organization called Palestra, college students who are interested in investigative reporting.

From Tiffany Wilson’s blog: I've been cross-matching out-of-state Obama staff with various Ohio Board of Elections websites. In Franklin County alone, I've found six Obama staff names on the registration lists. Two of these individuals already voted, two others requested absentee ballots. Most of these individuals are field organizers for the Obama campaign. We've found matches and Obama organizers who voted in other Ohio counties as well. That is voter fraud.

This massive influx of voter registration needs to be carefully examined and cross-referenced, and sting operations should be set up. If we do not have a voting system which is honest, we do not have a democracy, no matter who wins in November.

This is short and simple. Obama has been touting tax breaks for 95% of families. However, Obama has never voted for a tax break or for reduced taxes once in his life. He’s voted for numerous tax increases, however.

To be fair, Democrats are famous for sending money to their base, so I believe that Obama will send a check to those who did not pay taxes.

In the last debate, Obama talked about improving education by hiring an army of math and science teachers, and he spoke of how important this was, even having national security ramifications. When handling somewhere between $50–100 million with William Ayers, he did absolutely nothing for math and science education in Chicago. They did funnel some of this money to ACORN, but nothing went to improve academics.

This is unclear, but what appears to be the case is, Obama’s campaign gave $800,000 to a shadow group, who then gave a small portion of this money ($80,000) directly to ACORN. It is my understanding that the boards of directors for both organizations are identical.

Greta Van Susteren interviewed a head of ACORN the other night, and he explained that Obama did not give $800,000 to ACORN, but to a different group, and that group gave $80,000 to ACORN. So, this much is confirmed by ACORN.

I don’t know if you pay close enough attention, but Obama, for the most part, speaks very carefully. He is adept at saying one thing, which is very specific, but it ends up sounding like he said something else.

Our news services are taking after Obama. When it is discovered that ACORN is polluting the political process with submitting thousands upon thousands of falsified documents, the press is quick to point out, “There is no voter fraud, this is voter registration fraud.”

ACORN protests the government because lenders are foreclosing on houses where ACORN demanded loans be given, even though the people could not afford to loan. So, what the hell do we do, just give them the house?

There is more to Obama and ACORN than getting in your face; they want to shut up the other side:

Not everyone gets a house to buy. Saving up money and showing credit worthiness and finding a house you can afford are necessary steps which should not be sidestepped by legislation.

Not every kid should go to college, and there is no reason why I need to pay higher taxes so that someone else’s kid goes to college.

It is not the government’s job nor should it come out of my pocket to give someone else a “leg-up.”

Increasing the number of people who vote is not necessarily a good thing. If they know nothing about the government and nothing about the candidates, and are essentially brainwashed by ACORN (or some other organization) which gives them a little money or a cigarette to register, this is not democracy in action. These people are being used to vote.

This was slightly a better debate than the first two, but mostly because McCain had to do something.

There was a fight which Mohammed Ali had where he employed the rope-a-dope, which he used against George Foreman. Ali leaned back against the ropes and let Foreman tire himself out throwing punches which Ali blocked and ducked, clutching Foreman often. After awhile, Foreman tired himself out, and Ali waited until Foreman was thoroughly exhausted, and then he began boxing himself, knocking Foreman out.

The rope-a-dope was Obama’s strategy going in, and McCain kept landing punches in the first 45 minutes or so of this debate, but, as the debate continued, McCain became less and less dynamic. The first half of the debate was all McCain’s, but the second half was a draw, as, every time McCain had an opening to take Obama out, he passed.

This was Obama’s strategy, but without the knockout punch. McCain would land a minor punch, criticizing Obama’s policies, positions, history, or associations, and Obama had a quick, short answer—a counterpunch, and most of the debate exchanges gave Obama the last word, making it seem as if, no matter what McCain said, there was an answer for it.

Obama did not have to land a knockout punch. He could just lean back into the ropes, let McCain punch himself out, and then respond with a counterpunch, which inevitably ended that particular exchange.

McCain’s biggest mistake—and he made this mistake a few times at the end of the debate—he was not ready for Obama’s counter punches. Most of not all of McCain’s criticisms were valid; most of Obama’s responses were clever, disingenuous and/or moved on to a different subject. McCain should have been ready for all of these responses and been willing to go back into the fray. He did not always do this.

Let me give you an example. The “I’m not Bush” exchange. McCain told Obama, “You are running against me and not against George Bush; if you wanted to run against him, then you should have run 4 years ago.” (Not an exact quote). Obama counter-punched with “Your economic policies and your foreign policies are virtually the same as Bush’s.” At this point, McCain should have waded in and explained how he differed from Bush in foreign policy and in economic policy. If the moderator tried to stop him, McCain should have said, “Mr. Obama has been making this false accusation over and over again, and it is about time that I answered it.” Then McCain should have explained that, economically, Bush spends a lot of taxpayer dollars and tends to throw money at a problem. “That is more like you, Senator Obama, than it is like me.” Then he should have added, “I have proposed a simplifying of our obscenely confusing tax structure; Bush has not done that and you propose to add more and more complexity to the tax system, just like Bush.” Then he should have added, I have clearly stated that I will put a freeze on federal spending. You have responded that you will use a scalpel, which sounds good, but you have yet to come up with $800 million worth of spending cuts that you would apply your so-called scalpel to.” And if Obama responded, then McCain should have been ready to counter-punch. McCain needed to get in the last word on each exchange, but he did not.

Let me give you another example: the abortion exchange. McCain pointed out Obama’s record and Obama obfuscated his record, explaining how there was a law already in place to deal with the lives of babies aborted alive. McCain should have counter-punched with, “You make a lot of fancy talk here, Mr. Obama, but the end result was, you argued to kill innocent helpless babies after they had been delivered alive in a hospital. I have your exact quote here.” Then McCain should have continued, “A nurse came in and testified before you that she held a poor little aborted baby in her arms for the last 45 minutes of its life, giving that baby the only love it would ever know. If that law to which you refer is so good, why was that baby thrown out like it was garbage? How can you argue in good conscience for killing a child like that?” And if Obama responded (which he would), then McCain should have pointed out that Obama has promised to pass, as his first act as president, the most liberal abortion law ever. “When a baby is alive, you say is above your pay grade, Mr. Obama. I’ll tell you when that baby is alive; it is alive and fully human at the moment of conception, and no scientist or biologist can tell you any differently. You glibly say, ‘We’ll just provide better birth control’ but then you will have policies which will continue to kill our nation’s children. If there is one thing a president ought to do, it is to protect the innocent and the helpless. You are all for taking Joe the Plumber’s money and spreading his wealth around, because you are giving it to people who will vote for you. However, these babies will never be able to vote fo you, so you don’t care whether they live or die.” And if Obama had that same grin on his face, McCain should add, “We are talking about the lives of innocent babies here, Mr. Obama, and you should wipe that stupid grin off your face; this is one of the great moral failings of the United States. We may or may not be able to reduce the number of children born to unwed mothers, but once that baby is in the womb, he or she needs someone to defend him, and you refuse to take a clear stand to defend the innocent. You just use fancy and clever rhetoric, and the end result is, more babies die.” And if Obama says something else, McCain should interrupt him and say, “You need to get a moral grip on this issue and stand with me to save the lives of millions of innocent children.”

But, McCain did not put in the last word, and that was his biggest mistake—however, unlike the last couple debates, it did not occur again and again and again.

Overall, McCain did better than he did in previous debates, but, Obama, who is a very quick study (notice, he no longer says “uh uh uh uh” but now uses a long “and” instead); and notice that he was ready with everything that McCain had to say to him with a quick, 30–60 second response.

Should Barack Obama win the presidency and the Democrats control Congress, as now seems likely, they will launch a full-scale war to drive critics - especially on political talk radio - right out of legitimate public debate.

Signs of what the new environment will be like for the right are already evident:

• When the National Rifle Association recently released television and radio ads in Pennsylvania targeting Obama's history of anti-gun votes, the Obama campaign's general counsel fired off bullying letters to stations that ran the spots, implying that they may have violated public-interest obligations.

• When the 527 group, the American Issues Project, came out with a commercial linking Obama to former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, the campaign (unsuccessfully) complained to the Department of Justice that AIP had broken campaign finance laws, and managed to spook some stations away from the ad.

• When two different conservative writers looking into Obama's background appeared on Chicago's WGN-AM Radio, the campaign's "action wire" energized its activists to bombard the station with rage-filled phone calls and e-mails, making the program more difficult to conduct.

(The show, hosted by the eminently reasonable Milt Rosenberg, had on both occasions invited the Obama campaign to send a representative to respond; the campaign preferred to answer with digital brownshirts.)

I do not believe that Anderson here is wildly running around crying out, “The sky if falling.” Historically, this has already happened; there has already been a Fairness Doctrine as law, which reduced informational sources. Obama, in the examples above, has already sought to silence anti-Obama messages. His campaign has more money than any other campaign, yet, instead of running counter-ads, Obama has sought to shut down some groups who oppose him.

If you knew nothing else about this election, this by itself should make you concerned about the possibility of an Obama presidency.

You may be a liberal and you may hate O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh; if you effectively want to silence them, vote Obama. Just do not be surprised if this later leads to the silencing of other opinions which you might approve of.

In case you did not know, there used to be a law called the Fairness Doctrine which required that, if an AM radio station had 1 hour of a conservative Republican on the air, then this had to be balanced with 1 hour of a liberal Democrat. The idea of the Fairness Doctrine is, the airways are publicly-owned, so we ought to reasonably regulate them so that this or that viewpoint does not get a stranglehold on this media. It seems like a very reasonable approach and almost any fair-minded person would have to admit, AM talk radio is ruled by conservative voices.

The same fair-minded people may or may not be willing to admit that NPR radio, FM radio, public radio and public television, NBC, CBS, ABC (to some extent), CNN and MSNBC, along with almost every newspaper in the United States and the Associated Press, present liberally-slanted news. However, the Fairness Doctrine would not affect these sources.

Here is what would happen to AM radio. If any station attempted to provide a balance—say, 3 hours of Rush followed by 3 hours of Rachel Maddow, the following would happen: people would listen to Rush and then turn their radios off or turn to another station. This would make TalkRadio much less profitable, because most stations try to have a lineup which will result in the greatest number of listeners, which means the most ad revenue. Ad revenue would decrease by about a third or more, because people, in general, have little interest in listening to angry liberals.

Okay, let’s say that most radio stations were able to make this format work, despite the listener fall-off for the liberal shows. Then you have the lawsuits saying, Rush is on at a better time than Maddow, so, they need to be interspersed, hour by hour.

Then there is the paperwork. If you have any involvement with a government agency, then you know that they produce a buttload of paperwork (mostly, this justifies their function). Reduced revenues + many extra hours dealing with paperwork. If Rush is too successful on a radio station, then that station can be attacked based upon government-generated paperwork.

The end result will not be more voices, but fewer voices and voices which are harder to find. The Fairness Doctrine does not seek to increase free speech. It seeks to effectively regulate and restrict free speech when it is not in line with the majority in power.

Right now, we have a variety of voices that we can listen to, and that is the way it should be. Free speech is a good thing.

For those of you who did not watch Sean Hannity's "A History of Radicalism" I strongly recommend that you do, on Youtube, or wherever you can find it.

This documentary nails down Barack Obama's past, and it is VERY disturbing, far more incindiary than I imagined.

One issue Hannity confronted was the Obama camp's refusal to release his transcripts from Columbia and Harvard. It can be assumed that those records would expose his radical socialist leanings.

In a nutshell, Obama's naked ambition led him into the periphery of William Ayers, and this was where his rise to prominence began. Obama claims that his association with Ayers was topical, and was no more than a casual relationship.

Perhaps that is believable from Obama's perspective, but men like Ayers do not invite people into their homes, and otherwise devote time and energy to such a relationship, unless there is an ideological connection. There was not merely a compatible philosophy at play, but a scheme was hatched with the objective of promoting this young man, who possessed the charisma and oratory skills to become a prominent figure.

Hannity claims that after Obama got cozy with Ayers he was given a post as a "community organizer", and that this innocuous title conceals a radical agenda that amounted to a trial run for the young politician. Once he successfully completed that term as an organizer, which was actually a plan to dramatically alter the educational system in Chicago, a very powerful Arab, with ties to the Saudi royal family, greased the skids for Obama's attendance at Harvard.

But this is the tip of the iceberg. Obama studied radical socialist doctrine (the author escapes me now), and later came under the influence of a past PLO front man. Jeremiah Wright's part in Obama's life came later, and he was also involved with Louis Farakkan and Father Pfleger, both of whom are known loonies.

All of this, and more than I have been able to recall, is behind Obama's rise to power. He is a VERY SCARY GUY! We can only hope that enough American's will become aware of his background, which the Obama campaign is trying desperately to conceal.

There's been no secret that Barack Obama has went after FOXNews in the past few days:

* NYT article, via Politico (American Girl won't visit nyt.com anymore since signing a petition to get them to investigate.)

While steady FOXNews viewers are angry over Bill O'Reilly's comments Thursday evening that Barack Obama is a "decent guy." Other FOXNews followers cite the change in direction came in the Wednesday post-debate coverage when the panel all dissed McCain's debate performance. Meanwhile, the Obama campaign was negotiating a 30-minute infomercial on FOX for Tuesday evening, delaying the start of the World Series game.

FOXNews kills all other cable stations in ratings last week by drawing a 2.7 household rating and 3.4 million viewers according to Nielsen TV Ratings. TBS, USA, and ESPN round out the top four. CNN was fourth with 2.38 million viewers and MSNBC was ninth with 1.55 mmillion viewers.

FOXNews has done deep investigations into Obama's Senate voting records in both the U.S. Senate and Illinois Senate. They've also investigated Obama's associations with ACORN, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the influence of Saul Alinsky on Obama's voting record and policies. Have you seen that sort of investigative coverage on CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, or MSNBC? As a news junkie, I can admit that I have not - and I'm not a huge FOX fan.

While Obama tells the NYT, "I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls," Obama says. "If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn't vote for me, right? Because the way I'm portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latte-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants somebody like that?"

FOXNews doesn't diss him that way (I would notice because I happen to really like Volvos), instead they investigate - what ALL the newsrooms in America should be doing and they aren't. While Joe-the-Plumber gets 20 reporters on his lawn the morning after Wednesday's debate, I've only seen one reporter (from FOXNews) outside Bill Ayers home.

FNMA and FHLMC have about $5 Trillion in mortgages, which dwarfs the holdings of just about anything else in this world.

Although I have gone over this before, let me brief you on the concept: FNMA and FHLMC represent the secondary mortgage market, something which most people did not even know existed. Your mortgage company lends you money for your house, and then turns around and sells this mortgage to FNMA or FHLMC. At one time, they had strict guidelines, which meant, in order for a mortgage company to sell a mortgage to them (so that the mortgage company could go out and make more loans), FNMA and FHLMC could be secure that these would be performing loans (i.e., the borrowers would continue to pay regularly). ACORN, the Community Reinvestment Act (and its modification under Bill Clinton) changed all of that, so that these mortgage companies and FNMA and FHLMC had lowered their standards, now funding and buying loans which were risky loans.

Most of the fingers on this crisis are democratic ones, but not exclusively. Since we are dealing with a crisis of mammoth proportions, this is probably what send our economy into a tailspin. This is analogous to, the flutter of the butterfly’s wings in Africa eventually sets off a hurricane headed to the Gulf of Mexico.

Although I am certain that Obama will do nothing when it comes to investigating the FNMA and FHLMC crisis, it is less clear what McCain will do. There are too many Democratic heads which will roll, and Obama has said nothing about this crisis, other than to blame it on Bush. The Democratic Congress which has launched more investigations than any other Congress in history will not launch an investigation here.

At one rally, spurred on by some fired up conservatives, McCain talked about going after those at fault, naming Chris Dodd and Barney Frank as two of the villains. The crowd went wild and this would be a winning strategy to play on this. However, McCain has not. So far, I have not seen ads where McCain says, “And I will get these bastards!” Nor have I seen Republicans run on this as a campaign issue or promise. That is a bad sign.

McCain fired Phil Gramm from his campaign, and I cannot even recall the Mickey Mouse reason which was given (I looked it up; he said the American people were suffering a mental recession). Gramm was in charge of FNMA and FHLMC before Dodd and Frank. Even though there appears to be no contact between McCain and Phil Gramm, they are long-time friends and allies.

Recently, McCain fired someone else on his campaign staff who has ties to FNMA (although I cannot locate this guy’s name right now).

In any case, if I was making book, I would say, there is a 75% chance McCain will not pursue a criminal investigation of Congressional mismanagement of FNMA and FHLMC, and a 99% chance that Obama will not do anything about it either.

One of the recent accusations which has found its way onto pretty much every news sources is that, Palin mentioned Obama’s name, and someone in the crowd screamed “Kill him.” This has been reported as a fact. So far, this incident is based upon the testimony of one reporter; no one has corroborated his story. Police and the FBI have all been on this behind the scenes (you do not make such threats against the president or a presidential candidate). So far, no one in the crowd, no other reporter, and no one in law enforcement can back up this lone reporter’s claim (which he stands by). However, I bet you have heard more about this and other so-called examples of hate speech and it is doubtful that you have heard of anything similar to this sort of speech directed against McCain and Palin which is occurring at all rallies.

John Stossel suggests that getting out the vote is not necessarily a good idea (this is short and excellent):

A link to ABC news; choose the quote which most agrees with your thinking, and then see which candidate you support (this takes about 4 minutes and you may agree with both statements and you may disagree with both statements, but you still have to choose the one closest to your opinion):

The Wall Street Journal has some incredible editorials, one of them entitled A Liberal Supermajority.

If the current polls hold, Barack Obama will win the White House on November 4 and Democrats will consolidate their Congressional majorities, probably with a filibuster-proof Senate or very close to it. Without the ability to filibuster, the Senate would become like the House, able to pass whatever the majority wants.

Though we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on.

Either link should offer up Obama’s stand-up debut, but it was not quite as good (except his joke about his middle name; that was pretty funny).

Take the Obama test (a few questions are poorly worded, but it takes about 5 minutes):

Who wrote Dreams of my Father? Don’t dismiss this out of hand. The evidence for a writer other than Obama is not unreasonable:

Remember when Hillary was under enemy fire in Bosnia? Biden has faced the same thing; he is every bit the man that Hillary is:

RUSH: The Associated Press poll shows McCain down to Obama 44-42. Now, there's an interesting side light. In the last four weeks, Obama has not moved. He's gone down in some polls. He's not over 50. He can't get over 48. If you take the average of all these polls, he's at 48, and he has not moved in a month. But this AP poll, this is near journalistic malpractice 'cause I have the story. The poll, don't forget, now, 44-42, Obama. Here's the headline of their own story talking about their own poll: "Voters Souring on McCain." Obama stays steady. It's 44-42! I read the whole story. I read the entire story. Nowhere in the story is their poll mentioned. Their story focuses totally on how voters are souring on McCain, in a poll that they report being 44-42 Obama, two-point poll -- statistically tied.

RUSH: The Supreme Court today, siding with Democrats in this case involving Ohio's Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner. As you know, there are 200,000 voter registrations that don't match their DMV records and Social Security numbers and so forth. The secretary of state of Ohio (with whom we had numerous run-ins during Operation Chaos), she was saying, "I don't have time to implement this by Friday." Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals said, (paraphrasing) "You gotta straighten this out. You gotta figure out which of these people are legit and which aren't, you gotta do it by Friday." So she ran to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court -- I think it's the full court, I don't think it was just Justice Stevens -- said that the setup in Ohio is sufficient as it is to weed out all these fraudulent voters. Republicans were contending the information for counties that they wanted Brunner to give would help prevent fraud, and Jennifer Brunner said the Republicans are trying to disenfranchise voters. Ha! These are already known to be fraudulent registrations! So basically Jennifer Brunner, the secretary of state for Ohio, went to the Supreme Court, said, "Let my people cheat," and the United States Supreme Court said, "So ordered. Your people can cheat." What a great country.

RUSH: Here's Biden on the Today Show today discussing Joe the plumber. David Gregory: "We've moved through the debates, we're moving into the final stretch. What happened on this debate that will be the basis of a final pitch from Obama-Biden to undecided voters?"

BIDEN: You know, as John continues to cling to the notion, evidence the fact this guy Joe the plumber, I don't have any Joe the plumbers in my neighborhood that make $250,000 a year and are worried, the Joe the plumbers in my neighborhood, the Joe the cops in my neighborhood, the Joe the grocery store owners in my neighborhood, they make like 98% of the small businesses, less than $250,000 a year, and they're going to do very well under us and they're going to be in real tough shape under John McCain.

RUSH: In the first place, 98% of small businesses do not earn less than $250,000 a year, but more than that, Joe the plumber doesn't either, Joe the plumber doesn't earn $250,000, he wants to. He wants to buy a plumbing company. They're perfectly distorting it. But I don't think any plumbers live in Biden's neighborhood. I don't think any cops live in his neighborhood, and I don't think any grocery store owners live in his neighbor because Mr. Biden's neighborhood is very ritzy. From the October 1st, 2000, edition of the New York Times: "Mr. Biden's 6,800-square-foot colonial-style house sits on four lakefront acres that he bought in March 1996 for $350,000. But these days, his kitchen table can be found in a 6,800-square-foot custom-built colonial-style house on four lakefront acres, a property worth close to $3 million." There is no way any plumber lives in Biden's neighborhood. There is no way any cop lives there or any grocery store owner. And, by the way, I doubt that Biden has ever even seen Joe the plumber in a Home Depot because Biden's never been seen in a Home Depot.

RUSH: Let's go to the audio sound bites with Joe the plumber. On Good Morning America today, the plumber Joe Wurzelbacher. Diane Sawyer says, "If people making $250,000 should not be taxed additionally -- by the way, it's 3%, just 36% to 39% over Obama's plan -- if those people should not be taxed additionally even though they're in the top 5%, what about people who make a million dollars or $5 million?"

WURZELBACHER: Why should they be penalized for being successful? I mean, that's what you're telling me, or that's what it sounds like you're saying. That's wrong. Because you're successful you have to pay more than everybody else? I mean, we all live in this country, I mean that was -- you know, it's basic rights, and Obama wants to take that basic right and penalize me for it is what it comes down to. I mean. that's a very socialist view, and it's just incredibly wrong. I mean if it's $250,000 now, what if he decides, "Well, you know, $150,000 you're pretty rich, too. Let's go ahead and lower it again." It's a slippery slope. When's it going to stop?

RUSH: This morning on Joe Scarborough on MSNBC he and Buchanan were talking to Robert Gibbs, Obama campaign aide. Scarborough says, "Why do you want to tax Joe the plumber? Why do you want to destroy his dreams of starting his own business and hiring four or five people?"

GIBBS: If you've seen interviews with Joe the plumber; Joe the plumber m-makes, uh, from best we can tell, an income level where he'd probably receive a tax cut from Barack Obama. And Joe the plumber if he was --

SCARBOROUGH: Joe Biden afterwards said, "Hey, we're going to tax Joe the plumber because he makes $250,000."

RUSH: No, it's not that he makes 250. It's that he wants to! He has a dream; he wants to buy the plumbing business. He wants to hire four or five more people. That will move him into Obama's tax bracket. And, by the way, Obama lied through his teeth twice last night when McCain nailed him on twice voting for a budget authorization bill that would increase taxes on anybody earning $42,000 or more. Obama shook his head, "No, no, that's not true, and even Fox News backed me up on it," even Fox News. I don't know what he's talking about. It might have been one of these stupid commentators thinks Obama's a rock or thinks Obama is a mountain, or is cool, calm, collected, or what have you. But he voted for it twice. But anyway, this guy Gibbs, they're now attacking him. Folks, they're attacking you. The Obama campaign, in attacking Joe the plumber, is attacking every one of you. They're calling this guy a liar. They are suggesting that he is selfish. They are suggesting he earns more than he at present does. Last night on Nightline the cohost Terry Moran talked to Joe the plumber, and Moran said, "What do you make of what you heard about your exchange with Senator Obama? Senator McCain said it essentially demonstrated Senator Obama wants to tax you and people like you too heavily and redistribute the wealth. What do you make of that?"

WURZELBACHER: Well, to be honest with you, I mean that infuriates me. I like, you know, Bill Gates, I don't care who you are. If you worked for it, if it was your idea and you implemented it, it's not right for someone to decide you made too much, you've done too good and now we're going to tie some of it back. That's just completely wrong.

RUSH: The thing that everybody has to realize here is that there is very little wealth. Wealth is in the process of being destroyed right now in the stock market, people's 401(k)s. You've seen them. I know you've been scared to open the envelopes, but you've seen what's happened to your 401(k)s, your retirement accounts. We got unemployment rising. There is no wealth to speak of here. We need to start creating wealth! We need Reaganomics. We need tax cuts. We need more disposable income. Look at Pelosi talking now about a $300 billion stimulus package. What is that? A $300 billion stimulus package is to put more money in your pocket. By doing what? By spending more! By borrowing more! Where are they going to get it? Where's the government getting all its money? Have you seen the national debt? Have you seen the annual deficit? Where are they getting it? They're printing it. Can you say "inflation"?

And they're going to give you a little bit of it and they're going to say, "Go spend," and that's going to revive the economy. The simple way is to cut taxes. But see, government cannot do with less. The dirty little secret is it's not even about that because tax cuts create more revenue to the Treasury. It's the Democrats want more Democrats and control over you, and this is what Joe the plumber instinctively understands. But the Democrats have destroyed the economy. The Democrats have taken a big chunk out of people's wealth here. There's no wealth to redistribute right now, yet it will not stop Obama. Joe the plumber was cut off by Katie Couric last night right after he says he likes McCain's answer on something. This is last night, post-debate analysis, Katie Couric, "Joe the plumber, the infamous Joe the plumber -- actually not infamous -- what do you think about the debate? Were you swayed either way?"

WURZELBACHER: I have an idea of who I'm going to vote for, but that's, you know, that's my -- you know, the nice thing about going into the booth, you know, only me and the lever knows, so... I think McCain did a fine job this evening. I think he brought up some good points. I do like his health care and I do like where he stands on taxes. Obama --

COURIC: We're going to... We're going to talk to you more on our webcast, because, unfortunately, we're out of time, but thanks.

RUSH: Well, well. "I like his health care. I like where he stands on taxes. Obama, as usual..."

"Sorry, Joe, we're out of time. We'll put you on the Internet where nobody else can see you because nobody goes to our Internet website. So that's where we'll park you, Joe, you big buffoon. You didn't play it right," Katie is thinking. "You're supposed to come here and attack McCain. You're supposed to come here and build up Obama! We're not going to let you get away with this, Joe."

Joe had a press conference outside his house today. Joe the plumber outside his home in Holland, Ohio. Unidentified reporter: "What is it about you, do you think, that's so attractive to the two presidential candidates that they would mention your name four times more than they would even mention Iraq?" Now, that question is as incompetent and absurd as any you would want. McCain brought up Joe the plumber. Obama had to bring up Joe the plumber in defense. He looked in the camera, "Joe, you're going to be fine with me." He had just told Joe the plumber he's going to take some of his money. Last night he lied to Joe the plumber. So the report says, "How come this gets mentioned more than Iraq?"

WURZELBACHER: I don't know. That bothered me. To be honest with you, I'm sure Obama didn't want my name mentioned so it wasn't so much as that. But I'm sure he expected it. Like I said, it was just a focal point, and if it helps the debate then I'm happy for that, but I wish, you know... I don't know, probably talked about more important issues. You know, November 4th is coming here, we're going to be voting shortly and there's a lot of real issues affecting us.

RUSH: The reporter said, "Well, that's the biggest issue for you. What do you hope for your son's future?"

WURZELBACHER: I want him to live in an America that he's proud of. I'm tired of people downing America, saying that we're this bad country. I mean, that upsets me and my friends greatly. You know, we are the greatest country in the world. Stop apologizing for it! I mean, really. It just... (sigh) I get real mad about that. I'm not sorry for being an American, I'm not sorry for having the things I have. I'm not sorry for any of those things. I'm not sorry that we're in Iraq. Has it kept us safe? Absolutely! I believe in that 100%. WMDs or not, I don't care. You know, we took the fight to them. We've done a pretty good job there. Could we have done better? Yeah, sure. But, you know, it's easy to be an armchair quarterback. You know, and hindsight they say is 20/20. I call it X-ray vision.

RUSH: The question is just how representative of Middle America is Joe the plumber. How many other Joe the plumbers are there out there? You know, "the silent majority" is the term that Nixon coined to describe them. How many others are out there that are just fed up with the idea that Obama's going to raise their taxes; fed up with hearing their country maligned by the likes of Obama and Biden and Clinton and John Edwards and the entire Democrat presidential roster? How many Americans are fed up with the Obama campaign apologizing for America while in Berlin? How many Americans are fed up with being called bitter clingers when Obama is hanging around these elite rich Democrats in San Francisco? We don't know. The polls are not telling us this. The polls...

Karl Rove has a piece today in the Wall Street Journal says (paraphrased), "You know, look, he's outspending McCain three-to-one. He ought to have sewn this up by now. He ought to have this deal closed. This election ought to be over, and it isn't." Rove's point is that McCain is still in striking distance. Now, I asked this question: how many Joe the plumbers are out there? Ben Smith at The Politico yesterday got an e-mail from a Republican consultant who conducted a focus group. The Republican consultant e-mailed Ben Smith about the group he had just finished conducting. What he did was show them a hard-hitting ad on Ayers, William Ayers, and this was the e-mail he sent to Ben Smith.

"Reagan Dem[ocrat]s and Independents. Call them blue-collar plus. Slightly more Target than Wal-Mart. Yes, the spot worked. Yes, they believed the charges against Obama. Yes, they actually think he's too liberal, consorts with bad people and WON'T BE A GOOD PRESIDENT...but they STILL don't give a f***. They said right out, 'He won't do anything better than McCain' but they're STILL voting for Obama. The two most unreal moments of my professional life of watching focus groups," he said, are these two, "54 year-old white male, voted Kerry '04, Bush '00, Dole '96, hunter, NASCAR fan...hard for Obama said: 'I'm gonna hate him the minute I vote for him. He's gonna be a bad president. But I won't ever vote for another [G]-damn Republican.

"I want the government to take over all of Wall Street and bankers and the car companies and Wal-Mart run this county like we used to when Reagan was President.' The next was a woman, late 50s, Democrat but strongly pro-life. Loved B. and H. Clinton, loved Bush in 2000. 'Well, I don't know much about this terrorist group Barack used to be in with that Weather guy but I'm sick of paying for health insurance at work and that's why I'm supporting Barack.'" The consultant said, "I felt like I was taking crazy pills. I sat on the other side of the glass and realized...this really is the Apocalypse. The Seventh Seal is broken and it's time for eight years of pure, delicious crazy...."

Now, this is ostensibly from a Republican consultant who had gone out and done focus groups and sends the results to Ben Smith at The Politico. Now, granted if you read it and you have no questions about it, you might agree with the Republican consultant. I don't mean to insult Ben Smith of The Politico, but what Republican consultant would do this? What Republican consultant would send this kind of information to...? I'm not saying it didn't happen. If it did happen, it is indicative of something that we all know and we're hoping can be overcome, and that is it's the economy. It's the economy. And we also know that the Drive-By Media has for six years been trying to convince people they live in a rotten one, that they live in a recession. Joe the plumber (we don't apparently have this bite) this morning in his press conference said, "What is it about poverty? Everybody in poverty in this country's got a cell phone. They've got a car. They've got a TV. What is it about poverty?" This guy Joe the plumber is on the road and he's articulating McCain policies better than McCain does!

RUSH: So the Obama campaign and the Democrats now start attacking Joe the plumber. It's amazing how Joe the plumber has them flummoxed. They're treating Joe the plumber almost liked the treated Sarah Palin when she first came out. As a curiosity, do you realize this is important, ladies and gentlemen. They looked at Palin, said, "Who is this woman? She shoots; she hunts; she takes care of her own kids." And they're looking at Joe, "Who is this guy? Who's this Joe the plumber guy? What do you mean, some guy who is a blue-collar guy who is a plumber, and he's not going to vote for Obama? Who is this guy? Who are these people who live out here in Ohio? What do you mean he wants to start a business now, who is this guy? We can't understand this guy, this Joe the plumber." What the press can't get through their heads is that America is Joe the plumber. Sarah Palin is America. Anne Kornblut, Katie Couric, sadly, Fred Barnes and Bill Kristol, the Fox All-Stars, they're not America. They have become elites.

You don't know how hard this is for me to say, folks. Roger Ailes is one of my closest friends and he has been since 1990, and he is the chairman, chief executive officer of the Fox News Channel, I saw him this weekend, spent a lot of social time with him. It is really hard for me to tell you what I really think about what the Fox All-Stars reaction to this debate was last night. I know they're not under any obligation to carry an agenda. They're not under any obligation. They didn't see it. They didn't see what everybody else who watched this debate saw, even other people in the media, they didn't see it. And these are the people that put us down; these are the people making fun of us for not wanting McCain; these are the people we thought McCain was the only guy who can win, McCain can reach across the aisle, independents, Democrats, McCain is the guy that can do it with honor, great story, and now they're saying fire the campaign, McCain's horrible, can't do well in a debate. My gosh. Your head swims trying to keep up with them.

The Kornbluts and the Katie Courics, they try to make it out like Sarah Palin and Joe the plumbers are interlopers. It's the press, it's the Drive-By Media, the elites that are the interlopers. They are the minority; they are the freak show class. There's nothing freak show about Sarah Palin. There's nothing freak show about Joe the plumber. The freak show is the elites in Washington and New York that are in the media and out of the media. The Fox All-Stars have become elites, too, and you've got Jack Murtha. How in the world do the Democrats come close to winning this? Jack Murtha says that his part of Pennsylvania is definitely racist, a Democrat who impugned and maligned all of our great, brave Marines in Haditha and others of the US fighting force in Iraq. Oh, yeah, where I live, western Pennsylvania, yeah, very racist, gonna cost Obama four points at least, but he's still gonna win. His own state he's calling racist, western Pennsylvania. He's going to get reelected, probably. Who knows. Hope not. It's just amazing. I'm telling you, folks, there have to be a lot more Joe the plumbers and Josephine the plumbers and Sarah Palin types all over this country than you know or that the Drive-By Media knows or that Washington-New York elites know. If they weren't out there doing what they're doing and being who they are, our economy would have tanked years ago.

RUSH: One more audio sound bite here from Joe the plumber from his press conference today. He actually had a press conference outside his house in Holland, Ohio. Now, keep in mind, the press looks at him the same way they look at Palin: Who is this freak? We don't have people like this in America. Who is this guy? Plumber? Wants to make $250,000 and vote McCain? A blue-collar guy? Who the hell is this? Remember, now, these reporters had to get visas to go into the foreign country of Ohio to interview Joe the plumber, and this is what he said about liberating Iraq and real poverty, compared to American poverty.

WURZELBACHER: You know, my friends in the military that come back and tell me the thanks that they receive for us being there, it doesn't get enough play. I mean we've liberated another country. I mean, you know, freedom, things that every one of you guys take for granted, everything that Americans take for granted, I mean these guys haven't had it; now they got it? I mean that's an incredible thing. You know, our guys here that are poverty stricken have cell phones. Those old people over there, you know, they have one pair of pants and a shirt. You know, so what we've done over there is an incredible, incredible thing.

RUSH: Here's Joe the plumber making the case for the war in Iraq, putting it on the table in a proper context about poverty there versus poverty here, and the press looks at him like he is from Mars.

RUSH: In a further effort to discredit Joe the plumber, CBS' Maggie Rodriguez today said he's nothing but a Republican pawn. Republican pawn? He spoke to Obama when Obama was going door-to-door! As though Democrats don't have pawns. Joe the plumber also (they're going after him here on this, too) says he doesn't have a license, and says he doesn't need one because he works for somebody else. He wants to buy out the guy he works for down the road. He doesn't have a plan for it. Joe the plumber is 34, and he's working on it. He and his boss had talked about a plan eventually where he would take over, but he doesn't have a plan in place. He does not earn $250,000. He wants to buy the company, he wants to grow it, and then he will get his license.

RUSH: Well, the plumbers union, the Democrat union thugs are now going after Joe the plumber. This is from the website Radar Online: "It remains to be seen whether John McCain's blue-collar hero, Ohio's Joe the plumber, is a Republican plant or not. (One thing he is definitely not: a licensed plumber.)" This is what they're focusing on. I mentioned this to you about 20 minutes ago. "Either way, though, he's succeeded in raising the ire of a lot of his plumbing brethren, particularly those in the United Association of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry!" This is not to be confused with the pig iron workers.

"The UA was the 'first international Union to endorse Senator Barack Obama for President of the United States,' having thrown their support behind Illinoisan way back in January. Radar called them up to see how they felt about a man so inextricably linked to the world of pipes suddenly becoming a campaign talking point. 'You know, hopefully Joe put in his time as an apprentice and a journeyman, so he can appreciate what it's like to be a working person,' a spokesperson told us. 'Now that he has succeeded and has the chance to become a contractor and a business owner, he should really be supportive of Senator Obama's tax plan, which will benefit the working-class people who really need it.'" I don't know who this spokesman is, but this spokesman is just dumb. I don't think people understand what Obama's tax plan is. Look, folks, there's just a certain degree of ignorance that we're going to have to deal with, and it's rampant out there, and I tell you it is the most expensive commodity we face in this country: pure ignorance. Not partisanship, and not ideologues, pure ignorance, 100% ignorance, the most expensive thing we have.

RUSH: I went back, because I remembered something. This past summer, Gallup put out a poll, McCain needs to hammer this. It was June 27th, headline: "Americans oppose income redistribution to fix economy," by 84-13%. Hello, Joe the Plumber. "When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly, 84-13, prefer that government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the job situation in the country as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans. Eighty-four to 13. This is back in June. Now, granted, gas prices were very high in June. The economy and the Wall Street mess had not yet come to the fore. It was effervescing out there. We hadn't gotten to the point where we're panicking and talking about bailouts. And in another portion of the same -- this is Gallup, now -- "Half of Americans think government is doing too much, not too little." This is the Joe the Plumber lesson.

The Joe the Plumber lesson is not who he is and not what he said. The lesson is what Obama said. But now the Drive-Bys have to go out and destroy Joe the Plumber. As I asked yesterday, how many Joe the Plumbers, Joe Six-Packs and Josephine the Plumbers are there? They are doing everything they can, the Obama campaign staff, the Drive-By Media, to destroy Joe the Plumber, and he's having some hard economic times right now like a lot of people are. They're even saying he's got this fantasy of owning a business. He's got a fantasy, as though that's not possible, who is this guy, thinking he's going to own a plumbing business. The plumber's union yesterday dumping all over Joe the Plumber about the fact he doesn't have a license or what have you. The fact is he is a plumber and he can work. They're doing everything they can to destroy this guy. What is this fantasy business? He has a fantasy. Fantasies are unrealistic, are they not? That's why they're called fantasies. Dreams are what he has, that's right, he has a dream and they're calling his dream a fantasy. I hope people are noticing what this Obama campaign is willing to do in order to win. It's a page right out of the Clinton book. You destroy anybody, including average Americans you claim to have formulated your economic plans to help.

Remember all the women in the Clinton administration, trailer park trash, the whole bimbo eruptions unit to destroy them. Obama's got the same thing here. Twenty-four hours, the Drive-By Media can unearth everything there is about Joe the Plumber. In two years we can't even get them interested in finding out who the real Obama is. In all these years, they have no interest with all this controversy about Bill Ayers, they have no desire to talk to him. They're not camping outside Bill Ayers' door and demanding he conduct a press conference and answer inquisitive, threatening, intimidating questions. So the die is cast, ladies and gentlemen.

RUSH: Let's go to a montage we have here of Drive-By Media trashing Joe the Plumber.

JOHN BERMAN: It doesn't actually appear he's a licensed plumber, and, it does appear there are some issues about past taxes. There are records of a tax lean filed against Joe!

WYATT ANDREWS: The man whose personal story steered a presidential debate over taxes, owes some $1,200 in back taxes.

DAVID "RODHAM" GERGEN: When we found out he was Sam the Non-plumber, it changed a little bit. (snicker) Why the McCain team didn't vet the guy...

ANDERSON COOPER: Joe is not actually a licensed plumber. He admits he's not making anywhere close to a quarter million. His name is actually not Joe; at least that's not his first name. His name is Sam: Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher.

CHRISTOPHER HAYES: There's this tremendous gap between the mythical creature of Joe the Plumber and the actual real-life guy, and we see this time and time again. Sarah Palin is a perfect example.

RUSH: These people just can't stand it because Joe the Plumber caused Obama to screw up. Joe the Plumber caused Obama to actually give it up on what his campaign is really all about. You want to talk about past taxes and leans, Charlie Rangel? Does that name come to mind? Does it ring a bell? The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee had to pay back taxes; was trying to cheat the government out of some money on some property he owns down in the Dominican Republic. There's also a guy named Martin Nesbitt, the treasurer of Obama's campaign, who has tax leans. His name isn't Joe? Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher; his name not Joe? Who is this guy? We have to find out who is this guy? This mythical creature? He's a far more real human being than any of the elitists in New York and Washington. Here is Joy Behar from The View this morning.

BEHAR: Joe the Plumber doesn't have a business yet. He's fantasizing about a business he's going to have.

BEHAR: Wait a second. Fantasizing is a very legitimate term to describe somebody who's predicting the future for themselves.

HASSELBECK: Fantasizing is a dangerous thing to say because it assumes that it is not attainable.

RUSH: They're just doing everything they can to destroy the poor guy. Kathleen Hall Jamieson, do we have time? Barely. Last night on The NewsHour.

JAMIESON: Joe the Plumber also set up a very concrete example that both campaigns could now play through in the following days. Senator Obama hasn't specified when people are going to be paying a fine, how many people have to be in a business to call it "a small business," how much dollar amount does the business have to have to be classified small business. So when Senator Obama says, "Well, small businesses are exempted, Joe, don't worry." The fact checkers and news people are now saying, "But, Senator Obama, you haven't specified what constitutes a small business." That may actually advance this dialogue. So Joe has made concrete very abstract proposals, and as a result I think he's advanced this precedent very importantly.

RUSH: And we'll take a brief time-out here, folks, come right back. Stay with us.

RUSH: Stay focused on this whole business of Joe the Plumber. It's not about Joe the Plumber. I don't care if Joe the Plumber landed from Mars and was impersonating a human being and if Karl Rove did set it up six months ago that Obama was going to go to this house and a Republican would answer. This is what the left is saying, by the way. The left is saying that Joe the Plumber is a plant and that they're uncovering a fraud. They are saying it! This is what they say: Joe the Plumber was a plant. Somebody, Karl Rove, brilliantly arranged all this -- including the house that Obama was going to knock on, in the town where Obama was going to be, on the specific date and time, Rove knew it months ago, where Obama was going to be and arranged all this. Joe the Plumber could be a squirrel! It's what Obama said. Let's go back, this is Sunday in Toledo, and let's listen to the original exchange.

OBAMA: You get a 50% tax credit, so you get the cut of taxes through your health care plan.

OBAMA: So you would actually get a tax cut on that point. If your revenue is above 250, then from 250 down, your tax is going to stay the same; 95% of small businesses make less than 250.

OBAMA: What I'm saying is the folks who make more than 250, that that marginal amount above 250 they're gonna be taxed at a 39% instead of 36% rate. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.

RUSH: "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." Now, the Democrats are very worried about this, despite their public protestations, otherwise they won't be out trying to destroy Joe. I just heard Roger Simon on the television during the break say, "His name is not even Joe! It's Sam." No, it's Samuel Joseph. A lot of people go by their middle name. It's just petty, and it's striking. They're out to destroy one of you; one of us, average Americans, who happened to expose the truth about little Barry: the man-child known as The Messiah. He's filled with lies here. "Ninety-five percent of small businesses make less than 250"? Somebody needs to demand that he prove that. We have the figures from the Small Business Association and the Census Bureau. We shared them with you last week. There's no way. He's not even defining revenue. We don't know if it's gross; we don't know if it's net. Is he including inventories in this? He doesn't know what he's talking about.

That 250 figure is just his magic figure. Now they have to say, "Well, Joe didn't open the business. Even if he bought the business, the business would not be in the 250 or above range." He wants it to be! We're talking about somebody's dream here. "Well, he's got tax leans." So does Charlie Rangel. So does one of the chief treasurers of Obama; a lot of people have tax leans. A lot of people are in debt. You want to punish all of them? You want to say they're all discredited from having a political opinion about a political contest because they're in debt? How many of us are going to be disqualified if they allow that? This next one is popularity. This is Obama yesterday. Everybody talks about, "Why is McCain in this state and that state? That state's lost. Why didn't he go down to Florida? Why doesn't he go back to Ohio?" What is Obama doing in New Hampshire? Why the hell is Obama in New Hampshire? That ought to be in the bag. He was in Londonderry yesterday speaking in an apple orchard, and he brought up the plumber himself. Listen to this.

OBAMA: He's trying to suggest that -- that -- that a plumber is the guy he's fightin' for. How many plumbers do you know makin' a quarter million dollars a year?

RUSH: Folks, do you understand the multileveled condescension in this short sound bite? Mike, play this again. This is Obama speaking in an apple orchard in New Hampshire yesterday.

OBAMA: He's trying to suggest that -- that -- that a plumber is the guy he's fightin' for. How many plumbers do you know makin' a quarter million dollars a year?

RUSH: In the first place, McCain's fighting for everybody, Obama. You're the one that's divvying up for who you want to fight for. You want to punish certain Americans. McCain doesn't want to punish any. Of course he's fighting for plumbers. He's fighting for everybody! He has fought for everybody, Obama. Name one time you've fought for anybody other than a bunch of leftist radicals who want to overthrow the country as it exists? You're fighting for Warren Buffett's ideas. Here's another thing, Obama and the rest of you. He's copying his vice president here, Joe Biden. "How many plumbers you know making quarter of a million dollars a year?" What a condescending thing to say? Do you realize how he is insulting you plumbers, trying to discredit a voter?

This guy is trying to discredit a voter by saying, "How many plumbers you know make 250 grand a year?" As though plumbers are just dirt. Plumbers are just dirt. I'll bet there are plenty of plumbing businesses. I know damn well. Try to get one when you need one! There are plenty of plumbing businesses that do very well in this country, but to me, this is just striking. "How many plumbers you know making a quarter of a million dollars a year?" Obama, this is not about Joe. It's not about Sam. It's not about anybody but you and your obvious condescending view of the people you claim you want to help. Would somebody explain to me how it is that you make poor people rich by making rich people poor? How does that happen?

Now, unusually, ladies and gentlemen, it's the Democrats who parade people like Joe the Plumber all over the Senate and all over the House, all over these hearing rooms; and they portray them as sob stories. And they try to blame the Republicans for the circumstances these old people are in or these welfare recipients are in or these pregnant women are in or what have you. Now, somehow this guy Joe the Plumber is a fraud because he's in debt? He's a fraud because he doesn't really earn $250,000? He never said he did. He said he thought the business did but he wants to buy it and grow it. Here's guy to the best of his ability is articulating the American dream, and the Democrat Party is trying to squash this guy like he's a cockroach. Now, to this US News and World Reports blog post by James Pethokoukis.

I don't know how to pronounce his name, so I'm just giving all the variables 'cause I don't want to be accused of mispronouncing his name, and the headline of his post here: "Did Barack 'Spread the Wealth' Obama Just Blow the Election? -- No. Really. You're kidding me. Barack Obama actually told that Joe the Plumber guy that he wants to 'spread the wealth around.' What, did Obama just get done reading the Wikipedia entry on Huey 'Share the Wealth' Long or something? Was he somehow channeling that left-wing populist from the Depression? Talk about playing into the most extreme stereotype of your party, that it is infested with socialists," except, Mr. Pethokoukis, it's not a stereotype anymore. The Democrat Party as a socialist party is not a stereotype. He then says... Get this. Now, this is a reporter from US Snooze & World Report.

"A while back I chatted with a University of Chicago professor who was a frequent lunch companion of Obama's. This professor said that Obama was as close to a full-out Marxist as anyone who has ever run for president of the United States. Now, I tend to quickly dismiss that kind of talk as way over the top. My working assumption is that Obama is firmly within the mainstream of Democratic politics." He is. (laughing) They are radical extremist socialists. Anyway... "But if Obama is as free with the sort of redistributive philosophy in private as he has been on the campaign trail this week, I have no doubt that U of Chicago professor really does figure him as a radical, and after last night's debate, a few more Americans might think that way, too. McCain's best line: 'Now, of all times in America, we need to cut people's taxes. We need to encourage business, create jobs, not 'spread the wealth around.'

"By the way, I just notice that had IBD/TIPP poll, the most accurate in 2004, has McCain down by just three points. If the contest is perceived by the voters as a contest between a wealth redistributor and a wealth creator, then it could be a long night come November 4th. This is still a center-right country, gang. Note this Gallup poll from June," and then he cites the 84-13% figure who do not want redistributive policies in the federal government. McCain has to hammer this. Palin does. Palin hammers this constantly in her appearances. But that's what this is all about. The University of Chicago professor says he's "as close to a full-out Marxist as anybody who's ever run for president." Of course, the Drive-Bys say, "Yeah, you've gotta disregard that kind of talk. I think he's in the mainstream of the Democrat Party." These guys don't even know who he is. Half these journalists don't even really know who he is and they're not curious to find out because they're too busy trying to destroy Joe the Plumber.

RUSH: Yeah, I can't get past audio sound bite number eight. Obama saying about the plumber. Well, he's talking about McCain. He's trying to suggest that a plumber is the guy he's fighting for? "How many plumbers you know making a quarter of a million dollars a year?" You know, Obama, you're the guy with class envy; you're the guy that looks in disgust at certain groups of people and elements. McCain's fighting for everybody, buddy. But I just can't get over this condescension that Obama has for everybody. The plumber is supposedly his demographic. Normally people like Obama love people in debt like Joe, 'cause it's not their fault, like these people with their mortgages that they shoulda never been given in the first place. We gotta bail them out. Why isn't Obama asking to bail out Joe? Oh, you got leans? How can we help? Why the hell is he not doing that? He's doing it for everybody else. Some college student complained to him the other day, we had the sound bite, that she is having to pay for her education. Well, well, well, we can't have that, Obama said, we'll do what we can to help out. That's what we're gonna do. Now he's making fun of a guy who's in debt and making fun of a guy who doesn't make $250,000 a year.

I'm going to tell you something, folks. It's not just plumbers. It's about electricians, the guys who install your Lumber Liquidator floors. The guy who comes to your house, sprays for bugs, maybe does your yard mowing and your landscaping, the people that cut your hair, and if you happen to be vain, if you get manicures and pedicures, people who do that. It's about people that mail and deliver your packages; it's about all these people who fix your cars; it's about all the great plumbers that install these Rinnai Tankless Water Heaters; it's what all the people that build fences, it's about all the people that put on roofs; it's about all the people that serve food, about all the people that cook food. Obama may as well have been insulting every working person in this country when he asks, "How many plumbers you know make $250,000 a year, huh, huh, huh? How many you know?" The truth of this guy is coming out and Joe the Plumber did it. There's nothing mountainish about this. There is nothing eloquent about this. We are witnessing a thug who has no sense of humor, which you shall hear in moments coming up, we get to it in the next hour. And Sarah Palin, by the way, is hammering this. This is this morning, West Chester, Ohio, at a campaign rally. The Drive-Bys, I've seen them this morning, ridiculing her for bringing this up.

PALIN: We've really gotta hand it to Joe. Somehow, he got Barack Obama to finally state his intentions in plain language. Senator Obama said that he wants to spread the wealth, and he wants government to take your money and decide how to best redistribute it according to his priorities. Joe suggested that that sounded a little bit like socialism. Whatever you call it, I call it bad medicine for an ailing economy.

RUSH: Bad medicine for an ailing economy. And they're all over her for continuing to bring this up, because they know that Senator Government -- I think that ought to be the permanent name for this guy -- Senator Government has really exposed himself.

RUSH: I want to give you another analogy here about Joe the Plumber because one of the things that the Drive-Bys are trying to do -- and, by the way, do you realize we know more about Joe the Plumber than we know about most of the terrorists who blew up this country in 1993 and 1999? The Drive-By Media has had more interest in exposing whoever Joe the Plumber is. By the way, his name is Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher. They're saying, "His name is not even Joe." Yes, it is! Joe is somebody comfortable with his middle name and allows it to be used, as opposed to who? There's this kid out there named Obama, and we're not allowed to mention his middle name, which is Hussein. But Joe Wurzelbacher is very comfortable having his middle name mentioned.

They're trying to disqualify him, because they know the Obama vulnerability here. The vulnerability is Obama's answer to Joe's question, not what Joe said. So they're trying to disqualify Joe's question. "Well, Joe really isn't a plumber and Joe really doesn't make 250. So Obama's answer doesn't count. Obama's answer is irrelevant because Joe lied in his question." Let me give you an illustration of this. Suppose Obama's going door-to-door in south Florida, or in Brooklyn, and he knocks on somebody's door and the door opens, and the person inside says, "Senator Obama, as a Jew, I want you to promise to support Israel," and Obama said, "Israel is going to have to pay. They've got an unfair advantage and they have to give up half of their hand. They're going to have to pay. They've got an unfair advantage. Those people are poor; Israel is wealthy. They're going to have to pay."

Later it's found out that the person asking the question was not a Jew, so Obama's answer doesn't count? That's what they're trying to say today, that Obama's answer does not count. Obama, I've been watching him, he's making a speech somewhere today. He's uptight. He has been focusing in this speech. McCain has hit him hard, "Senator Obama, my name is not George W. Bush, and if you wanted to run against George Bush, you shoulda done that four years ago." McCain hammered him on that last night, too. Obama's defensive as hell. He got mad. He's focusing on that, wherever he was. He was in Virginia today.

Why is Obama in Virginia? He's supposedly up ten points in Virginia. Why is he wasting time and money in Virginia if he's up ten points there? If he's up ten points, how the hell could he lose Virginia with such little time to go?

RUSH: Drudge just posted a link that said Saturday Night Live has a script, a little skit coming on Joe the Plumber as John McCain's imaginary friend. They keep piling on, folks, and I'm smiling about it. Don't fret.

RUSH: McCain spoke this afternoon in Miami. I mentioned that he was going to come to the defense of Joe the Plumber. Here's how he did it.

MCCAIN: Americans ought to be able to ask Senator Obama tough questions without being smeared and targeted with political attacks. (wild cheers) Give it up a little for Joe! The question Joe asked about our economy is important because Senator Obama's plan would raise taxes on small businesses that employ... (boos) that employ 16 million Americans. He could have had a simple answer to Joe's question. All he had to do to say to Joe the Plumber and millions of small business people around this country is, "I won't raise your taxes," but he couldn't do that because he's going to raise their taxes. (boos) My friends, when politicians talk about taking your money and "spreading it around," you better hold onto your wallet.

RUSH: And they went nuts again. So there's McCain defending Joe the Plumber. "Americans ought to be able to ask Senator Obama tough questions without being smeared and targeted with political attacks." The Democrats just have to go out and destroy these people left and right, average Americans. They could resonate. This actually could resonate.

RUSH: I found something interesting here about the Page Six business regarding the Obamas at the Waldorf-Hysteria hotel. They said this happened on Wednesday, there was a meeting there on Wednesday, and the Alfred E. Smith dinner was last night, which is Thursday. Anyway this is the Page Six report: "Though he's battling GOP accusations that he's an Ivy League elitist, Barack Obama has a lifestyle of the rich and famous, like TV show host Robin Leach, who always signed off, 'Champagne wishes and caviar dreams!' While he was at a meeting at the Waldorf-Astoria at 4 p.m. Wednesday, Michelle Obama called room service and ordered lobster hors d'oeuvres, two whole steamed lobsters, Iranian caviar and champagne."

Though he's battling Republican accusations that he's an Ivy League elitist, Obama has a lifestyle of the rich and famous, like Robin Leach, who always signed off, "champagne wishes and caviar dreams." While he was at a meeting at the Waldorf-Hysteria at four o'clock Wednesday afternoon, Michelle Obama called room service and ordered lobster hors d'oeuvres, two whole steamed lobsters, Iranian caviar and champagne, this from a tipster who called Page Six. Now, the first thing about this is, if I'm the Obamas, I'm thinking, "Who the hell called the newspaper on this?" These hotels are not supposed to say a word about what goes on in there. Trust me, they do. He-he-he-he. Folks, you may not be aware of this, but I am a powerful, influential member of the media. If somebody's throwing a party, like down here or in New York, and if they're getting a caterer, I won't go. Because what happens is that tabloid reporters and other reporters will call some catering companies and they'll offer big money to let the catering company hire one of their reporters, and reporters then show up as an employee of the catering company and they started taking pictures with their cell phone or whatever, or they overhear things that are being said and that's how these things sometimes happen. Not all catering companies -- don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to impugn them all.

It's a reporter tactic and I'm sure the Obamas are saying, "How the hell did this happen?" Somebody on the hotel staff had to call Page Six. What we did here, Steve Gilbert, Sweetness-Light.com, he remembered a passage in Obama's book, Dreams from My Father, page 239. Obama wrote in that book what passages of Reverend Wright's sermon, Audacity to Hope, most inspired him, and this is one of them. "It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks' greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere.That's the world! On which hope sits!" And so while he's lamenting all the food that cruise ships throw overboard and all the apartheid that was out there, here's his wife ordering all this stuff. It's hypocrisy. But Obama, have you ever wondered why Haiti is in such a mess? Have you looked at who's run the place for the last hundred years? It's a dictatorship. How do you explain, Obama, that on the other side of the mountain range when you get to the Dominican Republic -- it's the same island -- how do you explain all the burgeoning capitalism in parts of the Dominican Republic?

How do you explain all the Major League Baseball players that get out of the Dominican Republic, they have facilities there to play in Dominican, they get good, they're scouted by Major League teams, they end up in America playing Major League Baseball earning huge money! It's the same island; it's Hispaniola. How is this happening? The same island. You had the Duvaliers, Baby Doc and Doc, and you had Jean-Bertrand Aristide. We had to send Colin Powell and so forth down there to bail this guy out. You wonder why there's poverty in places around the world, it's governments, Obama, set up exactly like you want to set ours up. But he thinks it's white greed. He wrote about it in his book, "white folks' greed runs a world in need." Barack Obama in his book.

In case you didn't hear this, Hawaii -- this is big -- is ending universal child health care after only seven months. "Hawaii dropping the only state universal child health care program in the country just seven months after it launched." You know why? "'People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free,' said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. 'I don't believe that was the intent of the program.'" Oh, really? Yeah, of course it wasn't the intent of the program. Lots of stuff that goes wrong with liberal programs is never intended. Uh-huh. "State officials said Thursday they will stop giving health coverage to the 2,000 children enrolled by Nov. 1." We're only talking 2,000 kids, they couldn't even afford that because everybody gave up. This is what Obama wants to do throughout the United States.

Now, we don't want to forget this. This is the UK Telegraph. It's Mark Steyn writing on March 8th, 2004: "John Edwards's campaign theme is a slice of warmed-over Disraeli: there are 'two Americas,' one for the rich, one for the poor, and, even though he's part of the former, he wants you to know that he started out in the latter. Friday was the Edwardses' 27th anniversary, so, in keeping with tradition, they hit the Newburgh Wendy's, along with the Kerrys, campaign mascot Ben Affleck and accompanying press crew." On their anniversary they went to Wendy's. "The photo-op didn't go smoothly. Kerry went over to say hi to some marines, who turned out to be Bush supporters and resented the interruption to their lunch. More telling was Teresa Heinz Kerry. She pointed to the picture of the bowl of chili above the clerk's head: 'What's that?' she asked. He explained that it was something called 'chili' and she said she'd like to try a bowl. The Senator also ordered a Frosty, a chocolate dessert. They toyed with them after a fashion, and then got back on the bus.

"It then emerged that Wendy's had just been an appetizer. The campaign advance team had ordered 19 five-star lunches from the Newburgh Yacht Club for Kerry, Edwards, Affleck and co to be served back on the bus: shrimp vindaloo, grilled diver sea scallops, prosciutto, wrapped stuffed chicken, etc. I'm not sure whether Ben had the shrimp and Teresa the scallops, but, either way, it turns out John Edwards is right: There are two Americas -- one America where folks eat at Wendy's, another America where the elite pass an amusing half-hour slumming among the folks at Wendy's and then chow down on the Newburgh Yacht Club's specials of the day. The Elizabeth Edwards anniversary-at-Wendy's shtick was meant to emphasize her husband's authenticity, but it now looks as inauthentic as Kerry's own blundering 'regular guy' routine."

Don't forget Kerry was the guy who walked into a famous Philly cheese steak shop in south Philly and ordered a cheese steak and then asked for Swiss. He asked for Swiss and they didn't have any. They don't put Swiss on a Philly cheese steak, anybody that's a real American, average American would know this. So here's old Barry writing about the starving in Port-au-Prince because of white greed, and old Michelle, I guess they let her out of the closet, took the duct tape off long enough for her to eat 'cause she ordered some lobster hors d'oeuvres and then two steamed lobsters and Iranian caviar and champagne, at four o'clock in the afternoon. Must have been teatime at the presidential suite at the Waldorf-Hysteria.

CALLER: Okay, that's good. I'm a longtime Hillary Clinton supporter. And there are a couple issues that have just been frying my brain. The other day, I believe it was on CNN, they had a lady named Karen Finley on there. She was a spokesperson for Barack Obama.

RUSH: Yeah, because Karen Finley was one of these performance artists who would go on stage and lather her nude body up with chocolate.

RUSH: Well, she can still be an Obama spokesperson. One of these Love Your Body babes, yeah.

CALLER: But they were asking her about the whole ACORN thing, asking her if, you know, you ever gave money to ACORN, at first she said no, and then they pressed her again. Okay, so you never gave him $800,000? Oh, well, yeah, we did, but that was during the primary. So I'm putting that together and then I'm watching the Barack Obama's performance --

RUSH: Now, let me bring people up to speed who may not know what you're talking about because this came up in the debate last night. I know you were just going to say this, but Obama denied anything to do with ACORN, and McCain said, "Wait, you gave a branch of ACORN $832,000 get-out-the-vote efforts in the primaries, it was in Ohio and Pennsylvania and a couple other places," and Obama, that's one of the times he shook his head. But they did do it. Who cares whether it was the primaries? The primaries were just six months ago.

RUSH: But as a Hillary Clinton supporter, shouldn't that be concerning, especially after watching the debate yesterday. I mean every time he was asked, I mean when they asked about Ayers and ACORN is the only time that he really looked like he was looking at his hand or reading off of them. I mean it was very, very disturbing, and as a Hillary Clinton supporter--

RUSH: His answer on Bill Ayers was as filled with holes as everything else about Obama is. And sadly, Senator McCain, I mean, he hit him hard on Ayers, but it would have been nice if he would explain who Ayers was and if he would have explained what Ayers is doing now. But I thought he scored big time on Ayers when Obama, "I was eight years old when he did those despicable acts." McCain said, "You weren't eight years old on 9/11 when he wrote a piece in the New York Times saying he wished he had done more."

RUSH: Really hit him hard on this stuff. That's why I don't understand these people that don't understand what happened last night. So you're worried that Hillary got cheated?

CALLER: I'm concerned that all of us got cheated. I mean I think the voters have every right to know what's going on, and if I recall when the Hillary Clintons like myself were going to the polls there was things on the news saying how Hillary Clinton supporters were getting harassed and getting bullied and they just ignored it, and it's just starting -- it's confusing me and it's frying my brain, and it's been bothering me.

RUSH: Well, it should be, Shara. I don't know about Obama cheating with ACORN during the primaries, but I can tell you right now this ACORN bunch has been around 30 years and they're doing far more than just fraudulently registering voters. They are at the root of the home mortgage collapse. They are at the root of what's wrong with education in the inner cities, the inner-city schools. There's no question, they're being investigated in 14 states, 200,000 unconfirmable, unverifiable registrations in Ohio. Hello, ACORN. FBI, as I say, is looking into them. I think you can be confident that the Obama campaign is cheating.

RUSH: I mention this story, actually it's an article from the Wilson Quarterly, the Woodrow Wilson Center for scholars: "The Irrational Electorate." It's by Larry Bartels who directs the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics in Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He is the author of Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age, published earlier this year by the Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press. Now, when you print it out, it runs four or five pages. I'm not a scholar, and Mr. Bartels is, and, to me, the first part -- I had to read this a bunch of times. It reads like gobbledygook, and what it is is an analysis of a whole bunch of studies worldwide over many, many decades of the electorates, the electorates in democracies. And let me just give you some excerpts. One sentence in this piece -- and this is about how people determine who they are going to vote for. People are very short term in their focus. They tend to vote based on how the economy is going, rewarding or throwing the bums out regardless of party. But here's some interesting bits for you.

"A team of psychologists led by Alex Todorov established that candidates for governor, senator, or representative who are rated as 'competent' by people judging them solely on the basis of photographs are considerably more likely to win real-world elections than those who look less competent. Brief exposure to the photographs -- as little as one-tenth of a second -- is sufficient to produce a significant correlation with actual election outcomes. A follow-up study showed that the electoral advantage of competent-looking candidates is strongest among less informed voters and those most heavily exposed to political advertising." So, the follow-up study said the electoral advantage of competent looking candidates is strongest among less informed voters. One-tenth of a second, somebody looking at a picture, will form more of a lasting impression on how somebody's going to vote than what their issues are? I know that's how a lot of people get married. Well, it is. You know people make jokes about this, but a lot of people get married on the basis of one-tenth of a second, on how somebody looks. And if you're going to make a decision on who you going to marry on the basis of one-tenth of a second looking at them or a picture of them, well, it's a far less of a commitment to vote for somebody than to get married to them. But the less informed you are the more powerful the visual impression of somebody you think looks competent.

"A team from UCLA found that most of the effect of any given ad on voters' preferences evaporated within one week, and that 'only the most politically aware voters exhibited . . . long-term effects.'" In another study, "A major ad buy produced a seven-point increase in voter support for the featured candidate a day after the ads aired," but two days later the lead was gone. So we can assume that, again, most people are not politically aware round the clock, 24/7, and those who aren't can be moved by an ad for a day, and the ad's effect vanishes after one day. Another paragraph here: Issues matter less than they seem. People attribute their views to the candidate they like and adopt their candidate's views. This and one more explain Obama. "Voters consistently misperceived where candidates stood on the important issues of the day, seeing their favorite candidates' stands as closer to their own and opposing candidates' stands as more dissimilar than they actually were. They likewise exaggerated the extent of support for their favorite candidates among members of social groups they felt close to. ... Political scientist Gabriel Lenz found very little evidence that people actually changed their vote because of the Social Security debate. What happened, mostly, was that people who learned the candidates' views on privatization from the blizzard of ads and news coverage simply adopted the position of the candidate they already supported for other reasons. The resulting appearance of 'issue voting' was almost wholly illusory."

So if your candidate has one issue that you like, and you've seen one-tenth of a second of an audio or a picture of the guy, and you've determined you like him, and then he runs an ad that you really, really dig, you'll forget the ad in one day, but it will make your support for him go way, way up. You won't remember why you support him. The support will be even more profound and deep. Then the candidate comes out and voices something you totally disagree with. You'll reject that because you like the guy. "Ah, that doesn't matter. I don't care about that." He's right on whatever issue that is most important to the person. Everything else is irrelevant, plus the likability factor.

A couple of good voter behavior stories: Woodrow Wilson and shark attacks. "In the summer of 1916 a dramatic weeklong series of shark attacks along New Jersey beaches left four people dead. Tourists fled, leaving some resorts with 75 percent vacancy rates in the midst of their high season. Letters poured into congressional offices demanding federal action." Now, we're talking, again, 1916. "Letters poured into congressional offices demanding federal action; but what action would be effective in such circumstances? Voters probably didn't know, but neither did they care. When President Woodrow Wilson -- a former governor of New Jersey with strong local ties -- ran for reelection a few months later, he was punished at the polls," because he didn't do anything about sharks. "He lost as much as 10 percent of his expected vote in towns where shark attacks had occurred," 'cause he hadn't done anything about them.

"The 1936 election has become the most celebrated textbook case of ideological realignment in American history. However, a careful look at state-by-state voting patterns suggests that this resounding ratification of Roosevelt's policies was strongly concentrated in the states that happened to enjoy robust income growth in the months leading up to the vote. Indeed, the apparent impact of short-term economic conditions was so powerful that, if the recession of 1938 had occurred in 1936, Roosevelt probably would have been a one-term president. It's not only in the United States that the Depression-era tendency to 'throw the bums out' looks like something less than a rational policy judgment. In the United States, voters replaced Republicans with Democrats in 1932 and the economy improved. In Britain and Australia, voters replaced Labor governments with conservatives and the economy improved. In Sweden, voters replaced Conservatives with Liberals, then with Social Democrats, and the economy improved. In the Canadian agricultural province of Saskatchewan, voters replaced Conservatives with Socialists and the economy improved. In the adjacent agricultural province of Alberta, voters replaced a socialist party with a right-leaning party created from scratch by a charismatic radio preacher peddling a flighty share-the-wealth scheme, and the economy improved. In Weimar Germany, where economic distress was deeper and longer lasting, voters rejected all of the mainstream parties, the Nazis seized power, and the economy improved. In every case, the party that happened to be in power when the Depression eased went on to dominate politics for a decade or more thereafter. It seems far-fetched to imagine that all these contradictory shifts represented well-considered ideological conversions."

Ideology and issues had nothing to do with it. Whoever was in charge when the thing went south got punished. Whoever was in charge when it came back got rewarded. This is a longer piece from the Wilson Quarterly. It's a much longer piece than what I shared with you here by Larry Bartels, the Irrational Electorate. It's a scholarly work trying to explain why voters do what they do when they do it in democracies.

RUSH: I want to go back, ladies and gentlemen, to this little joke I made at the top of the hour. The Obama campaign sent out debate talking points before the debate. They sent the talking points out about 11:17, or even earlier than that. They sent the debate talking points to the media. In other words, they sent the media talking points to explain what will happen in the debate tonight before the debate has happened. Well, it turns out that if you compare the Obama talking points with an article by Kit Seelye in the New York Times about tonight's debate, you find amazing similarities. Now, we're not surprised at this, but still, I open my mouth in wonder at it. I know I shouldn't. I should know by now that the Obama talking points are nothing more than press releases and talking points for New York Times and Washington Post articles, but this is amazing.

By the way, the talking points, again, were sent out by the Obama campaign, some flack at the Obama campaign; and we're going to juxtapose some of the talking points with what Kit Seelye said in her story, "What to Watch for During the Final Debate." Talking Point: "This is John McCain's last chance to turn this race around..." Kit Seelye, writing in the New York Times: "Tonight's debate provides Senator John McCain with his last, best hope of reversing the tide that appears to be running against him."

Talking Point: "John McCain has been erratic and unsteady since this crisis began... [McCain's] erratic response to this economic crisis doesn't [sic -- does?] disqualify him from being President." Here's what Kit Seelye wrote: "His behavior during the current crisis ... appeared to have the effect of undermining voter confidence and driving away independents."

Talking Point: "Just this weekend, John McCain vowed to 'whip Obama's you-know-what' at the debate, and he's indicated that he'll be bringing up Bill Ayers to try to distract voters." Kit Seelye, New York Times: "Mr. McCain has already vowed to 'whip' Mr. Obama's 'you-know-what' tonight."

Talking Point: "So we know that Senator McCain will come ready to attack Barack Obama and bring his dishonorable campaign tactics to the debate stage." Kit Seelye: "The downside of Mr. Ayers for Mr. McCain is that it could reinforce the notion that he is more preoccupied with political tactics than addressing the main topic on voters' minds -- the economic meltdown and the collapse of the value of their homes. The Ayers question aside, watch for the degree to which Mr. McCain dials back his attacks, as he has on the campaign trail."

So, the New York Times got the talking points message. It's a little New York Times doing Joe Biden impersonation: Kit Seelye with near plagiarism of the Obama campaign talking points about the debate tonight.

The following is Sean Smith’s talking points which he set out (Sean is from the Obama campaign):

* This is John McCain's last chance to turn this race around and somehow convince the American people that his erratic response to this economic crisis doesn't disqualify him from being President.

* Just this weekend the weekend, John McCain vowed to "whip Obama's you-know-what" at the debate, and he's indicated that he'll be bringing up Bill Ayers to try to distract voters.

* So we know that Senator McCain will come ready to attack Barack Obama and bring his dishonorable campaign tactics to the debate stage.

Obama continues to lead on the economic crisis with a rescue plan for Main Street.

* Over the course of the campaign, Barack Obama has laid out a set of policies that will grow our middle class and strengthen our economy.

* But he knows we face an immediate economic emergency that requires urgent action - on top of the plans he's already laid out - to help workers and families and communities struggling right now.

* That's why Barack Obama is introducing a comprehensive four-part Rescue Plan for the Middle Class - to immediately to stabilize our financial system, provide relief to families and communities, and help struggling homeowners.

* Obama has shown steady leadership during this crisis and offered concrete solutions to move the country forward - and his Rescue Plan for the Middle Class builds on the plans to strengthen the economy and rebuild the middle class that he's laid out over the course of this campaign.

* Already in this campaign, he's unveiled plans to give 95 percent of workers and their families a tax cut, eliminate income taxes for seniors making under $50,000, bring down the cost of health care for families and businesses; and create millions of new jobs by investing in the renewable energy sources.

* John McCain has been erratic and unsteady since this crisis began - staggering from position to position and trying to change the subject away from the economy by launching false character attacks.

RUSH: It won't matter. Their lives are going to be affected in profound ways that they won't care what the media is saying. Now, about the media, Jack. This is crucial, 'cause you talking about the media. One of the first things -- and this is going to be an epic fight -- that's going to happen is the Democrats will move to get rid of people like me and Hannity and every other conservative talk show host on radio by reimposing the Fairness Doctrine. We're going to litigate it, of course, but litigation takes a long time. But that's going to be one of the first things they do. Obama's philosophy is you clear the playing field. You just get people out of the way. The Democrats do not like criticism. They don't like the fact that they can't succeed in this medium so they want to wipe this medium out, and they can do it by reimposing the Fairness Doctrine. That's going to be an epic battle and the American people on our side are not going to put up with that. It really is going to be epic. But even if they succeed in doing that, and if they have a total dictatorship, there are still elections. Now, ACORN's going to still be cheating and so forth, but the American people in two years are going to find out, if these people do what they claim they're going to do, they're going to so negatively affect people's lives that the midterm elections in 2010 will get rid of a lot of Democrats in the House and the Senate. Now, I've gotta take a break. I want to get your thoughts of what I just said so hold on through the break and we'll get right back to you.

RUSH: Those of you out there, forget what party affiliation that you have. Forget your ideological orientation. Those of you who own small businesses and those of you who work at small businesses, I want to speak to you directly and in a pure business fashion right to your heart, here. Obviously throw some politics in because lies are being told by the Obama campaign through and through, not corrected by the Drive-Bys, about small business. That figure of $250,000 is key. It is everywhere Obama speaks. It's used all the time when he talks about tax policy. Well, what is a small business in America today? Obama says that most small businesses do not earn over $250,000 a year. That is clearly a lie.

It is impossible. It cannot be true. Your own instinct tells you that. You in small business know full well it can't be true. Now, the employees of a small business might believe it. Most employees don't get to see the books. But if you're an employee of small business, and there are five or six other employees in your small business (and that's a small business) just add up your combined salaries and find out if your small business has enough to pay them. If you're making $50,000 a year at a small business and there are five of you, that's $250,000 right there. If there are three of you and one's making 30, one's making 70, one's making 60, you can see how just the number of employees will get you close to what Obama says is the top of most small businesses.

That $250,000 is key because he wants all of you who don't make that amount of money to think you're not going to get a tax increase. Now, remember, Obama has this new coalition of voters, the 30% to 35% who pay no income tax in this country. Not only do they not pay income tax, they want you to pay more. They have seen the benefits of no income taxes. They've been told they're the backbone of America. They've been told they're getting shafted. They've been told the rich are getting all the tax cuts. They have been told that all that wealth and prosperity out there is being denied them by the rich. They pay no taxes, no income taxes. Federal income taxes. So they're thinking they've been screwed, that they've been shafted. Obama's playing to them, and he's telling them, "Because you've been shafted for so many years by Bush and so many years by Reagan, we're going to get even with the people who shafted you."

That's that magical figure of $250,000, and he's using it in a way that is an out-and-out lie. They have been saying that most small businesses do not earn over $250,000 a year, but the Small Business Administration has a different view. I have a post here from October 7th of this year from Patterico's Pontifications, and it's entitled, "Obama's Tax Plan and Small Business." The genesis for Patterico putting this all together was Obama at the town hall presidential debate saying this about his tax policies, and it's according to a CNN transcript. Quote: "Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan." Now, "The US Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a 'small business' according to its average annual receipts or the number of its employees."

I know numbers are hard to follow, but this will not be. I want you to keep sharp in your head the number $250,000, because that's the operative number that Obama uses. Remember Obama: "Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan." Okay. Here. Let's look at the maximum average annual receipts by industry that a business can have and still be classified as small business by the SBA. "Crop production of all types: $750,000." Keep that $250,000 figure in mind because every business that I'm going to list here, every small business is far larger than $250,000 in receipts. Yet Obama says most small businesses do not make over $250,000. "Crop production of all types: $750,000. Animal production except for cattle & chicken/eggs: $750,000. Cattle feedlots: $2.5M. Chicken/egg production: $12.5M."

These are small businesses, according to the SBA. "Forestry & logging: $7M. Fishing: $4M." Did you know that forestry and logging has as many operators that are small businesses? It's a $7 million definition of a small business by the SBA. "Fishing: $4M. Irrigation, sewage, water supplies: $7M." These are various areas. The size of your business -- for example, if you're in housing construction and you're a business is under $33.5 million, you're considered a small business by the SBA. Now, keep in mind, Obama says the vast majority of small businesses don't earn more than $250,000. Let me keep going. "Heavy and civil engineering construction: $33.5M. Dredging and cleanup: $20M. Concrete, framing, and other housing contractors: $14M. Car dealers: $23-29M."

Do you know some car dealers are small businesses? Those of you who work at them do. If you own a dealership or series of dealerships valued in your receipts (these are annual receipts) between $23 and $29 million, you're a small business. "RV, motorcycle, & boat dealers: $7M. Furniture, hardware, clothing & sporting good stores," if your receipts are under $7 million a year, you're considered a small business. "Electronic stores..." They're not talking the Circuit Citys, the Best Buys and all this. If you're a mom and pop electronics store, $7 million is the cutoff line for you to be called a small business. "Supermarkets, gas stations & department stores: $27M." Anything over that, and you're not a small business; anything under it, you are. "Pharmacies: $7M."

Now, keep in mind, 250 grand. Obama in the presidential town hall debate said, "Only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan." The truth is that if he's going to implement a plan that people over 250 grand personally or small business, Subchapter S filing under a personal return, if he's going to have a tax increase on anybody more than 250 grand, 99% of small business is going to get a huge tax increase! The very little guy that Obama claims to want to help is the very guy that's going to get clipped here, because once these taxes go up the first instinct of the small businessman or woman is to survive as a small business.

If your taxes go up and you have an economy like this and you cannot grow for a little while because people don't have a whole lot of disposable income because their taxes are going up, too, what are you going to do? You can't keep paying people if your business is going down. Your job is to have your business survive because you have to go through the up and down cycles. You're going to have to lay people off. The business cannot purposely lose money for humanitarian reasons, for a very long time. If it does, it will go out of business and nobody will get anything from it. I listed for you -- one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, 12, 13, 14 -- 17 categories of small business. Not one of them would qualify for a tax cut under Obama's plan. There are probably some small businesses that are under $250,000, but they are so tiny.

They are so small. They might be sole proprietorships. Now, there are a whole lot more examples. We're going to post all this at RushLimbaugh.com. There are a whole lot more examples at the link. Most of the industries in the table, such as manufacturers of food, beverages, apparel, print, oil, gas, plastics, plumbing, machinery, computers, on and on and on are considered small businesses based on their total number of employees instead of average annual receipts. Now, in those industries, the cutoff between small and large businesses range from 500 to 1,000 employees per business or industry. Now, I'm going to tell you what. If you have a small business with anywhere between 500 and a thousand employees, I will guaran-damn-tee you your annual receipts are higher than $250,000 --and you, too, are going to get Obama's took us increase.

It is going to be a personal income tax rate increase, for those of you that file on your personal form, Subchapter S, on your personal return. You're going to get your own marginal tax rates go up. You're going to have to a capital gains tax increase. And it's likely that at some point down the road Obama will shore up and raise corporate taxes, in the midst of an economy that all the time all the so-called experts say is going to take a while for it to rebound here. Now the Dow Jones Industrial Average is up almost 600 points now. It's at 581. We're over 9,000 at 9,032, and of course it's (clapping) but why? Because the feds and everybody else has taken over all these banks! So the supposed free marketers on the Street here are getting all happy about socialism and nationalization.

Don't forget, in the midst of all this, we've got Pelosi and Reid and Hoyer planning a special session after Obama wins to start this process of tax increases going to eliminate their lifting of the ban of weeks ago on offshore drilling. They think they've got this in the bag. Obama is running around using this $250,000 figure for every tax increase he's planning because he figures 99% of the people in this country are employees, and they will also believe that their business will not get a tax increase because, "Obama is smart. Obama is suave! Obama is smooth. Why, it's so nice to have finally a smart guy that will be leading and speaking for America." He's lying through his teeth. Now, forget politics here, folks. We're talking about it as if this ever happens, if this actually happens, with 95% or more of all small businesses and the corporate tax, too, going up, we're talking about your standard of living.

We're talking about your quality of life. We're talking about your ability to save. I don't care whether you buy stock or you've decided to put the money in the mattress, you're going to have less of it, and eventually the oil price is going to rebound and go up. It's going to happen. There's something awfully suspicious about that dropping from 130 to 80 bucks two weeks or three before an election. But it's what it is, and of course everybody's putting out this news, "Largest single drop in the gasoline price in history!" It's thirty cents, from 3.80 to 3.30, average across the United States. Now, I have even more on this small business stuff. These numbers get even harder to translate on radio, but it is from the Census Bureau, and it's the receipt size of firms. It's the latest, most recent data we have for this are 2002, receipt size of employer firms.

It illustrates here quite readily that the... Just take this, the 100 to $499,000 figure that I mentioned earlier, there are 2,387,780 firms, there are two million establishments, there is about 8.8 million workers. The annual payroll total is... Well, forget those numbers. If you look at this breakdown and you add up all the firms and all the revenue and all the employment, there is no way that the vast majority of small businesses have only receipts of $250,000 a year! There are a total of 5,697,759 firms (we're discussing here small business), 1.2 million of them have less than a hundred thousand dollars in receipts which makes them sole proprietorships; 2.3, almost 2.4 million are between 100 and $500,000. And then as you go higher, the numbers decrease. But when you add them all up, you find that... No matter how you look at it, is the point -- whether you look at it as number of employees, whether you look at it as receipts -- there's no way Obama's even close to the truth on this.

RUSH: What a teachable moment I have here for you. I love teachable moments. I just got a couple of e-mails. I checked them; there may be more than two, but I just checked: "Rush, when you talk about receipts, a small business's receipts, $250,000, are you talking about gross or net?" Folks, you're asking the wrong guy! The onus here is not on me. You're asking the wrong guy. We don't know if Obama's talking about receipts or profits, 'cause nobody's asking him, and I'm not the one promising to raise your taxes on this. The little squirrel Obama is. Somebody needs to ask him, "Are you talking about receipts or profit? Are you talking about gross or net?" We don't even know if he's including inventory. Folks, do you understand, in a small business, you can have one person that runs a realty shop, you can have one person that runs a catering business. What about inventory, how do you calculate that in this $250,000? We do not know because Obama is not saying. Nobody's asking if he's talking about net profit, gross, we have no idea what he's talking about and neither does he, because he is lying.

The $250,000 number is designed to get most Americans thinking that they're going to get even with the people who have stolen everything from them and have gotten unfairly wealthy. He's using that $250,000 figure to secure the votes of people who want to see everybody at 250K or over get their taxes raised. The $250,000 figure on FDIC insurance guarantees it's just a further way to promote that number. Everywhere you look, Obama's magic number is $250,000. We had a brilliant caller last week, if you didn't hear this, who said Obama and the Democrats are out there saying they are for the American dream. In Obama's world, the American dream ceases to exist once you get to $250,000. "Well, Rush, do you mean net worth? Do you mean annual income?" I don't know, folks, 'cause nobody's asking Obama. I don't know if his definition of a small business of $250,000, which he says the vast majority have receipts that are smaller than $250,000. I don't know if he's talking gross or net. Don't ask me. The onus is not on me to explain this. Ask him, or get your friendly Drive-Bys. Here's the real point. It doesn't matter because he's lying 'cause the number isn't anywhere close to being accurate in the first place. So don't get caught up in net or gross. Get caught up in screwed or free.

RUSH: This $250 grand number is all moot anyway because Obama voted twice in the 2009 budget resolution to raise taxes on anybody making $42,000 a year or more.

RUSH: We're going to start Jacksonville, Florida. Hi Carl. It's nice to have you, sir, on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: When you talking about the small businesses, I'm probably the smallest business owner right now that you can find, you know, when you talking about people owning small businesses because I'm a single man operation. I'm trying to make my business grow, and I know it's going to grow and it's going to do well past 250 gross. That's what I'm talking about, and my concern is, what's my incentive, then, to hire guys to even make this business grow if I'm going to get taxed up the yin-yang that he's talking about, Obama. And I don't think it's net. I think he's talking about gross. I don't think he's talking about income. Because small businesses, I mean there are thousands of us out there that own small businesses and do this. I mean, it's ridiculous.

CALLER: Well, that's the thing, and that's what I wish somebody ask him. I wish somebody would.

RUSH: We don't know if he's talking income. We don't know if he's talking gross. We don't and he doesn't, either. None of this is true! The $250,000 figure and his statement that 95% of small businesses earn less than that -- gross, net, inventory, whatever -- it's just the magic figure to play the class envy card.

CALLER: But he's gotta clarify that because it's scary. I'm telling you, everybody I know is a small business owner.

RUSH: This statement that he's gonna raise taxes on people over 250 grand, he's made it numerous times in the campaign. It was last week in the town hall presidential debate where he said small businesses, the vast majority of them are $250,000 or less. He didn't clarify, specify or anything. You said he's going to be forced to have to explain it. Other than today have you heard anybody even reference the fact he said it in that debate?

CALLER: I wish he did because I've been talking about it for the past month, and I don't hear anybody talking about it and try to get more specific on it, you know what I'm saying? That's crazy, because there are a lot of small businesses that make over 250. When I say I'm not, I just started last year, and my business will go over 250,000 because I know it can. The guys that I do business with and the people that are around me that do own small businesses are doing more than 250,000 a year, and that's what scares me.

RUSH: Look, I got very little time. Do your friends know what's headed for them?

RUSH: All right. Well, if you run into people, it doesn't matter... You know, don't use Obama's name. Well, you have to use Obama's name. You run into other small businesses who don't know what's in store for them, tell 'em.

Obama votes to raise taxes on $42,000. Now, what do you believe, his actions or his rhetoric? This is from MSNBC, by the way.

What specifics do Obama’s people say about 95% of Americans getting a tax break under Obama?

Stanley Kurtz: Obama funded extremist Afrocentrists who shared Rev. Wright's anti-Americanism

Obama is not promising tax cuts; he will, in essence, send out welfare checks to some:

You may think that gay rights is just simply letting gays do what they want, but here is a field trip of first graders taken to the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian lover:

Conservative Review
Issue #45	Kukis Digests and Opines on this Week’s News and Views	October 19, 2008