A packed house last night at Kennesaw State University for my faux commencement speech. Nobody threw anything at me. Not even any of the Kennesaw faculty members. Thank you, my friends, for the standing "O". Love you long time. And thanks to the event staff at Kennesaw for providing us with a wonderful venue.

The "Commencement Speech" was videotaped by Comcast and will be available on Comcast On Demand in the near future. A gallery of photos, yes, including pictures of Belinda and Cristina, is posted here. We'll also be replaying the speech next week on The Neal Boortz Show ... and the text of the revised speech will be going out in today's Boortz Blast newsletter. If you aren't already a subscriber, you can sign up here.

The Young America's Foundation has been keeping tabs on who is being invited to speak at commencement ceremonies around the country ... notice that I am not one of them ... and it won't shock you to hear that far more liberals are invited to speak at graduation ceremonies than conservatives. Why is this? Well it is very simple: liberals are preaching to the choir where as conservatives are more likely to spill the beans about the realities facing these fresh graduates.

So here is the list of just some of the liberals invited to speak at the nation's top colleges this year:

President Barack Obama, Notre Dame
Vice President Joe Biden, Wake Forest University
Hillary Clinton, New York University
Rahm Emanuel, George Washington University
Matt Lauer, Harvard University
Katie Couric, Princeton University
Ellen DeGeneres, Tulane University
Deval Patrick, governor of Massachusetts, MIT
Steven Chu, secretary of Energy Department, California Institute of Technology
Oprah Winfrey, Duke University
Wynton Marsalis, Northwestern University
Vicente Fox, Emory University
Gwen Ifill, Georgetown University
Suze Orman, University of Illinois
Tom Brokaw, Fordham University

Now, only five recognizable conservatives were selected to speak at the nation's top colleges this year:

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), Miami University
Laura Bush, Southern Methodist University
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), University of Georgia
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, University of Virginia
U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Morris Arnold, University of Arkansas

When it comes to this cap-and-trade scam, just remember one thing: that it is, in fact, a scam created for the purposes of expanding government and getting more of your money out of your pocket. Obama is running up a huge bill and he needs every cent he can get his hands on.

Take a look at what is happening in the battle over this bill. This is according to The Hill:

A committee chairman is threatening House leaders to either give him a role in shaping climate change legislation or risk losing every Democratic vote on his panel when the bill hits the floor.

Rep. Collin Peterson (Minn.), the outspoken Democratic chairman of the Agriculture panel, has been making it well-known that he wants his committee to have full jurisdictional authority over whatever climate change bill emerges from Chairman Henry Waxman's (D-Calif.) Energy and Commerce Committee.

This isn't about the environment, folks. It is about power. Even if you are government educated, you should have been able to figure this out by now.

The economy has hit broadcasting just as every other industry out there. Advertising revenue is down and people - damned good people--are being laid off. In one sense it doesn't seem logical. When business is bad you advertise to bring more customers through the door. Our weasels are trying hard to get that message across .... But in some cases the money just isn't there.

Well ... the Democrats have a solution. A solution, that is, if you're not a broadcast company owned by a white male. House Majority Whip James Clyburn (SC) is one of the preeminent race pimps in Congress. Every issue has a racial component for Clyburn. Clyburn has teamed together with Slobbering Barney and tax-cheat Charles Rangel to urge the Treasury Department to start spending some of that bailout money to minority-owned broadcasters.

If you're a broadcasting company owned by a white male you need not apply.

We'll just rely on your comments here. You pretty well know what I might have to say about this.

Obama wants Congress to authorize another measly $100 billion to loan to the International Monetary Fund. Why does the IMF need the money? To create a $500 billion global bailout fund.

Just what we need ... because our own domestic bailout is working oh-so well. We're going to run record deficits until your grandchildren have grandchildren thanks to PrezBO .. so why not spread some of your Grandchildren's wealth to the entire world? Aren't you just loving the change?

Headlines like this that remind me why the Republican Party is in its current state of pathetic existence: "Conservatives Urge Americans to Pray for a Troubled Nation."

No .. I have nothing against prayer. I use it every day. But I'm sorry ... as crazy as it seems there are still people who are looking to the dysfunctional Republican Party for some ideas on how to bring our nation back from the Obama-socialist precipice. Maybe it's just me ... but when I look to the Republican leadership for some sort of a brilliant plan, "Pray for a troubled nation" doesn't quite cut it. Our pastors can handle that suggestion .. we expect more from elected officials.

One out of every seven detainees that are freed from Guantanamo Bay ends up returning to terrorism. This according to the Pentagon. But Barack Obama wants to close up shop in Guantanamo Bay. Our government can't figure out what to do with the remaining prisoners. Doesn't all this make you feel so warm and fuzzy?

Change you can believe in? Housing terrorists in the US instead of Gitmo. How's that work for you?

I guess these cops were so angry with this suspect that they forgot about the rolling dashboard cameras. Whoops. Five of the cops have been fired.

Obama says that we can accomplish new auto emissions standards if we "work together." The Wall Street Journal has a message for him: good luck with that.

Here is a series of exchanges and quotes from tax cheat Tim Geithner. Read this, and then tell me that you still want this guy in charge.

While we are at it ...... watch this video of Barney Frank and then tell me if you can understand anything slobbering Barney is saying. If you can, call and enlighten me --- or just leave a comment right here. By the way ... what poor sap has the job of wiping down the microphones after Slobbering Barney gives a press briefing.

The Congress has officially passed the credit card bill that would impose sweeping new limits on the credit card industry. This is not going to work out all that well. Step number one? Credit card companies will start closing marginal accounts.

The Obama administration is one step closer to having a 'regulatory czar.' His name will be Wesley Mouch.

Now they tell us ... Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says that closing Gitmo was a "hasty decision." Duhhhhhhhh.

Three of Chrysler's secured creditors want the court to halt the restructuring plan on the grounds that it violates their legal rights and the government's authority.

Not that Obama doesn't have enough on his plate, but Iran has test-fired a missile capable of striking Israel. PrezBO will give Achmanutjob a call today and settle things down.

The Obama administration has now decided that California can have its stimulus money after threatening to withhold it because the state cut wages for healthcare workers.

No matter how many of these articles you read about the repercussions of Obama's emissions standards ... I never read one that says it will be a good idea.

How do Republicans plan on holding up this cap-and-trade bill? By reading all 946 pages .. all aloud. That's after they've hired the speed reader to comb through the darn thing.

Chuck Schumer has decided that now is the time to change our immigration laws.

State senators in South Carolina are "torn" on a resolution affirming the 10th Amendment. What's there to be torn about? Must be government educated ... maybe they don't know what the 10th Amendment says.

Here's an interesting report that found that our air quality actually improved during the Bush administration. That's a good reason to force the automakers to build go-carts.

A bunch of America's evil, filthy rich got together for a secret meeting recently ... and now the moonbats have begun concocting their conspiracy theories that these rich people are plotting to take over the world. Me? First, I wasn't invited. Second .. I think we would be much better off if we just let poor people run the show.

Joe Biden now says that he was fired on by Bosnian snipers ... wait, haven't we heard this one already? Oh .. and so was Hillary, by the way. Though I don't think those snipers were Bosnians. I think they were from Turdistan or something.

Here's some good news ... Illegal border crossings are down 27% since last year. The bad news is that there is a lot of sheet rock around that needs to be hung.

How do you like the idea of the Imperial Federal Government of the United States owning ALL of General Motors? Well, it could happen! Yeah, I know ... that's pure socialism. But look who's in the White House! A typical Marxist grad student is running the show. Don't act surprised.

According to Reuters:

General Motors' plan for a bankruptcy filing involves a quick sale of the company's healthy assets to a new company initially owned by the U.S. government, a source familiar with the situation said on Tuesday.

The new company is expected to honor the claims of secured lenders, possibly in full, according to the source.

The remaining assets of GM would stay in bankruptcy protection to satisfy other outstanding claims.

The government's plans include giving stakes in the new company to GM's union and bondholders, although the ownership structure of the company is still being negotiated, said the source who is familiar with the company's plans.

In addition, the government would extend a credit line to the new company and forgive the bulk of the $15.4 billion in emergency loans that the U.S. has already provided to GM, the source said.

But when it comes to the unions, UAW president Ron Gettelfinger says that he plans to sell the union's stake in Chrysler and GM in order to raise cash to cover retiree healthcare costs.

I'm looking for the part where the government is required to privatize. If you see it, let me know ... or is General Motors, along with Chrysler, going to be a ward of the state.

By the way ... Yesterday PrezBO announced his plans for a 39-mile-per-gallon corporate fuel economy average by 2016. Not going to happen. Any American automaker who tries to meet this goal is going to have to sell so many tiny and unsafe high-mileage cars that it will be virtually impossible for them to be profitable without adding thousands to the price of the models that people actually want to buy. This is what you get in a government-run economy. Products that people don't want to buy, but that please the snot out of special interest groups like the Sierra Club.

The Republican Party believes that it has turned a corner and is making a comeback. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has vowed for the GOP to more aggressively confront Barack Obama. Yes, this is how they are going to make a comeback ... by being more aggressive against Obama. Steele says that despite Obama's obvious personal popularity, the Republicans are prepared to take him on.

Now apparently, a lot of people in the Republican Party think that this is silly to confront the most popular Democrat: Barack Obama. Instead, they want to focus on less popular Democrats in order to show their strength. This is actually a good line from Michael Steele. He says, "They suggest that instead we should go after Nancy Pelosi, whom nobody likes. Or Harry Reid, whom nobody knows. Or this Tim Geithner fellow, whom nobody believes. Or maybe even Barney Frank, whom nobody understands."

Here's an idea for the Republican Party .. why don't you focus on getting some productive ideas of your own, rather than worrying about Barack Obama and the Democrats. No. one on the list? The FairTax.

A listener pointed me to this letter from a Dodge dealer down in Florida. Thought you may enjoy ....

My name is George C. Joseph. I am the sole owner of Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu, a family owned and operated business in Melbourne, Florida. My family bought and paid for this automobile franchise 35 years ago in 1974. I am the second generation to manage this business.

We currently employ 50+ people and before the economic slowdown we employed over 70 local people. We are active in the community and the local chamber of commerce. We deal with several dozen local vendors on a day to day basis and many more during a month. All depend on our business for part of their livelihood. We are financially strong with great respect in the market place and community. We have strong local presence and stability.

I work every day the store is open, nine to ten hours a day. I know most of our customers and all our employees. Sunshine Dodge is my life.

On Thursday, May 14, 2009 I was notified that my Dodge franchise, that we purchased, will be taken away from my family on June 9, 2009 without compensation and given to another dealer at no cost to them. My new vehicle inventory consists of 125 vehicles with a financed balance of 3 million dollars. This inventory becomes impossible to sell with no factory incentives beyond June 9, 2009. Without the Dodge franchise we can no longer sell a new Dodge as "new," nor will we be able to do any warranty service work. Additionally, my Dodge parts inventory, (approximately $300,000.) is virtually worthless without the ability to perform warranty service. There is no offer from Chrysler to buy back the vehicles or parts inventory.

Our facility was recently totally renovated at Chrysler's insistence, incurring a multi-million dollar debt in the form of a mortgage at Sun Trust Bank.

HOW IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CAN THIS HAPPEN?

THIS IS A PRIVATE BUSINESS NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY

This is beyond imagination! My business is being stolen from me through NO FAULT OF OUR OWN. We did NOTHING wrong.

This atrocity will most likely force my family into bankruptcy. This will also cause our 50+ employees to be unemployed. How will they provide for their families? This is a total economic disaster.

HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN IN A FREE MARKET ECONOMY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

I beseech your help, and look forward to your reply. Thank you.

Sincerely,

George C. Joseph
President & Owner
Sunshine Dodge-Isuzu

The Mayor of San Francisco has a proposal for all you filthy, disgusting smokers who insist on throwing your cigarette butts out onto public streets. So he is going to impose a fee on cigarette butts.

The taxpayers of San Francisco pay $10.7 million annually in order to clean up cigarette butts from gutters, drainpipes and sidewalks. The butts make up one quarter of all trash that the city picks up on the taxpayers' dime. So the city will add an additional 33 cents to the cost of every package of cigarettes. I guess that will cover the cost.

Question ... can you save your butts and turn them in for a deposit on the 33 cents? That would be a bit over a penny per butt.

Smokers are slobs. They don't care about their own health, why in the world would they care about littering the streets. That's nothing compared to what they're doing to their lungs.

Are you buying Barack Obama's (expensive) plan for cleaner, more fuel efficient cars? Here's a concept .. why not let the free market decide if it wants more fuel efficient cars? Wait a minute. Government knows best. Almost forgot.

This author says that Obama's proposed mileage standards may kill more Americans at a faster rate than the Iraq War. Dead Americans don't matter to the environmental crowd.

If gas prices stay low, Americans are less likely to buy into Obama's plans for vehicle fuel efficiency.

The House approved an expansion of this Helping Families Save Their Homes Act to assist homeowners facing foreclosure.

Yesterday the Senate overwhelmingly passed the credit card reform bill. People who run up huge credit card balances that they don't pay in full every month deserve to be abused. Stupid behavior should be punished.

Someone has decided to tackle the Flat Tax vs. the Fair Tax.

The Democrats are doing the Hokey-Pokey with this $80 million in funding to close Gitmo. They have now decided to pull the money out of the war spending bill. They know the danger in closing Gitmo - but PrezBO needs to be protected.

Barack Obama doesn't believe that school choice is an option to improve our education system in this country. That's because the unions don't like the idea. By the way, he exercised school choice in deciding where to send his kids.

On to some of the more important things in Washington ... the Pentagon said that it no longer includes a Bible quote on the cover page of daily intelligence briefings for the Obama administration.

A Muslim leader says that 'climate change' is the terrorist America should be fighting. Yeah .. climate change may walk into a crowded theatre wearing a bomb any time now.

Joe Biden is at it again .. claiming that this economic stimulus has created 150,000 jobs, which is entirely untrue.

Which politician tried to buy votes by handing out checks and free vegetables to the poor?

How did the Louisiana legislature manage to override Gov. Bobby Jindal's rejection of $98 million in federal stimulus dollars? Easy ... someone relied on the laziness of government officials.

A study out of Australia shows that the obesity epidemic in the US is due solely to increased food intake. Gee ... how did they figure that out?

Take a peek at the coversheets of the Worldwide Intellegence Updates to the Oval Office given to President Bush during the first days of the Iraq War. 

UPDATE: the event is now SOLD OUT! The only way to get tickets is to win them. If you would like to make a donation to the Make-A-Wish Foundation, you can do that here.

If you're listening to our flagship station, News/Talk 750 WSB, you'll have a chance to win tickets to the Commencement Speech. Listen weekdays during the 9 o'clock and 12 o'clock hours ET for when the Talkmaster tells you to call in and win.

You know that great commencement speech I wrote but have never been able to deliver? Well, we got tired of waiting for someone to invite me to do it, so we set the whole thing up ourselves! Grab your kids and join us May 20th at Kennesaw State University in Georgia for the infamous Boortz Commencement Speech. Tickets are $10 and benefit the Make-A-Wish foundation.

The Democrats are working out the details of a massive wealth redistribution bill, all in the name of climate change. This is the liberal nirvana. You take a naturally recurring climatological phenomena and use scare tactics to stampede the great unwashed into supporting your tax and spend schemes. The looter's plan to limit greenhouse gases are not in the name of sound environmental science but in the name of more government. The Democrats want to use something known as "cap-and-trade" to lower naturally occurring emissions by 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050.

The looters know that this is going to be expensive. So in order to offset the soaring energy costs associated with this plan ... which we will get to in a minute ... they want to create a system where the government would issue pollution allowances. These permits would then be traded in a government-designed marketplace.

Besides this artificial market, created entirely by government for government, cap-and-trade promises to cripple our economy. The Heritage Foundation has done an analysis of how this Waxman-Markey bill would affect our economy by 2035. Now 2035 might sound like a long way off .. but a child you have today will only be around 26 years ago and just starting to raise a family when that time comes. Here are their findings. Waxman's "environmental" bill would:

• Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $9.6 trillion
• Destroy 1,105,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 2,479,000 jobs
• Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation
• Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
• Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
• Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500
• Increase inflation-adjusted federal debt by 26 percent, or $29,150 additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation.

I will guarantee you, folks, that the government already has plans to make sure that low-income Americans will not pay a dime in increased energy costs. This will be just another notch on the entitlement belt.

Speaking of scams .. don't let the government fool you into thinking that ethanol is going to solve all of our problems either. Not only is it worse for our environment but it is going to cost you money. When that ragtag band of tired socialists and communists ran for the hills with the fall of the Soviet Union they immediately started looking for a new vehicle they could use for their anti-capitalist agenda. They found it. The environment. And they're so glad that you're so easily conned.

Don't you worry dear listeners ... we will get government-run healthcare in this country. It is only a matter of time. But just remember that to most people, they view government-run healthcare (or universal healthcare) as "free" healthcare. That would be because they are government-educated fools.

The last thing that universal healthcare is going to be is free. Maybe it will be free to those 50% of Americans who don't pay income taxes. But for a lot of Americans, this grand government healthcare scheme is going to cost them a lot of money in the form of tax increases. Remember, government doesn't earn wealth it seizes wealth. So in order to provide a service like healthcare, it has to get the money to pay for it - and the more you produce, the more of that money is going to come from you.

That leads me to this poll conducted by Rasmussen ... 42% of Americans say that everyone in the United States should have "free" healthcare. So there we go. Now you understand our dilemma. This question is inherently flawed, but I think you understand what they are getting at - it might as well be a right that is outlined in our Bill of Rights ... the right to healthcare!

Interesting to note, however, that by a two-to-one margin Americans reject the idea of free healthcare if it means that they would have to change their own coverage or join a program administered by the government.

So people don't want the government to touch their own healthcare, but they believe that the government should provide it for others.

Tax cheat Timothy Geithner has decided that the government should not impose caps on executive pay at companies receiving bailout funds. Thanks for finally clearing that one up for us, Tim. But he does believe that the government should set policies that would discourage financial companies from rewarding excessive risk-taking.

He says, "I think we can bring about broader reforms of compensation incentives in finance as a whole," not just at companies participating in TARP. "We'll make it much less likely that people get paid to take large amounts of short-term risk at the expense of their firm and the system as a whole."

Now, of course, we need to figure out who gets to define whether or not risk-taking is "excessive." I guess that would be the government. And a quick question for you ... where would our country be today if our history were not full of people who were willing to take "excessive risk" for a fantastic reward.

Today Obama is going to announce new nationwide fuel efficiency standards. This is the government telling the failing automakers what types of cars they can build. How much better off would we be if these automakers could simply make cars we wanted to buy?

Obama and Israel's Netanyahu aren't seeing eye-to-eye on Obama's plan for a two-state solution. Just so you know ... the Arab world will never accept a bona-fide two-state solution that permits the continued existence of Israel.

Obama has laid out a timetable for talking to Iran. Yeah, this ought to go over real well. Iran has a timetable too. Anyone worried about that one.

Are we in for a good old-fashioned congressional coup?

Your next adventure vacation?

Here's something to take note of ... China and Brazil want to use their own currencies, rather than the dollar, in trade transactions. This will only get worse as America slides deeper and deeper into debt.

Apparently Barack Obama is backing off promises to renegotiate NAFTA. Funny how that happens, isn't it?

Here is some potentially good news from Washington ... the card check bills is pretty much dead. I just hate this for the goonion movement.

Here's a name that we haven't heard in a while: Rod Blagojevich. Why is he back in the news? I don't know, why don't we ask Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

"Progressive" groups are trying to have Bush administration lawyers disbarred for their role in drafting legal rationale for interrogation techniques.

Seven weeks after being ousted by Barack Obama, former GM CEO Rick Wagoner is still on the payroll.

Newt Gingrich believes that Nancy Pelosi should no longer be Speaker of the House, considering her latest brouhaha with the CIA.

What will the politicians think to tax next in order to pay for their government healthcare schemes .. and where will it stop

How much taxpayer money is being spent to put up signs boasting that this project is being funded by your tax dollars?

When are we going to fix our entitlement problem in this country? Medicare, for instance, is paying billions of dollars in fraudulent payments. If you're surprised by that ... you're hopeless.

FOX News explains the current re-branding madness that is happening in Washington.

Here's a rather weird story ... A Texas mother of twins got the shock of her life when doctors revealed that her 11-month-old boys do not have the same father.

It's graduation time, and everyone was invited to give a commencement speech .. except me, of course. I've never been invited to give my commencement speech. I did deliver a high school commencement speech once, and enjoyed it. No negative critiques either. But a college or university? You have to be kidding me. Ain't gonna happen. We will have the chance this week to get some inkling of what I might do, however. I'm going to be delivering a faux commencement speech this Wednesday evening Kennesaw State University. That's about as close as it's gonna get for now.

Let's get to the people who do get to speak to graduates ... Michelle Obama gave the commencement address at UC Merced over the weekend. In her speech, she told the students to do one of my absolute favorite things: give back.

Gag.

She says, "You will face tough times. You will certainly have doubts, and let me tell you because I know I did when I was your age ... Remember that you are blessed. Remember that in exchange for those blessings, you must give something back. You must reach back and pull someone up. You must bend down and let someone else stand on your shoulders so that they can see a brighter future."

Sometimes I think I'm alone here, but this "give back" crap just makes me nuts. It is now the standard language of the left and those who should know better use the phrase all the time.

OK ... here we go again: The inference in the "give back" phrase is that whatever you have was given to you. You graduates have had this education handed to you on a silver platter. You didn't earn it. You didn't study. You didn't stay up long hours trying to understand a difficult text or to study for a critical exam. You didn't spend evenings in study groups that you could have spent brandishing your fake ID at several local watering holes. You romped and played your way through college and these diplomas you will received today will be given to you, not earned. Once you leave this college you will be given a job. You will not have earned that job through your educational pursuits, it will be given to you. Then, after you begin work, you will be given a salary. You will not have earned that money. If you receive commissions those will have been given to you as well. A gift. Not something you have earned. Ditto for bonuses. All gifts. Nothing earned through the application of skill and sweat.

Michelle Obama, and every other looter who has an eye on the wealth you produce, and who uses this "give back" line, will be completely negating every amount of effort you have put into your livelihood. Remember, they're not asking you to "give," they're telling you to "give back." The very premise of that phrase is that your wealth was a gift, not earned. Since your wealth was given to you, when you make some sort of a donation to a charity you are not "giving," you are "giving back."

I know that I drone on and on about this ... but this "give back" nonsense is like a dripping faucet.

Alright, can I have a show of hands as to how many of you are sick of hearing about Barack Obama's commencement address at Notre Dame? Good. That's what I thought.

Briefly, I am going to delve into a topic that I never talk about on the radio, and that is abortion. We get it .. Notre Dame is a Catholic school. Most of the students are likely to be pro-life. Barack Obama is a Democrat and he is pro-choice. To some of these Notre Dame students, this is the worst possible thing that could happen to them - have a president in the White House who is pro-choice. The real problem here is that the students weren't protesting Obama's plans to massively grow government or spend them and their children into oblivion. Nope. That didn't seem to bother the students at all. All that these protesting students were concerned about was abortion.

Maybe once they grow up after entering the real world, they will find something other than controlling the reproductive lives of females to focus on. Obama got it right when he said that "the views of the two camps are irreconcilable." That's why we never talk about it, folks. I'm going to continue to fear a government that would force a woman to have a baby she does not want to have, and the other side is going to continue to sing the praises of government force. And so it goes.

The federal income taxes for every taxpayer would have to rise by roughly 81% to pay all of the benefits promised by the government under current law.

How do you figure that? Bruce Bartlett will explain.

The government wants to expand its role into how corporations govern themselves. Chuck Schumer will be introducing a bill this week known as the shareholder bill of rights. It will give shareholders more say on executive compensation and make it easier for them to nominate corporate directors.

The bill will do a few things:

• Confirm the SEC's authority to grant shareholders access to the corporate proxy
• It will require public companies to create a separate risk committee to ensure that risk management is given "appropriate oversight."
• The duties of the chief executive and the board chairman would be required to separate.
• Companies would also be required to get approval from shareholders for executives' golden parachute packages.
• Corporate directors would be subject to annual shareholder votes and must receive a majority of voters in order to remain on the board.

Shouldn't all of these guidelines be up to the shareholders and not the government? Maybe that's just my weird mind at work.

Peggy Noonan has a great column about the indecipherable language of government and how it is endangering our nation.

Wall Journal Editorial ... "Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich." No need to say any more.

Do you remember last week when Obama said that healthcare leaders pledged to cut costs by $2 trillion? Yeah, turns out that it isn't exactly accurate. Wait! Obama not being entirely truthful? You have to be kidding me!

As of right now, the Democrats are sticking by Nancy Pelosi, despite the fact that she accused the CIA of lying to Congress. That's fine. She's theirs. They're welcome to her.

Reckoning day for tax and spend governance may finally be at hand ... in California.

Mark Steyn has an excellent column exploring Nancy Pelosi's 'troubling' performance at her press conference last week.

While John Kerry is anxious to bailout the newspaper industry, the White House actually seems resistant to the idea.

According to a Rasmussen poll, 32% of Americans say they'd be willing to pay higher taxes so that the government could provide health insurance for all Americans. Now that's a rather interesting statistic when you consider the fact that almost 50% of Americans don't pay income taxes in the first place.

Where would we be without the latest gaffe from Vice President Joe Biden.

Speaking of Vice Presidents ... Dick Cheney has been in the news a lot lately, and the Republicans seem to be okay with this.

Michael Steele has decided that the Republicans need a new way to oppose gay marriage .. so they are going to say that it will affect small businesses. Oh yeah .. this is really going to propel the Republicans into power again.

Today Barack Obama will be meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. I would just love to be able to read Netanyahu's mind during that meeting. "How in the hell did this guy ever get elected?"

New York Rep. Pete King says that the ACLU is single-handedly "tearing down the United States" because of their position on torture and the Gitmo detainees.

Have you heard about this Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009? It would authorize Eric Holder to deny the sale or transfer of firearms to known or suspected terrorists. Would that include our veterans?

So a 16-year-old high school student decides not to wear any underwear - and a somewhat short skirt - to high school on a day when pictures are going to be taken. What could possibly go wrong? The family, of course, is going to hire a lawyer.

We are getting closer to having the first four-year accredited Islamic college in the United States.

Hugo "the Horrible" Chavez wants to close down the last remaining TV station that dares to question his authority.

Research suggests Wal-Mart can actually reduce obesity in low-income neighborhoods.

What products of flying off store shelves in this economy?

• emphasizing treatment over incarceration
• ending disparity between crack and powder cocaine
• ending raids on medical marijuana clinics in states where they are legal

It's only a matter of time before President Barack Obama's vast popularity runs aground on his energy policies. In the name of saving the planet from global warming, he has delayed new oil drilling, an action that will have major political repercussions once the world economy recovers. Instead of using some [of] the stimulus billions to produce more gas and oil, Obama's wild-eyed supporters dream of "renewable" energy derived from corn, wind, sunshine, and even grass.

With the appointment of extremists like climate czar Carol Browner and science adviser John Holdren, Obama has placed his administration's environmental policy in the hands of radicals. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar proposes replacing oil and coal with windmills. Yet Barron's recently reported that America would need to build 500,000 giant offshore windmills and transmission lines to produce Salazar's specified 1,900 gigawatts of electricity. In contrast, oil and gas drilling could provide hundreds of thousands of solid, well-paying blue-collar jobs. . . .

All of these things are happening at a time when natural gas is abundant and cheap. The new technology of horizontal fraccing has made it economically feasible to drill into vast shale deposits in many states, even famously difficult ones like Michigan and New York. Many cars could run on natural gas, much like many buses do already. On a recent trip to Peru, I learned that most taxicabs have been converted to natural gas for a cost of about $1,000 each. New technologies continually revive old oil and gas fields and make new ones economically viable. So it's little more than socialist Malthusianism to argue that the world is running out of cheap energy. Science will always find and harness new sources.

The headline from the Associated Press reads "5 Miami men convicted of Sears Tower attack plot". Read the story here ... then click back.

There ... did you notice anything. Though at the end of the story you'll see some references to al Qaeda .. nowhere in the story are these men identified as Muslims; and yes .. they were all Muslims. Another story identified them as "members of an apparent militaristic religious sect", but not Muslims.

Radical Muslims can rant all week long about their intentions to kill as many Americans as possible and to bring destruction to our shores, but for heaven's sake we simply cannot identify these people for what and who they are. That would just be oh so insensitive and offensive, wouldn't it?

What headlines am I talking about? Ones like this: "Obama Halves Chrysler's Planned Marketing Budget." Barack Obama, the president of the United States, is now in the business of setting marketing budgets. Tell me, where in the Constitution does it mention this one? Probably right next to the part where it says that he can oust CEOs of private companies.

Here's the deal ... Chrysler wanted to spend $134 million in advertising over the next nine weeks. But Barack Obama's auto task force decided to give them half of that. The sad part about this is that many people are simply excited that the Obama task force would even somewhat recognize advertising as a necessary expense. How sad. In the real world a bankruptcy trustee would make decisions of this type with the approval of the bankruptcy judge. No more, it seems. It's the rule of Obama now, not the rule of law.

Back in April, the EPA determined that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that poses a threat to public health. Because of this finding, it set into motion a series of regulations under the Clean Air Act.

A White House document confirms that an EPA proposal to regulate gasses blamed for global warming will be costly for factories, small businesses and other institutions. The memo was a compilation of opinions that had been sought before the EPA determined that greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health. The memo states, "Making the decision to regulate carbon dioxide ... for the first time is likely to have serious economic consequences for regulated entities throughout the U.S. economy, including small businesses and small communities."

So there you go. The Obama administration knows that these cap-and-trade proposals and carbon regulations are going to be costly ... and yet it will continue to allow the EPA to act in the name of "global warming."

The Media Research Center did an analysis of the lamestream media's coverage of Obama's first 100 days. Guess what? Turns out that they have done a great job of sending tingles up their legs but a lousy job acting as watchdogs.

MRC analysts looked at all 982 broadcast evening news stories about Obama and his administration from Inauguration Day (January 20) through April 29. Here are some of the interesting, though not surprising, things that they found:

- Obama's first 100 days were defined by massive spending, aggressive intervention in the private sector and proposals for a huge expansion of the federal government. Yet none of the networks aired a single story on whether Obama's policies were pushing the U.S. toward socialism, and no reporter used the term "socialist" to describe Obama.

- Not only that, network reporters never used the word "liberal" to describe either Barack Obama or his agenda during the first 100 days.

- The networks lavished good press on every major initiative of the early Obama administration, including the massive stimulus package, all of the various bailouts, health care, stem cells, the environment and foreign policy.

- In the days before the President unveiled his unprecedented $3.5 trillion budget -- with a record-shattering $1.75 trillion deficit -- four out of five statements on the evening newscasts parroted the White House spin that Obama was a deficit fighter.

- Reporters treated Obama's hugely expensive $787 billion stimulus bill to mainly positive coverage (58 percent positive, 42 percent negative).

- The networks applauded Obama's decision to use taxpayer money to fund embryo-destroying stem cell research (82% positive coverage).

- Network coverage of Obama's mortgage bailout was also positive -- 59% of statements supported the bailout or wanted even more intervention, compared to 41% who opposed the bailout as unfair to responsible homeowners.

- Reporters heavily skewed their coverage in favor of the President's actions on global warming (78% positive).

- President Obama's decision to send thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan was greeted by nearly unanimous (91%) positive coverage -- a far cry from the highly negative coverage of President Bush's successful troop surge in Iraq two years ago.

- Like Obama and the Democrats, the networks went on a feeding frenzy against big corporate bonuses. The networks aired six times more statements forwarding the "infuriated" reaction to business (104) than criticized politicians' grandstanding (16).

- The networks spent days decrying AIG's $165 million bonuses, but hardly mentioned the $210 million in bonuses handed out by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the bailed-out mortgage giants with strong Democratic ties). ABC and NBC completely ignored the Fannie and Freddie bonuses, while the CBS Evening News gave it 27 seconds.

They made him. They must support him.

Give me a break, would you?

OK ... here's the deal. The Food and Drug Administration is a bit upset with General Mills, the folks who make Cheerios. Cheerios boxes, it would seem, make the claim that Cheerios can lower your cholesterol 10% in one month. True? Don't know. But the FDA says that this advertisement on the box makes Cheerios a drug and they want the language changed or eliminated.

My beef? An Internet headline this morning said "Now Obama Admin Battles Cheerios." Oh yeah .. this is all Obama's fault. Any other president and the FDA would be sitting silent. Are you kidding me? Look ... there is enough about Barack Obama to cause concern with any thinking American who values liberty, but trying to paint Obama as the enemy of Cheerios? A bit much, don't you think? How in the world can we expect anyone to pay attention when we bring up some actual problems with Obama's theory of governance? "Oh yeah, that's the same guy who was worried about the Cheerios."

I have it on good authority that those Brinks home alarm systems will absolutely not work unless it's a white guy trying to break into your home. Never in the history of Brinks advertising on television has anyone other than a white guy been shown breaking into a home. If you live in an area where someone not white might actually break into your home you might want to look into another alarm system.

Byron York has an excellent column about Barack Obama's budget. It seems as though the problem is that Obama's budget is so large and ostentatious that the Republicans don't even know where to begin. If that is how the Republicans in Washington feel, imagine the average ignorant voter out there.

From York's column:

Republican strategists have a problem. The scale of what President Barack Obama proposes to do to the American economy is so enormous, so far-reaching and so potentially disastrous that the opposition party is having a hard time describing it.

"How do you translate the numbers into something that people can grasp to represent the broader problem?" a Republican pollster asked in a recent conversation. John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and other GOP leaders would love to hear an answer, but the pollster didn't have one.

GOP message mavens are struggling with something that academics call "insensitivity to scope." It affects us all; we can understand something on a small scale but have a difficult time comprehending the same thing on a massive scale.

Insensitivity to scope is a major obstacle to understanding the Obama administration's $3.6 trillion 2010 budget. People simply have trouble understanding a number so big. A recent poll asked Americans how many million are in a trillion. Twenty-one percent of respondents got the answer right -- it's a million million. Most people thought it was a lot less.

There's more here .....

This is bound to set off the discussions about Social Security and Medicare. The latest news is that these two entitlement programs have gotten worse because of the recession. In fact, they are in such bad shape that Medicare is now paying out more than it receives.

The Trustees of the program said that Social Security will start paying out more than it collects in 2016. That is one year sooner than previously projected, and the entire system will be depleted by 2037.

Medicare is doing even worse. The trustees say that it will be insolvent by 2017, which is two years earlier than projects.

By the way .. there is not now and there never has been a Social Security Trust Fund. That's a fiction created to keep the dumb masses placated.

But what does Barack Obama want to do? Create MORE entitlement programs and grow the size of the government. Do you REALLY think this is going to work out well for us?

If Chef Hans Rueffert were any less tenacious, you might say he he was cut down in his prime--but as hard as he's fought, it's clear he believes his best days are still to come.

After years of running his family's gourmet restaurant at the Woodbridge Inn in Jasper, GA, and producing his own TV specials and cooking shows, Chef Hans' career reached a high point when he was selected to compete on "The Next Food Network Star" out of more than 8,000 applicants. Just two weeks after placing third in the competition, Hans was diagnosed with advanced stomach cancer.

Two years and endless surgeries and complications later, Hans is not just surviving when the doctors told him not to expect too much. He's still following his passion and supporting his young family--his wife Amy and their children, Finn, 9, and Ella, 7--during this trying time. 

His new cookbook, "Eat Like There's No Tomorrow," is more than a collection of recipes--it's a story and a prayer. Hans employs his classical culinary training alongside vivid writing and compelling photography to explain why food, for its ability to bring people together, may just be the thing most worth living for.

"Eat Like There's No Tomorrow" is self-published and is available at www.hanscooks.com for $24.95.

So is Obama going to tax your employer healthcare benefits in order to pay for his government healthcare scheme? The possibility seems more and more likely.

Barack Obama and the Democrats want to help pay for this government healthcare by imposing a tax on soda.

Could a tax cut for some evil rich people actually slip through the cracks of the Obama budget??

The FAA has decided that a good use of $800,000 of your tax dollars would be to repave a runway at an airport named after John Murtha.

Not only is California is facing a budget crisis of $ 21.3 billion dollar. That's what happens when you tax the tar out of the achievers in your state.

The government ran up a $21 billion budget shortfall last month, which is the first April deficit in 26 years. That's change you can believe in.

Governors Rick Perry and Mark Sanford are planning a tele-town hall that is being called the "Tea Party 2.0."

Barack Obama ended the US boycott of the UN Human Rights Council ... and so now we are a part of it.

Part of this credit card reform may include allowing retails stores and restaurants to offer discounts to customers who pay with cash.

After whining about corporations hosting conferences and junkets in Las Vegas, Barack Obama is headed there himself.

Even after Barack Obama's grand stimulus package, state and local governments are still facing the realities of having to lay off workers.

Did you hear that Hugo Chavez has created the world's cheapest cell phone and decided to name it after the male sex organ?

This is typical government for you ... The US will pay $2.6 million to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job. Your tax dollars at work.

Considering the efficiencies of government, I am surprised that we haven't gotten more stories like this one about a woman who has been dead 40 years who received a stimulus check.

Some 200 laid off UAW worker are going to get the chance to go to Hollywood and attend a special Eminem concert, thanks to the Jimmy Kimmel show.

I wonder if in Maine you have to be insured for moose falling out of the sky.

We can all rest easy now ... Donald Trump says that Miss California can keep her crown.

Neal and Kermit

Royal and Kermit

The government will have to borrow nearly 50 cents for every dollar it spends this year.

Borrowing implies that it will one day be paid back. With interest. Actually, it has to be paid off. Much of that debt is owned by foreign governments. That debt will have to be repaid. Some of the debt is held by Americans ... and the government can easily just ignore that. After all ... the government owns us. We work at the pleasure and for the pleasure of the political class. Whatever wealth we produce, they own. In their infinite wisdom they'll allow you to keep just enough of your wealth to encourage you to keep working so that you can keep funding them. It will be the same for your children and your grandchildren. There's a huge multi-trillion debt to be paid ... thank goodness the government has the assets to cover that debt. Your children.

George Will had another excellent column over the weekend, and a listener brought this paragraph of that column to my attention.

In "Democracy in America," Alexis de Tocqueville anticipated people being governed by "an immense, tutelary power" determined to take "sole charge of assuring their enjoyment and of watching over their fate." It would be a power "absolute, attentive to detail, regular, provident and gentle," aiming for our happiness but wanting "to be the only agent and the sole arbiter of that happiness." It would, Tocqueville said, provide people security, anticipate their needs, direct their industries and divide their inheritances. It would envelop society in "a network of petty regulations -- complicated, minute and uniform." But softly: "It does not break wills; it softens them, bends them, and directs them" until people resemble "a herd of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd."

Read it a couple of times. When you fully understand what de Tocqueville wrote find a government-educated friend and try to explain it to them. If you REALLY want a challenge find someone who voted for Obama - and has not come to regret that vote - and see if you can explain it to them.

Barack Obama announced yesterday that he wants to see 5,000 failing government schools closed and reopened with new principals and teachers. A few questions immediately come to mind.

Since Obama doesn't have the authority to do this, how exactly is he going to see that local school districts follow suit? Or will he expand his role as president to make sure this happens ... wouldn't shock me. Maybe he'll just withhold federal funding. That seems to work.

What the heck are these schools going to do with these teachers and principals in the meantime? Will they get paid not to work? Will they be fired? Will they be transferred? Fired? Did I say fired? No way. There will be some other government job for them somewhere. You don't expect them to survive in the private sector, do you?

That leads to the next, giant question ...

How long will it be before the teachers unions throw a fit? Unless their jobs are guaranteed ... I would give them minutes rather than hours to blow a union gasket.

My last question would have been how much money is the going to cost the taxpayers? But I managed to find the answer ... about a million dollars per school. Yep, Obama's budget sets aside up to $5 billion to facilitate this type of school turnarounds for failing government schools.

Here's an idea, Obama ... ever heard of a voucher or a private school? Rather than spending $5 billion to build more government schools, why not use that money to give students vouchers to attend the schools of their choice. That's what you and the First Lady did? Or here's another idea .. why not allow that money to be used by private companies or individuals or churches or what-have-you to build and run private schools. Just because you build a brand-new school doesn't mean that the education is going to be any better .. especially when you are dealing with government.

Unions rule in the education world, my friends. They're doing to the government schools what they did to our auto industry. We're just going to stand by and let them get away with it.

Have you heard about the standoff between California and the Obama administration? California's governor's office says that a politically powerful union has an inappropriate influence over the Obama administration. Why is that? Because the Obama administration decided to withhold billion of dollars in federal stimulus money until California reverses a wage cut for labor group workers. Now this wage cut between the California government and the home health care worker's union was negotiated. Both sides agreed. But the Service Employees International Union didn't like the idea of any union negotiating for a lower wage ... so they went to DC and complained to the government. Obama steps in and tells California that he is going to withhold $7 billion in federal funds unless the negotiated agreement is cancelled and the home health care workers get their money.

Governments run by unions. Change you can believe in.

As expected, the Obama administration revealed more changes to the tax code yesterday. Remember that it had to find ways to come up with more tax revenue because it miscalculated how expensive it is going to be for the government to bring healthcare to the people! One of the many ways the government plans to get more of your money is by closing tax loopholes for all those evil rich people ....

A senior administration official says, The proposals "take on what we believe are a series of unjustifiable loopholes, unjustifiable tax breaks that we simply cannot afford."

That who cannot afford? The imperial federal government? Is it entitled to this money that is earned by you, the taxpayers? What they are really saying is that this money belongs to us .. and we just can't afford to let the people who earned it keep it. We'll let them keep just enough to keep them working. Are you starting to "get it" folks?

Some Dallas, Texas schools are going to give students time off for performing well on tests. Looks like there's going to be a scarcity of Asian faces around these schools on some days.

Uh oh. That was racist, wasn't it?

The Mercatus Center of George Mason University has released a study ranking the states compared to their level of personal freedom. The results? Some of the most liberal US states rank the lowest when it comes to personal freedom. Lordy, what a surprise? The study says that it is the "first-ever comprehensive ranking of the American states on their public policies affecting individual freedoms in the economic, social, and personal spheres."

Here are some of its findings:

• The freest states in the country are New Hampshire, Colorado, and South Dakota, which together achieve a virtual tie for first place. All three states feature low taxes and government spending -- and middling levels of regulation and paternalism.
• New York is the least overall free by a considerable margin, followed by New Jersey, Rhode Island, California, and Maryland.
• When weighing personal freedom alone, Alaska is the clear winner, while Maryland brings up the rear.
• As for freedom in the different regions of the country, the Mountain and West North Central regions are the freest overall -- while the Middle Atlantic lags far behind on both economic and personal freedom.

In the age of Obama these disparities simply cannot be allowed to exist.

Here are the latest details on how the Obama administration plans to get its hands on the money you've sent overseas to escape our confiscatory taxation.

Just in case you weren't aware .. the US may have high budget deficits, but it is not Barack Obama's fault!

Politicians in Washington are hashing out the details of this new credit-card consumer bill of rights. Jury is still out for me on this.

When it comes to probes into the Bush interrogation techniques, the GOP now has something to throw in the Democrats' faces: Nancy Pelosi. What a hag.

Have you been following the back and forth right now over whether or not the country is more or less safe with Obama as president?

John McCain says that Obama does not have the authority to use TARP money intended for banks in order to bailout the auto industry.

The White House still believes that its stimulus plan is going to create 3.5 million jobs by 2011. Some economists beg to differ.

Is Washington going to bailout the newspaper industry? Kevin Hassett says that failed liberal newspapers should be allowed to fail.

Read this article about how your stimulus dollars are being spent, and then tell my why on earth you want government in charge of anything in your life.

The Justice Department has sounded the warning for corporate America that the government is going to "aggressively" investigate big firms that improperly dominate markets.

An upcoming war funding bill is set to include money to relocate inmates from Guantanamo Bay. Now the question is .. where are they going to go?

Florida Governor Charlie Christ is going to run for the Senate seat opening up due to the retirement of Mel Martinez.

Maybe this will explain a thing or two about why Congress is going to get away with this ridiculous cap-and-trade scheme ... only 24% of voters know what cap-and-trade actually is. What a surprise.

Here's a real shocker .. in the Arab world, Barack Obama is more popular than the United States.

White House officials want you to know that Wanda Sykes' joke about Rush Limbaugh was not funny. Got it?

Australia is worried about a potential sub-prime mortgage meltdown, and it is looking to the United States to learn from its mistakes.

Greece has barred Google Street View from taking any more images.

This is what some thug in Florida believes it takes to be a rapper. Gotta love that Hip Hop culture.

A Saudi judge has determined that a husband has the right to slap his wife for spending too much money.

The government wants to make sure that you know that attending a "swine flu party" is a bad idea. Just in case you couldn't figure that one out for yourself.

This weekend volunteers from Alpha Team K9 Search and Rescue located the body of a missing murder suspect in Georgia. They do their amazing work at no charge. Hey look, they are a nonprofit. I'm sure they could use a few bucks to continue their work.

... that Democrats are working for legislation that would automatically register to vote anyone who obtains a driver's license or who qualifies for welfare benefits? There is no move to automatically register anyone who actually obtains a job, becomes successful and pays taxes.

... that three-quarters of the budget "cuts" that Obama identified in his new budget come from defense spending, not discretionary domestic spending?

... that one species of bat has a tongue that is 150% longer than its body? It cannot, however, breathe through the top of its head ... so what's the point?

... that the people who make Hotwheels and Matchbox cars made more money last year than the people who make Fords, Chryslers and Chevys?

... that there are strong rumors that Nancy Pelosi is conjuring up a plan to place a tax against all outstanding pension and 401K plans? I know the Clinton administration was looking at this ... but thus far no solid evidence that Pelosi is on the same track.

... that you use about 50 pounds of toilet paper a year? We are 7 percent of the world's population, yet we use half of the toilet paper. Even more since January 20th.

... that the feds are cranking up some new mortgage programs designed to get low-income people into the wonderful world of home ownership? In other words, plans to make sure people who can't afford to buy a home can buy a home. This is what got us in trouble in the first place.

... that the Republican party has absolutely nothing going for itself right now! OK. So you knew that one.

Most of us are operating under this belief that the purpose of our appeals courts, including the Supreme Court, is to consider questions of interpretation of our laws in the light of prior court rulings and our Constitution. Yeah .. that might be what most of us think, but it is most certainly NOT what President Obama is thinking.

Sometime soon .. possibly this week .. Obama will let us know his choice to replace Justice Souter. I'm not looking for him to appoint anything resembling a strict Constitutionalist. Instead, he will appoint someone who treats the Court as merely a second legislative branch of government.

To understand just what kind of a Supreme Court Obama wants, just read this column from the Weekend editi8on of The Wall Street Journal. Back in 2001 a Chicago radio station interviewed the future president. The subject somehow turned to the Supreme Court. Obama told the listeners that he was disappointed that the Supreme Court has done little more than just defending peoples "formal rights." Obama wished that the Court had spent some more time addressing "more basic issues of political and economic justice." Uh oh. There's that "justice" word again. To me "justice" is when someone gets what they deserve. To the left "justice" is when someone gets what they want. And just what economic justice issue did Obama want the Supreme Court to spend more time addressing? Well .. how about "redistribution of wealth?" That's right! Back in 2001 Obama was telling how he wanted the Supreme Court to be a player in efforts to take money from those who earned it to hand to those who did not. There's Obama's Supreme Court ... taking wealth from those who earned it and giving it to those who want it.

There's still more change you can believe in.

Isn't this so much fun?

The White House has decided that private companies deemed "too big to fail" need to be policed by a supercop, and the White House is recommending the Federal Reserve play the role.

Last week, Obama's economic advisors had a meeting with representatives from banks, hedge funds and financial groups. These groups had suggested to the president that if the government insisted on regulating industries, that the task should be divided among various regulators. But that doesn't seem to be what the White House is going for. It wants a single independent regulator to monitor system-wide risk, and that one regulator "should be given better visibility into all institutions that pose a risk to the financial system, regardless of what business they are in."

So we aren't just talking the financial industry here. We are talking about any company that the government feels is too big to fail and would pose a risk to the financial system. Who in Congress has been chosen to lead the task for drafting legislation for such a supercop?? None other than slobbering Barney Frank.

This legislation, according to tax cheat Tim Geithner will include an "aggressive" package of reforms for the financial industry. That includes a fundamental overhaul of how the industry pays its senior executives. In other words, those evil bonuses will be a thing of the past.

This is a massive proposed increase in the control privately-owned businesses by government. But I don't have to tell you that, do I? What you may not know, however, is what you call this type of economic system --- a system where business is owned privately but owned by the government. The word would be Fascism.

Experts say that Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing is all but inevitable for General Motors. If it wanted to avoid bankruptcy, GM would have to persuade bondholders to swap $27 billion in debt for 10% of its risky stock. That's not all .. you also have the UAW to deal with, and you have to close factories and dealerships. Oh and all of this has to be done by a June 1 deadline.

Bottom line is that it doesn't seem like it is going to happen.

Experts say that GM is currently lining up majority stakeholders to make a court-supervised reorganization go more quickly. But some say that the threat of bankruptcy is just a ploy to con any reluctant bondholders into the equity swap deal. The government requires that 90% of the thousands of bondholders agree to this stock swap. Why would they, considering that the government and the UAW would get far more stock in exchange for debts owed by GM? Consider what the White House tried to pull last week with Chrysler .........

Barack Obama's auto task force has a difficult choice to make ... will it bend to union demands and require GM to keep more jobs in the US or will it allow GM to expand its operations in countries with cheaper labor?

After pouring billions of OUR CHILDREN'S DOLLARS into GM, the fact of the matter is that it can't survive while it is beholden to the United Auto Workers. This means moving more manufacturing (and therefore jobs) overseas. Needless to say, the unions are less than happy. They feel as they have a right to these jobs! How dare GM try and make money by paying people to do the same job for less money!

The current outline for GM would roughly double the number of cars built in Mexico, China and South Korea. This makes absolute sense. In the United States, GM pays UAW workers about $54 an hour with benefits. However in South Korea, GM would pay its workers less than half of that at $22 an hour. In Mexico, workers could earn about $10 an hour and in China that figure could be as low as $3 an hour.

A UAW official says, "My hope is that the government is like the UAW: protectors of the people." I'm sorry but GM is not in the business of protecting the people. It is in the business of making cars. As for the UAW .. it isn't in the business of protecting people either .. unless they're UAW union members.

When I'm thinking about these autoworkers one image sticks in my mind. When is the last time you saw an autoworker wearing a windbreaker or hat with just a Ford, Chevy or Chrysler logo on it? I'm sure they're out there .. but I haven't seen one. Instead they're always wearing their clothing emblazoned with the UAW logo .. UAW Local this, that and the other thing. Who are they working for? Ask them and they'll point to their union logo. Seems a lot of them forgot that the union doesn't sign their paychecks.

So what is it going to be, Obama? Are you going to let GM survive by allowing it to expand its overseas production with less costs, or are you going to bow to the labor unions and force GM to make cars in the United States?

This shouldn't come as a shock to you. Barack Obama and the Democrats are insistent on making you more dependent on the government. Their current plan on how to make this happen is to convince you that you need the government to provide you healthcare. But reality is starting to set in and guess what? Obama's grand plans are going to be a LOT more expensive than originally anticipated. The original estimate from the Obama administration was $634 billion, but that may pay for only half the cost. We are now talking an upfront tab of up to $1.5 trillion over a 10 year period.

As of right now, the Obama administration is sticking with its figure of $634 billion. What they've realized is that they didn't raise enough taxes to pay for it. They need more tax dollars. Obama's original spending cuts will only actually save about $309 billion and tax increases will only raise about $267 billion. That's leaves a gap of about $60 billion that the administration has to take from your wallet at the point of a gun.

Today the administration will reveal the details of plan B ... a revamp of its tax objectives in order to make-up the difference for this healthcare scam.

We know that Obama will propose $60 billion in new tax increases over 10 years on wealthy estates, businesses and others. So the evil rich, the corporations and business owners will shoulder the burden of payment in order to fund the dreams and schemes of Barack Obama's great government expansion and dependency. More specifically, Obama would tighten estate-tax rules that would give taxpayers less flexibility to minimize liabilities on inherited goods. Another part of the plan would require businesses that make payments to corporations to report these payments to the IRS. The goal is to make sure that evil corporations are reporting all their taxable income.

Another way Obama may try to raise extra cash to pay for this plan is to tax health insurance benefits provided by private employers. This may sound familiar to you ... it was John McCain's plan during the presidential campaign. If health insurance was taxed as regular income, the government could potentially collect another $250 billion each year.

Another way to get more money to pay for this scheme is to do it the Hillary Clinton way: require that every US citizen has medical insurance. Or to put it another way ... make it illegal to be without health insurance.

This is from a column in the San Francisco Chronicle ... a glossary of Republican doublespeak for all you right-wing conservatives. I'm ticked I didn't make the list.

No commentary necessary ... just read and enjoy.

Activist judges: Judges whose rulings are at odds with the perceived wisdom of Republicans.

Bankers: Stewards of the capitalist system who always know what's best for the economy, who deserve low taxes and big year-end bonuses no matter how poorly their institutions have performed.

Class warfare: Assaults on rich people in the form of the usual whining of poor people.

Clinton, Wm. Jefferson: Democrat president whose sexual dalliance sent the nation into a tailspin from which even George W. Bush could not save it.

Compassionate conservatism: Ignoring the poor, except for an occasional contribution to the collection plate at church. Also see "conservatism."

Democrats: Devil-worshiping scum, foes of free enterprise, champions of the shiftless and the lazy, enemies of hardworking Americans everywhere.

Energy policy: Drill, baby, drill.

Fairness Doctrine: A government regulation once imposed on broadcasters under the mistaken notion that the public airways were owned by the public. Wisely rescinded by Ronald Reagan, paving the way for the careers of Rush Limbaugh, et al.

Fox News: A place where failed newsmen go to live out their golden years (e.g., Britt Hume, Geraldo Rivera), with paychecks provided by an Australian capitalist intent on explaining America to itself.

Gore, Al: Democrat presidential candidate and sore loser who concocted the myth of global warming just to steal joy from the Republicans who beat him.

Greed: The emotion that drives food-stamp recipients.

Justice Department: Agency created to legitimize illegal acts of Republican presidents.

Liberal: Any of a species of lily-livered, weak and effeminate men, or pushy and overly masculine women who have either renounced men altogether, or turned them into "girly-men."

Limbaugh, Rush: A male Mother Teresa for the oppressed captains of business and industry.

New York Times: Propaganda organ, once affiliated with Pravda, now a subsidiary of Al-Jazeera.

No!: All-purpose reply to any idea that doesn't include tax cuts for the wealthy.

Obama, Barack: Inept, inexperienced and inarticulate Negro man elected to the highest office in the biggest mistake the American electorate ever made.

Patriotism: Hoping the nation's leader fails, if he's a Democrat. Hoping the nation's leader succeeds, if he's a Republican.

Pelosi, Nancy: See also "harpy," "harridan."

Poor: People born lacking the gene that creates a solid work ethic, but with an excess number of genes that prompt whining.

Profit: The most sacred goal of human existence. Anything that interferes with its pursuit or acquisition is an affront to God.

Republicans: 1) The only real Americans; 2) Those who uphold traditional American values, such as marital fidelity, and disdain un-American practices such as homosexuality. Republicans uphold these values in public, though they sometimes are found to betray those values in private. They're only human, after all. (see also Vitter, David, or Craig, Larry).

Saint: (n.) See Reagan, Ronald.

Secular humanists: See "spawn of Satan."

Victory: A word foreign to Democrats, who always favor retreat or capitulation to the nation's enemies, foreign or domestic.

Wall Street: The nervous system of America, linked directly to the heart and brain. In short, the essence of this great nation.

George Will has another great column about the government's role in our economy.

Oh those gentle liberals. Wanda Sykes at the White House Correspondent's Dinner. Nice.

Over the weekend, Hugo Chavez thought it would be appropriate to use the military to take over companies that provide services for the oil industry including two US-owned gas facilities.

Hollywood showed up in Washington over the weekend to attend the White House Correspondents Association dinner.

Barack Obama wants a credit card reform bill on his desk by Memorial Day for him to sign. Here's an idea ... just let the government issue credit cards.

Great Britain is spending its tax dollars wisely in order to provide government healthcare. Wait, this is government we are talking about. Who are we kidding?

Fannie Mae needs another $19 billion from the taxpayers to stay afloat.

I could have told you this one ... Barack Obama's rich supporters fear his tax plans show he's a class warrior. I wonder what their first clue was.

Is Barack Obama just naïve when it comes to our economy, or is he intentionally destructive? Valid question. It's either one or the other.

President Obama is set to revive the system of military commissions for prosecuting Guantanamo detainees.

This Obama budget is such a joke. Here's another way to look Obama's "half-penny" solution to our government spending crisis.

This isn't good news, folks ... China has overtaken the US as Brazil's largest trading partner.

When it comes to the future of the Republican Party, Dick Cheney says that he would rather have Rush Limbaugh leading the charge over Colin Powell.

Oh no ... the CIA forced terrorist prisoners to stay awake for 11 days! The horror.

Has Barack Obama reversed his stance on immigration enforcement??

One item in Obama's budget that saw an increase in funding was for AIDS research and programs. By the way ... you do know that AIDS has never been an epidemic in the United States, don't you?

Montana passed a bill asserting that that guns manufactured in Montana and sold in Montana to people who intend to keep their weapons in Montana are exempt from federal gun registration.

Talk about government waste ... take a look at how politicians in Great Britain are using taxpayer dollars.

Here's some refreshing news from the Obama administration ... it will let stand a Bush-era regulation that limits protection of the polar bear from global warming. Every once in a while ... a glimpse of common sense.

What are global warmers going to do when they find out that the Arctic ice is in fact "twice as thick" as scientists expected?

Apparently Susan Boyle turned down an invitation to attend a dinner with Obama at the White House.

They are going to start charging rent at homeless shelters in New York City. Don't feed the bears.

Every time our wonderful government tries to do something to promote homeownership ... it seems to turn into a disaster. Time to back off?

Obama released the details of his budget yesterday. This disaster is 1,500 pages long. We can't afford the $3.4 trillion price tag. The money simply isn't there. Obama believes that the more money the federal government spends, the greater America becomes. This is the mindset of a man who believes that our greatness comes from government. I don't think I've ever seen anyone so in love with government as Barack Obama.

Oddly enough, the news today isn't that Obama is proposing spending $3.4 trillion. The media is all abuzz over the news that Obama has proposed cutting $17 billion in spending and completely eliminating some programs. Let's get real folks .. this $17 billion is just one-half of one percent of Obama's budget. Government spending has doubled in the past eight years ... and if all you can find to cut is one-half of one percent than you aren't worth a damn as an administrator or CFO.

What's more ... PrezBO's list of proposed budget and program cuts is less than the list put forth by George Bush proposed last year. Bush proposed $34 billion in savings. Now speaking of proposed spending and program cuts ... just because these cuts are proposed doesn't mean that they actually happen. In fact, half of Obama's proposed cuts are the very same ones that Bush tried to get nixed from the budget when he was in office.

Earlier this week I told you of news reports that the Obama White House was using the services of a behavioral psychologist for briefings on the way people react to large dollar figures. Interestingly enough, most people can't differentiate between $17 million and $17 billion. Once the numbers get that high they all bland into a numerical sameness. This means that Obama can propose spending $3.4 trillion and then propose $17 billion in savings and the people think that he is actually doing something incredible! Aren't you comforted by the idea that the president is hiring behavioral psychologists to help him pull the wool over your eyes?

Here is something to keep in mind. Posturing about spending cuts usually means nothing. Presidents generally roll out a long list of spending cuts. It's all for show. The cuts are generally ignored by Congress. So while he may tout the fact that he is proposing a cut of $17 billion, the chances of that actually happening are as slim as my chances with Angelina Jolie - and she's so covered with ink I don't think I'm interested anymore. Let's go with Allison Krause.

Here is something else to keep in mind. Even if Congress adopted these proposed cuts, it would not actually reduce government spending. In fact, Obama's budget is going to increase overall spending. So any savings that Obama may generate from these cuts will be used to pay for more government programs ... the ones that Obama wants to create, like government healthcare.

Amidst these proposed cuts, what gets an increase in federal funding??

The IRS. Yep, Obama wants to double the funds for the IRS to enforce tax laws. There's another $890 million of your tax dollars. Rather than spending more money to enforce a tax system that doesn't work and punishes achievement, how about implementing a new tax system that will allow the taxpayers to keep this money and allow businesses to bring jobs to this country without fear of being punished by the government.

Then there's endless examples of mindless government pork projects. While Obama's budget does seek to cut several education programs, (won't happen) there are a few other "educational" programs that were seen as worthy of maintaining their federal funding. One, for instance, is a $9 million program to promote the history of whaling and trade in Massachusetts.

Here's a list of all the programs that Obama is cutting in this budget. One of these cuts, by the way, is a 9% cut in the unit of the Department of Labor that's in charge of regulating unions. Gotta thank the people that put you in office.

Talked about this on the air, need to put this in the Nuze. I was walking through the mall earlier this week when I noticed a black dude walking the other way. His t-shirt had the old Warner Brothers logo on it .. but the lettering was interesting. "If you see the police, Warn-a-Brother." How cute. Let's not get into a whole rant here about what this t-shirt says about the culture this character lives in. I'm just wondering what happens if I go to a mall in a predominately black community wearing a t-shirt with the words "If you see a brother, warn-a-cop." My guess is that I'm not going to fare to well.

Another detail in Obama's budget is that he plans to end tax breaks for those evil, filthy oil and gas companies. In other words, Obama wants to increase taxes on the oil industry. He wants to end $26 billion in tax breaks, which he classifies as "unjustifiable loopholes ... costly to the American taxpayer and do little to incentivize production or reduce energy prices."

Did he say "costly to the American taxpayers?" Well, he can get away with that because he suspects you don't realize - and many Americans don't - that every penny of additional taxes these evil oil companies have to pay to the federal government will be added to the cost of the products they produce. The tax increases will show up at the gas pumps. I know that this is a difficult concept for the government-educated dumb masses to understand, but corporations - and this includes oil companies - don't pay taxes. They collect taxes from their customers, shareholders and employees and pass them on to the government.

Again ... let me point out that the greatest ally the looters in Washington could possibly have is an uneducated population.

After releasing the results of these "stress tests" ... the Obama administration says that it is still open to the idea of government dictating management changes at these companies receiving "substantial" government aid. Robert Gibbs says the government would consider changes at the CEO level and at the board of directors level in order to make sure "that the management was in place to remedy the situation and ensure long-term viability without continued government assistance."

Tax cheat Timothy Geithner also echoed this sentiment. He says, "We'll have to make judgments about whether the quality of leadership of those boards is strong enough so that again our interests are met best." Did you hear that? "Our" interests. Who exactly is he speaking for? The federal government .. the Obama administration .. the Treasury Department .. the taxpayers? Either way, I am still waiting for someone to show me where in the Constitution it says that the executive branch of our federal government can remove anyone from a private company.

Again .. I'll point out, though it won't register with most people, that there is a name for an economy where the means of production are privately owned but controlled by the government. That would be a fascist economy. Not that anyone really cares.

A listener pointed us to this "Rant and Rave" from the local Augusta Chronicle:

"THE SWINE FLU is a plot by the right to kill off the poor, the old and anybody that doesn't fit their idea of a good American. Just watch out people, it is going to get worse."

Dollars to doughnuts that this person voted for Barack Obama.

Saw this low-life walking through the airport yesterday. Pulled out the trusty Flip and shot about 20 seconds. Look at this idiot. It looks like his pants are fastened just above his knees. He has to waddle like a duck to even walk. Upstairs we had the typical backwards baseball hat and a scowl. Can you imagine anyone wanting to give this moron a job doing anything where he might come in contact with the general public? Probably won't need a job anyway ... odds are we'll be providing him with room and board before too long. Is there any chance he knows how totally ridiculous he looked? Not that he would give a flying KrispyKreme.

The Financial Times explains how emotions are going to save our economy.

The Obama administration released the results of the bank "stress tests" ... Ben Bernanke says that the Treasury Department "stands ready to provide whatever additional capital may be necessary."

Obama tells journalists directly that they should stress the fact that his proposed budget cuts are "significant" when writing their reports. Trouble is ... they aren't.

What kind of impact are Obama's grand budget cuts going to have on our deficit? Next to nothing.

Obama's plans to close down Gitmo has really turned into a mess. The Wall Street Journal has more on where we are going to send these prisoners. Attorney General Eric Holder reassured lawmakers that detainees will not be released in the United States.

Thomas Sowell explains what exactly Obama means when he says he wants to appoint a justice with "empathy."

Whenever an article is called "free cars for poor" ... you can bet that a government outrage is stirring.

Sovereignty resolutions are becoming more prevalent in state legislatures around the country.

Some of Obama's biggest backers during his campaign are now fighting Obama's support of the card check legislation.

The WHO says that up to 2 billion may get the swine flu over the next two years. The rock group or that UN crowd?

A slow economic recovery sure is getting in the way of Obama fulfilling his promises to massively expand our government entitlement culture.

Dick Cheney says that it would be a mistake for the Republican Party to become more moderate.

I've told you about Great Britain's plans to tax the tar out of its high achievers. Tell me this isn't going to cause a mass exodus of achievers.

The EU is considering shorter work weeks and more spending on government retraining programs.

The taxpayers of Tennessee are going to fund the erection of a statue of Al Gore. Will the statue depict him with his head up his ass?

Urban outdoorsmen will now be protected under hate crimes laws in Maryland.

How would you feel if I told you that our imperial federal government was going to set up a powerful national agency to bailout cities and states? Considering where the looter-in-chief and the Democrats are taking this country, it probably wouldn't surprise you. The man who orchestrated the financial rescue of New York City in the 1970s is advocating this type of agency. Felix Rohatyn says that Congress should consider creating an entity like the Reconstruction Finance Corp. that was created back in 1932.

Seeing as our government is doing such a fantastic job bailing out the financial industry or the auto industry ... don't you think that we should give the government even more power to bailout our cities and states? You know where this goes, don't you? The emasculation of local governments and the primacy of the federal government. Come on, folks. Can't you see this coming? We have a president who is completely and absolutely in love with government - a president that has no love for the private sector. Just where do you think this is going to take our country? Do you see those people driving around with Obama bumper stickers on their cars? Your children are going to have a lot to thank them for.

Speaking of bailouts ...

You knew this one was coming. Chrysler is not going to repay the taxpayers more than $7 billion it received in the form of a bailout. It has been confirmed with the Obama administration that this is included as part of its bankruptcy filing.

So there you go. Not only do secured creditors get the hind teat ... but so do the taxpayers. Who gets the front? The very union workers who helped destroy the American automobile industry. How wonderful. That's $7 billion ... gone. Poof. Never to be seen again by you or your children or grandchildren.

Democrats, including Barack Obama, don't like the idea of vouchers. Vouchers smell too much like freedom. Government knows what is good for us, so there is no need for us to exercise any freedom of choice. Government reasoning isn't hard to figure out. First we have the teacher's unions. Teacher's unions are the most powerful unions in this country, and teachers don't want the competition that would come from vouchers. If the teacher's unions don't like it ... the Democrat Party will kill it; guaranteed.

I bring this up because the D.C. voucher program is back in the news. Remember that Democrats essentially killed the D.C. voucher program. But Obama has decided that he is going to extend the program until all of its current participants have graduated from high school. So the students who are currently enrolled in the program will get to stay in the program ... but this opportunity will not be afforded to any new students or families in the future. There are currently 1,1716 students participating in the voucher program.

Now Obama has to become a salesman and convince Democrats to endorse the gradual phase out of the program, which would include granting funding in future appropriations bills.

So Obama has essentially taken the easy way out. He won't come out in favor of the voucher system; however he won't totally deny these students participation in the system. He will let it run its course and hope that this will appease the participants enough to get by for the next couple of years.

Depriving DC parents of school choice. Change you can believe in.

Aren't you just sick to death of me pulling these "change you can believe in" lines on you?

Do you think that Arlen Specter has had his "oh crap .. what have I done" moment yet? Considering the fact that he has lost all seniority in the Senate, I would say that moment is coming soon if it hasn't already. The amazing part of the story is that Senator Harry Reid apparently promised Specter that he would retain his seniority if he jumped parties. Angry Arlen trusted the cadaver? He didn't take into consideration the fact that government is all about power, and his fellow Democrats weren't about to give up any of their precious power just so they could claim another desk on their side of the aisle. Either way, Specter is confident that Harry is going to "work it out" and that his assurances on seniority "will be fulfilled." Keep dreamin, Arlen.

So what may have done it for the Democrats? Debbie Stabenow says that many of her colleagues were irritated when Specter told The New York Times that the Minnesota courts should "do justice" by declaring Norm Coleman to be the winner of the Senate race against Al Franken.

Here's why this seniority issue is a big deal for Arlen Specter .. it limits his ability to get pork projects, money and jobs for his state. See, Specter was a senior ranking member on the all-powerful Appropriations Committee. He says, "My senior position on Appropriations has enabled me to bring a lot of jobs and a lot of federal funding to this state." Without this, Arlen believes that he doesn't have the "power" he has accumulated during his 29 years in the Senate. Without power, he probably won't be re-elected.

Wouldn't that be wonderful?

In the meantime ... does anyone see a Republican leader on the horizon? Yeah, I thought so.

Get an eyeful and an earful of the Talkmaster at a couple of upcoming events:

• Friday, May 8th in Naples, Florida I'll give my own State of the Union Address and more at this Boortz Bash
• Wednesday, May 20th in Kennesaw, Georgia I'll deliver my newly updated Boortz Commencement Speech to benefit the Make-A-Wish Foundation
• Saturday, June 13th in Columbia, Missouri for the Midwest FairTax Rally

It has been 44 months since Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. But the parasite culture is still living large. FEMA still has 4,600 trailers in Louisiana and Mississippi that are occupied. But as of May 1st, their deadline for sucking vital bodily fluids from the taxpayers expired. Now, the residents of these trailers are upset and fearful that they are going to be kicked out by May 30th.

OMG! How horrible! These parasites might actually have to go out there - after almost four years - and take care of themselves?

Housing advocates - that's a fancy way to describe people who believe that having a house is a right guaranteed by our Constitution - say that the people living in these trailers are the Gulf Coast's most vulnerable residents ... those would be the poor, the sick and the old people. So they want the deadline extended yet again.

Belinda Jenkins is a 53-year-old disabled resident of FEMA housing. She says, "I don't have no plan right now." Yep, that should about sum it up.

Remember: Don't feed the bears.

What an absolutely incredible column today from George Will. Read this and then call and tell us of the high hopes you have for the American automobile industry.

Today Obama is sending his 2010 budget package to Congress. The headline will be that he is cutting $16 billion from federal programs. They're not cuts. They're just reductions in spending increases. But we are talking about a $3.55 trillion budget.

The White House has changed its tune again ... now it looks like it WILL be releasing images of the NYC photo op. Actually .. one picture. Only one.

What we are currently seeing with Chrysler and GM should show us why government shouldn't have gotten involved in the auto industry to begin with.

Here's an interesting little tidbit ... who was the only Republican Senator to receive campaign donations from the UAW in 2008?

The Washington Post reports that former Bush administration officials are urging the Justice Department to soften an ethics report that criticizing lawyers who gave the OK for the government to use "harsh interrogation tactics."

This sounds about right for our government ... paying government school teachers not to teach.

When the budget gets tight, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declares that it's time to study whether to legalize and tax marijuana for recreational use.

I love this ... House Republicans are trying to figure out ways to handle slobbering Barney Frank.

The Oklahoma legislature has approved legislation claiming Oklahoma's sovereignty.

The governor of Oregon says that we need to scale back consumerism in order to save the environment.

The New York Post has a tip for President Obama: Next time you excoriate tax cheats, try to keep Rep. Charles Rangel's name out of the discussion.

How does the government plan on tracking all of this stimulus spending? Easy ... it is going to make you, the taxpayers, do it. That's because the government won't be able to handle the job of tracking how stimulus money is spent until at least 2010.

Rest easy. A Senate panel is currently looking into the plight of the newspaper industry.

Have you ever heard of a pika? Well it could be the first animal in the contiguous states to get Endangered Species Act protection because of climate change.

When a supermarket wouldn't sell an ambulance driver alcohol because he was wearing his uniform ... the man took matters into his own hands.

In which country do women participate in the "Miss Beautiful Morals" pageant? I'll give you a hint ... think penguins.

... and this time it's none other than Dave Ramsey.

The FairTax is a bold proposal. It is only natural that people are going to try to criticize it. Is it too much to ask for these people to do at least a modicum of research so that they at least appear to know what they're talking about?

This time the culprit is Dave Ramsey. I like the guy, and I like his approach. His sermons on living debt free are right on, and no doubt he's helped millions of people to improve their financial. OK .. mighty fine. But now he's taken it upon himself to opine that the FairTax simply isn't, in his words, "fair."

Let's take this quote from Ramsey's article: "People would only pay taxes on items they buy, except for food, basic clothing and other kinds of necessities." Most of the FairTax supporters know that this is just flat-out wrong. The explanation is incomplete. If Ramsey really was informed on the FairTax he would know that you pay taxes only on items that you buy at the retail level, and that food, basic clothing and other kinds of necessities are included. Ramsey would also know about the prebate. He would know that every household in this country --- that is, every legal household --- would get a credit or check from the Treasury Department every single month equal to the FairTax they would be expected to pay on the basic necessities of life during the following month. This FairTax prebate is so essential to the FairTax plan that to ignore it, or to be unaware of it entirely, is worse than careless.

Ramsey also writes of the FairTax "This means it's more of a burden on poor people, because they would pay a higher percentage of their overall income." Sorry, wrong. The poor, poor pitiful poor would pay virtually nothing - zero percent of their income - to the federal government. [ALERT! Brilliant thought follows!] To pay any taxes at all to the feds the poor would have to spend above the poverty level. If they're doing that ... they're not poor. Pretty easy, isn't it? I wonder why Dave Ramsey doesn't get it? Is there a chance he just shot from the hip here without doing any real research? The FairTax deserves better than this flippant, uninformed treatment.

Dave Ramsey could be a good proponent of the FairTax. He's very bright, and he would recognize the beauty of this plan if he just would take the time to actually study it. Knowing what you're talking about .... Is that too much to ask?

Weird, this audio clip on YouTube seems to show Ramsey supporting the FairTax. Huh. Maybe he's lost changed his mind since that was recorded.

It's been a while since Americans have had a corporation that they could really rail against. It feels like ages since everyone raised their pitchforks over the AIG bonuses. Well, maybe the time has come again, as AIG makes its way back into the news. The original outrage, you may remember, came when AIG announced that it was going to pay $120 million in 2008 bonuses to about 6,000 employees.

You'll be happy to know that this $120 million isn't even close to the amount AIG will actually pay to employees in the form of bonuses for 2008. Try $454 million ... that's quadruple what Americans were outraged over before.

AIG's explanation is that this $454 million is the answer to a different question than what as previously asked ... this new figure "'reflects all types of variable compensation across all of our businesses,' while the $120 million figure he provided earlier reflected only bonuses paid to corporate headquarters executives and high ranking officers at its major businesses around the world."

So if it has been a while since you have let your wealth-envy really get the best of you .... Just remember that all of these evil people working for this evil corporation are going to be getting bonuses!

After the taxpayers spent $328,000 on pictures of Air Force One over Manhattan, and after hundreds of New Yorkers marked their shorts, Obama has decided that the photos will not be released to the public. Sort of odd, isn't it? After all, this White House has been eager to release other photos! How about pictures of American troops "torturing" Islamic radicals? How about pictures of the coffins of dead American soldiers returning from the Middle East? Those pictures are just fine, thank you very much. But those pictures of Air Force One? No way. And why not? Well ... here are two possibilities:

1. The Obama White House knows that those photos will be a constant reminder to the people of his free spending policies.
2. If the pictures are released someone will immediately duplicate them using Photoshop .. and dare you to tell the difference. Just a bit embarrassing.

Hard to blame him, isn't it? Release of those photos only leads to additional embarrassment.

The Hill did a little survey to find out exactly what Congressmen think of each other. So over the last couple of months, they asked Representatives to name the hardest and easiest members of Congress to work with. Here's what they found ...

Most partisan Democrats

1. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.)
2. Henry Waxman (Calif.)
3. John Conyers Jr. (Mich.)
4. Barney Frank (Mass.)
5. Jim McDermott (Wash.)

Most partisan Republicans

1. Tom Price (Ga.)
2. Virginia Foxx (N.C.)
3. Jeb Hensarling (Texas)
4. Patrick McHenry (N.C.)
5. Michele Bachmann (Minn.)

Most bipartisan Democrats (listed alphabetically)

Neil Abercrombie (Hawaii)
Rick Boucher (Va.)
Bill Delahunt (Mass.)
Barney Frank (Mass.)
Steny Hoyer (Md.)
Jim Oberstar (Minn.)
Collin Peterson (Minn.)
Ike Skelton (Mo.)
Gene Taylor (Miss.)
Ed Towns (N.Y.)

Most bipartisan Republicans (listed alphabetically)

Judy Biggert (Ill.)
Bob Inglis (S.C.)
Walter Jones (N.C.)
Steven LaTourette (Ohio)
John McHugh (N.Y.)
John Mica (Fla.)
Ron Paul (Texas)
Lee Terry (Neb.)
Fred Upton (Mich.)
Bill Young (Fla.)

Did ya notice anything peculiar about these lists .... How about the fact that Barney Frank is the only House member to appear on both the partisan and bipartisan lists? You will notice also that Nancy Pelosi appears only as a hyper-partisan Democrat.

Jamie Dupree mentioned this on the air yesterday, and I just had to get a good chuckle. With Obama's impending Supreme Court nomination, everyone has their theories as to who will be the chosen one. Some say it has to be a woman. Others say it has to be a Hispanic so we can check off the list "first Hispanic justice."

But there is another strong lobby group out there ...the gay lobby. Yep, there is a big push to have Obama nominate the first openly gay justice on the Supreme Court.

Now, some could argue that we have already had gays serving as Justices ...... but we will just leave it at that.

Some interesting email from someone who has never listened to my show. What a surprise:

Name: Alberto Mota
City: El Paso, Texas.
Subject: Swine flu!!??

first of all i just want to make clear the fact that i've never listened to you show by radio, you may ask yourself how do i know about you, or you may not because you seem to be a very popular man in your region at least, but well the reason i know you is because this morning i was watchig the news in a mexican channel, and they were talking about what everyone else is talking in the world: swine flu. so it got to my attention a piece that this channel put about your program.. i don't know, i just don't get, the way you say that every single mexican is a carrier..

what are you talking about???!!

and the fact that you don't want any mexican around you, not working in your properties, well, you know what... i don't think so, you need us, as well as we need dollars to pay our bills and to give shelter and food to our families, i mean, you need us, and we don't even need you, we didn't come to this country for you, we came because we needed to, and we don't go over there to cause problems, and i know there's people that become criminals and put a stain in our name, but there is people like that everywhere, and you know you're not helping us, and actually you know that the world you're dreaming on is not possible anymore..

One of the things i can't totally get is people like you, leaders that take their followers to a totally wrong way, all full of hatered and nationalisms...

coming back to the swine flu topic, if you're the responsable guy you seem to be, don't lie to your audience, think before you talk, inform youself and then if you have a reason to, blame someone, or on the other hand try to help the situation instead of getting it worse..

with the respect you deserve,

a citizen of the world...

Oh I love that "citizen of the world" nonsense. If you think you're a citizen of the world, try voting in elections outside your country. You folks know the truth here. I have never said any of the things alluded to in this character's email.

Barack Obama's tax proposals could "kill the spirit of competition" ....... In India. Here too. Democrats don't like competition. Just take a look at our schools.

Take a look at how Obama's tax proposals would affect the Irish economy. Imagine if we had the FairTax and these companies would be encouraged to bring that money and those jobs to America.

Read this from the Wall Street Journal. Obama wants you to buy Democrat cars.

Now we get an extremism dictionary from the Homeland Security Department. These people are really on a roll lately. I don't like confiscatory taxation. That makes me an extremist.

The Obama administration is stepping up pressure on Israel to accept a two-state solution to its conflict with Palestine. Actually, there's more to it than that. Obama wants Israel to accept all Palestinian's who want to live in and do God-Knows-What in Israel. You get the feeling that Obama wants Israel to just go away.

The "cash for clunkers" bill is back on the table .. the government will give vouchers worth up to $4,500 for people to replace their less fuel efficient cars for models with better mileage.

Here's an article from Forbes Magazine explaining that the recession is over.

Gallup polls show that Americans want less government control when it comes to gun ownership.

China is building up its military power and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff believes that this is aimed at the United States. We show weakness, they show strength.

The White House is still on a mission to support corn ethanol which is worse for our environment and costing the taxpayers a lot of money to prop up the industry.

Did you hear an Obama official declare: "At the White House, We Love MSNBC."

How did the Democrats receive Arlen Specter at his first policy lunch? With warm applause. And from this article in Politico it seems that Angry Arlen isn't exactly being welcomed by the Looters with open arms.

Just the latest tirade against Israel from the mad mullah Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

A bill being considered in Connecticut would require all government schools to use environmentally friendly cleaning products.

A mayor in Alabama wants to change the law to require that all business signs in Spanish include English translations.

A man has sued the New Orleans Police Department for $1 in damages over his "right" to wear a skirt.

The University of Wisconsin System wants the state to adopt laws that would allow universities to punish students for actions that take place off campus.

Scientists have unveiled a race car that runs on chocolate.

Red light cameras are considered "effective" if they generate enough revenue for the government.

Yesterday I gave you a Boortz economic lesson in an attempt to explain what the Barack Obama administration is trying to pull in this Chrysler bankruptcy. The latest on this story ... Thomas Lauria, a lawyer for top creditors, has officially filed a motion to stop the Chrysler bankruptcy. Lauria claims that the Obama administration has violated the Constitution by trying to devalue the senior creditors' holdings on behalf of junior creditors. What does Lauria base this on? Something called the 5th Amendment. Maybe you have heard of it. Just in case, here is a little reminder:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

But wait ... as they say ... there's more! Lauria, who represents the group referred to as the non-TARP lenders, is going to ask that the bankruptcy court keep the names of his client confidential. Why would that be? Because they have been receiving threats. You can bet that some of the threats are coming from union members. These union goons like the idea of their pension debts being given priority to Chrysler's secured lenders, and I think we all know what union goons do when something happens they don't like. There was a time not too long ago when the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms noted that the number one illegal use of explosives in the United States came at the hands of union members engaged in work actions.

But there's another group threatening the secured non-TARP creditors. That would be the White House. Lauria and others have claimed that people within the Obama administration have made it clear that if any of these secured lenders get in the way of Obama's gift to the unions the White House will work to destroy their reputation. Now the White House denies this. What would you expect? But listen to the language ... Obama has attacked these people in public as being "vultures" and has painted them as evil capitalists who don't want to stand by the families of Chrysler workers. If he'll do this in public, what do you think his attack dogs will do in private?

Even if you think Obama hung the moon; even if you're now calling him the best president this country ever had; you just have to recognize the danger in the precedent that's been set here. The United Auto Workers are getting priority for their unsecured Chrysler debt simply because they are political powerful. Now just how is that going to work out for us in the future? Do you want to live in a financial world where lenders base lending decision in part on the political prominence of the borrower?

Giving unsecured creditors priority over secured lenders in bankruptcy proceedings .. now that's change you can believe in.

President Obama is trying to follow through on his campaign promise to close tax loopholes and clamp down on all of those evil rich people and corporations who dare to put their money in overseas accounts where they have more potential to grow. Obama says, "If financial institutions won't cooperate with us, we will assume that they are sheltering money in tax havens and act accordingly." Read that again - please. Either cooperate with us or we're going to assume you're breaking the law. I may be wrong, but don't we have a long and valued tradition whereby the government assumes innocence until guilt is proven? Guilty until proven innocent ... sounds about right. Just another change we can believe in.

So what exactly is Obama's plan? Well for starters, companies that generate profits abroad would not be able to write off any domestic expenses. This is commonly referred to as "deferral." The thought behind this is that it will reduce the incentive for American companies to base some or all of their operations in countries that won't gouge them to death with taxes.

Obama also wants to overhaul regulations known as the "check-the-box" rules, which give companies the ability to decide where their subsidiaries should be taxed.

Another part of Obama's plan is to .... Imagine this ... hire more government hacks! Not just any hacks, but 800 new agents for the IRS in order to better enforce the tax code.

Here's your bottom line. There is somewhere between $10 and $13 trillion dollars of American wealth that have been sent overseas where those dollars can be free to work and produce wealth in places where tax treatment is more favorable. These dollars are fleeing tax tyranny and looking for freedom, much like people in East Berlin tried to get over that wall to find freedom in the west. The East German communists shot those people down in cold blood. Obama wants to do the same to your money. He's and his Democrat pals are erecting an economic Berlin Wall to keep your money from escaping their tyranny.

One of the first acts of Obama's administration was to begin the process of shutting down Guantanamo Bay. No one had actually thought about what to do with the prisoners - where to put them, how to try them - but the order to shut down Gitmo nonetheless. Now lawmakers have unveiled a bill to pay for military and diplomatic efforts. It costs well over $90 billion. One of Obama's requests that was not included in the bill was $50 million to relocate prisoners from Gitmo. Democrats in the House decided that they just weren't going to include it. They have no idea what to do with the prisoners, so the plan will go unfunded until further notice.

Don't worry though ... the money could be transferred at a later time, and without a vote that promises to be politically challenging.

I have two great suggestions for relocating the prisoners. Haiti or Berkeley. You choose.

Swine Flu Hysteria! Duhhhhh .... You think?

The mugging of Chrysler by the union .. .this whole scenario reads like a bad gangster movie. Good column ... don't pass this one by.

Barack Obama may announce his choice for a Supreme Court nominee as soon as this week.

Who is helping the Democrats draft their climate change legislation? Lobbyists ... who also happen to be getting a deal from the Democrats.

More than 40% of people on this planet live under a regime that does not allow freedom of the press.

Just what does a criminal illegal alien have to do to get deported in this country?

It's time for that "equal treatment under the law" stuff to apply under the Voting Rights Act.

ACORN is back in the news ... Nevada authorities are accusing ACORN and two former employees of illegally paying people to register voters. No problem though .. ACORN will still have a big role in the upcoming census.

Debate over the card check bill is now being duked out over Twitter.

Here's an interesting look behind the scenes of the people in Washington who are having a large impact on healthcare reform.

The Obama administration is also working on massively expanding entitlements in the way of student loans.

Great Britain is considering taxing search engines, download websites and broadband providers in order to fund government service TV.

Jesse Jackson says that the NAACP must help to save the auto industry. Hey, maybe it can do a better job than the government.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs says that there may be nothing the government can do to save the newspaper industry.

In the healthcare debate, government insurance is still on the table ... but not a sure bet.

Now for a list of the top ten reasons why Obamanomics won't work.

Any guesses as to which state in this country has the highest number of bank failures?

A proposed amendment to Massachusetts' child pornography law would make it a serious crime to photograph with "lascivious intent" a person over the age of 60 or a person with a disability who has been declared mentally incompetent.

Talk radio only has five years left?

Big day...we had two guests! Each has links that might interest you.

Dick Morris' website can be found here.

Mark Levin's book is Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto.

Also, this is the place to talk about what they had to say if you wish.

You've read, no doubt, about the Chrysler bankruptcy. Have you read, though, of how Obama used his power as president to demonize and browbeat some of the people to whom Chrysler owed money? I've been saying for years that despotic politicians depend on the ignorance of the American people to work their schemes and protect their positions of privilege and power. The behind the scenes goings-on are a brilliant case in point.

Now I'm not trying to insult anyone here, but permit me to couch this bit in terms that the victims (though they aren't aware of their victimhood) of our government education system can grasp. Getting down to basics is necessary for as many people as possible to understand how our anti-capitalist president has possibly turned business lending on its ear. If you think I'm stating the case wrongly here you're welcome to chime in with a comment. (You do see the "comments" link, don't you?)

There are two kinds of people in the world: People who divide the people in this world into two types, and those who don't. There are also two types of loans. You have secured loans, and unsecured loans. The terms under which you borrow or lend the money will depend on large part whether the loan is secured or unsecured. The difference: With a secured loan the borrower has put up something of value that he owns as security to ensure his payment. If he doesn't pay, the lender can perfect his security interest on that item of value. The most common examples would be real estate loans and car loans. You put up either the car or your house as security for the loan, and if you don't pay the lender sends out some huge tattooed menace to repossess your car or a pot bellied Sheriff with aviator sunglasses to foreclose on your home.

If you put up nothing but your good reputation and credit history as security for the loan, well that would make your loan unsecured.  Good reputations and credit histories tend to be worthless when economic times get rough. 

When you're lending other people's money and you owe those people a  duty to do everything you can to make sure the loan is paid back, with interest.  In many cases the lender is actually a corporation and the corporate officers loaning the corporate money have a responsibility to corporate shareholders to keep their investments safe. 

Loans, like talk show hosts, have a pecking order. (I'm one of the smaller peckers out there). When a borrower goes Tango Uniform the lenders line up to get their money out of the carcass ... usually through a bankruptcy procedure. The secured lenders go first. The unsecured creditors go last. This is as it should be. What good is getting security for your loan if you know that when you get to a liquidation of your borrower through bankruptcy you're going to have to wait until some unsecured lenders get made whole. Let's expand this a bit. Let's say a corporation or business comes to you for a loan. It doesn't matter for what: Maybe they want to expand, add jobs, develop a new product. Doesn't matter. They want money; you have money ... and you're trying to make a deal. You, the lender, have a responsibility to your shareholders, so you're going to insist on security for the loan. No security - no loan. You're also going to want to know that in the event of a meltdown you loan is going to be given priority over all of the unsecured loans your borrow may have. Without that assurance you're not likely to make the loan.

OK .. why all of these basics? That would be because they all come into play in this Chrysler bankruptcy. The two warring parties here were bondholders and unions. Chrysler owes money to bondholders. Those loans are secured. Chrysler also owns money to union pension funds. Those obligations are not secured. Enter, politics. Unions are a lot more important to a Democrat president than are bondholders. After all, bondholders are mere investors ... and they are more likely to be wealthy than the retired union members. That, of course, makes them evil.

So ... this appears to be how the Chrysler bankruptcy is going to shake out. The union pension funds are going to get priority over the bondholders. In other words, unsecured creditors will get preference over secured lenders. Cats and dogs sleeping together. Not only will the unsecured union pension plans get priority, Obama and his minions did no small amount of demonizing the secured lenders in the process.

Some of the secured lenders - those not under the thumb of the Obama administration because they took TARP funds - balked at Obama's plan. They were secured Chrysler lenders, and secured lenders they wished to remain. Obama demagogued these secured lenders by saying "I stand with Chrysler's employees and their families and communities" and not "those who held out when everybody else is making sacrifices." So there you go. If you want to enforce your security interest - if you want your money back -- you're against Chrysler's employees and families. Everyone else is making sacrifices and you don't want to. Hey ... wait a minute here. Are we forgetting that these people have obligations to their shareholders?

OppenheimerFunds is one of those secured creditors. They issued a statement saying "Our holdings in secured Chrysler debt are entitled to priority in long-established U.S. Bankruptcy law, and we are obligated to our fund shareholders to support agreements that respect these laws." How do you go to your shareholders and tell them that you've just flushed a bunch of their money down the crapper because you wanted to stand by Chrysler's families and communities? Other liberals also have a name for the secured creditors. They call them "vultures." You'll also hear the word "greedy" Obama called them "speculators," a word that doesn't carry a positive image with the dumb masses. That's Obama for you. Investors are evil. They're "speculators!" They're greedy because they want their loans repaid. Only in the anti-capitalist mind of a liberal moonbat would you hear such asinine language.

Yesterday afternoon we got news that the Obama White House threatened to destroy the reputation of a particular investment bank if they didn't cave in and go along with Obama's bankruptcy plan for Chrysler. How? By calling them traitors and vultures? That's been done already.

OK ... so what's going to happen now? Two things:

First: Some of Chrysler's secured creditors are going to object to the Obama-negotiated bankruptcy plan. They will fulfill their obligation to their shareholders, as they should, and try to get the favored treatment from the bankruptcy court usually reserved for secured creditors; and for standing by the rule-of-law they will be called every but Children of God. The anti-capitalist crowd will use these creditor hold-outs to demonize the financial sector in general and to promote the cause of even more government control.

Second: Lenders are going to be very careful in their lending decisions. What lender, for instance, will want to buy any bonds in any company that might end up a protectorate of the federal government? Who would want to loan that company any money? You want security for your loan, and you don't want political hacks demagoguing you if you actually try to foreclose on your security interest. Under this standard businesses - especially businesses in a wee bit of trouble - are going to have a rougher time getting needed financing.

Here's a scenario from you. A manufacturing concern is in trouble. If they don't get some financial help to make it through a rough spot they're going to tank, and about 2000 workers are going to lose their jobs. The manufacturing company goes to an investment bank and seeks a loan. As security for the loan the manufacturing company offers a lien on its buildings, corporate aircraft and manufacturing equipment. The lender, though, says no. The company is in trouble and there is a possibility that the loan might not be repaid. Under the new Obama scenario the government might step in and prevent the lender from foreclosing on its security interest in land, buildings and equipment. The government might decide that all of the company's assets should be sold in bankruptcy and the funds dedicated to the unsecured pension obligations to the 2000 workers. Result? Since the normal rules about secured and unsecured credit don't really apply any more, the lender declines the loan. We'll be in a situation where the best way for a company to get a loan is to prove to the lender that they don't need the money. This will all work out well for Obama, of course, because if the ailing company can't get the private sector financing ... where is there to go? Why, to the government, of course!

OK ... a bit wordy. But you need to know just how having a dedicated anti-capitalist in office works. Good for those who love government. For those who don't ... not so good.

(From Breitbart.com)

Happy ending for the muggers? I like the word "fends".

Barack Obama is really doing wonders when it comes to building confidence in our financial institutions. (Please note the sarcasm.) Obama wants to make sure that you know that Wall Street is still going to be an important part of our economy, but it will never be half of our economy ever again. At least, if he gets his way.

What does this mean? Obama says, "That means that more talent, more resources will be going to other sectors of the economy ... I actually think that's healthy. We don't want every single college grad with mathematical aptitude to become a derivatives trader. We want some of them to go into engineering, and we want some of them to be going into computer design."

Ironically enough, what is the "other" sector in our economy that is showing the most growth right now? That would be the government. It takes college grads with mathematical aptitude to control so many people's lives you know.

The other night during his press conference, Obama claimed that his economic stimulus bill had "already saved or created 150,000 jobs."

For most of the dumb-masses out there, no one thought twice about this statistic. Considering the fact that our economy has lost well over a million jobs since Obama took office, one might wonder ... where in the heck did he get 150,000 jobs from?

It turns out that the president is basing this number on estimates of what his economic advisers THINK the economic stimulus bill is doing, rather than what it is actually doing.

An Obama spokesman explains, "... the estimate does not mean that employment has risen by 150,000. Rather, it means that employment is 150,000 higher than it otherwise would have been." The figure is simply an estimate of the number of people hired to work directly on stimulus-funded projects, as well as "jobs created by the tax cuts, aid to the states, and other parts of the ARRA." Question .... What tax cuts did the Obama administration provide that would allow for jobs to be created?

Doesn't really matter, though. You've seen those bumper stickers out there, haven't you? "Obama said it. I believe it. That settles it."

I know that a lot of callers have said that census workers have begun to knock on doors. The latest story about the census comes from Kansas where a woman says a census worker asked her some questions beyond the typical "how many people live in your household."

Kim Mertin says that the census workers asked her if she'd like a backrub and it she "was wearing pink undies." Who knows ... maybe these are the kinds of details the new administration is looking for. Either way, Mertin closed the door and called the police.

My first gut reaction to this story was that this census worker was clearly a fake, an imposter. But Mertin got ahold of the Census Bureau and it turns out that the man is really employed as a Census worker.

I suppose that is what you get when you team up with organizations like ACORN to hire your Census workers.

The media is going to be buzzing for a long while over who Barack Obama is going to nominate to replace Justice Souter on the Supreme Court. Initial reports suggest that Obama's top choice is 2nd Circuit appeals Sonia Sotomayor. Only Sotomayer is already catching a lot of flak for this comment:

"All of the legal defense funds out there--they're looking for people with court of appeals experience. Because court of appeals is where policy is made. And I know, I know this is on tape and I should never say that because we don't make law. [Laughs] I know. I know. [Laughter] I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it, I'm...y'know."

So .. there you go. The perfect liberal. This woman - who may become a Supreme Court Justice - thinks that courts make policy. Probably just the type of person Obama would love to have on the bench.

Jack Kemp passed away over the weekend. A true American patriot.

The World Health Organization is set to declare the swine flu, Mexican flu, whatever you want to call it ... anyway, it is set to declare it a pandemic.

This is a great list of the things you don't read about Barack Obama in the lamestream media.

You have GOT to be kidding me.... Janet Napolitano as a possible Supreme Court Justice?

According to environmentalists, one of the biggest problems with global warming is the term "global warming." That would be because there is no global warming. Looks like they need a new name for their project to control the world's economies.

If you want a good laugh read this story: What Finland can teach America about true luxury. We greedy American capitalists just can't enjoy life!

My comments about the fajita flu made it into an Associated Press story. As you can imagine, they weren't all that impressed with my creativity.

Guess who has a whopping 71% approval rating? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

There is a lot of speculation that Obama's Supreme Court nominee will be from Chicago. Here are some of the possible nominees.

Is Obama using 'code' words to describe his desire for an activist Supreme Court Justice? Senator Orrin Hatch seems to think so.

Now that the UAW is the majority shareholder of Chrysler, we will see how it does running a business.

Iran lambasted Obama for his first one hundred days in office and demanded to see his "change."

This article should scare the tar out of you: Obama revelling in U.S. power unseen in decades.

Apparently blacks in this country are now more optimistic about race because Obama has survived 100 days in office without being shot at. Seriously. This comes from the Philadelphia Inquirer.

You young wippersnappers should love this.

Here's an excellent column expressing why we can't afford to have the government run our businesses in this country.

Arlen Specter admits that he was motivated to switched parties is because he had a very low chance of winning the Republican primary in 2010. Power wins over principle every time.

The White House has decided to join MySpace, Facebook and Twitter. If you ever want to know what is on the mind of the average American voter, just take a look at the comments section of the White House's MySpace page. God help us.

This seems pretty appropriate ... Obama is going to visit American Idol?

To celebrate my new knee's first birthday, have a look at pictures from my surgery! Not for those with weak stomachs. You have been warned. Here it is all nice and healed up:

Rumors have it that Justice David Souter is going to hang up his black robe. We knew this was going to happen ... and we know that the results are going to be a disaster. Now Obama gets to make his first Supreme Court appointment and the people of this country get to see the real consequences of their vote last November. It certainly isn't going to be pretty.

What to expect? Pretty easy, actually. Just imagine that someone goes out to Berkeley and asks a Marxist grad student to suggest someone for the Supreme Court. Good chance that the student would come up with pretty much the same name that Obama will present.

It's a cinch that Obama will not nominate someone who actually believes that the power of the federal government is or should be limited by the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. It's a certainty that Obama's nominee will not recognize and vote to restore our right to political free speech. But this is all minor compared to one very sinister belief that Obama's nominee will bring to the court .. and that is the belief that it is perfectly proper for the Supreme Court to consider foreign law and the rulings of foreign courts in their decisions as to the constitutionality of laws passed by and the actions of our own government. Our Constitution will no longer be the basis upon which rulings are made - at least for Obama's appointments.

This retirement will happen early enough in Obama's first term that he will be able to go leftist radical in his appointment. He knows that the American people have short memories when it comes to voting. He'll appoint a leftist radical and still have plenty of time to move to the center for the next campaign.

Nancy Pelosi is offering a little bit of advice for Republicans. Considering Arlen Specter is now batting for the other team, Nancy says that Republicans should "take back" their party ... and by that, she means that they should become more like Democrats.

Here's Nancy's sound advice, "I say to Republicans in America, take back your party ... The party of protecting the environment, the party of individual rights, the party of fairness."

So is that what a Republican is supposed to be to Nancy Pelosi? Boy does this explain a lot about why these buffoons can't get anything done in Washington. How about the party of smaller government? The party of lower taxes? The party of self sufficiency?

Pelosi is so tiresome.

The Republicans are starting a new outreach initiative. Basically, they know that their party is hopelessly screwed. They can't save themselves; they can only hope that the Democrats screw up enough to make the Republicans not look as bad.

But they are making an effort, nonetheless. Will it work? Well, this National Council for a New America launched an open letter to the American people. What is interesting about the letter is what was left out: illegal immigration, same sex marriage, abortion .... all of these issues that have the Republican Party completely handcuffed.

Now I have a strong personal interest here ... but I truly believe that if the Republican Party would work to understand and then promote the FairTax the American people would respond very positively. They could have the Democrats on the run. Am I dreaming here? Your thoughts?

I've told you about studies similar to this ... but here is a recent example of how people would rather see the government seize money from the rich than earn more money for themselves.

In Minnesota, the Star Tribune did a little poll. It found that two-thirds of people would want the government to seize wealth from rich people in order to help solve the state's budget woes. But then when it comes to raising taxes on everyone ... not just the filthy rich ... 60% of Minnesotans say absolutely not.

So taxing the rich is OK. Other taxes that are popular with Minnesotans are those on tobacco and alcoholic beverages. But they aren't done there ... 57% of people believe that corporations should pay higher taxes. Higher taxes? Are these people completely brain dead? Do they not understand the fact that the United States already has outrageously high corporate tax rates? Of course they don't; because you are talking about the government educated dumb masses. You are talking about people who believe that evil rich people and greedy corporations don't pay their "fair share" in taxes. And you're talking to people who are so uneducated and obtuse that they don't understand that all taxes paid by businesses filter down to the people who ultimately purchase whatever that business is producing at the retail level.

I'll say it again: At the core of most, if not all, of the problems facing our country today you will find a public that is so uneducated that they just can't understand basic concepts of governance and economics. Government schools were designed to create a populace that was educated just to the point that they would be good government subjects and good employees. Government education has been a massive success.

I am honestly not sure if Kent Conrad is referring to God or Barack Obama. Seriously, folks. Here's the scenario: the House and Senate passed Obama's $3.5 trillion spending blueprint. This included language to pass national healthcare through the process of reconciliation, which would allow the Democrats to bypass any Republican filibuster. However, the Democrats in the Senate told Americans that they were against using this process to achieve healthcare reform. So when Kent Conrad was asked about this change, he said that he was pushed into reconciliation by a "higher power."

Now does my question make a little more sense?

It took them long enough but PETA is finally having its say on this swine flu. Naturally, the organization wants to use this swine flu in order to illustrate why people should become vegetarians.

What they want to do is set up a real-life hog farm on the steps of the Capitol. The exhibit would include three pigs, and 3,500 gallons of pig manure and urine. Then they are going to get large fans, which will be used to blow the odor around. In the background, they will show undercover footage of conditions in hog farms while distributing information on why you should become a vegetarian.

I'll show you undercover footage of Nancy Pelosi ... and that will ensure that you will never be a vegetarian.

Are you enjoying your whopping $10 a week from Obama's "Making Work Pay" tax credit? Well enjoy it while you can, because the government is more than likely going to re-seize it in the long run. This is because new IRS withholding tables could cause millions of taxpayers to receive more money than they are "entitled" to under the credit. For some, this will mean a smaller-than-expected tax refund. For others who calculate their withholding differently, you could end up owing the government, come next April.

Here are some prime examples of what some people may be facing.

-- A single worker with two jobs making $20,000 a year at each job will get a $400 boost in take-home pay at each of them, for a total of $800. That worker, however, is eligible for a maximum credit of $400, so the remaining $400 will have to be paid back at tax time--either through a smaller refund or a payment to the IRS.

-- A married couple with a combined income of $50,000 is eligible for an $800 credit. However, if both spouses work and make more than $13,000, the new withholding tables give them each a $600 boost--for a total of $1,200.

-- A single college student with a part-time job making $10,000 would get a $400 boost in pay. However, if that student is claimed as a dependent on a parent's tax return, she doesn't qualify for the credit and would have to repay it when she files next year.

And when it comes to Social Security and veterans, there are a whole heap of issues there too. But don't you worry. Tax cheat Timothy Geithner says that he is "exploring ways to mitigate that effect."

That should make you feel much, much better.

This guy wishes he hadn't been.

We are going to have Atlanta attorney Andrew Speaker on the show today. Here's the latest on his lawsuit against the CDC.

The World Health Organization says that "all of humanity is under threat" from this swine flu fajita flu.

Fox won the ratings war by scoring more viewers than other networks that ran Barack Obama's press conference the other night.

This Wall Street Journal column says that the real culture war in America is over the concept of capitalism and essentially freedom.

Experts are warning that the Internet is running of space.

It looks like the Obama administration isn't going to be able to release all of the detainees from Gitmo like liberal bed-wetters had hoped.

Yet another Democrat admits that Obama's plan to institute a cap-and-trade policy is going to increase energy prices for Americans.

Good news .. the Senate defeated the "cramdown" bill yesterday.

When Obama has to fill an open seat in the FCC, who better to appoint than the oldest daughter of South Carolina race-pimp Senator James Clyburn.

Tax cheat Timothy Geithner says that the government is not going to need any more bailout money ... anytime "soon."

Now you will learn how $100 million is large when $8 billion is small, in the world according to Barack Obama.

Get a load of this .. Israeli passengers have complained to a British airline that Israel was nowhere to be found on their inflight maps, which showed flights bound for Israel were instead heading to Mecca.

A hospital in Nashville has agreed to pay a former employee $70,000 in damages for denying him time off so that he could make a pilgrimage to Mecca.

Connecticut has now made it illegal to transfer machine guns to children . Aren't you glad your lawmakers are making great use of your tax dollars?

Now a man from Montana will explain to you why he does not want to serve on a jury.