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

President Obama requests $83 billion in additional spending for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

The North Koreans launch a missile while President Obama talks to a European audience about reducing our own nuclear arsenal, while his secretary of defense proposes cuts in our own missile defense system.

Joe Biden recalls a personal conversation that he had with President Bush where he shot Bush a zinger.

Pirate terrorists attack a US ship off the Somali coast. Although they were kept from getting the ship, they take the captain hostage and demand $2 million in ransom. Both our Navy and FBI are dispatched to the scene.

Newsweek puts on its cover, The Decline and Fall of the Christian Nation in the shape of a cross, just in time for Easter. In 20 years, those with no religious affiliation jumped from 8 to 15% and those who think that the United States is a Christian nation dropped was at 60% in 1996 and is at 62% today. In between times, it has been as high as 71% (2005). According to their own survey, those for whom religion plays a important part in their lives (very or fairly important) is 85%. That seems to be a pretty high percentage to me.

Although the student protestors in France have been the most radical protestors since the 60's (they even captured a university president and held him hostage). It appears as though they might take off for spring break and come back and protest when break is over (Wall Street Journal on FoxNews).

The Democratic Black Caucus goes to Cuba to meet Fidel Castro and they quite like the man. He wants to do whatever he can to help Obama to succeed.

After a discussion about President Obama going around Europe and apologizing for American’s arrogance, Newt Gingrich provided some historical context: “After we liberated Europe, all we asked for was enough land to bury our young men who had died to free Europe. We did not seek to conquer, we did not seek to dominate, we do not dominate them today. It is not just insulting but historically dangerous to have an American president who so fundamentally misunderstands the world. It is not America which is dangerous; it is North Korea; it is not American which is arrogant, it is Iran.”

"We do not attribute any particular meaning, with respect to the range of issues that we are looking to address with the Iranians, from this particular statement," Clinton said at a news conference when asked about an Iranian statement that it was now running 7,000 enrichment centrifuges.

"In 25 years on the bench, I've never seen anything approaching the mishandling and misconduct that I've seen in this case," U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said in dismissing the case against former Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens and voiding the verdict.

“I can tell you one thing about that boy—he s missing a few dogs from his front porch.” Bob Beckel on Levi, the ex-bf of Sarah Palin’s daughter, after he showed up on the Tyra Banks show.

When pondering a strike against the Somali pirates and their mainland camps, a U.S. counterterrorism official said "There is increasing concern about what terrorists operating in Somalia might do." According to other senior officials, the camps have graduated hundreds of fighters.

Karl Rove on President Obama’s recent European tour: “No European lead has previously run down their predecessor on the world stage [as Obama has]...Europe loves a pliant president who expects nothing out of them. President Bush told Europeans that is was immoral to let Africans die of AIDES...and that it was immoral to allow the population decimation in the Sudan.” This quote is not exact, but it is the essence of what Rove told O’Reilly on 4/6/09.

The last thing we need is a tiny boat with 4 pirates in a standoff against the US Navy. If this goes on much past a week, not only will it be unbelievably embarrassing (remember the Iran hostages?), but it will embolden savage Muslims against the United States while Obama is in power.

[So far, I still have not found a solution to my computer’s inability to play YouTube other than to download RealPlayer and download the video and watch it that way. Do not download FLV in order to fix this problem; it will not fix the problem.]

Neil Cavuto argues with a Leslie Marshall, liberal talk show host, about whether the news ought to cover the Tea Parties. She does not believe that the news should spend any time on this story because it is not sexy and it does not bleed. Neil is great! You need to enjoy this interview.

Some individual liberals and libertarians who are attending these tea parties (liberals see these bailouts as a lot of money being given to the rich, and I cannot disagree with them):

http://www.blinkx.com/video/tea-party-politics/5P3iSYZJm6udGHNnXFp9AQ (An expert called in has a very hard time understanding what these tea parties are all about; and the host suggests that this is the Herbert Hoover approach—who basically did a lot of what FDR did, but not as big. In any case, these people do not like FoxNews, which is mentioned.)

I have seen vids of far-left people who do not like the idea of the continued bailouts.

In case you missed it, the beginning of the Hannity on April Fool’s Day—it’s hilarious:

This is what real torture is; and it is nothing like the fraternity-hazing things which have occurred in American prison camps (Anderson Cooper interviews Ahmad Batebi, who had been tortured for 9 years in an Iranian prison):

This was a little weird; Hillary Clinton laughing while answering questions on the Somali pirate thing; however, it really is not the big of a deal, as we have all laughed at inappropriate times:

1) There are several things which have gotten beaten to death, and I wonder if they are not out there to take our attention from something else. First one is this made up story Joe Biden talked about, saying that then-President Bush said, “I’m a leader.” and Joe then quickly said, “Look behind you, Mr. President, no one is following you.” Two things: it is not standard operating procedure for the President to be alone with a Senator, much less Joe Biden and George Bush (it is not like they are great friends). Secondly, it makes little or not sense for Bush, at loss for things to talk about, to suddenly blurt out, “I’m the leader.” Even if you do not like Bush, you have to realize that is way stupid for someone to say.

2) The second non-story of this week—again making me wonder if there is some bit of misdirection occurring—is Obama’s bow to the Saudi king. Robert Gibbs lied and said it was not a bow, when it clearly was. He ought to open up the next press conference saying, “Okay, apparently it was a bow, and the President just made a mistake. Let’s please not make a big deal out of it.” Gibbs is then off the hook, just as Obama would be. Maybe the misdirection this week is for liberals, who might not like Obama asking for more war money?

3) Although I don’t think that Obama has a clue as to what he ought to be doing with regards to foreign policy, I think that it is good he visited troops in Iraq, and so far, he seems to be doing fine with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

4) It strikes me as ridiculous as Obama talking about nuclear disarmament and that we need to lead the way, as well as hypocritical. Obama has secret service men with him at all times. He had this early on in the campaign. At no time will Obama say, “Hey, guys, I don’t need you while I am out in this crowd.” He needs the secret service, because there is always the chance of that one lone crazy being among the crowd. This is a problem for every president and ex-president. All it takes is one lone crazy. So, why does that not apply to nuclear weapons as well? He wants protection; and we the American people, want our president to be protected (the only thing worse than Obama as president would be Biden or Pelosi). How can Obama understand that it is legitimate to have men with guns protecting him yet not see that it is just as

important for our country as a whole to be protect with missile response weapons and nuclear deterrents? Just as Obama does not just have one guy guarding him, but a plethora of men; so we need redundant systems as well.

5) What is wrong with us dispatching a hostage negotiator to Somali? At best, hostage negotiators are used to dealing with people who have snapped and need to be talked back to this world. The FBI ought not to have been sent to deal with these pirates. I have no idea who made this call, but it was a bad one.

6) Federal taxes is just a piece of the tax pie. You might think, so-and-so is rich; they can afford to pay 38% federal tax. On top of that is sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, state taxes, etc. Even people with average incomes or slightly above average incomes can find themselves paying over 50% of their money to the government. Now, of course there ought to be taxes—we need roads, we need a government, we need police and we need an army. However, what has been going on for a long time is, government is taking our money and buying voting blocks with this money. In more and more ways, people are being grabbed and held by food stamps, unemployment insurance, housing, welfare, social security, medicare, subsidies, and tax write-offs. Count me with those who would like to see federal and state income tax scrapped, outlawed, and replaced with a flat consumption tax—the same for everyone. It is unambiguous and transparent. When we buy this or that, we know we are going to add onto that thing 25% and that money goes to the government. Every time we buy something, we know what portion goes to the government...and we can then vote accordingly.

7) Just in case you were unaware, according to a recent Pew survey, President Obama is the most polarizing president to date (this survey only goes back 7 presidents). Approval ratings from the opposing party are subtracted from the approval rating of the president’s party, and that gap represents the president’s polarizing number.

8) One possible solution for global warming coming out of the White House is to pump more pollutants into the upper atmosphere, which the idea that, these particles will reflect more of the sun’s rays, and slow down global warming. This may seem like the stupidest thing every to suggest that environmentalists are suggesting that more pollution in the right place is a good thing. How could you get anyone behind this? Easy. We have people filling their homes with bulbs which contain mercury at levels which may be lethal (no deaths have occurred yet, insofar as I know); and this is highly favored by environmentalists.

9) Other than during a political campaigns, I do not recall any president blaming their predecessor at all for anything. This blaming the previous administration reached a new high when Timothy Geithner was on Meet the Press and he said, “we have to fix the mess we inherited.” For some reason, the moderator did not remind Geithner that he was a part of the treasury department of the previous administration.

10) When it comes to federal wiretapping, and the warns in Iraq and Afghanistan, 3 issues which seemed to loom large during the election, there does not seem to be any daylight between Bush’s and Obama’s policies.

11) President Obama said that we are not a Christian nation, but a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values. Does Obama know enough about our founding documents to know where these ideals and set of values came from? I would be quite curious if he knows which Muslim holidays we observe as a nation? Which Jewish holidays we observe as a nation? Which Christian holidays do we observe as a nation?

12) There is a reason why Somali pirates have not messed with US ships until now—President Bush. Obama needs to follow the Bush mold and go after as many pirate boats and establishments as he can. He needs to make them bleed, to make them die, and to financially devastate them. Our Navy is right there right now. This is an excellent time to make an example. He does not need a coalition in order to do this. I will be the first one to proclaim hurray for Obama if he takes a hardline approach against the Somali pirates.

13) Steve Forbes, when interviewed on Fox, points out that Obama is still in campaign mode and that he will need to make some tough choices which will alienate the far left of his party. The government pumped in a huge amount of money into our economy, along with making home loans easy to get, and this caused the housing bubble. He also pointed out that there are more million dollar executives in FNMA and FHLMC [which organizations the news seems to be all but ignoring].

14) Dick Morris says that there is now an international board over businesses all over the globe and that these now have the power to regulate our businesses, to some extent, in the US. I have not confirmed this elsewhere.

15) Even after Obama’s European apology tour, he cannot even get a strong [and worthless] resolution passed in the UN condemning the launching of the North Korean missile. Sorry, but that is weak.

16) Both Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer pointed out that Obama saying to the US is not at war with Muslims is a straw dog argument. This should be obvious and he should have pointed out that the US has fought side-by-side Muslims in order to free them from radical terrorist Muslims (who kill far more Muslims than the US does). Obama could have pointed to several cases in point, to indicate that the US under Bush and the US under Clinton has not been anti-Muslim or anti-Arab; and he could have proclaimed that he would continue in that same vein.

17) A vegetarian in Colorado loves tofu and wanted to proclaim her love to the world, so she applied for the personalized license plate ILVTOFU. Her request was denied.

There are hundreds of tea parties taking place all over the nation, with thousands showing up to each tea party.

9 = the number of MSNBC links resulting for searching for “tea parties” and all of them are apparently comments left by readers on this or that story.

There have been 400 pirate attacks off the shore of Somalia since the beginning of 2008. This past week was the first time a US ship has been attacked.

Hannity pointed out that 40% of dropouts under 24 are unemployed. ⅔^rds of the inmates in prison are dropouts.

Barney Frank and other Democrats went o FNMA and to FHLMC and demanded that they take on 42% of their mortgages from poor people, and later when back to raised this to 50%. When FNMA explained that these poor people did not have money for down payments, and therefore, there were no mortgages to get, then they were told to forget about requiring down payments. This would have been in the late 90's and possibly the early 2000's. In case you do not understand what FNMA and FHLMC do, they will buy mortgages which have already been made by banks and other lending institutions, which then allows these banks and lending institutions to make more loans. The loans that these banks make are usually in compliance with FNMA and FHLMC standards; otherwise, they would not be able to sell their loans to them.

The richest 1% of New Yorkers already pay almost 40% of the income tax, and the top 0.5% pay 30%. And New York has just raised 100 new taxes, fees, fines, surcharges and penalties to be paid by all New York residents.

The United States will run nearly a $1 trillion deficit in just the first 6 months of this year. That is a little more than the Bush deficits for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008 combined.

Last week, I wrote President Obama gets the Queen of England an IPOD (which is actually a better gift than 25 DVD’s that won’t play on a region 2 English DVD player); she gives him an autographed photo of herself. Seth Myers scorched both Obama and the queen for giving such lame gifts on Weekend update.

Obama wanted two things when he went to Europe and talked down America, calling us arrogant; he wanted a greater participation in Afghanistan by NATO and he wanted more European stimulus spending. He got neither, despite the mostly fawning press and crowds.

[New Regular Feature: More than any president that I recall, President Obama tends to use language very carefully, to, in my opinion, obfuscate what he is doing rather than to clarify. This seems to part and parcel of the Obama campaign and now of the Obama presidency. This has become a mainstay of the Democratic party as well.]

Obama, who is both refinancing loans and guaranteeing mortgages, has promised, “There's seven to nine million people across the country who, right now, could be taking advantage of lower mortgage rates. We estimate that the average family can get anywhere from $1,600 to $2,000 a year in savings by taking advantage of these various mortgage programs that have been in place.” The reality is, some mortgages increase, some stay about the some, and some go down. This savings that Obama speaks of is not typical. Also, in all cases, you are paying a variety of loan costs (5% of the loan is about average); and sometimes the reduction of one’s payment just ends up increasing the number of payments that a person must pay.

Obama’s press secretary tells us that Obama did not bow to the Saudi president. I guess he has not heard of Youtube? If you head is below the other guy’s shoulders, then you have bowed.

The big deal here is one of trust and honesty. Obama should not have bowed, but he is new at this. He’s a novice. We get it. Say he made a mistake, don’t lie about it, and it is all over.

President, Obama, Vice President Biden, David Axelrod, and several other members of the Obama cabinet (including Timothy Geithner) have continually referred to the "mess we inherited." Had Obama been president instead of George Bush, precisely what should he have done and when should he have done it? (I am allowing you to be a Monday morning quarterback here)

Follow up question: if they hem and haw and give a non-answer or use such vague phrases as "more responsible and measured regulations" then ask, "Please be more specific. Many economists believe that the economic recession could be tracked back to FNMA and FHLMC taking on loans that they should not have. Tell us, after the fact, more specifically what legislation or regulation you would have passed."

Second follow-up question: If by any chance, they give the answer, "Well, we'd do just what we are doing right now" the follow up would be, "President Bush practiced high deficit spending and developed the first TARP plan, which is what the Obama administration is doing. So you are saying that President Bush did not spend enough money? Are you saying that his deficit spending should have been greater?"

If you think that Obama’s visit to Europe was all sweetness and light. There were specifically anti-Obama columns written (several which said, “We are tired of you; go home”) and demonstrations which specifically anti-Obama. If you are unaware of these things, then your news source has not leveled with you. Personally, I was aware of the anti-Obama columns, but I had to hear from someone in the Philippines about the demonstrations—even FoxNews (to the best of my knowledge) did not cover them.

If you think it is okay for your newspapers or news stations to completely ignore the hundreds of grassroots tea parties which are occurring throughout the nation.

John Holdren, Obama’s science advisor, has suggested that earth could be as close as six years away from the loss of Arctic summer sea ice. So, let me go out on a limb and suggest that, in 6 years, there will be a lot of ice in the Arctic Seas.

Obama continues on his campaign tour with teleprompters even overseas. He tells the audiences exactly what they want to hear, whether in Turkey or troops in Iraq.

Let me preface these remarks by saying, I was a high school and college teacher for nearly 30 years; I spent 7 or 8 years going to college myself; and I very much enjoyed working with the college-bound kids and the gifted and talented kids.

We have a myriad of problems with our schools, and way up there are the parents of these kids and the lack of discipline and respect of the kids and the parents. This does not mean that every kid is bad or every set of parents are poor; but once you hit about 10% (and I think we are over that), no teacher is able to teach. However, I don’t want to deal with those problems today.

One of the biggest problems which I see with our schools are a government problem—the curriculum, and the curriculum has been cranked up with the idea that we need to prepare every kid for college. College is a great thing, and I obviously enjoyed my college years, given the time I spent there; but not every kid is college material nor should they be (nor should they be encouraged to be).

Half of the students today are above average, with respect to their peers. The other half are below average. When you set up a curriculum which focuses upon that top 50% (a smaller percentage actually go to college), then you are leaving out the other kids. This should not be a shock that we have huge dropout rates today. If a student recognizes that school is irrelevant to him, and some dumb kids are smart enough to recognize this, then dropping out becomes a logical alternative. Why spend 12+ years of your life stuck in an institution that is clearly not designed for you or for your best interests? The fact that we have such a high drop out rate indicates that our dumb kids are not so dumb.

Let’s say I was going to spend 12 years in a public educational system and the outcome was supposed to be, I would end up being a Mary Kay cosmetic consultant—that was the focus of the school pretty much all the time. At some point in time, I would recognize, that is not my calling in life, and try to do something else.

Making public education as a preparation for college only leaves half of the kids behind and insults the intelligence of 50–60% of the kids, making them feel as if somehow, they are not living up to what they ought to be living up to.

This is taking 60 out of 100 round pegs and forcing them into square holes. It just is not going to work.

Our kids need an education, and a basic education. Of course, any kid who comes out of high school ought to be able to read, write and do arithmetic. However, not every kid ought to be pointed toward the nearest college, after forcing a so-called college prep curriculum down his throat.

At the school where I used to teach, students had to complete one year of math in order to graduate (I taught math), and it could be a fairly easy math course. When I left, every student had to take Algebra I, Geometry and Algebra II. What do you do with the dumb kids? You now make them take these irrelevant courses (irrelevant to them). What happens to these courses? They get watered-down, so they really are not college-prep courses. What is the end result? 20–40% (and more) kids drop out of school. Of those who go off to college, most are not prepared for college because their college-prep courses really did not prepare them for college.

Our school curriculum needs to have some basic courses which are required. For the first 2 or 3 years of high school, every kid should be taking 3–5 required courses. But the overall requirements need to be reduced dramatically and flexible. 1 year of math is enough for a high school diploma, as long as the student can demonstrate reasonable arithmetic skills. 2 or 3 years of English is enough. 1 or 2 years of science is enough. A year of US history, a year of world history, and civics and geography should be required. But there needs to be flexibility and classes designed for those who are not intellectual giants. Their lives and their futures are every bit as important as the genius who is going off to college to become a doctor or a lawyer (well, quite obviously, more important than the person going to school to become a lawyer). But you get the picture.

Some students cannot sit still. This is not having ADD; this is called being a normal teenage boy. There are a lot of classes where a person can do hands-on work and be on his feet for much of a class period. Whether he is playing a band instrument, working on an electric circuit, baking cookies, building a scale model of a house which he designed, or running laps on the football field for pissing off the coach. There needs to be relevant options for a young person, and options which do not classify him as a second-class person.

When I began teaching, the school I was at did many of these things. As the years went on, they did fewer and fewer non-book study courses; and piled on more and more (state-mandated) requirements.

There are a lot of schools out there which emphasize this or that. Large districts have magnet schools, which are a start (unless the student must take a schedule filled with college-prep courses).

Even better than this are private schools, each providing whatever emphasis is reasonable to their own philosophy. Schools where trades and business education are emphasized need to be provided.

FInally, a parent and a student need to be able to decide together where this kid is going to go to school. Does he want to go to a school where there is a great sports program? Is he interested in artsy-fartsy stuff? With freedom, competition, and school choice, a parent can find the right fit for his child. When a kid likes where he is; when he is doing work that he enjoys doing; when he sees some relevancy to his life in the future; he is going to be a lot less likely to drop out.

None of this takes more money. We could drop the price per student in any city by 10–20% and let that tax money go with the student to whatever school he wants to attend. Some schools would fail and some would succeed. Private schools have historically survived on budgets at 50–80% of the public schools.

Such an approach to education is pro-child and fiscally responsible. Lowering curriculum requirements is not the same as lowering standards. It is making school relevant to that 50% who are below average.

After maintaining his silence for two days, President Obama will soon make his first public statement about the pirate attack upon an U.S.-flagged vessel off the Horn of Africa. After several inquiries and a few well-placed bribes, Exurban League has received an early transcript of the President's remarks:

“Good evening. As you know, early yesterday, Somali-based pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama, a freighter carrying relief supplies to Kenya. While we do not yet know all the details, the Alabama's crew re-took control of the vessel and forced the pirates off the ship.

Since the pirates are still holding the captain, I have sent FBI negotiators to facilitate his safe and speedy release. I assure his friends and family that I will not stop until this man-made disaster is resolved in a peaceful, tolerant and ecologically-sound manner.

Obviously, this incident has raised many concerns among Americans. There have been calls for justice and even violence against the misguided perpetrators. But such an emotional reaction has led to the disparagement of entire groups with which we are unfamiliar. We have seen this throughout history.

For too long, America has been too dismissive of the proud culture and invaluable contributions of the Pirate Community. Whether it is their pioneering work with prosthetics, husbandry of tropical birds or fanciful fashion sense, America owes a deep debt to Pirates.

The past eight years have shown a failure to appreciate the historic role of these noble seafarers. Instead of celebrating their entrepreneurial spirit and seeking to partner with them to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.

Some of us wonder if our current Overseas Contingency Operation would even be needed had the last administration not been so quick to label Pirates as "thieves," "terrorists" and worse. Such swashbucklaphobia can lead to tragic results, as we have seen this week.

To address this issue, I have instructed Vice President Joe Biden to create a cabinet-level Czar of Pirate Outreach and Buccaneer Interrelation. In addition, June 1-7 has been designated as Pirate Awareness Week, during which all federal buildings will fly the Jolly Roger and sponsor sensitivity training. Thankfully, my American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will fund free grog and hard tack for all attendees.

Finally, to all pirates listening to international broadcasts, shortwave services and ship-to-shore radio, let me say this:

Ahoy, me regret arr relationship has set sail in a scurvy manner. Arr people share many mutual 'alues and concerns on t' raging main. Perchance, could ye handsomely release the cap'n o' the ship and I assure that no harm will come t' ye or ye hearties. Let us smite t' reset button and launch our seabond on a new pegleg. Savvy? Godspeed t' ye and t' ye beauties. Aye, me parrot concurs.”

Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact he is quite ignorant on most important subjects. Barack Obama is a narcissist. Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love, also believes, "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist."

Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he talks about narcissism everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).

Vaknin explains: "Narcissistic leaders are nefarious and their effects pernicious. They are subtle, refined, socially-adept, manipulative, possessed of thespian skills, and convincing. Both types [cerebral and somatic] equally lack empathy and are ruthless and relentless or driven." These were the very traits that distinguished Hitler and Khomeini. Many of these traits can be seen in Obama. As for his ruthlessness, perhaps his support of legislation to let babies die if they survive abortion, gives a glimps into his soul, that he may lacks empathy, does not value life, and if in the position of power can be ruthless. Narcissists need power to show their ruthlessness. Considering the fact that Obama neglected his own half brother, George Hussein Obama, who lives on one dollar per month in Kenya, we can't vouch for Obama's empathy or say he is a caring person.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) describes narcissism as a personality disorder that "revolve around a pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and sense of entitlement. Often individuals feel overly important and will exaggerate achievements and will accept, and often demand, praise and admiration despite worthy achievements."

[It is] An all-pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration or

adulation and lack of empathy, usually beginning by early adulthood and present in various contexts. Five (or more) of the following criteria must be met:

* Feels grandiose and self-important (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents to the point of lying, demands to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

* Is obsessed with fantasies of unlimited success, fame, power or omnipotence, unequalled brilliance (the cerebral narcissist), bodily beauty or sexual performance (the somatic narcissist), or ideal, everlasting, all-conquering love or passion

* Is firmly convinced that he is unique and, being special, can only be understood by, should only be treated by, or associate with, other special, unique, or high-status people (or institutions)

* Requires excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation, or failing that, wishes to be feared and notorious (narcissistic supply)

* Feels entitled. Expects unreasonable or special and favorable priority treatment. Demands automatic and full compliance with his expectations

* Is "interpersonally exploitative" i.e., uses others to achieve his or her own ends

* Is devoid of empathy. Is unable or unwilling to identify with or acknowledge the feelings and needs of others

* Is constantly envious of others or believes that they feel the same about him or her

* Is arrogant, has haughty behaviors or attitudes coupled with rage when frustrated, contradicted, or confronted.

Narcissists seek power. That is the whole purpose of their existence. Power for them is the elixir of life. Those who know about NPD can't help but notice it in Obama's posture, the tone of his voice, his demeanor and particularly his grandiose claims and unscripted adlibs.

Narcissim has degrees. When it is extreme it shows in the posture and the way the narcissist walks and talks. Obama's posture, exudes haughtiness. He is all puffery. Compare his posture to those of Hitler, Stalin and Saddam.

According to Vaknin, Obama displays the following behaviors, which are among the hallmarks of pathological narcissism:

- Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and "ideals" (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause him overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, refuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.

- Ignores data that conflict with his fantasy world, or with his inflated and grandiose self-image. This has to do with magical thinking. Obama already sees himself as president because he is firmly convinced that his dreams, thoughts, and wishes affect reality. Additionally, he denies the gap between his fantasies and his modest or limited real-life achievements (for instance, in 12 years of academic career, he didn't publish a single scholarly paper or book).

- Talks about himself in the 3rd person singular or uses the regal "we" and craves to be the exclusive center of attention, even adulation

- Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon)

- Displays false modesty and unctuous "folksiness" but is unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true Obama is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.

- Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).

Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. The University of Chicago Law School provided him with a fellowship and an office to work on his book. The book took him a lot longer than expected and at the end it devolved into., guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which, he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father .

Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself?

Narcissists are magical thinkers. They live in a world of fantasy; fantasies of grandiosity and unlimited power. But they are convinced that those fantasies will become reality because they are special and destined for greatness. That is why Obama already sees himself as president and acts presidential. The very fact that he travelled abroad and visited with several heads of states is another sign of this man's delusions of grandiosity. He is not representing the government. Under what pretext he visited those heads of states and entered into negotiations with them?

Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month. A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself.

Narcissists can be very generous, but never without an ulterior motive. They are generous when their display of generosity is noticed and elevates them in the eyes of others. Obama donated $20,000 to his racist and anti-Semitic church, but neglected his brother who could get some education and live a lot better if only he had one dollar per day.

Narcissism is all about image. Vaknin says, "The narcissist is shallow, a pond pretending to be an ocean. He likes to think of himself as a Renaissance man, a Jack of all trades. The narcissist never admits to ignorance in any field - yet, typically, he is ignorant of them all. It is surprisingly easy to penetrate the gloss and the veneer of the narcissist's self-proclaimed omniscience."

This is not the entire article, and much of it is rather incendiary. However, the author does make some very good points. If you want to read the whole thing, go to:

If you believe that the children are our future and that education is important, then you need to read this to find out what has just happened:

Remember that we get taxed coming and going—federal taxes, state taxes, sales tax, gas tax, etc. Here are the states raising their taxes this coming year:

New York millionaire taxes (which applies to individuals making $200,000 and couples making $300,000):

Recently, bloggers and CNN have been actually blaming talk show hosts for the recent shootings:

I am sure that I saw footage on CNN where this was actually a news report; but I have not been able to locate it online.

I love short quizzes online where I do well; this is a Pew Research news quiz; it was fairly easy, I thought (although I was not 100% sure of 2 answers). 12 questions; I have to brag, I got 12 out of 12.

It is interesting, but not that surprising, that Republicans outperform Democrats. We would expect older people to outperform younger people (which they do), but I was surprised that men did substantially better than women.

The case against a college degree (not getting a college degree can mean more money, not less):

Charles Freeman Jr. is Obama’s pick to head up the National Intelligence Council (they put out the national intelligence estimates). From the little I have read, he appears to be decidedly anti-Israel and pro-Arab.

When the government got into the housing business, requiring banks to give mortgages to people who did not qualify for a loan and did not have a down payment for same, this resulted in 1 out of 9 houses sitting empty today. That worked out so well, that there is now a government website focused on home loans.

A good overall review as to who is responsible for our current economic crisis (this includes the Bush administration):

I realized that I occasionally make a comment or a remark which might be seen as my attempt to be provocative. I do have sources.

RUSH: CNN is reporting about what happened on the Hawaiian island of Kauai: "Their livelihood was being threatened, and they were tired of waiting for government help, so business owners and residents on Hawaii's Kauai island pulled together and completed a $4 million repair job to a state park -- for free. Polihale State Park has been closed since severe flooding destroyed an access road to the park and damaged facilities in December. The state Department of Land and Natural Resources had estimated that the damage would cost $4 million to fix, money the agency doesn't have, according to a news release from department Chairwoman Laura Thielen. 'It would not have been open this summer, and it probably wouldn't be open next summer,' said Bruce Pleas, a local surfer who helped organize the volunteers. 'They said it would probably take two years. And with the way they are cutting funds, we felt like they'd never get the money to fix it.' And if the repairs weren't made, some business owners faced the possibility of having to shut down.

"Ivan Slack, co-owner of Napali Kayak, said his company relies solely on revenue from kayak tours and needs the state park to be open to operate. The company jumped in and donated resources because it knew that without the repairs, Napali Kayak would be in financial trouble. 'If the park is not open, it would be extreme for us, to say the least,' he said. 'Bankruptcy would be imminent. How many years can you be expected to continue operating, owning 15-passenger vans, $2 million in insurance and a staff? For us, it was crucial, and our survival was dependent on it. That park is the key to the sheer survival of the business.' So Slack, other business owners and residents made the decision not to sit on their hands and wait for state money that many expected would never come. Instead, they pulled together machinery and manpower and hit the ground running March 23. And after only eight days, all of the repairs were done, Pleas said. It was a shockingly quick fix to a problem that may have taken much longer if they waited for state money to funnel in."

Not just state money, state workers. Two years to complete the project, the state said, whatever it was, and four million bucks. And these people did it in eight days! Ivan Slack said, "'We can wait around for the state or federal government to make this move, or we can go out and do our part. Just like everyone's sitting around waiting for a stimulus check, we were waiting for this but decided we couldn't wait anymore.' ... Now, because of their hard work, volunteers hope they'll be ready to send that positive message -- right in time for the tourist season." Now, I love this story. Let me recap what this is. It shows us we do not need the government for much of anything. The state Department of Land and Natural Resources in Hawaii, the government, said that it would cost four million to fix damages to an access road to this park on Kauai after a flood damaged it. They said it would take two years and four million to fix it, and that was if, in these economic times, there was money in the budget to do so. So these people who depend on this park for their business and their recreation, decided not to sit around and wait for the government to do something. They came together.

The community came together. They did the repairs themselves. It took only eight days to finish all the repairs, compared to two years. It did not cost the taxpayers a dime. Anybody want to say, "Yes, we can"? Now, this illustrates many things, not just the fact that people can get off their butts and do things themselves. It illustrates the absolute screeching halt on progress that is represented by government. Four years and two million bucks, and these people found a way to do this with no charge to the taxpayers. It was important to them, their business derives from this. They did it in eight days. Eight days! Like I say, I can't believe CNN ran this story. Eight days they got this done. Now that the story has gone public, I hope that the residents of Kauai who participated in this effort are prepared for the fact that some other government agency is going to come out and inspect this, may come out and inspect your work and find that it doesn't meet their standards. You don't embarrass the government this way. You just don't do it. Eight days instead of two years and $2 million to fix a park and an access road.

I just love stories like this where people roll up their sleeves and do it themselves, rather than sitting around waiting. This is the kind of spirit that built the country, and in this case people just got fed up with waiting, and they got fed up with the bureaucracy. There was no sense of urgency anywhere to get this done, by a government that is existing primarily to serve the interests of the people. They were not interested in that at all. It's a great illustration of just how bloated and out of hand things have gotten at all levels of government.

RUSH: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Thursday she did not see Iran's latest statements about its nuclear program as a rebuff to U.S. overtures to engage Tehran. The top U.S. diplomat also voiced skepticism about Iran's new claims that it had made major progress in its nuclear program and tested more advanced equipment for enriching uranium." And then she said, "We don't know what to believe about the Iranian program. We've heard many different assessments and claims over a number of years." You know, they're out there, they're thinking so hard on this, they're thinking so hard on the Somali merchant organizers, the marine organizers, they're thinking so hard about Iran, they're thinking so hard about North Korea, but they have no idea, "We don't know what to believe." How about believing Ahmadinejad? That's the path of least resistance, Mrs. Clinton, believe what the lunatic says. If he's lying, it's a bonus. If he's not, and we're not prepared for it, we're cooked.

[In additional to all of the tax increases, there are huge numbers of city employee layoffs in NYC]

RUSH: A story related to the upcoming tax increases in New York state and New York City: "Sweeping layoffs of government employees," sweeping layoffs of government employees, i.e., union employees, "are needed to prevent New York going bankrupt, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Thursday. Bloomberg, who is in tense negotiations with municipal workers' unions, said an extra 7,000 jobs would have to go unless major reductions are made in employee benefits. 'We cannot continue. Our pension costs and health care costs for our employees are going to bankrupt this city,' he said in comments broadcast on NY1 television. Bloomberg, running for a third mayoral term at the end of this year, said that proposals from unions so far were 'nowhere near what is adequate.' The possible job cuts, first announced Wednesday, would be on top of 1,300 already proposed and another 8,000 that could be axed through attrition."

Let me add this up. Sixteen thousand three hundred jobs lost in the city of New York. Union jobs lost. And of course there will be even more when I cease doing business in New York, 'cause there will be even less tax revenue. And this, of course, pleases the governor of New York, David Paterson, who has publicly said that if he knew I would leave, he would have raised these taxes sooner. A grand total of 16,300 union jobs, can't afford the pension costs or the health care costs. Now, I don't know, it doesn't say how many will be left, it doesn't say what the total payroll is. The budget office said on Wednesday that 7,000 extra job cuts would allow the city to cut a further $350 million in expenditure. So if they cut the 7,000 extra jobs they can save $350 million they don't have to spend or won't have to spend. Now, look, in a way, I really do have mixed emotions about this 'cause these are people. We are talking about Americans and human beings, and they're going to get laid off, and they're being told, "Your pension and your health care costs," which again were negotiated, the city negotiated health care costs and pension. Now, you hate to see this happen. I know that they're liberals. I don't think all the union employees are liberal. There's some conservative Republicans in New York, but the vast majority I'm sure are. And of course the city is run by liberals, as is the state.

What they're admitting here is the hard, cold reality of truth, that none of this was ever sustainable. The concept of being paid far more than what you produce just isn't sustainable, and look where the cuts are coming from. Even with all these preferred union employees, the city really isn't cutting services to the people on welfare. They claim they're going to be, but they don't dare because that would lead to riots. They don't dare do any of that. So they're going to be laying people off. Health care, pension, people had been counting on it, this is what they thought the deal was, the promise was, when they signed on. Many of them are looking forward to retiring at age 40 which you get to do with 80% pay or whatever, and then you go out and get another job. The point is that none of this works. Over time you learn that it's unsustainable. The golden goose is only golden for so long. You can only rape the golden goose for so long before it doesn't have any gold left. All of this is coming home to roost now, and look where it's coming home to roost. It's coming home to roost for the largest part in public and private businesses that are unionized. Not entirely, not exclusively, but predominantly.

I remember I got into big trouble on this program, and innocently so, early on in the days of this program, might have been 1988 or '89. We were discussing unions, and I made the point that one of the big problems with unions was that every contract year they'd demand more pay for less work, more time off, more sick days, more vacations, more this, more that, and I remember my father telling me about a contract that he had to do with the bricklayers union. So I mentioned this -- and this is in the late eighties -- and the bricklayers union, out of Chicago was livid, they called, they demanded a retraction, they said it wasn't true, and I stuck to my guns, and it was. We dug up the information. Everything that I said about it was true. They did negotiate contracts. Bricklayers had to lay X-number of bricks a day fewer with the new contract with more break time and so forth. This is not how productivity happens. It's not how wealth is accrued. It's not how growth happens. Now Snerdley thinks I'm being too nice here with my compassion for these union employees. Well, James, let me ask you a question. Do you want to be in their shoes?

It may be a life lesson for them, but do you want to live in New York City on what they earn? Do you want to live out in Queens, wherever it is they live, live in one of the boroughs, make what they make, and their whole reason for doing this is the pension they're going to get when they retire and their health care, and all of a sudden they're going to be told -- (interruption) What else are they going to go do? They're going to have to become entrepreneurial themselves. These kinds of jobs are vanishing. Then they're going to be on unemployment for as long as they can. I know a lot of you people are saying, "Okay, good riddance, the way the liberals have stuck it to us every year, the way these people have stuck it to the genuine producers and have tried to do their damage in the private sector, good, it's about time they found out what the pain is like." Remember when Rick Wagoner got blown out of General Motors, there were prominent liberal columnists who wrote pieces of glee and happiness. "Good, it's about time he finds out what it's like to walk out the door without a job. It's about time he finds out what it's like to be treated the way he treated all of his employees."

All right, if we wanted to, when we get the news of these 7,000 upcoming layoffs, because the pension and health care costs are bankrupting the city, imagine you're one of these 7,000 people, and you hear the mayor say that your health care and pension plans bankrupting the city? I don't think you're going to believe that, but it's liberal versus liberal here. You got liberal government in the state and the city, liberal employees making deals with one another. Now the bloom's off the rose. So some people might say there's some sweet justice, or at least a teachable moment. I'm not into vengeance. I'm not looking to be made happy because of these people's suffering. I actually feel for them. I feel for them because they've been duped; as liberals, they've been duped into believing things about economics that are not true, and now here it's all coming home to roost, and it's happened before. It happened back in 1975 with the city. Union membership at its high in this country was 35, 38%. It's down to 11 or 12% now. That's why card check is such an important thing to Democrats. That's why illegal immigration is so important. Illegal immigration is all about finding new union members at lower wages that will become Democrat voters. It's what it's all about, but, you see, it doesn't work, because the deals that are made, paying people after they stop producing, even if they're retired for longer than they've worked, does not work. It's mathematically impossible.

RUSH: I'm being bombarded. "You are just being too nice to these people. These are Democrats. They have elected Democrats. They've elected Democrats, Rush, like you say, on the promise that the Democrats are gonna make 'em prosperous. And they get laid off and they never get anything other than barely above poverty, they just always remain poor, and yet they keep voting Democrats. Why do you feel sorry for them?" I have a big heart. Look, it's sad that it's happening. It's not surprising. I got another two or three of these that I just checked. It's amazing the visceral reactions people have. All I said was you cannot go to work at an outfit for 20, be told you're gonna work for 20 years, 25, then you're gonna retire, and for the rest of your life you're going to make 80% of what you earned with all health care? If somebody told me that, I wouldn't believe it. I know it isn't possible. At some point it isn't gonna work, at some point it's all going to collapse, particularly when the unions are in business to do damage to the very companies that they work for who are trying to produce cars, products, services, profits, that pay these people.

I mean the structure of a union from the leadership level is antithetical to what a corporation's about. They're at odds. There's a huge conflict of interest. Most union leaders are opposed to what a business is trying to do. A couple of these e-mails, "Okay, Rush, okay, so what are we just supposed to do, work our fingers to the bone until we die? Are we never supposed to retire?" And, see, that makes me sad. If you understand my view of this country, if you understand how in awe I am of this country and how special it is, how exceptional it is, it literally -- and I said this at the CPAC speech -- it breaks my heart to see so many people have so little faith in themselves. It breaks my heart to see people not fulfilling anywhere near their potential. Remember the story a couple years ago, it was a layoff at a automobile plant, I think it was General Motors or Ford, not sure which, in Detroit, a 28-year-old kid almost committed suicide when he got laid off 'cause he thought, at 28, he had no future, because his whole future was working the assembly line, and once that was taken away... and I said, "My God, who raised this kid? What vision does he have of his life's possibilities?" Put all his money into one stock and so forth, even if he did that.

But when people get on my case here for, "Well, what are we supposed to do, just work our fingers to the bone and never, ever retire?" No. No. Unless you love it. I intend to. I'm not thinking about retirement. I don't go into a job saying, "How much you gonna pay me when I'm not working?" I don't ask, "What are my vacation days, how many sick days do I get, how many days do I get to go feed the dog?" I don't ask, "Well, what percentage of what you're paying me now is going to be mine when I quit when I'm 45?" I don't think this way. I don't know why, I just have always believed that -- and some people think this is sad to hear, I frankly don't -- I've always believed that nobody's gonna take care of me, 'cause nobody has the self-interest in myself that I have, 'cause they're too busy worrying about themselves, as everybody is. "But, Rush, it's unrealistic to think that everybody's going to be able to pay for their own retirement." That's an extreme statement. But it's not unrealistic to expect that in this, the most bountiful, fruitful country ever in the history of the world, more people could than are. The idea that some compassionate bunch of Democrat liberal politicians is going to make your life easy, that notion is blown to smithereens every day in this country. Go to any neighborhood that votes a hundred percent Democrat and take a look at it.

This thing goes around the Internet all the time. I keep it handy for times when I need it. Poverty in our cities, Census Bureau, 2006 data: Percentage of people below the poverty level, Detroit, Michigan, number one at 32.5%; Buffalo, New York, number two at 30%. Percentage of people below the poverty level: Cincinnati, 27.8%; Cleveland, 27%; Miami, 26.9%; St. Louis,

26.8%; El Paso, 26.4%; Milwaukee, 26.2%; Philadelphia, 25.1%; Newark, 24.2%. The top ten cities with over 250,000 population have the highest poverty rate. What is the one thing they all have in common? They are run by liberal Democrats, and it is the poor who habitually elect liberal Democrats, yet they remain poor. It's union people that habitually elect Democrats, and it's union people habitually who get laid off by Democrats and have their health care benefits taken away. We're told it's evil corporations. Well, who the hell do you think is running those these days? It's not a bunch of evil country club Republicans anymore.

While all this is happening, I want you 7,000 in New York to listen to this. It's not happening in New York, but it may be. We don't know. From Jefferson City, Missouri: "Investment staff members weren't the only employees at the state government's pension system who received bonuses last year. All 72 employees at the Missouri State Employees Retirement System -- from the records equipment operator to the deputy director for operations -- drew bonuses, even as the system's stock market losses mounted." Every state has one of these, a public employee retirement system, or a state employee retirement system, California PERS and so forth. Teachers have one, too. All this money is invested in the stock market. Well, we know what's happened to the stock market, and the people who run the State Employee Retirement System in Missouri's job is to make sure the fund grows.

The fund collapsed, and they gave themselves bonuses, every damn one of them, state workers, Democrats. While in Missouri, I'm sure they're pondering cuts in the budget and layoffs here and there, and suspending work on projects they just don't have the money for. "The 58 operations staffers received about $160,000 in one-time 'incentive payments' last June. Employees got the money -- up to 10 percent of their salaries -- if they and the agency met certain targets, such as processing pension applications promptly." If you process an application promptly, you get a bonus, not whether the fund performs. This is in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch today.

RUSH: We have a junior from the University of Tennessee, the Tennessee Vols. This is Jordan on the phone. Hi, Jordan. It's great to have you here. Hello.

CALLER: I just have a quick question. I am in a macroeconomics class. My minor is economics, and my professor drones on and on and on about the supply-side economics and how it does not work. And constantly in my test and even an essay, we had to talk about why supply-side economics does not work and why it's not fair to the poor and why it increases income inequality. I just want to know the truth, I guess. I'm just tired of this.

RUSH: Okay, so, in the first place, it does work -- and it works every time it's tried, and it's brilliant. It's very simple to understand, and explain. But your professor...? I just want to understand this. Your professor said it doesn't work?

RUSH: And it never has worked because it's not fair to the poor and it increases income inequality?

RUSH: What does he say trickle down or supply-side economics is? Does he define it for you in the class?

CALLER: Yes. Lower personal income tax rates, reduce tax on incomes and savings, reduce tax on capital gains, reduce corporate income tax, is how he defines it.

RUSH: Well, those are the results of a belief in supply-side economics. Supply-side economics is simply capitalism. Now, let me give you some numbers. In 1981, when Ronald Reagan took office, and the top marginal -- are you recording this?

RUSH: Top marginal tax rate, Ronald Reagan took office, the top marginal tax rate was 70%. There were a bunch of different tax rates. Has he adequately explained to you what a marginal tax rate is?

RUSH: Okay. Let me explain, because that's central to understanding this is understanding what a marginal tax rate is. In 1980... I'm guessing here, but let's say there were 13 or 14 tax brackets. These are arbitrary numbers. I'm making these up. I don't have the actual tables in front of me, but the way it worked is the first $10,000 you made, you paid 10%. The next $10,000 up to $25,000 a year from $15,000, you paid maybe 15% and on and on and on and on, until the top marginal rate -- 'til you had you'd earned over let's a $150,000 a year -- every dollar over $150,000 was taxed at 70%. Okay? Did you follow that?

RUSH: Okay. This was called "bracket creep" back then. As you earned more, you end up in a higher tax bracket, and it's the marginal dollars, the last dollars you earn -- and the last dollars you earn are the dollars that define your wealth, or define your income. So when Reagan took office, the top marginal rate was 70%. Now, very few paid it, Jordan, because there were all kinds of tax loopholes that were built into the system back then. Not loopholes, but there were incentives to invest in this area of the economy. If you put your money here, you would not be taxed on that money. But still we had a top marginal rate of 70%, and the total take in tax revenue to the government in 1981 was about $480 billion. Okay?

RUSH: Now, in 1989, when Reagan left office, the top marginal tax rate had been reduced from 70% to 28%. The take to the Treasury almost doubled. It was $950 billion. So reducing marginal tax rates from 70% to 28% doubled Treasury receipts. Now, how did this happen? It happened because it created more taxpayers. It created more jobs by reducing the top marginal rate on people. If you tell people, "You're going to keep 72 cents of every dollar you earn," you're going to go out and earn dollars and not going to worry about sheltering them or hiding them. You'll report your income. You don't look for places to hide it. At 70%, you look for places to hide your income.

RUSH: So at a top marginal rate of 28%, more people were hired, because small businesses are Subchapter S corporations. Most of them file their income tax on a personal form, as they're allowed by law, and so they weren't hiring more people. Corporations of all kinds were able to hire more people. The capital gains tax came down. The corporate tax came down. This meant that there was more money in the private sector and not at government.

RUSH: Supply-side simply means leaving the money of creativity and productivity in the hands of the people who produce and create: the citizens. It's their money! They earn it. Now, the reason that your professor says it doesn't work, income inequality, is because we're all different, and so many people don't want to work as hard as others. You are finding yourself in a macroeconomics class, but many at your school are majoring in PE because they think it's going to be easier. They'll get a degree in that. They're not going to go the hard route. You have an interest in economics. Some people don't. Some people have an interest in being rocket scientists and going to the moon or Mars. Other people are content to get to 7-Eleven.

RUSH: We're all different, Jordan, and in a capitalistic society... He calls it supply-side, your professor. Your professor -- I hate to say this, but your professor -- is a walking liberal cliche who doesn't understand economics, and if he does understand it, he's threatened by the concept of individual freedom and liberty and is trying to mold you students into people who are going to conform so that you agree with the concept that nobody should earn anything more than anybody else, that there should not be any poor people.

RUSH: But the only way that we can guarantee that kind of equality is to make everybody miserable.

RUSH: He could have gone to the University of North Pole, and I'm sure the curriculum there is the same thing.

RUSH: But it's just capitalism. Now, let me give you some figures that just came out today. The federal government announced -- the IRS announced today -- that last year they took in, just in the income tax, around $500 billion or $560 billion. This year, the federal government's going to take in 25% less: $450 billion. Why do you think that is, Jordan? You're the student; I'm the teacher. We've raised tax rates now from the 28% and we're back up to 35%. Soon we're going to be back to 39.6% federal.

RUSH: We have a federal deficit. With these numbers today, this year's federal deficit guaranteed to be $2 trillion -- not the $1.2 trillion, not the $1.7 trillion. We're going to have a $2 trillion federal deficit. Now, why is it that April 15th is going to be a down day for the government? Their collection and income tax revenue is going to be down 25%. Why?

CALLER: Crowding out, possibly? I know it's okay to have a budget deficit when you're in a recession, so isn't that okay?

RUSH: No. No. Forget that. That's another concept altogether. That's Keynesian, and that means... Have you been told about John Maynard Keynes?

RUSH: Yeah: spend money you don't have to stimulate an economy. It never works. It's never, ever worked. It prolonged the Great Depression.

RUSH: This is sad. You are paying nothing to call me and learn the truth, and how much are your parents paying to send you to this worthless class?

RUSH: At any rate, the government is going to collect $150 billion less in tax revenue because of unemployment.

RUSH: There are fewer people working. There are fewer people paying taxes. Why is that? Because we are in a recession. The government is borrowing so much money and printing so much money and yet taxing people at increasing levels so there's not the money in the supply-side sector, in the private sector. Government has all the money. Government is deciding who's going to get it -- like the banks, and the auto companies, and how they have to spend it. There's less money in the private sector for people to be hired, and if you're not working, you don't pay taxes. That's how you explain $450 billion in tax revenue, 1981, doubling in eight years by reducing tax rates from 70% to 28%.

RUSH: The Bush tax cuts, after 9/11, is what kept this country in an economic boom, because any... Look, it's very simple. If you're a capitalist, and if you believe in the concept of individual liberty and freedom, then you have to accept the notion that what you earn is yours and that you are entitled to earn as much as you desire. Following rules, of course. And that there is nothing immoral about earning more than somebody else, just like there's nothing immoral about you becoming an economics graduate and somebody else going to a junior college. You made the choice; that other person made the choice. Why should that person who decided to go to a community college come out and be vo-tech and learn how to use a scratchall, make as much as you who are investing whatever you're going to invest in college to be an economist and perhaps go somewhere?

Why should you two make the same, and whose right and whose authority determines what either of you should make? That's what your professor wants some central planner to decide, that you're no better than somebody who works with a scratchall in terms of your value. I'm not talking about your morality or as a person. I'm talking about your value economically. You know, your value is something. You look at athletes. I'll bet your professor thinks athletes are overpaid.

RUSH: He probably doesn't think movie stars are overpaid 'cause they're libs, but he probably thinks athletes are overpaid, and he probably thinks that the school gets, you know, they bend the rules too many times and let the football team not go to class all the time.

RUSH: What's the value? What's the value of a professional baseball player? Alex Rodriguez gets $270 million over ten years, whatever it is, because somebody's determined he's worth it.

RUSH: Okay? Now, your professor probably blanches at that notion. While Alex Rodriguez is making 270, some pauper playing for the Kansas City Royals is only making $2 million. "Only" two million! That's gotta be grossly unfair.

RUSH: How can Rodriguez get $270 million and some pauper shortstop for the Royals only get two million? Oh, the injustice of it all! What a rotten country.

RUSH: Supply-side economics is not just tax cuts. Tax cuts are the result of a principle, and the principle is that we are individuals and that we have freedom to compete, to invest in ourselves, to become whatever we want. We could become slackers. We can become wealthy. We can become accomplished; we can become semi-accomplished. It's up to us. No two people are the same. Now, he's saying that supply-side doesn't work because he's looking at the various inequalities throughout, not just income, but other inequalities, and he looks and says, "It's just unfair. It's just unfair."

RUSH: And then he also couples this... I'm sure he has the attitude that the rich are a bunch of SOBs, just on general principles.

RUSH: They're mean, rotten cheaters, thieves, and liars. Of course, rich Democrats are not. Like Ted Kennedy and the whole Kennedy family.

RUSH: They never had to work a day in their lives. They just get up. But that's wonderful because they talk about the things your professor talks about, but you don't see Ted Kennedy or any other liberal walking neighborhoods giving money away -- unless he's taken it from somebody else first. I implore you, Jordan, my man, to investigate independently the economist Friedrich Von Hayek (H-a-y-e-k) from the University of Chicago. He's long dead. I urge you to. Does your professor ever talk about Milton Friedman?

RUSH: Oh, he doesn't. I'm not surprised. Milton Friedman. There's a videotape, DVD series that Milton Friedman did that explains everything you want to know here in a classical economics sense. He's written many books. He was brilliant, Milton Friedman. So is Thomas Sowell, who is at the Hoover Institution on campus at Stanford. But read Friedrich Von Hayek, read The Constitution of Liberty, and read The Road to Serfdom. They're tough reads. These are intellectual treatises, but you will not be disappointed.

RUSH: You bet. Hang in there, because the country depends on people like you being open to the concept of individual liberty and what that results in.

RUSH: Here's a good supply-side, demand side question to ponder. How many wheelchairs with motors is General Motors going to have to make before anybody wants to buy one?

RUSH: Here's Natalie, 13 years old, I just saw this, Natalie in Beverly Hills, California. Great to have you on the program, Natalie.

CALLER: First of all, I wanted to discuss with you about the infatuation my school has with President Obama. This guy pretty much scares me because I want to be a CEO one day, and I walk through the hallways and I see big pictures of him. I go into the library one day, and here's a huge framed photograph of President Obama, and I asked, "Where is the picture that we used to have of George Bush?" which we didn't. I wanted to know why there wasn't a picture of George Bush up and why there was just something of President Obama? That scared me completely.

RUSH: Wow. At 13, this alarmed you, scared you, to see pictures of the great leader all over the hallways of your school.

CALLER: It did. They treat him like he's a king, like he's like the Second Coming, I mean --

CALLER: Because they say it's a historic moment that they want us all to relish in. I don't agree with that.

CALLER: They say he's the first African-American president so we should all relish in it. I said, "Any president is a historic moment." They had inauguration party practically for him. They made us stop all our classes to watch him be inaugurated.

CALLER: They tell me that I am right and the rest of the world is just completely crazy, and that one day when our country gets down in the economic dumps we'll one day get out of it and the people will realize exactly how wrong they were.

RUSH: We hope. The thing is, Natalie, there have been so many of these kinds of teachable moments over the years that people have seemingly not learned from. But you're right on the button with why they think this is historical, and they're wrong about it because the historical aspect is over now, and presidents are not kings, and we don't idolize them, and we don't bow down to them. Apparently our presidents bow down to Saudi kings. I'll tell you what's driving this among not only the people that run your school and the students there, but elsewhere where this is the prevailing thought, and that is a supreme sense of guilt. Slavery is considered to be our original sin, and so it doesn't matter, the substance of things doesn't matter. The color of skin is all that does matter, and you're running into this. I hope you're able to remain steadfast. I hope you don't give up your dream of being a CEO. I hope you're able to navigate your way through this. And if you are, and you remain true and steadfast to what you believe, you'll find some converts along the way. There are probably some that exist, like you, they are just afraid to say anything, but they're talking about it at home. I'm glad you called, really nice to talk to you.

RUSH: You know, if Natalie called here and said that Bush scared her, she would be a media star by five o'clock this afternoon.

RUSH: Man, these youngsters are fired up out there. It's spring break. We got another one. He's fourteen years old. Josh in Los Angeles. Josh, I have about a minute and a half, but I wanted to get you on.

CALLER: Hi. I called to talk to you. I actually live close to Beverly Hills, where that girl lives who called earlier.

CALLER: And wanted to talk about how in the schools they've really been sensationalizing President Obama, but not educating the kids about why. I remember they had the inauguration dispersed throughout the entire school, and I asked one of my teachers, "Did they do the same thing for George Bush?" and they kind of gave me this, "Oh, no, but, you know, this is a really, really historic one," and I kind of responded by saying, "Well, you know, any of the 44 (sic) men who have been elected president is pretty historic, and so why wouldn't they put it on for George Bush?" And I just keep getting this, "Well, well, well, well, whatever."

CALLER: (laughs) I think it's wrong that they're not, because so many kids at my school -- I've seen too many -- Obama T-shirts. Obama this, Obama that. On Facebook, everyone puts, "Obama! Obama!" Obama this, Obama that.

RUSH: This is part of the plan. We saw evidence of this during the campaign, when there were videos of little school kids singing songs about President Obama. Josh, have a great Easter and a great spring break, and thanks for calling in. See, folks? They're not all being brainwashed out there. That's fabulous news.

RUSH: Who's next? Alyssa, a 15-year-old from Holdingford, Minnesota. Is that right? Nice to have you on the program.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks. I was going to tell you about a conference about cap and trade that I went to at St. Cloud State, Minnesota, and --

CALLER: My dad got a couple of e-mails about it from Michele Bachmann, and I really wanted to learn more about it.

CALLER: They were actually really rude there, and they had to be talked to by security a couple times.

RUSH: Okay. These are probably community organizers like ACORN, the same kind of people that are the pirates.

CALLER: Yes. And they were screaming questions, and we got these cards that we had to fill out questions on, and instead of that they were screaming them out. And then they asked about green jobs, and he asked them to name a couple of them, and they just shut up after that.

RUSH: Yeah, a green job is a myth. What is a green job? They didn't have an answer for it?

RUSH: A landscaper is a green job. You work around things that are green: Grass, weeds, flowers, plants, that sort of thing.

RUSH: Well, I'm glad that you got to see this. Was this the first time that you had seen in person this kind of rude behavior from liberals?

CALLER: I think there were about 2,000 people there, and there were probably maybe 20 of them.

RUSH: Now, you knew that this was liberal behavior before you went there, you just had never seen it in person?

RUSH: Seeing it in person has a much more powerful impact than just watching it on television. Watching it on television, you're not really there. You see it on TV so much, it doesn't have any impact. But when you're there, like you were, profound impact. Well, that is pretty much standard operating behavior for American libs. Well, it is, Snerdley. People think I'm going to be misleading this young girl, but I'm not. They're constantly mad; they're constantly angry; they don't want to debate whatever is being debated. They want to shut down any discussion of a position that's not theirs, because they're afraid that the 2,000 people there were going to be persuaded to agree with a concept that they don't agree with. So, rather than debate it, they wanted to shut it down. This is how they operate. It's intimidation. These people were probably paid, too.

RUSH: Yeah. I'm sure they're just saving up money for the next party, kegger, whatever. Well, good, how did it end up? Did the seminar end up being okay and you learned more about it than you knew before you went in?

CALLER: The global cooling that they talked about like a couple years back when my dad was in school, and there was global warming that was way worse before, the earth fluctuates in temperature.

RUSH: Yeah. That's right. By the way, your dad was in school more than two years ago, I hope.

RUSH: 'Cause you're talking about the covers of Newsweek and TIME Magazine back in 1979. They were talking about the coming ice back then. I want to give you, Alyssa, a closing thought that will help you to understand liberals even more. Let's take the global warming debate, and this has to do with what I call the vanity and the total lack of humility that these people have. The earth is billions of years old. The earth, as you learned, has gone through cycles of heat and cooling, warmth and freezing, that are beyond the ability of any earthly creature, human or otherwise, to influence. We can influence our environment, we have air-conditioning and heat. But we can't change the climate, we never have been able to. But for some reason, throughout all these billions of years, the last 20 or 30, which are so microscopic a grain of sand does not represent the size of the last 30 years in just a hundred years. I mean we are so infinitesimal a part of this planet, yet the last 30 years all of these people, Alyssa, say that everything that is now is normal. The level of ice, the temperatures, average temperatures around the world, the amount of rainfall, cloud cover, everything now is what is normal, and any variation is a disaster.

Any variation or trend toward any variation is a disaster. Now, what kind of arrogance does it require for a living human being to think that in the full breadth and scope of world history, that their little irrelevant period of time on it is the way it's always been or is even optimum and the best? The world is constantly moving and shaping. Your dad someday is going to take you to the Grand Canyon. Your dad someday is going to take you to Arizona, and you're going to see big mountains, and you're going to learn, you're going to see lines and scales all up and down the sides of the canyons and you're going to be told that what you're looking at used to be thousands of feet under water, and what you're looking at is sediment lines. And you look up, and it's thousands of feet in the air, hundreds of feet in the air. What? Under water? And then you're going to ask yourself how in the world could I have seen to it that all these rocks that were under water somehow became mountains on the surface? You couldn't have done it. It's just happened, and that's how the climate operates. You got a great head start thanks to your dad taking you to this thing. It's great that he did. Alyssa, thanks for the call. Appreciate it.

You may or may not be aware of the tea parties which have been going on, but ACORN is, and they intend to infiltrate these gathers:

Conservative Review
Issue #70	Kukis Digests and Opines on this Week’s News and Views	April 12, 2009