Let's face it. Friday was not a good day not to be on the air. But who knew that these five leftists Norwegian Arctic Circle Moonbats were going to hand the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama?

For what? For not being George Bush, that's what!

Hopefully you weren't all that surprised.

Since I wasn't here Friday, let's re-post some of the comments I emailed back to the Web Wench from Texas ... and then add to those thoughts.

First - you have to come up with a definition of "peace." There's a Nobel Prize for physics and one for medicine too. In virtually every culture and every country in the world you define "physics" and "medicine" pretty much the same way. That's not the way its done for "peace." During the post World-War II the Soviet Union defined "peace' as "an absence of opposition to world Communism." As long as nobody was challenging their communist expansionism they felt we were all at peace. Let some country; like the evil United States for instance, challenge their plans for world domination and ... no more peace.

For me any definition of "peace" must have a component dedicated to freedom. You can, after all, live a life of peace in a jail cell, so long as there isn't someone there to stir things up. You're not free, but peace reigns. Web Guy forwarded some emails to me over the weekend that disagreed. These people said freedom was not a proper component of peace. Well ... see what I mean? There are perhaps as many different definitions as there are definers. I'm not at peace if I'm not free. Simple as that.

Now ... to Obama and the Peace Prize. I take you back again to that Pew Research poll conducted in Europe last year. Almost 60% of Europeans who responded to the poll wanted America to be less powerful in world affairs. That's not an uncommon sentiment over there ... not uncommon right up until the Germans or Russians come marching across a border.

So ... here we have these five Norwegian politicians; The Nobel committee. Can we reasonably assume that this committee reflects much of the European attitude? I mean, they're not exactly headquartered in Boise. They look at the nominations before them, and there's PrezBO! Now what has Obama done in the past nine or so months? Why, he's given the Euro-weenies just exactly what they wanted! Now we have a United States with a weaker presence in world affairs! Russia and China are striving for military domination. Obama backs off the American promise of a shield against Iran's missiles for Eastern Europe. Putin says "frog" and Obama jumps. Putin says "jump" and Obama asks "how high?" Then we have the Arab states reportedly working to replace the dollar as the petroleum trading currency. And last week there are suggestions that Obama is just going to declare that the Taliban are too entrenched in Afghanistan for us to possibly prevail there - a prelude to a cut and run. Does any of this sound like a projection of strength? Of course not. America is projecting feel-good, hopey-changey weakness at every turn; and this is exactly what Europe wanted.

So last week they delivered a message to Obama. Europe likes your style. You're giving us exactly what we wanted --- what we asked for. You're weakening the United States; for us, the key to peace.

Oh ... and don't forget the slap in the face for George Bush. Bush is in office for eight years. He responds strongly to the attacks from terrorist Muslims. He frees Iraq from a ruthless dictator and his rapist sons. He projects American strength .. and Europe hates him for it. So ... the Nobel committee comes along and delivers a slapdown.

For those who define peace as an living free of threats to your natural right to be free ... this just isn't your day, is it?

Well ... at least this will give Newsweek a reason to put Obama on the cover again.

But wait! There's more! If you act now ..........

With all that being said ... in case you are not aware, criticizing Barack Obama for winning the Nobel Peace prize makes you a terrorist. Seriously, folks. That comes from the DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse. He said, "The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists - the Taliban and Hamas this morning - in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize ... Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize - an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride - unless of course you are the Republican Party." There's more to his rant. Woodhouse says, "The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim." By "the 2009 version of the Republican Party," I assume that he is referring to the Tea Party protesters. It is "that" type of Republican that has the Democrat boxers in a bunch.

Now we get it, don't we? If you aren't fawning over our new Nobel Peace Prize winner you're in the same bed with Islamic goons who kill innocents in Israel by lobbing rockets their way, and you're supportive of the Taliban's brutal efforts in Afghanistan. That's where political discourse has brought us today.

Hillary's state department also took the time to take a swipe at George W. Bush in the wake of Obama winning the Peace prize. Assistant Secretary PJ Crowley said, "Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes."

One thing for certain: If the Nobel Peace Prize wasn't all-but discredited when it was awarded to Yasser Arafat, this ought to do it.

Just wanted to start your day off with a little tidbit that you can be sure to pass along to your liberal friends who are oh-so-convinced that George Bush is still the reason for this country's problems. We've heard Barack Obama touting this line for months ... the war in Iraq is taking a serious toll on the economy. Well as it turns out, Barack Obama should look himself in the mirror. Here are the details.

The Congressional Research Service tells us that the total cost of the Iraq war under President Bush was $622 billion. Do you have any clue how much Obama is going to spend on welfare, treating America's parasite infestation, in just 2010 alone? Care to guess? Well ... let's try $888 billion. Yup, you got it. That's about $260 billion more than the cost of the Iraq war under Bush. And what will we get for that money? An entrenched welfare class, that's what. Our parasite problem will become even worse. Frankly, we got a lot more bang for the buck out of the war in Iraq.

Just trying to keep the truth. I mean, where else do you think you will find these facts ... the mainstream media??

The issue of the Bush memos being released isn't going to die anytime soon, especially with Barack Obama opening up the possibility of prosecution of Bush officials who approved such interrogation techniques. We are talking about this asinine assertion that waterboarding is torture.

I'll say this again - and you'll groan again - but if someone has information that could save thousands of lives, wouldn't you do anything you could to get that information? Pull out the bamboo shoots. Dump water over the guy's head. Poke 'em in the eye. You do everything you can until he talks. That's why this whole "torture" debate is such nonsense. You can sit on your high horse and bemoan torture all you want, but if it is the life of someone you cherish on the line my guess is that you are suddenly in the mood to make exceptions.

In the case of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the September 11th mastermind ... that's exactly what the CIA did. And guess what? It worked. Because the CIA waterboarded this Islamic goon, he revealed information that led the US government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

If that attack had gone through, or if other attacks since had culminated in the death of just one American at the hands of these Muslim goons ... I wonder what the virtuous Barack Obama would have to say.

What more can you say about Slobbering Barney Frank? I mean, when you strain to understand the guy, you realize that there isn't much point ... his thought process is about as mushy as his syllables.

So Barney was making a speech ... wait, people PAY to hear this guy speak??? Anyway, Barney was making a speech at the National Low Income Housing Coalition. And get this. Barney tried to blame this entire mortgage meltdown on George Bush. I kid you not! Barney said that it was "a Bush-era policy to help low-income families become homeowners instead of renters contributed to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and, ultimately, the larger economic crisis now confronting the country." How blatant! The policy was promoted by Bush, to be sure ... but it originated under Clinton and was promoted by none other than Barney Frank himself!

But don't worry. It's Barney Frank to the rescue! He says, "We will do everything legally possible to preserve every unit of affordable (rental) housing." Yeah. It's the government's job to make sure that people can obtain affordable housing. Amazing stuff, isn't it folks?

Remember ... if you're not part of the parasite class, when you go out there to rent or buy a place to live, find out where these government-subsidized living units are, and get as far away from them as you possibly can. Unless, that is, you enjoy living around criminals and druggies.

Now we are getting all of these reports about the fact that CIA interrogators used ... brace yourself .. waterboarding on Khalid Sheik Mohammed - the Islamic goon who admitted to planning the attacks of September 11th. And not only did they use waterboarding, but they used it 183 times! The horror!

The question all along has been: why has the Obama administration decided to release these memos now. Why? What purpose does it serve?

Dick Cheney brought up a good point. He points out that the Obama administration didn't bother to release the memos showing the success of these CIA efforts. He doesn't bother to release any information that show how many American lives were saved or the realities of any consequences of planned attacks. Of course he wouldn't, because that would legitimize the use of these techniques to save American lives. Obama is interested in building himself up in international eyes as some paragon of virtue .. the man that will bring the United States out of the dark ages of dungeons and torture to join the rest of civilized society.

OK .. bottom line time again. Let's talk torture. If someone has the information that could save thousands of lives -- OK .. just one life -- and if you had a reasonable expectation that you could get that information from this guy by pulling out his fingernails or (gasp!) pouring water on his face ... and if you didn't do it ... then you are every bit as worthless as he is.

The "9/11 was an inside job" crowd better dust off the gear .. you are being called to duty. Democrat Senator Patrick Leahy (who also happens to be the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee) wants a US "truth commission" to investigate the Bush administration. Leahy says that he wants the commission as a way to heal the "sharp political divides under former President George W. Bush and to prevent further abuses." He wants this truth commission to be set up similar to the one in South Africa that conducted investigations during the apartheid era.

So far, this is just Patrick Leahy spewing rhetoric and getting the moonbats all hyped up. We'll see if anyone in the Obama administration or other members of Congress are interested in the charade.

One of the media's favorite lines during this presidential transition has been that Bush left office with the lowest approval ratings in modern history. Turns out that this is not true. Surprised? The Media Research Center has run the numbers, and both Truman and Nixon left office with lower approval numbers. In addition, other presidents were in an approval ratings freefall when they left office ... they just got out before they bottomed out. Kennedy, who left office under tragic circumstances, had an approval rating that was in crash mode. Don't expect the media to correct their error on this one. They'll just let the "Bush had the lowest approval ratings" things slide.

This is going down as one of the smoothest presidential in history. Who do we have to thank for that? George Bush. Doesn't that just gall you? Contrast the class shown by the Bush staffers with the crassness shown by the Clinton staff.

And by that I mean that all of these anti-Bush activists are going to have to find another day job .. there is no more president Bush to protest. Most of them are disappointed that Bush hasn't been arrested and put on trial for his "crimes against humanity." Some are clinging to the hope that Nancy Pelosi would seriously consider prosecuting Bush administration officials, as she hinted over the weekend. But as for the people with bumper stickers "Bush lied, people died" and all this horsesqueeze.. they are going to have to find something new to protest. Maybe they will join the environmentalist movement .... if they haven't already.

Yesterday President Bush decided to commute the sentences of the two Border Patrol agents who were convicted of shooting a Mexican drug dealer. The shooting took place back in 2005. The agents shot admitted Mexican drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete Davila as he tried to cross the Rio Grande, abandoning a van full of marijuana. The agents say that they believed Davila to be armed and shot in self defense. Either way, the men were served with prison sentences longer than 10 years. They have already served two of those years.

During our Oval Office visit last week one talk show host, who shall remain unnamed (hint: It wasn't me) brought up the case of these two imprisoned agents. The president said that there was a process to be followed there, and that he was confident the host wasn't trying to circumvent that process. Talk about slinking back into your seat! For some reason the matter wasn't mentioned again during out visit.

While illegal immigration has taken a back seat to the election of Barack Obama, it still stands as one of the most vital issues when it comes to protecting our nation. GW really dropped the ball on this one. As did John McCain. And the Democrats won't be any better ....

But at least these two Border Patrol agents, who many argue were doing nothing but protecting the borders of this nation, will become productive members of society a little sooner. Keep in mind that Bush didn't pardon the men for their supposed crimes, he just commuted their sentences because he believed they were excessive. No kidding, even Osvaldo Aldrete Davila the drug smuggler was sentenced to less time in jail than the Border Patrol agents.

Last night I watched the President's address to the nation from the East Room in the White House. Around noon on Sunday I'm sitting with this man in the Oval Office with some other talk show hosts engaged in general conversation. Thirty-six hours later I'm watching him deliver a speech on TV. Let me tell you, these were two entirely different people. When we sat down in the Oval Office President Bush just started talking about his presidency and the ups and downs of the last eight years. His presence was dynamic. He was connecting with every person in the room. I'm certainly not saying that his speech was a disaster of any type --- but it's just a shame that the American people, and that includes the critics, can't experience the George Bush I experienced on Wednesday.

Just days before George Bush leaves office, the FISA court issued a major ruling. Now remember, FISA stands for Foreign Intelligence Secrecy Act. It is a secret court that expedites warrants for our intelligence agencies to help fight the war on terror. In a really rare public opinion from the court, it validated the "power of the president and Congress to wiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a specific court order, even when Americans' private communications may be involved." Here's the story from The New York Times.

This marks the first time that an appellate court addressed the constitutionality of the wiretapping powers of the federal government. With this ruling, "it may offer legal credence to the Bush administration's repeated assertions that the president has the power to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping that may involve Americans."

As a senator, Obama was very much against Bush's presidential wiretapping power. But then he voted for the bill anyway that gave Bush the power to do so. Now that Obama is entering the Oval Office, maybe he will appreciate a ruling like this .. knowing the challenges that face him.

Apologies from those who slammed Bush on this issue? Yeah, right. Are you kidding me?

By the way ... note that the critics always used the term "domestic wiretapping" when referring to these wiretaps even though either the caller or the person receiving the call was always in another country. Only in the mind of a liberal is that "domestic wiretapping."

Name: Doug Butler
City: Gainesville
Subject: you
Your message:...too bad Bush 43 is gone...now you can't carry his water for torture and warmongering. No self respecting libertarian would have anything to do with Bush and his hatchet job on the Constitution...which, obviously you go along with.

So, be outraged by Obama all you want; you just accept big government from so-called conservatives and rage at liberals who do exactly the same thing.

Brilliant, Doug. Just brilliant. Glad we gave you this opportunity to show off.

I had just returned from traveling to Arizona and Nevada over the holidays, and was ready to settle in for the Winter when the email came: "The President Wants To See You." Well, you don't ignore invitations like that, so it was off to Washington on Tuesday afternoon for an Oval Office meeting with several other talk show hosts with President Bush. This was the third time I had been invited to such a meeting - and my best guess is that it never going to happen again - at least not for the next eight years.

Too much to put into the notes ... but we'll talk about it today.

President Bush has declared Washington DC in a state of emergency. The emergency: the inauguration of Barack Obama. This promises to be the most expensive inauguration in history, costing over $150 million. Upwards of 2 million people are expected to attend .. are you ready to sue over those lines at the port-a-potties? Anyway, Bush did this so that unlimited funding could be released to help local authorities pay for the event. Mostly security costs.

Just for kicks .. take a look at this article from Bush's last inauguration. The liberals are throwing a fit over the cost and extra security. As you can imagine, that is nowhere near what we are gearing up to spend for Obama. For liberals it's the end of the world when big bucks are spent for the inauguration of a conservative Republican, but business as usual and entirely justified when the same bucks - and more - are spent on a coronation of the most liberal president in our nation's history. You can't accuse the left of hypocrisy though .. only conservatives can be hypocrites.

So we have yet to capture Osama bin Laden. Nancy Pelosi and her liberal compadres will tell you that this is one of the great failings of the Bush administration. Well even if Bush didn't catch him, his administration did do something ... they made the guy obsolete. He doesn't matter. He is just another turban hiding somewhere in the mountains of Pakistan. This isn't just me blowing smoke, folks. This is coming from a senior US counterterrorism official. He says that "Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his second-in-command have been rendered ineffective by international anti-terrorist efforts."

But don't worry. If he is caught under the Obama administration, he will have full access to the US court system. Yep, remember when he pledged that during the campaign? I wonder if that will be another one of those promises he can't keep once he realizes the realities of the situation.

Neal headed up to Washington D.C. for what he believes will be his last White House Christmas party. Meanwhile, I know you all need something to fill the time without your regular dose of notes, so try your hand as a secret service agent protecting President Bush from an angry shoe thrower!

Liberals are irate over this story. Here's the scoop .. five days before the inauguration, the president-elect and his family move into the Blair House in Washington. But the Obamas have requested to move into the Blair House on January 5th so that their girls can start classes at their private school. But the Blair House turns out to be booked until January 15th for "receptions and gatherings" by members of the outgoing Bush administration.

Now you get the comments .. "the Bush's are just Obama-haters," "the Bush's should have been kicked out of Washington a long time ago," "the Republicans are stooping to a new low by attacking the Obama children."

Oh ... and don't forget the racism argument. This is one you're going to have to get used to. For the next four years - possibly the next eight years - every single time someone disagrees with a word that Obama says, or every time someone doesn't jump when Obama says "frog;" every slight of Obama, no matter how obscure, will be called racism. Obama, you understand, is perfection. There is only one reason in the world that anyone would ever disagree with one word from this man. Only one reason why anyone would ever deny him anything; and that would simply be because Obama is black.

This is going to get sooooooooo tiring.