Friday -- October 7, 2005
 BOOK SIGNINGS -- DENVER AND GRAND JUNCTION!
I'll be in Denver tonight to sign copies of The FairTax Book at the Barnes & Noble Book Store, 960 S. Colorado Blvd. We start at 7:00 p.m.
Tomorrow I'll be in Grand Junction, Colorado for two signings of The FairTax Book at the DoubleTree Hotel. Tickets for the first signing at 2:00 p.m. are gone, but you can still get tickets to the second signing at 6:30 from my Grand Junction affiliate KNZZ. Looking forward to traveling to one of my favorite states. Too bad we can't stop by Vail for a run or two down Northridge.
WHY I'M GOING TO GRAND JUNCTION
Grand Junction, Colorado is about 180 miles west of Denver .. on the other side of the Rocky Mountains. I'll be spending the day there tomorrow to meet with my KNZZ listeners and sign copies of The FairTax Book. Now some may think that Grand Junction might be off the beaten path for most book tours ... but not for me. I've been telling the folks at Grand Junction that I'm heading their way for over a year, and tomorrow I get to keep my promise. The story in today's Grand Junction Sentinel explains why. An excerpt from Gary Harmon 's article reads:
Grand Junction radio listeners might not have heard Boortz on any of those subjects had they stayed quiet back in February 2004, when KNZZ canceled his show in favor of Tony Snow."I will admit it was probably the single biggest error in judgment we made," said Jim TerLouw, KNZZ general manager. Boortz' removal set off a series of complaints to the station. "We had an unprecedented number of bummed-out people," TerLouw said. "When we took him off the radio, these people were hurt," one telling him, "You've taken away my good-morning time." What listeners didn't want, TerLouw said, was "another right-wing political show" that sounded like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, both conservative Republicans. Listeners, TerLouw said, wanted a different voice, what some described as a "stimulating, different point of view." Today, Boortz "is our strongest personality," with more listeners than Limbaugh, Hannity or any other talker in the station's lineup, TerLouw said. So, Grand Junction --- here I come. I'm looking forward to saying "thank you" in person.
A THREAT TO THE NYC SUBWAYS
 New York City remains on alert today after a scare yesterday involving a specific threat received from the FBI. The intelligence said that an attack on the New York subway system was possible in the days ahead...and the same information was even used to lead a raid against suspected Al-Qaeda operatives in Iraq.
Once again, the peaceful religion of Islam rears its ugly head. So what was the threat all about? Apparently it involved the threat of 15 to 20 Islamic killers, who are already in the United States, by the way, to use explosives hidden in baby carriages. New York officials are urging the public to curtail the use of briefcases, baby strollers, luggage and other containers that draw attention.
The mayor continues to ride the subway to work. However, this is an important wakeup call. What happened in London could just as easily happen here. After all, there is nothing to prevent these terrorists from walking right in the front door.
So much for border security.
Let's hope to God they're profiling in their search for the Islamic terrorists in New York ... even if they say that they aren't.
THIS IS WHY I'M GLAD BUSH IS IN OFFICE
"This" being his recognition of the threat that presents itself to the Western World as Islamic terrorism and his determination to pursue the war on terror wherever the Islamic radicals may be found. But as soon as Bush was through with his speech the aging hollow-eyed hippie, Nancy Pelosi, stepped forward to condemn Bush's efforts. Then came Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. They just couldn't wait to undermine Bush's speech and his efforts to protect us from the Islamic terrorists. Nice going, Nancy. Oh .. and thank you San Francisco for delivering this menace to our Congress.
YOUR INTERNET IS IN DANGER
We won't go into depth here, but you need to know that the machinery is in motion to turn the operational control of the Internet over to the United Nations. Here's a link for you to read the story.
Where can this go? Let's consider for just a moment that document that Bill Clinton called the greatest document ever written by man in support of human rights and freedom. That would the the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This document is supposed to be the great international blueprint for human rights around the world. The document says that it represents "a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations." Does the UN Declaration of Human Rights protect free speech? Freedom of the press? Well ... in a word, yes it does. Article 19 says that everyone has a right to freedom of opinion and expression. So far so good. The declaration also says that everyone has a right to rest and leisure and a right to a standard of living. Interesting. It also says that all mothers and children are entitled to "special care and assistance." Problematic, to say the least. But, let's cut to the chase. Let's go to Article 29 Paragraph 3. "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations."
Do you need to read that again? Please do. It's critical. This one clause negates every single right recognized in this so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." You have no freedom of speech. You have no freedom of expression. You have no right to own property. You have no right to your precious standard of living ... you have nothing ... not one thing if your exercise of those rights interfere with the goals of the United Nations.
Now ... back to the Internet. When the United Nations gains control just how far will it go? Will it start censoring the Internet to make sure that nobody posts any information or opinions that might interfere with the "purposes and principles of the United Nations?There is talk, for instance, of a world-wide income tax on the wealthy to fund UN operations. Would anyone be allowed to post an opinion in opposition to this scheme?
Are you worried? You should be. But then maybe you're more concerned about this evening's top story on Entertainment Tonight.
SHOWING WEAKNESS
While Bush was detailing the threats posed to the free world by Islamic radicals, 90 members of the U.S. Senate were voting on some sort of a bill to place limitations on how American troops can treat these terrorists once they're in custody. I think that an argument can be made that there should be no limitations on how those trying to keep us safe can keep a terrorist in captivity., Pull their damned fingernails out if you have to in order to get information that can save innocent lives. Screw them. They're walking around in civilian clothing with bombs hidden under their coats. They want to kill as many women and children as they can. Don't send them a message that they'll be treated as honored guests once they're captured.
LOUIS FREEH ON BILL CLINTON
 Here's a new book that should be quite a read. Former FBI Director and Clinton appointee Louis Freeh has written about his time in the White House, and it's not very favorable to Bill Clinton. In fact, it's quite interesting. You start to realize just how much the history of the most corrupt administration ever is being papered over by the mainstream media.
Speaking frankly about his former boss, Freeh says: "The problem was with Bill Clinton – the scandals and the rumored scandals, the incubating ones and the dying ones never ended. Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction. His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out." That about says it all.
Aside from the personal animosity between the two, the most telling part of Freeh's story is this one. When Islamic terrorists attacked Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, the FBI tried to interview the suspects in Saudi custody. Bill Clinton would not ask Crown Prince Abdullah directly for permission to do so. Instead he asked Abdullah for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library. That explains why the United States did nothing about terrorism for 8 years.
Mike Wallace interviews Freeh on 60 Minutes this Sunday. This should be good.
THE NOBEL APPEASEMENT PRIZE
 If you ever need any proof that the process of awarding the Nobel Peace Prize is a complete joke, then this is it. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, has been awarded the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize. He was reportedly chosen from a field of 199 candidates. So why did he win?
Supposedly for his efforts in limiting the spread of nuclear weapons.
Right. Let's take a look at his record, shall we? On ElBaradei's watch, we have seen his inept bungling when it comes to Iraq. Under his Nobel Prize-winning oversight, North Korea and Iran have become nuclear powers. What a guy! He's been a complete failure, but such success has to be rewarded in the international community.
But if you look a little closer, you see the real reason ElBaradei was chosen. It turns out he has been running around for a couple years bashing the United States and George Bush over the claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. So once again, the Nobel Peace Prize goes to the most anti-American person they can find.
True to form, expect ElBaradei's acceptance speech to include criticism of the United States. It's all part of the America-hating template at the Norwegian Nobel Committee. 
Tour Gallery | amazon.com reviews | NEW TOUR DATES!
REDNECK SCRAP BOOK Ah, Redneck love. Isn't it sweet? More in the Redneck Scrap Book. READING ASSIGNMENTS
The Mexican consulate sent a letter to a Ohio Sheriff warning him about profiling Mexicans. It seems to have backfired, however, as the Sheriff now says he may increase enforcement against illegal aliens.
The real fault for the Harriet Miers' nomination lies not with the president, but with the week-kneed Republican majority in the Senate. Thomas Sowell explains why.
Democrats are holding back on attacking Harriet Miers....the reason? Republicans are doing it for them. Even Chuck Schumer seems pleased with how much the right is complaining.
Tom DeLay is hitting back at Ronnie Earle. It turns out Mr. Earle has taken the same types of campaign contributions for which he has indicted Tom DeLay. Oops.
The mayor of San Francisco says everybody has a fundamental right to wireless Internet access. Debra Saunders says she's impressed at just how well the mayor is handling his priorities.
Tom DeLay no doubt would rather not be indicted by a prosecutor from Texas. But as Byron York reports, he's fortunate that the one prosecuting him is the infamous Ronnie Earle.
With over a million lawyers in the United States, Charles Krauthammer says it is nothing short of scandalous that George Bush would pick Harriet Miers.
In all the anti-William Bennett response over his remarks on his radio show, Jonah Goldberg picks up on something interesting. Liberals are referring to unborn babies as people. Stop the presses!
Critics of Harriet Miers' are being charged with demonstrating elitism, all because they say she's not qualified enough. David Limbaugh says it's not elitism that's driving their concern.
George Bush is going to be meeting with Hugo Chavez at a summit in Argentina next month. The elected communist dictator is already setting the table by calling the president "Mr. Danger." This should be good. Morning Sickness: Danish man with cerebral palsy seeks disability payments for extra charges he has to pay when hiring a prostitute because of his condition. | 
Search Boortz.com
Join Neal and his proud beast Coco at 
