Tuesday, March 31, 2009

And the Hits Just Keep on Coming

The Tax and Spend Democrats have taken over. With taxes increasing beginning with the tobacco tax on April 1, we're learning of still more Democrats that didn't pay taxes. Naturally, they continue to say "unintentional".

One incident I might be able to understand. Two would be a coincidence. Three begins to appear as though it's becoming common. Four has to make you wonder if taxes are only meant for everyone other than Democrats. Five, makes it halfway to the Ten Most Wanted List. Six makes one wonder if there are any Democrats able to follow the laws that they write.

I'd ask 'who's next', but I'm afraid that we may find out.

You're welcome to comment.


Monday, March 30, 2009

Tea Party-April 15, 2009

In 1773 citizens of Boston, Massachussets dressed as Indians and boarded three English ships loaded with tea. In three hours time, they tossed that tea into Boston Harbor to protest the latest tax imposed on them.

This event was the culmination of events since the French and Indian War including the Stamp Act, the Townsend Acts, and the Boston Masssacre. Great Britain's Parliament thought the colonists wouldn't give up their tea and if they taxed the tea, it would be an indication by the colonists that they agreed with Britains right to tax them.

Today's Tea Parties that are springing up around the nation are not exactly the same as it was in 1773, but it is similar in that the people are protesting the excessive taxation imposed on the people by the government.

In spite of campaign promises to provide a tax cut to 95% of the people of this country, we are now going to be taxed like we haven't been in years. The government is using our money to bailout companies that have already failed. Yes, I said "our money". The government does not earn money. They confiscate money from the people in the form of taxes. Taxes are necessary, but not to the extent that we're being taxed and will be taxed under present conditions in the very near future.

On April 15, there will be Tea Parties held all across this country to protest the taxes that are about to be imposed on the citizens of this country. April 15 is of course, tax day in this country. This has been a growing phenomenon. There have been tea parties held already across the country. Naturally, the size of them has been underreported. The most notable thus far has been in Orlando, Florida, where it was reported that a couple of thousand people were out to protest. The number was actually placed at over 5,000.

Look in your area for when the Tea Party will be held and attend if you are able. I know that there is one planned in Lansing, Michigan and I've been hearing there may be one in Battle Creek, Michigan. I am hoping to attend one here and take pictures and post them. If you attend one in your area and take pictures and send them to me, I will try to post them as well. You can see below for some of the scheduled Tea Parties.

If you are able to send a picture, please send it to me at BYoung7411@gmail.com and include the city and state that your picture represents. If you have the estimated attendance I'd like that as well.

You're welcome to comment.


Wednesday, March 25, 2009

"Overseas Contingency Operation"-The Cowards Way of Talking about the War on Terror

In an earlier posting, I said that the Obama administration hadn't used the phrase "War on Terror". Apparently, they aren't going to in the future.

They've decided on closing Guantamo Bay (Gitmo) and they suspended the hearings for terrorists held at Gitmo. There is talk that some of the detainees held in Gitmo will be set free in the United States and those put on trial will be put on trial in our court system in this country.

Now, they have renamed the War on Terror the "Overseas contingency operation". I thought I'd look up the written meaning of "Contingency". I know that with Life Insurance, you name a beneficiary who collects the proceeds at your death, and you select a Contingent Beneficiary just in case the original beneficiary dies first. Wikipedia gives this as a definition: "In philosophy and logic, contingency is the status of propositions that are not necessarily true or necessarily false."

From Miriam Webster: 1: the quality or state of being contingent2: a contingent event or condition: as a: an event (as an emergency) that may but is not certain to occur b: something liable to happen as an adjunct to or result of something else

We were attacked on September 11, 2001. We were not at war. 19 men decided followed Osama bin Laden's instructions and crashed 4 airplanes. 2 into the World Trade Center, 1 into the Pentagon and the fourth was headed for either the Capitol or the White House but due to some heroic actions by American citizens, was instead crashed into a field in Pennsylvania. These were terrorists, operating under the direction of Osama bin Laden.

bin Laden had said in the past, during the fighting in Somalia in the 90's, that Americans didn't have the stomach to handle their terrorist activities. The Obama administration is making great strides in turning bin Laden into an accurate prophet.

When Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1941, the Japanese attacked the military. When we were attacked on September 11, 2001 citizens were attacked. On the planes and on the ground. Pearl Harbor was an act of war by another country. Sept. 11 was an act of terror perpetrated by terrorists on the American public.

This is and has been a war on terror and will continue to be a war on terror. They want to kill Americans. Not just American soldiers, but American people. The reward for the terrorists that give their lives for their cause think they are going to get 72 virgins in paradise for their actions. Will Obama now change that as well to "three score and 12 uninvaded female gender"?

Will Obama next want to enter into negotiations with bin Laden to attempt to put an end to the attacks?

Obama may not consider this a war, but the terrorists do consider it a war. If Obama is going to start treating terrorists like they've violated the traffic laws in this country, it's going to be a much longer war.

You're welcome to comment.


Saturday, March 21, 2009

Was the "Stimulus" Bill Read by Anyone?

In January and February, the President said that he wanted a stimulus bill ready for him to sign on Presidents Day. The Democrats in the House wrote the bill. They didn't want any involvement by the Republicans. It came up for a vote and not one Republican voted for the bill. However, they did complain about it. Not the contents, though. They couldn't complain about the contents because it was passed in the late hours and voted on the next day. The bill was over 1,100 pages long.

Representative and Minority Leader, John Boehner held up the bill on the floor of the House. It was 8 inches thick and he dropped it with a loud thud. His complaint was that they were being forced to vote on a bill that NOBODY could have possibly read.

With all of the problems coming up over that bills contents now regarding the AIG Bonuses, they are again saying that NOBODY read the bill before voting on it. I can state unequivocably that one Representative did read the bill. How do I know this? Because he's my Representative. Democrat, Mark Schauer.

Mr. Schauer held public meetings around his district in February. At his stops in Charlotte, Eaton Rapids and a couple of other places, he heard complaints from his constituents that he voted for a nearly trillion dollar spending package that he didn't read. Mr. Schauer claimed at each stop that he did in fact read the entire bill. It was reported in the Detroit News, the Detroit Free Press, the Battle Creek Enquirer and the Lansing State Journal. He was quoted in each of those newspapers that he had read the bill.

On February 17, one day after Presidents Day, and the day that Obama did sign the bill in Denver, Mark Schauer held another meeting. He called these events "Congress on your corner". This meeting was held at the Best Western in Lansing, Michigan. I attended this event. He was again questioned about the bill saying that he could not have read it and again, he reiterated on at least three occasions during that meeting that he did read the entire bill. The people there, which numbered about 100, broke out in laughter at this claim. But he stuck to his claim.

I have tried to do some research on this to find out if any other Congressmen or women were claiming that they read the entire bill before voting on it. I have been unable to find even one that claimed to have read it, other than Mark Schauer.

In the past week, we've learned that the AIG Bonuses were permitted in that bill. Christopher Dodd, Democrat Senator from Connecticut, claimed on March 17 that he didn't have anything to do with that being in the bill, then on March 18, on CNN he told Dana Bash that he did add the bonuses into the final product under pressure from the Obama Administration.

Since Representative Mark Schauer read this bill, and has claimed repeatedly to have read the bill, he had to have known these bonuses were in the bill. Yet, he still voted for it.

Mr. Schauer has a problem of his own creation now. He claims to have read the entire bill, and did vote for it, so he must agree that AIG executives are entitled to those bonuses. If he says that he didn't know it was in the bill, then he's admitting that he lied to his constituents across his district about reading the bill. Finally, if he's against the bonuses, then the question he should have to answer is, "why did you vote for it?" Is he that gutless that he couldn't stand up to his colleagues and bring this to their attention?

What's interesting is that I have found no comments yet from Representative Schauer stating his position on the AIG bonuses. But then, with the liberal press in this state, I'm really not surprised that it's not even being asked of Representative Schauer.

You're welcome to comment.


Friday, March 20, 2009

WalMart Stimulus Package

For the first time in 20 years, Walmart has announced it's bonuses to the Walmart associates. Walmart is paying out $500 billion to 80 million employees. It will be an average of $651 per associate.

Naturally, full time associates will get larger amounts than part time associates. It's divided up based on their status.

While the government gives bailouts to big companies that are failing, Walmart is paying their associates for their success. They have been doing this since 1986 but haven't announced the numbers each year. It's always just been given each year without fanfare. This year, they announced the amounts that are being paid.

According to associates last year, they were paid $500-$1,000 as a reward for their success, also known as their bonus for a job well done. Stores have sales charts in their break rooms to show how they are doing from month to month. By giving out this information, associates know from month to month if they are on track for bonuses and if they need to work to improve their demeanor with the customers and their placement of products on the shelves making them easy to find for the customers.

After all of the complaints that liberals like to throw out about Walmart, it's good to see them announcing the bonuses for their associates. I should probably clear something up before the liberals start their complaining. A Walmart employee is an associate. The person at the door that says hello, the stockboys, the cashiers, they are all associates. These bonuses, show they too take part in the profits of Walmart, and they aren't held back from working to improve their product, their stores, nor their associates by a union. If they were, the bonuses wouldn't be there.

You're welcome to comment.


This is What Happens When Liberals Take Over

The Congressional Budget Office gave it's report today on the deficit figures going into the future. They are saying that there will be an average of over $1 Trillion per year in deficits for the next ten years based on Obama and the Democrats so-called stimulus package. This will be the excuse for the massive tax increases coming soon.

So what has been happening with the President and Vice-President since the election? Here's the top ten gaffes since the 20th of January.

10. Just after he's been sworn in by him, the newly-minted Vice President Joe Biden gets the name of Justice John Paul Stephens, "one of the great justices" of the Supreme Court, calling him "Justice Stewart":

9. Barack Obama jokes about Nancy Reagan having séances in the White House. He later called her to apologise after the AP noted that although she had consulted astrologers, "she did not hold conversations with the dead":

8. Joe Biden forgets the "website number" for the White House internet site designed to show how TARP money is being spent:

7. Barack Obama mixes up the windows and doors at his new home:

6. Joe Biden jokes about Chief Justice John Roberts fluffing the inauguration oath. The president is visibly annoyed with his veep and Biden later apologises:

5. A Marine One double. First, on his maiden Marine One trip Obama breaches protocol and makes life uncomfortable for an enlisted marine by shaking the the serviceman's hand as he's saluting his commander-in-chief:
Then - Gerald Ford, eat your heart out. Barack Obama bangs his head as he boards his helicopter:

4. Joe Biden tells his wife that he had the choice of being either Secretary of State or vice-president - an offer that was news to Obama aides and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when Jill Biden spilled the beans on Oprah:

3. Gordon Brown presents the new President with: a pen holder carved from the timbers of HMS Gannett, a sister ship of HMS Resolute; the commissioning certificate of HMS Resolute; and a seven-volume biography of Winston Churchill. In return, the Prime minister gets 25 DVDS, which don't work in Britain:

2. Joe Biden tells a former Senate colleague who addresses him as "Mr Vice-President" to "give me a f---ing break":

1. The latest one takes the biscuit. Barack Obama jokes about the disabled on the Jay Leno show. Afterwards, he calls the head of the Special Olympics to apologise:

This doesn't inspire much confidence.

You're welcome to comment.


Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Bonuses: Next up. Fannie Mae then Freddit Mac

It was just announced that Fannie Mae will be paying $611,000 in bonuses to four executives. Fannie recently requested $15 billion in bailout money from the government. Freddie Mac has requested up to $45 Billion, but they have not yet announced what their bonuses will be.

Fannie Mae is a government controlled company. It will be interesting to see if Senator Schumer threatens these people with 100% confiscatory taxes on these bonuses.

Freddie Mac will be announcing their bonus schedule but has not done so yet. I'm also wondering why they haven't requested that Franklin Raines pay back the money he received.

You're welcome to comment.


Washington's Kremlin Boobs

National Debt: March 18, 2009

Obama Received AIG Dollars

Barack Obama received over $101,000 from A. I. G. Financial Services in 2008. Now that he's complaining about the bonuses that are contractual obligations of AIG, I wonder if he'll pay back money to the taxpayers.

AIG Bonus Money was known a year before payout

The bonus money being paid out from AIG was known about a year ago. The Obama Administration says they didn't know about this until the past month. However, when the bailout was discussed, the bonuses that are required under contracts was discussed by those in attendance at the meeting. The ones in the meeting where this was discussed were Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson (then Treasury Secretary), and Timothy Geithner (the tax cheat that is now the Treasury Secretary). So to say that the administration didn't know until this past month is an out and out lie.

Military May Have to use their Private Health Care for their Injuries

Obama has said that he's considering making military personnel wounded in our wars use their own private health insurance to pay for their war injuries. He complains on one hand how the health care costs are skyrocketing but then wants to put our wounded heroes into the private health system. This will drive costs up even higher. I believe that's the goal. Break the health care system and force Socialized Medicine on everyone.

The New Kremlin in Washington Using Taxes to Penalize Americans

Senator Chuck Schumer said today that if those that are receiving the bonuses don't "voluntarily" return the bonus, he and his colleagues will tax them for it and take it back. The heavy hand of this government will create an excise tax to penalize American Citizens, but only a select few, with a tax that will force them to pay back the bonuses that they are contractually entitled to receive. Is this what government is there for? It was Christopher Dodd, Senator from Connecticut that wrote in the provision that the bonuses will still be permitted. Now another Senator wants to penalize American citizens with taxes. We shouldn't be surprised. Taxes are penalties on the American citizen.

$11 Trillion Debt

The National Debt reached $11 Trillion today. Less than two months into the Obama administration the debt has grown by a tenth.

The Tax Man Cometh

Here they come. Beginning April first (April Fools Day) a cigarette tax increase of 62 cents a pack will begin. That will be followed by an increase in your gas and electric bills because of the carbon tax. Capital gains tax increase from 15% to 20% to follow that, then comes an increase in the income tax, dividend tax and another increase in capital gains. Whatever happened to Obama's line "if you make less than $250,000 per year you will not see your taxes increase by one dime."

He can implement an energy tax on utility companies, but they don't pay it. They write the checks, but make no mistake. It comes out of your gas and electric bills each month. He can increase taxes on large corporations but they don't pay it. They collect it in the form of higher prices and then write the checks from the money YOU pay for those higher priced items.

Usually, Boobs are a Wonderful Thing

I am more and more convinced that there are nothing but boobs in Washington DC. Obama can't seem to get his nominees confirmed and the ones he does are tax cheats (Geithner) or have dubious histories (Holder and Clinton). Obama and his administration are nothing short of incompetent and the American people are figuring that out. Obama's poll numbers are dropping and his negatives are increasing.

Someone Please Tell Bill Clinton to SHUT UP

Throughout history, there was an unwritten rule that a former President doesn't comment on the new administration for a year following his exit from office. This rule was followed throughout history with few exceptions. Jimmy Carter ended this in the 80's with his comments during the first year of the Reagan Administration. Reagan was silent during George H.W. Bush's administration. George Bush even commented that he would not speak about the Clinton administration for a year, and then didn't make any comments at all until the 7th year. Bill Clinton was constantly talking after George W. Bush was elected. He was silent for about a month, until the theft and vandalism that the Clinton Administration perpetrate died down. Following that first month, Clinton was on the air almost as much as President Bush.

President Bush (43) today said that Obama deserves his silence. He's honoring that unwritten rule. However, Bill Clinton is still showing up on the air telling what Obama is doing right and wrong. Someone needs to tell that guy to just go away. He's been out of office for over 8 years. He really needs to find himself another girlfriend.

You're welcome to comment.


Friday, March 13, 2009

N.C. Judge Decides to Dumb Down Homeschooled Children

In North Carolina, Judge Ned Mangum ordered a mother to enroll her three children into the public school system next year. http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4727161/

Four years ago, Venessa Mills decided to start homeschooling her three children. The children are now aged 10, 11 and 12. The improvement in the children's education was markedly improved. They have tested 2 years above their grade level since being homeschooled.

Venessa and her husband, Thomas ended up divorcing. As part of the ruling in the divorce, the Judge said that he wanted the children's beliefs learned as part of their homeschooling curriculum, tested by the public school system. Each side in this matter have agreed that the children have thrived since becoming homeschooled.

Divorce is difficult enough. The parents must learn to raise the children alone most of the time, hoping that they will get the asssistance of the other parent when there are problems and if there is no cooperation between them, then they must each learn to deal with the children's problems and emotions separately hoping that they are at least reasonably consistent with what the other parent does. However, divorce is most difficult for the children. The parents may not care for each other any longer, but the children love both of their parents.

The less change the children have to endure, the better it is for them. It's already devastating to not have mom and dad together. Now, a judge tells them that they must now go to government schools despite what their teacher, their mother, has done with them for the past four years.

Make no mistake, the children have benefitted from being homeschooled. The proof is there. They have tested two years ahead of their grade level since starting homeschooling. The father disagrees with homeschooling, yet he was a part of it for four years leading up to the divorce. The success is plain to see.

There are two main reasons stated for this disruption to the children's lives. The first is socialization. The second is because part of their curriculum is religious based.

There are enough studies out there to prove that socialization is not a problem for homeschooled children. In public school they are placed with 20-25 other children of the same age. In homeschool they are subjected to people of all ages. Homeschooled students are better equipped to interract with people of all ages than those children that are government schooled.

The judge said in the courtroom, according to those in the courtroom, that putting the children in government schools was a good opportunity for the children to be tested in what their mother has taught them.

Judge Mangum, in that statement, has admitted that government schools "test" religious beliefs at home. Or perhaps better stated, government schools only teach evolution and not anything that is contradictory to evolution. It is a veiled admission that the government schools are not taking into consideration the personal values of the family, but rather that they are opposing the values that parents give their own children.

4% of children ages 7-16 in North Carolina are homeschooled. Colleges and Universities look for homeschooled children to attend their schools of higher education because they have excellent study habits. Socialization is not an issue. Performance is not an issue. Homeschooled children, by all studies, are better educated than government schooled children.

This judge has taken on the job of parenting by making this decision. The mother must still feed them, clothe them, provide a roof over their heads, and the father presumably will have to pay child support to help her food, chothing and shelter, but the Judge is making the decision on how they are to be raised and with what values, or lack of values.

I wonder, will this judge be there when one of the children has a fever. Will he be there to rock them to sleep at night when they aren't feeling well? Will he be there to put the bandaid on the skinned knee? Will he be there on prom night taking pictures of the children and their dates as they prepare to leave for their dance? Will he be there giving the bride away when the daughter gets married or to support the son when he decides to marry?

Homeschool families are planning to march in support of Venessa Mills on March 24.

You're welcome to comment.


Sunday, March 8, 2009

One Earmark Story

We've all heard about the earmarks in the recent budget bill which is expected to be voted on in the Senate shortly. One of the terms that has come to represent earmarks is "the bridge to nowhere" made famous by the money for Alaska for the bridge to nowhere. It became famous for two reasons. First, just by it coming to be and second when Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska was selected by John McCain as his running mate in the 2008 election. Her famous line is that she said "thanks, but no thanks to the bridge to nowhere."

In Michigan, we seem to have our own earmark. This was for $3.8 million added by Senator Carl Levin for Tiger Stadium. In the 90's, they began talking and planning for replacing Tiger Stadium with a new stadium. They finally did it at the end of 1999.
Tiger Stadium has been there since 1896. This was before the Tigers were even part of the American League. It has had various names. Named for a Tiger Catcher it was called Bennet Park. Later it became Navin Field, then Briggs Stadium and finally renamed by former Tiger John Fetzer, it came to be known as Tiger Stadium.
My own experience with Tiger Stadium was when as an 8 year old, I attended my first Tiger game. Later, in the mid 70's, I started going to nearly every game that Mark the Bird Fidrych pitched and I continued to go throughout the 70's and early 80's to anywhere from 25 to 35 games per year. It was a great place to watch a ballgame. Regardless of where you were sitting, you felt like you were a part of the game. You were close to the field even when you were in the bleachers in centerfield.
I loved the box seats, which were along the edge of the field in the upper and lower deck. You could be behind one of the dugouts, the screen behind home plate or even out to the bullpen, you still felt like you were a part of the game. My own favorite seat was in rightfield. Right in the corner of the upper deck. You were extended out over the field by about 10 or 12 feet and the overhang continued in fair territory along right field unti you reached centerfield.
Even the seats that were considered obstructed view were great. They were obstructed view because you had a pole in front of you somewhere. You still felt a part of the game. I believe that the left fence was 325 feet from the plate expanding outward to 440 feet in Center Field and then narrowing down to 315 feet in Right field and with the overhang, it was 10 feet less if the ball was high enough when hit.
This is where Reggie Jackson hit the light tower above the building in Right Field during the 1971 All Star game. It's also where Ty Cobb, Hal Newhouser and Al Kaline played. It's where Denny McClain won many of his 31 victories in 1968.
I hated the thought of them tearing it down and putting up one of the new style big stadiums. They had less seats, sky boxes and the seats are pushed back away from the field.
There were times in the 70's, that they would ask kids not to bang their bats on bat day because the rumbling could cause damage. But it was still the best place to watch a baseball game.
The decision was made to tear it down after the new Comerica Park was built. All efforts to save the stadium failed. This was in the good economic times that it was decided to tear it down. After many years of court battles, the demolition finally began in July of 2008.
Now, Senator Levin has decided to earmark $3.8 million for Tiger Stadium, calling it an historical landmark. Notice the two pictures above. The one on the left is Tiger Stadium when in use. The one on the right is after the demolition began.
If you look again at the picture on the right, all of the stands you see in that picture are now gone. The outfield is gone. Most of the left and right field foul line stands are gone. Yet, NOW they want to restore Tiger Stadium using tax payer money.
I love history and Tiger Stadium was an important part of my youth. But what that stadium was is no longer there. They can still keep the field and use it for college playoffs, high school championships and youth teams. But that wouldn't cost $3.8 million to make playable. Especially in the worst recession since the late 70's and early 80's.
As much as I liked Tiger Stadium and still respect it's history, the time has long since passed for restoration. They've torn down the outfield and most of the foul line seats. It seems pointless to waste money after it's more than 2/3 down. What was the charm of Tiger Stadium no longer exists. Especially when you consider that the American people are being told to pay for it in serious economic times.
This is another example of wasted dollars by the government. The sad part is that it is OUR TAX DOLLARS that they are wasting. to quote another historical figure from Tiger Stadium, Ernie Harwell, this stadium is now "LONG GONE!!".
You're welcome to comment.

Friday, March 6, 2009

545 People


By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of representatives does.You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country. I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ...If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ. If they do not receive social security, but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way. There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible. They, and they alone, have the power. They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
What you do with this article now that you have read it.......... is up to you.

The Stroke of a Pen

The form to the left is a page from the "Stimulus" bill that was signed into law on February 17, 2009 by Barack Obama, the President.
First, thank you to Renk from the Live with Renk Show out of Battle Creek. He posted this on his website and I got it from him. You might be able to see it clearer at his site. http://www.renkandfile.com/
This page is from Title X page 19. Notice the bill is typed up, but somebody (I have no idea who) crossed out the amount listed and changed it to a much higher number. It's not whited out and typed over. It's not backspaced away and retyped. As Maynard G. Krebbs would say, that would be too much "work". Instead, they drew a line through it and wrote in by hand the new figure.
This just amplifies the complete incompetence of the people that we elect to be our "leaders". There is no working the numbers to figure out if they will actually help create jobs. There is no analysis to come up with a proper figure to accomplish what they claim to want to accomplish. There is no careful thought nor deliberation. What this is, is someone saying, 'Barack wanted an $800 Billion dollar bill and we're short $1.5 Billion, so lets boost this number up by that much."
This is an embarassment. But then, we should be getting used to embarassment from this Congress and this President. Here's another example.
The Prime Minister of Great Britain came here for a meeting with the President. He came bearing gifts. Gordon Brown gave to our President an ornamental pen holder made from the remnants of the anti-slave ship, the HMS Gannet. Mr. Brown also gave Mr. Obama a First Edition, seven volume set of Winston Churchill biographies. Both of these gifts were well thought out treasures. They had meaning. Thought was put in to these gifts.
What do you think President Obama gave to Prime Minister Gordon Brown? This is really embarassing. You might want to sit down.
President Obama, the new leader of the free world. Arguably the most powerful man in the world, gave the Prime Minister of Great Britain, one of our greatest friends and allies, a 25 DVD set of American Movie Classics.
As I said, this is embarassing. Our laws and bills are made hastily just changing numbers with a papermate and the most thought for a gift to one of our best friends in the world is whether to tell little Rahm Emanuel he can keep the change left over after handing him $6.00 to run down to Walmart and buy the 25 DVD set of classic movies from the $5.00 bin of movies.
You're welcome to comment.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

White House Practicing Hate

The Barack Obama White House has an enemies list. It's been reported in Politico that there is an enemies list within the Obama Administration. Tops on the list is Rush Limbaugh. In 2007 Senator Reid sent a letter to Clear Channel Chairman Mark Mays complaining about Limbaugh. When Limbaugh received the letter, he auctioned it off on E-bay. It sold for $2,100,100. The money was then donated to the children of soldiers and police who had lost their parent in the line of duty. In addition, Limbaugh matched that high bid and contributed the same amount from his own money bringing the total to $4,200,200 to benefit those children.

Now, with a new President, the White House has created an enemies list with Limbaugh at the top. The conspirators to this are James Carville, Paul Begala, George Stephanopolous and Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel is a top advisor to Obama. Carville and Begala work for CNN and George Stephanopolous works for ABC. The three stooges of the press are all former Clinton employees. Emanuel also worked for Bill Clinton but may be even better known for shipping a dead chicken to a politcal enemy.

Rush Limbaugh is still a private citizen. This is clearly the government targeting a citizen of this country for having differing views of the present government. Is that how a free society is supposed to run?

Limbaugh, on his program today, challenged the President to a debate. He offered Obama three hours on his program for a debate between the two of them. He challenged Obama and only Obama. Limbaugh said he wouldn't accept debating one of Obama's lackey's. That he won't hide behind others as Obama is doing by having his staff in the White House and Obama's staff in the press coming in Obama's stead.

Don't get your hopes up. Obama won't accept this challenge. It's a no win for him. First, he's no match for Limbaugh. Obama doesn't speak well unless he has teleprompters. Off the cuff, he's filled with "uhhhs" and "umms". Limbaugh is very good at speaking on the fly.

Second, he doesn't want a feud with Limbaugh because the only thing he could expect from such a debate is that he'd be accused of lying about his statements of "change the tone in DC". After having five of his appointees caught not paying their taxes, and three of those didn't get the job they were vying for.

These liberals are creating all kinds of problems with the economy that was already in bad shape, and their answer is to go after Rush Limbaugh? He's not elected to anything. He is the choice of 20 million Americans who listen to him, but he's not elected to anything. So what is the sense in creating an enemies list with Rush Limbaugh as the head of that list?

If they will go after one private citizen, what is to stop them from coming after anyone else that dares to disagree with them?

This is a sure loser for Obama, but then, he's probably getting used to failure in his White House. Obama is proving himself to be the leader of hate in this country.

You're welcome to comment.


Revisiting the Line Item Veto

Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold are teaming up again according to the news. This time they want to push for a line item veto. They've already had their one debacle with the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. Now they want to get us again with a new topic.

The line item veto allows the President to veto parts of a bill but leave other parts in the bill. It takes some of the power and some of the responsibility away from Congress.

Let's say that Congress writes a bill that says everyone in this country must wear blue levi jeans at all times. As Congress is known to do on occasion (ahem) they add some amendments. Let's say one of those amendments is that ACORN gets $1 billion and let's also say that another amendment gives $1 billion to a Pro-Life group.

The bill passes the Congress. It goes to the President's desk and he looks it over. President Obama sees that money going for Pro-Life and veto's that line. But he doesn't veto the ACORN expense. The bill goes through. Let's also turn it around. Let's say that this happened while it was President Bush. ACORN would be veto'd and Pro-Life would remain.

Again, using the above example, if there is no line item veto, the President, regardless of which one it is, has to either veto the bill or sign it.

The line item veto takes away the responsbility from the Congress. The House will pass anything, but the Senate is supposed to be a deliberative body. They no longer have to deliberate anything. They can pass everything and let the sitting President take full responsibility for everything.

Each party, when they are in charge of the White House will love the bill, but when they are out, they'll complain about it. It reminds me abit of term limits. We have term limits in Michigan. Back when it was passed, the argument was that these people are in there too long and make a career out of it and their power gets to be too great. The downside, is that now we have inexperienced people that have no real long standing relationships to get things done. Which is what the people wanted to end. So what do we do? Change it back and then listen to the complaints of entrenched politicians or leave it and listen to the complaints of inexperienced people in office. We'll end up with the same problems with the line item veto.

In Obama's place, if he has the line item veto, every Democrat spending proposal will be passed. Every Republican cut in spending will be veto'd. The only hope then is that the veto can be reversed. Look at the numbers. Do you really think the Republicans can overturn a veto with the numbers they have? Or reverse it, do you really think that the Liberals could overturn a Bush veto with the numbers they had in the 90's and the first six years of the aughts?

Time could better be spent by a Conservative challenging John McCain in his re-election bid.

Your comments are welcome.


Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Grab Your Parka and Protest Global Warming

"Thank God for Global Warming. We'd never find the march without it"

You just have to love these "global warming" whiners. First, the earth has not had an increase in the temperature since 1997. It's been 11 years since we've had the earth warming, and the way it's going this year, we'll likely not get an increase this year either. In fact, the "experts" are saying that we may be headed into an ice age until 2015. My one problem with this is the weatherman can't get todays weather right, how on earth can they tell us what the weather is going to be like in 6 years?

That, however, doesn't stop the global warming alarmists. Once again, they were to have a global warming march in Washington DC that was ummm snowed out due to the blizzard that hit the northeast yesterday. New York got a foot of snow. Washington DC got 6 inches and even Atlanta had several inches of snow.

This isn't the first time. How many times have we heard of Al Gore planning on a global warming "summit" where they got freezing rain, or an ice storm or a major snow storm? I can remember three times anyway.

I like to be supportive of other people's rights to an opinion, so I'll do my part and actually make a suggestion to these moronic liberals. Look at your calendars. Most all calendars tell you when each season starts. The warm months are late spring, all summer and early fall. You might want to plan these things for July or August. You're almost guaranteed it's going to be hot. But at least it will be warm. However, if you take a deep breath through your nose and your nostrils stick together for a few seconds, you're not going to get the ideal effect for global warming.

It takes a real group of morons to put on a global warming summit or protest when you have to wear ice skates or snow shoes to get around. It sends a much better message when pretty girls are out in their bikini's and still sweating. In addition, from my point of view anyway, it's more fun to watch that summertime protest.

By the way, when I woke up at 6:30 this morning the temperature outside was 2 degrees. Thank God for global warming. Imagine how cold it would have been here this morning without the supposed global warming!

You're welcome to comment.


Monday, March 2, 2009

Rush Limbaugh Speech to CPAC

On Saturday, Rush Limbaugh closed out the CPAC conference with a speech. Rather than give my comments on his speech, I thought I'd just post his speech here. As always seems to be the case with Limbaugh, he hit the nail on the head. We can only hope that the Republicans in both Houses of Congress and those in the Republican National Committee heed his words. I'm sure that some liberals will E-mail me. They don't post very often, but they do E-mail. Here are Rush's words from Saturday, February 28. :

RUSH: Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you all very, very much. Thank you all. I can't tell you how wonderful that makes me feel. It happens everywhere I go, but it's still special here. [ Laughter ] If you all will indulge me, I learned something, I guess, it's early Friday morning that I didn't know. Friday morning is when I learned this. I learned that Fox, God love them, is televising this speech on the Fox News Channel, which means, ladies and gentleman, this is my first ever address to the nation. [Applause] Now, I have someone in back taking phone numbers. In fact, I would like to introduce to you my security chief, a man who runs all of my security. His name is Joseph Stalin. Joseph, would you please -- [Laughter ] I am safe from any liberal attack, in public, because they would be afraid of offending Stalin. [Laughter] Now the opportunity here to address the nation, a serious one, it really is. And I want to take it seriously. I want to address something. I know that people are probably watching this who never have listened to my program and may not even really know what conservatism is. They think they do based on how they've been told -- the way we've been impugned and maligned and so forth. One of the things that is totally erroneous about me -- and I just want to get this up front -- is that I'm pompous. [Laughter]And that I am arrogant. Neither of these things are remotely true. I can tell you a joke to illustrate this.

Larry King passed away, goes to heaven. He's greeted by Saint Peter at the gates. Saint Peter says, "Welcome, Mr. King, it's great to have you here. I want to show you around, give you an idea of what's here, maybe you can pick a place that you'd like to reside." King says, "I just have one question: Is Rush Limbaugh here?" "No, he's got a lot of time yet, Mr. King." So Saint Peter begins the tour. Larry King sees the various places and it's beyond anything we can imagine in terms of beauty. Finally, he gets to the biggest room of all, with this giant throne. And over the throne is a flashing beautiful angelic neon sign that says "Rush Limbaugh." [Laughter]And Larry King looks at Saint Peter and says: "I thought you said he wasn't here." "He said, he's not, he's not. This is God's room. He just thinks he's Rush Limbaugh."[Laughter] [Applause]So you see I'm not pompous. [Laughter]

Now, seriously, for those of you watching on C-SPAN as well, and on Fox, I want to tell you who we all are in this room. I want to tell you who conservatives are. We conservatives have not done a good enough job of just laying out basically who we are because we make the mistake of assuming people know. What they know is largely incorrect based on the way we are portrayed in pop culture, in the Drive-By Media, by the Democrat Party. Let me tell you who we conservatives are: We love people. [Applause] When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don't see groups. We don't see victims. We don't see people we want to exploit. What we see -- what we see is potential. We do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work. We do not see that person with contempt. We don't think that person doesn't have what it takes. We believe that person can be the best he or she wants to be if certain things are just removed from their path like onerous taxes, regulations and too much government. [Applause] We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. [Applause] We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. [Applause] Liberty, Freedom. [Applause] And the pursuit of happiness. [Applause] Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded. We conservatives think all three are under assault. [Applause] Thank you. Thank you. We don't want to tell anybody how to live. That's up to you. If you want to make the best of yourself, feel free. If you want to ruin your life, we'll try to stop it, but it's a waste. We look over the country as it is today, we see so much waste, human potential that's been destroyed by 50 years of a welfare state. By a failed war on poverty. [Applause]We love the people of this country. And we want this to be the greatest country it can be, but we do understand, as people created and endowed by our creator, we're all individuals. We resist the effort to group us. We resist the effort to make us feel that we're all the same, that we're no different than anybody else. We're all different. There are no two things or people in this world who are created in a way that they end up with equal outcomes. That's up to them. They are created equal, given the chance - -[Applause]We don't hate anybody. We don't -- I mean, the racism in this country, if you ask me, I know many people in this audience -- let me deal with this head on. You know what the cliche is, a conservative: racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe. Excuse me, ladies and gentlemen of America, if you were paying attention, I know you were, the racism in our culture was exclusively and fully on display in the Democrat primary last year. [Applause]

It was not us asking whether Barack Obama was authentic. What we were asking is: Is he wrong? We concluded, yes. We still think so. But we didn't ask if he was authentically black. We didn't say, as some Southern Christian Leadership Conference leaders said: Barack is not authentic, he's not got any slave blood. He's really not down for the struggle, but his wife is. So don't expect the race industry to go away. Southern Christian Leadership Conference -- you may not know this, because it wasn't reported in the Drive-By Media -- the racism, the sexism, the bigotry that we're all charged with, just so you across the United States of America know, and you'll see demonstrated here as the afternoon goes on, doesn't exist on our side. We want everybody to succeed. [Applause]You know why? We want the country to succeed, and for the country to succeed, its people -- its individuals -- must succeed. Everyone among us must be pursuing his ambition or her desire, whatever, with excellence. Trying to be the best they can be. Not told, as they are told by the Democrat Party: You really can't do that, you don't have what it takes, besides you're a minority or you're a woman and there are too many people that want to discriminate against you. You can't get anywhere. You need to depend on us. Well. Take a look, someone has to say this -- I am thrilled for the opportunity to say it in my first national address to the nation -- and I'm going to touch on this in more detail in a moment, but this is just to get you thinking -- take a look at all the constituency groups that for 50 years have been depending on the Democrat Party to improve their lives. And you tell me if you find any. They're still complaining, still griping about the same problems. Their problems don't get fixed by government. And those lives have been poisoned. Those lives have been cut short by false promises, from government representatives who said don't worry about it, we'll take care of you. Just vote for us. [Applause]For those of you just tuning in on the Fox News Channel or C-SPAN, I'm Rush Limbaugh and I want everyone in this room and every one of you around the country to succeed. I want anyone who believes in life, liberty, pursuit of happiness to succeed. And I want any force, any person, any element of an overarching Big Government that would stop your success, I want that organization, that element or that person to fail. I want you to succeed. [Applause] Also, for those of you in the Drive-By Media watching, I have not needed a teleprompter for anything I've said. [Cheers and Applause ] And nor do any of us need a teleprompter, because our beliefs are not the result of calculations and contrivances. Our beliefs are not the result of a deranged psychology. Our beliefs are our core. Our beliefs are our hearts. We don't have to make notes about what we believe. We don't have to write down, oh do I believe it do I believe that we can tell people what we believe off the top of our heads and we can do it with passion and we can do it with clarity, and we can do it persuasively. Some of us just haven't had the inspiration or motivation to do so in a number of years, but that's about to change. [Cheers and Applause]For example, we gather here -- I understand that. I talked to David and Lisa in the super exclusive private green room that nobody, but about 55 people were allowed into, and they said that there's a sense of liberation here among all of you that are attending CPAC. I understand what the sense of liberation is about. But don't make the mistake at the same time of feeling liberated as thinking we're better and we can do better as a minority. Because we're not a minority. And if you start thinking of yourselves as a minority, you're going to be defensive. And you'll allow the majority to set the agenda and the premise and you're responding to it. The American people may not all vote the way we wish them to, but more Americans than you now live their lives as conservatives in one degree or another. And they are waiting for leadership. We need conservative leadership. We can take this country back. All we need is to nominate the right candidate. It's no more complicated than that. [Applause]

Now, let me speak about President Obama for just a second. President Obama is one of the most gifted politicians, one of the most gifted men that I have ever witnessed. He has extraordinary talents. He has communication skills that hardly anyone can surpass. No, seriously. No, no, I'm being very serious about this. It just breaks my heart that he does not use these extraordinary talents and gifts to motivate and inspire the American people to be the best they can be. He's doing just the opposite. And it's a shame. [Applause] President Obama has the ability -- he has the ability to inspire excellence in people's pursuits. He has the ability to do all this, yet he pursues a path, seeks a path that punishes achievement, that punishes earners and punishes -- and he speaks negatively of the country. Ronald Reagan used to speak of a shining city on a hill. Barack Obama portrays America as a soup kitchen in some dark night in a corner of America that's very obscure. He's constantly telling the American people that bad times are ahead, worst times are ahead. And it's troubling, because this is the United States of America. Anybody ever ask -- I'm in awe of our country and I ask this question a lot as I've gotten older. We're less than 300 years old. We are younger than nations that have been on this planet for thousands of years. We, nevertheless, in less than 300 years -- by the way, we're no different than any other human beings around the world. Our DNA is no different. We're not better just because we're born in America. There's nothing that sets us apart. How did this happen? How did the United States of America become the world's lone super power, the world's economic engine, the most prosperous opportunity for an advanced lifestyle that humanity has ever known? How did this happen? And why pray tell does the President of the United States want to destroy it? It saddens me. The freedom we spoke of earlier is the freedom, it's the ambition, it's the desire, the wherewithal, the passions that people have that gave us the great entrepreneurial advances, the great inventions, the greatest food production, the human lifestyle advances in this country. Why shouldn't that be rewarded? Why is that now the focus of punishment? Why is that now the focus of blame? Why doesn't -- Mayor Bloomberg the other day, ladies and gentlemen, resisting his Governor's call for an increased tax on the rich in New York had some astounding numbers. Eight million people live in New York. 40,000 of those eight million pay roughly 60 to 70% of New York's operating budget. He was afraid that if he raised taxes on those people some of them might leave. Mayor, one already has, by the way. [Applause] Stop and think of this, though. Stop and think of this. Forty thousand people out of eight million. He's right, if 10,000 of them leave, or 5,000, they've got a huge problem. Because New York has its own welfare state inside the one the federal government's created. They've got a dependency class that has grown up and been educated that their entitlement is to be fed and taken care of by these evil mean people who have more than they do. If New York City, New York State or Washington, DC were a business, these 40,000 people would be taken on golf tournament trips to Los Angeles, and they would be wined and dined and they would be thanked and they would be encouraged to keep it up. They wouldn't be told they're the problem. They wouldn't be told, except there's -- I pride my accuracy rating. There is one other business where the customer is always wrong and that's the media. Sorry about that. [Applause]Have you ever called to complain about whatever they do? They say, yes, sir, yes, sir, three bags full. They hang up and say you're too stupid to know how they're doing what they're doing. You can't get it. You're not sophisticated enough. So that's another business where the customer is always wrong. But, seriously, the people who have achieved great things, most of it is not inherited. Most wealth in this country is the result of entrepreneurial, just plain old hard work. There's no reason to punish it. There's no reason to raise taxes on these people. Barack Obama, the Democrat Party, have one responsibility, and that's to respect the oath they gave to protect, defend and follow the US Constitution. [Applause]They don't have the right to take money that's not theirs, from the back pockets of producers, and give it to groups like ACORN, which are going to advance the Democrat Party. If anybody but government were doing this, it would be a crime. And many of us think it's bordering on that as it exists now. [Applause]

President Obama is so busy trying to foment and create anger in a created atmosphere of crisis, he is so busy fueling the emotions of class envy that he's forgotten it's not his money that he's spending. [Applause] In fact, the money he's spending is not ours. He's spending wealth that has yet to be created. And that is not sustainable. It will not work. This has been tried around the world. And every time it's been tried, it's a failed disaster. What's the longest war in American history? Did somebody say the war on poverty? Smart group. War on poverty. The war on poverty essentially started in the '30s as part of the New Deal, but it really ramped up in the '60s with Lyndon Johnson, part of the Great Society war on poverty. We have transferred something like 10 trillion, maybe close to 11 trillion, from producers and earners to nonproducers and nonearners since 1965. Yet, as I listen to the Democratic Party campaign, why, America is still a soup kitchen, the poor is still poor and they have no hope and they're poor for what reason? They're poor because of us, because we don't care, and because we've gotten rich by taking from them, that's what kids in school are taught today. That's what others have said to the media. You know why they're poor, you know why they remain poor? Because their lives have been destroyed by the never-ending government hay that's designed to help them, but it destroys ambition. It destroys the education they might get to learn to be self-fulfilling. [Applause] And it breaks our heart. It breaks our heart. We lose track of numbers with all of the money, with all the money that's been transferred, redistributed, with all the charitable giving in this country. Ladies and gentlemen, there ought not be any poverty except those who are genuinely ill equipped. But most of the people in poverty in this country are equipped for far much more. They've just been beaten down. They're told don't worry, we'll take care of you. There's nothing out there for you anyway; you'll be discriminated against. Breaks our heart to see this. We can't have a great country and a growing economy with more and more people being told they have a right, because of some injustice that's been done to them or some discrimination, that they have a right to the earnings of others. And it's gotten so out of hand now that what worries me is that this administration, the Barack Obama administration is actively seeking to expand the welfare state in this country because he wants to control it. George Will once asked Dr. Friedrich Von Hayek, tremendous classical economist, great man, 1975, George Will, Dr. Von Hayek, why is it that intellectuals, supposed smartest people in the room, why is it that intellectuals can look right out their windows, their own homes and cars and look at their universities and not see the bounties and the growth and the greatness of capitalism? And Von Hayek said: I've troubled over this for years and I've finally concluded that for intellectuals, pseudo-intellectuals, and all liberals, it's about control. It's not about raising revenue. You think Obama has any intention of paying for all this spending? Folks, if he had any intention of paying for it, he wouldn't do 90% of it because we don't have the money. [Applause]They don't care about paying for it. All that's just words. All that's just rhetoric paying for it because he knows you have to worry about paying for it. He knows we all have to be concerned -- oh, except, wrong again. Except the words of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who were given homes that everybody knew they could never pay for, and now Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, the architects along with Bill Clinton of the policy that gave us the whole sub-prime mortgage crisis, get to sit around and act as innocent spectators to investigate what went on when they largely had the biggest role in causing it. [Applause]Congressman Frank's definition of affordable housing is you get a house you don't have to pay for that everybody else in the neighborhood will pay for. Why? Because it's unfair that some people can have a house and some people can't. Geez, it's just unfair. So here we have two systems. We have socialism, collectivism, Stalin, whatever you want to call it, versus capitalism. Admittedly over on the right side capitalism there will be unequal outcomes because we're all different. And some of us care more and have more passion and we know what we want to do and others are still struggling for it. Some people are just going to work harder than others. Okay. You get what you work for. Those who have a genuine inability for whatever reason are taken care of. We're compassionate people. On the left side when you get into this collectivism socialism stuff, these people on the left, the Democrats and liberals today claim that they are pained by the inequities and the inequalities in our society. And they believe that these inequities and inequalities descend from the selfishness and the greed of the achievers. And so they tell the people who are on different income quintiles, whatever lists, they say it's not that you're not working hard enough, you could have what they have, perhaps, if you applied it. They're stealing it from you.

So what liberals do, and I say this again to the -- another thing, I know people in the country are watching. I was watching a focus group after some event this week. Might have been after Obama's State of the Union show. [Laughter] And they had -- it was a typical, you know, Drive-By Media focus group. They round up losers -- [Laughter] -- who hear Obama speak and think that the next day their gas tanks are going to be filled up and get a new house and a new kitchen and a new car. And so this one guy said -- oh, it was some guy responding to Bobby Jindal. Oh, by the way did you hear about Joe Biden? Joe Biden was mystified how Bobby Jindal got his shift off at 7-Eleven that night to make the speech. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Time out. Suspend speech for explanation. People watching at home. I'm glad this happened. Glad this happened. You think I just made a joke, an ethnic joke about Bobby Jindal, don't you? I didn't. I made a joke about the bigotry of the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden. It was Joe Biden while walking through the train station he knows so well because he's such a real guy, that he made a comment that you can't go into a 7-Eleven without seeing some Indian guy behind the counter. They're all over the place. Now, let a conservative say something like that and he's brought up before John Conyers' committee with Pat Leahy wanting at you next. Many people think I lose my place in these speeches because -- by the way what time is it? We have plenty of time. We have to be out of here by -- [Applause] We have to be out of here by 6:00 -- okay, depends on how you behave. I'll decide as we go on. What liberalism Democrat, for those of you in the country, I really want you to believe this because it's the truth. I'm not saying it just because I believe it. This is a core. I want the best country we can have. We want the most prosperous people. We want to be growing. We want to lead the world. We want everybody to come here legally. We want this country to be so damn great and we just cringe to watch it -- basically capitalism be assaulted and our culture be reoriented to where the people that make it work are the enemy. That's not the United States of America. The people that make this country work, the people who pay on their mortgages, the people getting up and going to work, striving in this recession to not participate in it, they're not the enemy. They're the people that hire you. They're the people that are going to give you a job. They're the people that are going to give you a raise, the people that need you to do work for them. [Applause] President Obama, and take your pick of any Democrat, love to say we've tried it your way. Meaning Reaganism. We've tried it your way. We tried it your way in the '80s and it didn't work. We tried it your way eight years, the last eight years and it didn't work. Excuse me. Excuse me. Have you ever noticed those of you watching around the world in my first international address to the world, Fox is on some international satellites. They're watching this in the UK right now going (cringing). When Obama talks about past economies, he somehow always leaves out the recession of the '80s as worse than this one. Why does he leave it out? Because you know why he leaves it out, America? He leaves it out because we got out of that recession with tax cuts. [Applause] For those of you watching at home, I'm not nervous it's just really hot in here. These people are wired. We got out of the 1980s recession with tax cuts. Do you know that President Obama, in six weeks of his administration, has proposed more spending than from the founding of the country to his inauguration? Now, this is not prosperity. It is not going to engender prosperity. It's not going to create prosperity and it's also not going to advance or promote freedom. It's going to be just the opposite. There are going to be more controls over what you can and can't do, how you can and can't do it, what you can and can't drive, what you can and can't say, where you can and can't say it. All of these things are coming down the pike, because it's not about revenue generation to them, it's about control. They do believe that they have compassion. They do believe they care. But, see, we never are allowed to look at the results of their plans, we are told we must only look at their good intentions, their big hearts. The fact that they have destroyed poor families by breaking up those families by offering welfare checks to women to keep having babies no more father needed, he's out doing something, the government's the father, they destroy the family. We're not supposed to analyze that. We're not supposed to talk about that. We're supposed to talk about their good intentions. They destroy people's futures. The future is not Big Government. Self-serving politicians. Powerful bureaucrats. This has been tried, tested throughout history. The result has always been disaster. President Obama, your agenda is not new. It's not change, and it's not hope. [Applause] Spending a nation into generational debt is not an act of compassion. All politicians, including President Obama, are temporary stewards of this nation. It is not their task to remake the founding of this country. It is not their task to tear it apart and rebuild it in their image. (Crowd chanting "USA")

It is not their task, it is not their right to remake this nation to accommodate their psychology. I sometimes wonder if liberalism is not just a psychosis or a psychology, not an ideology. It's so much about feelings, and the predominant feeling that liberalism is about is about feeling good about themselves and they do that by telling themselves they have all this compassion. You know, if you really want to unhinge a liberal it's hard to do because they're so unhinged now anyway, even after -- but all you have to do is say you know that the things you people do, the things you people believe in are cruel. That's the last way they look at themselves. They are the best people on the -- they're the good people. You tell them that their ideas and that their policies are cruel and the eggs start scrambling. I have learned how to tweak liberals everywhere. I do it instinctively now. Tweak them in the media. And no reason to be afraid of these people. Why in the world would you be afraid of the deranged? There really is no reason to be afraid of them. And there's no reason to assume they're the minority. And there's no reason to let them set all the premises and all the agendas to which we respond to. I'm getting a little bit ahead of myself here but everybody asks me and I'm sure it's been a focal point of your convention: What do we do as conservatives? What do we do? How do we overcome this? Well, the one thing, and there are many, but one thing that we can all do is stop assuming that the way to beat them is with better policy ideas right now. I don't want to name any names. It's not the point. But I talk to people about the Obama budget or the Obama Porkulous bill or whatever else TARP 2 whatever it's going to be, and they start talking to me in the terms of process and policy. I say stop it. What do you mean? Who is setting the process or policy? They are. You want to tweak it? No. This is philosophy, folks. This guy, I forgot -- the guy in the focus group after Bobby Jindal said, I didn't want to hear him talk, he said: Republicans and Democrats. Republicans and Democrats. Ladies and gentlemen of the United States of America, that's exactly what your future is about, who wins, Republicans or Democrats, conservatives versus liberals. The notion of partisanship, false premise. Let me define bipartisanship for you. Bipartisanship -- everybody seems to go orgasmic over the concept of bipartisanship. Don't worry, I checked with Fox, that word's okay. [Laughter] [Applause]Remember, they covered the Lewinsky thing, so that's my -- bipartisanship occurs only after one other result, and that is victory. In other words, let's say as conservatives liberals demand that we be bipartisan with them in Congress. What they mean is: We check our core principles at the door, come in, let them run the show and agree with them. That's bipartisanship to them. To us, bipartisanship is them being forced to agree with us after we politically have cleaned their clocks and beaten them. And that has to be what we're focused on. [Applause] Why would any of us in this room who hold the core beliefs we believe, somebody tell me where is the compromise on all of this spending? Where is the compromise on all this punishment of the achievers. I don't know. [Laughter] [Applause]

Where is the compromise between good and evil? Should Jesus have cut a different deal? Serious. From the standpoint of what we have to do, folks, this is not about taking a policy or a process that the Democrats have put forward and fighting around the edges. If we're going to convince the minds and hearts of the American people that what's about to happen to them is as disastrous as anything in their lives in peacetime, we're going to have to discuss philosophy with them. We are going to have to talk about principles, because our principles are not present in what's happening here. So where the hell do we go to compromise what we believe in when our principles are not their principles, they're just the opposite of what's happening? [Applause]The American people -- it's a tough challenge. I admit -- I admit it's a tough challenge, but it's worth it. It's worth it. The way I just defined bipartisanship you could turn it around and liberals will define bipartisanship when we surrender and say okay we give. We're not quitting. We are not giving up. The country is too important. [Applause] There are certain realities. We don't have the votes in Capitol Hill to stop what's going to happen. What we can do is slow it down, procedure, parliamentary procedures, slow it down and do the best we can to inform the American people of what's really on the horizon. I know it's going to be tough. At some points, I don't think it can happen even right now. This is still the honeymoon period, and there's a lot of devotion to the Obama administration. It doesn't have anything to do with intellectual thinking, it's feelings. It's going to take some time for this to play out. But I spoke to David Keene, interviewing him for my newsletter. I asked him about this. He said they're going to overreach. Wouldn't you say they have? [Laughter].They're going to overreach. At some point, at some point people have got to realize none of this is possible. You can't have people living in homes they don't pay for. You can't have people driving cars they don't pay for. I mean, you can for a while. But after a while the people paying for it -- screw this. We're not putting up with it. And you're going to see -- you're already starting to see evidence of these. All the tea parties that are starting to bubble up out there. Those are great. Fabulous. [Applause] And here's the big question. Here's the big question. And I ask this again in the context of my first address to the nation. [Laughter] You don't know how I love saying that, how excited I am about this. Aside from the bastardization of the Constitution that the Obama plans are, that TARP is, it's not constitutional. Aside from that, where is the evidence that the people offering all of this have ever succeeded in any similar plans before? There's none. There is no evidence it works. [Applause]So you say how is he getting it done? Dumb down public education. Emotions. And the ongoing -- this is why I think it's such a waste for a man as gifted as President Obama with the communications skills, you know he could wipe out the Republican Party. He can wipe out the Republican Party if he would inspire this country to be the best it could be, but we don't have to worry about that because that's not what he wants. He wants people in fear, angst and crisis, fearing the worst each and every day because that clears the decks for President Obama and his pals to come in with the answers, which are abject failures, historically shown and demonstrated. Doesn't matter. They'll have control of it when it's all over. And that's what they want. Because they think they can do it better. They see these inequalities, these inequities that capitalism produces. How do they fix it? Do they try to elevate those at the bottom? No! They try to tear down the people at the bottom. It's not fair you're up there. So they whack us. That's not what made the country great.[Applause] And no evidence of it is in play here. John Kerry [Boos], who served in Vietnam. [Laughter] Think about this, and, by the way, Barney Frank got involved with this, too. Northern Trust, a bank in Chicago -- by the way, which holds the mortgage to the Messiah's house, purchased by Tony Rezko, Northern Trust holds the mortgage. Northern Trust was forced, like Wells Fargo was forced, to take TARP money. The Wells Fargo CEO said they were taken into Paulson's room and they were given until 5:00 to sign it. They weren't getting out until they did. They wanted it spread all over the banking business. Northern Trust was in there. They didn't want it. They took $1.6 billion. As you know, they went out and they sponsored the LA Riveria Open two weeks ago that Phil Mickelson barely hung on and won. [Applause]And we find out they hired some liberals to entertain, but it still wasn't good enough. They hired Sheryl Crow. And they hired the rock crooner group Chicago, but they had the audacity, Northern Trust did, to entertain their clients, to try to reward their best customers, to get new customers, banking is in trouble, Northern Trust is trying to do what they always do, what all businesses do, and that is mine for new clients and reward existing good customers. Not since they took $1.6 billion, I guess. The haughty John Kerry wrote a piece of legislation said: He's getting sick and tired, sick and tired of these CEOs using taxpayer money to throw all these lavish parties. And I'm saying where do you get yours, Senator? [Applause]Sad thing, sad thing is it works. They've created class envy in so many average Americans that they love hearing that. Yeah, you get even with those bank guys. How is it going to improve here? Let me ask a question for those of you watching my first national address. Take the favorite villain you've got, maybe it's John Thain at Merrill Lynch, because he used his own money, his company's own money, his company's own money, to redecorate a bathroom in an office for $1.2 million. By the way, to do that he had to hire a contractor. They got paid. Had to hire a designer and buy furniture, that's called stimulus. And he did it. But all of a sudden John Thain's thrown out. John Thain is thrown out. He's humiliated and embarrassed; how dare he? He did it a year before they took the TARP money. And all these Congressmen are standing up saying this is not going to happen. We are not going to watch these people capping executive pay while Obama tries to live like one. You know, he's trying to emulate the lifestyle he is attacking. That's what liberals do. Two sets of rules: One for them; one for everybody else. But it's coming. See, if you think that John Thain or the Northern Trust CEO, if you love them getting attacked, if you love them being ripped, ask yourself the next day, do you have any more money in your pocket? Is your life any better because that guy got taken out or down by some haughty senator from Massachusetts?

If you ask yourself this, you'll realize your life is no better off. That the Democrats and Obama are asking you to feel better simply on the basis that they're going to get revenge for you, but your life isn't going to improve, somebody else's is just going to be destroyed and they want you to be happy over that. That's sick. And that is not the United States of America. [Applause] Besides, as far as John Kerry is concerned, if it wasn't for his varicose veins, he would be totally colorless. [Laughter]Now let's talk about the conservative movement as it were. We, ladies and gentlemen, have challenges that are part and parcel of a movement that feels it has just suffered a humiliating defeat when it's not humiliating. This wasn't a landslide victory, 52 to, what, 46. Fifty-eight million people voted against Obama. There would have been more if we would have had a conservative nominee. [Applause] I don't mean that -- I mean that in an instructive way, as a lead-in to what I'm talking about here. No humiliating defeat here. I can't -- sometimes I get livid and angry. We do have an organizational problem. We have a challenge. We've got factions now within our own movement seeking power to dominate it, and worst of all to redefine it. Well, the Constitution doesn't need to be redefined. Conservative intellectuals, the Declaration of Independence does not need to be redefined and neither does conservatism. Conservatism is what it is and it is forever. It's not something you can bend and shape and flake and form. [Applause] Thank you. Thank you. For the purposes of this occasion, I'm not going to mention any names, I bet with you I won't have to. People watching my first address to the nation might be curious what I'm talking about. They'll find out in due course, trust me on this. I cringed -- it might have been 2007, late 2007 or sometime during 2008, but a couple of prominent conservative but Beltway establishment media types began to write on the concept that the era of Reagan is over. [Crowd Booing] And that we needed to adapt our appeal, because, after all, what's important in politics is winning elections. And so we have to understand that the American people, they want Big Government. We just have to find a way to tell them we're no longer opposed to that. We will come up with our own version of it that is wiser and smarter, but we've got to go get the Walmart voter, and we've got to get the Hispanic voter, and we've got to get the recalcitrant independent women. And I'm listening to this and I am just apoplectic: The era of Reagan is over? When the hell do you hear a Democrat say the era of FDR is over? You never hear it. Not only that, the President of the United States today thinks he's FDR, thinks he's Abraham Lincoln, and sometimes, Tuesday night, thinks he's Ronald Reagan. Our own movement has members trying to throw Reagan out while the Democrats know they can't accomplish what they want unless they appeal to Reagan voters. We have got to stamp this out within this movement, because it will tear us apart. It will guarantee we lose elections. [Applause]We have to. You see, to me it's a no-brainer. It's not even something to me: How do you get rid of Reagan from conservatism? The blueprint -- the blueprint for landslide conservative victory is right there. Why in the hell do the smartest people in our room want to chuck it? I know why. I know exactly why. It's because they're embarrassed of some of the people who call themselves conservatives. These people in New York and Washington, cocktail elitists, they get made fun of when the next NASCAR race is on TV and their cocktail buds come up to them, those people are in your party? How do you put up with this? It would be easy to throw them overboard, so as to maintain these cocktail party/Beltway/New York City/inside-the-Beltway media relationships. But I tell you: This notion that Reaganism is dead, conservatism needs to be refined, let's take a look at this. We've got to go get the Walmart voter. I opened my remarks tonight by telling the people watching on Fox who we conservatives are. When I look out at you in this audience, I don't see a Walmart voter. And I don't see a black, and I don't see a woman, and I don't see a Hispanic. I see human beings who happen to be fortunate enough to be the luckiest people on Earth since you are Americans. [Applause]Conservatism -- for us to make the decision that we've got to figure out policies, to get the Walmart voter -- psst, we've got most of them already, is the bottom line. Conservatism is a universal set of core principles. You don't check principles at the door. This is a battle that we're going to have. And there are egos involved here, too. When the situation like ours exists, there are people who want to lead it. They want to redefine it. Their egos are such that they want to be the next X, whoever it is. So there will be different factions lining up to try to define what conservatism is. And beware of those different factions who seek as part of their attempt to redefine conservatism, as making sure the liberals like us, making sure that the media likes us. They never will, as long as we remain conservatives. They can't possibly like us; they're our enemy. In a political arena of ideas, they're our enemy. They think we need to be defeated. Why do you think -- you all in this room know this. For those of you watching at home, my first address to the nation -- [Laughter] -- I'm sure you paid close enough attention, that you knew at one time Senator McCain was the favorite Republican of all the cable news networks and the Sunday shows. And they would just -- I mean their tongues would be on the floor. The media people (panting) when they knew McCain was coming. And they would treat McCain as the greatest guy in the world. Did you wonder why? You were told he was moderate. He was not strict. He was not an authoritarian, he was able to walk to the other side of the aisle, able to get along with the enemy. And everybody wants love and bipartisanship. That's not why they invited Senator McCain. They invited Senator McCain because he happened to be the loudest at criticizing his own president and his own party and that's what they want, is people from our side -- and there will be factions in our movement, folks, who are going to make an effort to say we have to grow, we can't stay stale, I think I heard the term used the other day. Nothing stale about freedom. There's nothing stale about liberty. There's nothing stale about fighting for it. Nothing stale whatsoever. [Applause] Freedom. Are you getting tired of standing up, I don't blame you. By the way for those watching on TV you think the standing -- people are just tired. They've been up and out of their chairs 100 times here. [Applause] Thank you. Freedom -- freedom is the natural yearning of the human spirit as we were endowed by our creator. And the United States of America is the place in the world where that yearning flourishes, where freedom is expected because it's part of the way we're created.

I loved it when the Soviet Union went down and the wall went down and the liberals in our country said you know they may not be ready for freedom over there. They've been oppressed -- yes, liberals will gladly tell you who can have freedom and who can't. And that's what the pieces of legislation are all about, folks, freedom, liberty, economic prosperity, they're all entwined here. We'll have to as a conservative movement understand that our job, after we come to an agreement among ourselves, which shouldn't be hard but it's going to be difficult because the people that think they're smarter than everybody else are going to be out there forging alliances with people that try to make themselves look like new power brokers, and they will become the spokesmen, by the way. By the way, explain that to you. This is a funny story. Show you how I can hijack a news cycle even by doing anything. The Tuesday before the inauguration, President Bush invited me to the Oval Office for lunch. And it was on and off the record, some of the conversations. And he brought out, interesting, at the end of it -- my birthday had been the day before. He brought out a chocolate birthday cake, a microphone, and stood beside me with Ed Gillespie and sang happy birthday. Photographers taking pictures. I wish my parents were alive. My parents wouldn't believe my life. They came out of the Great Depression. They didn't think it was possible for somebody who did not go to college -- and even for people who did -- they didn't think this was possible. Life has changed so much for the better in this country. That's why I cringe when I see what is in store. So as I'm flying home from lunch, I'm watching television and I see that the word has leaked out that Obama is hosting a dinner with conservative media pundits at the home of George Will. I said: I wonder who these people are? [Laughter] In the media, one of them is going to have to leak it. Sure as heck, one did. Now, we all know who were there. And let's see -- I can't remember all the names, so I won't mention any. But let me tell you Obama's purpose. Does anybody really think that Barack Obama had dinner with a bunch of conservatives hoping they would change his mind? CROWD: No! RUSH: Hell, no. His purpose -- and his purpose really wasn't to change theirs -- his purpose was to anoint them as conservative spokesmen. These are the people that Obama's willing to break bread with. These happen -- some of the people there happen to be the people who think the era of Reagan is over, who believe that conservatism needs to be redefined. Of course Obama would try to lure them in. Well, all of a sudden I land. I get home about 5:00, and my e-mail is jammed with questions from reporters, are you, is that why you took the day off today? Is that why you're not on the air? Are you going to dinner with Obama? By the way, I left out a crucial part of the story. Was this a Monday, Kit? It was a Tuesday. I had forgotten to tell my audience that I was going to miss the next day. I signed off the show saying I'll see you tomorrow. That's the last thing I said. The staff reminded me you're not going to be here tomorrow. I came up with a plan, that the guest host the next day would say that I was called out of town to Washington at midnight the night before. Just an innocent little trick on the radio audience. Everybody picked that up and thinks I'm invited to the Obama dinner. So those people that were invited to it got less coverage than I did and I didn't even know about it. [Laughter] It was fun. [Applause]

Conservatives are naturally happy. We seek happiness. We pursue it. It's part of who we are. So what can you do? Live your life. I swear, folks, you do not know in just the everyday life that you live in your homes, your neighborhoods, the favorite word of this administration, your "communities." Remember the root word there is "commune." [Applause] Be happy, live your life according to your values and principles. Know you're going to fail, no human being is perfect, you're going to make mistakes, but live your life -- you'll be stunned at how many people you impress. Don't be afraid to tell children that they're wrong. They don't know what you do. They simply haven't lived long enough. It's not their fault, but they're being fed a bunch of garbage in school and don't be afraid to tell them that they're wrong. Don't go the Oprah route and say gotta be friends with my parents, my kids, first and foremost. Understand they're going to hate you for a while and they're going to rebel against you and someday they're going to think you're the smartest person they ever met. But you owe them the truth. You owe them the truth about things. You owe them the truth about morality. You owe them the truth about values. [Applause] You owe them the truth about politics. Next thing, we've got to stop treating voters as children. [Applause] Somebody says they want something that's bad for them, do you give it to them just to be nice? Or do you tell them, regardless of their age, no, you shouldn't have that? Well, it's none of your business. Maybe not. And then you back out of it. But you still have to have the ability to tell people what's right and wrong. And that's not authoritative. That's not authoritarian. And it's not trying to deny somebody a good time. It's not trying to interrupt somebody's hedonism, pleasure, it's about all of us with shared values trying to make sure that people live the highest quality lives they can. Ultimately, it's their decision as to what they do. But the point is, don't treat them -- especially voters -- as kids just -- they say they want it okay we'll come up with a plan to give it to you. Have any of you seen the movie -- I'd never heard of it, but I happened to get a DVD the other day. Anybody see the movie Swing Vote with Kevin Costner? You know, it's kind of a moronic movie like most things out of Hollywood are. But this is fascinating in the way -- tell you a short story, because a voter screwup in New Mexico there's one voter who is going to elect the president. His vote didn't count because his daughter voted for him. I won't give the whole story away. But New Mexico's electoral votes, New Mexico's electoral votes determined it. And they have a two-week period before this guy can vote again. So the challenger and the president both relocate to where this guy lives in New Mexico and they end up like the Democrat played by Dennis Hopper stands for antiabortion. The Democrat candidate comes out with a commercial for life. The Republican candidate comes out, because this guy is an idiot and doesn't know what he believes, and every utterance that he makes these politicians react to it throwing their principles on the floor, just to get his vote. Sadly, this is what some of the conservative intellectuals in our movement want to do, essentially. And that we cannot do. We've got to stand for what we believe and treat people as adults and understand they can learn. [Applause] Go optimism. Joe Biden, ladies and gentlemen, was watching CBS -- when did you start here? Thursday. You might have seen this. The days run together. It might have been Wednesday, but Biden was on the CBS Early Show. And he was asked -- the anchorette -- sorry. I'm trying to change my ways. I've been doing women summit programs so not to offend women. The anchor, Maggie Rodriguez, went out and got some man-on-the-street questions. And one guy, woman, I think question for Biden. What is in the stimulus package for small business? Biden was clearly stumped because there isn't anything in the stimulus package for small business. So what Biden said, honest to God, what Biden said was: Well, if there's a bridge to your small business, we're going to make sure that bridge stays open so that you can get to your small business and your customers -- honest. I kid you not. Now, of course, the media today is a bunch of hacks, they're out there as PR agents; they're starting to get a little embarrassed. Maggie Rodriguez says, Senator Biden, there's a website that answers all these questions. What is the name of the website and Biden says I don't know. He looks off stage. "Does somebody have the website number?" [Applause] I realize those of you watching at home during my first address to the nation, you have never heard liberal Democrats be made fun of in this way. Get used to it. [Applause]Two other things and we'll get out of here contractually over time. The president's stimulus package, the TARP, the whatever, the budget, relies on one thing for its success. Well, aside from authoritarian government power. It relies on the complacency of the American people. It relies on their belief that they can convince the American people that there's such a crisis that only government, the only entity that can fix it is government, as Obama has said. So they get complacent and they sit around and they wait. See, this is something liberals will never understand about the United States of America and it's right under their noses, right in front of their faces, we are a competitive people. We strive, enough of us do, to be the best. We strive to win. We strive to avoid defeat. Enough of us still do. Don't believe otherwise. The liberals have made efforts to shut that aspect of our nature down. Wherever you live, I am certain that you, when you were a child or your kids today in youth sports are told not to keep score, because the losers, it's just not fair. They'd be humiliated, especially if one girl's basketball team can defeat another one 100 to nothing. And let's fire the coach who put that game together. It's so unfair. So let's not keep score. Well, here's the dirty little secret. The kids are keeping score. [Applause] You know they are. They don't want to lose. They know what winning and losing is. They're saying, well, why go out there and put on the pads and play football or T-Ball if the objective here is to not keep score. So they're keeping score. They get in the car with mom and dad and they tell mom and dad: Yeah, we kicked their butts tonight. Wait a minute, I thought you weren't keeping score. They weren't officially. They keep score. We're competitive people. Adults are doing the same thing.

It didn't take long for people to get fired up when they figured out that they're going to be paying mortgages for people who should never have been lent money in the first place for the bogus excuse of maintaining property values in the neighborhood. This is something that -- the complacency of the American people is something they're going to rely on along with their authoritarian efforts to control it. But they will not succeed at this. Because we're not quitters. We don't acquiesce. We're not going to give up the American dream and watch idly while it is restructured and transformed. [Applause]As I say, we want the best: Happiness for everybody. Now, about my still-to-me mysteriously controversial comment that I hope President Obama fails. I was watching the Super Bowl. And as you know, I love the Pittsburgh Steelers. [Cheers and Applause] So they have this miraculous scoring drive that puts them up by four, 15 seconds left. Kurt Warner on the field for the Cardinals. And I sure as heck want you to know I hope he failed. I did not want the Cardinals to win. I wanted Warner to make the biggest fool of himself possible. I wanted a sack, I wanted anything. I wanted the Steelers to win. I wanted to win. I wanted the Cardinals to fail. This notion that I want the President to fail, folks, this shows you a sign of the problem we've got. That's nothing more than common sense and to not be able to say it, why in the world do I want what we just described, rampant government growth indebtedness, wealth that's not even being created yet that is being spent, what is in this? What possibly is in this that anybody of us wants to succeed? Did the Democrats want the war on Iraq to fail! CROWD: Yes! RUSH: They certainly did. They not only wanted the war in Iraq to fail, they proclaimed it a failure. There's Dingy Harry Reid waiving a white flag: [doing Harry Reid impression] "This war is lost. This war is" -- [Cheers and Applause] They called General Petraeus a liar before he even testified. Mrs. Clinton -- [Crowd Booing] -- said she had to, willingly suspend disbelief in order to listen to Petraeus. We're in the process of winning the war. The last thing they wanted was to win. They hoped George Bush failed. So what is so strange about being honest to say that I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundation? Why would I want that to succeed? [Applause]Let me add a caveat here. My friends, I know what's going on. I know what's going on. We're in the aspects here of an historic presidency. I know that. But let me be honest again. I got over the historical aspects of this in November. President Obama is our president. President Obama stands for certain things. I don't care, he could be a Martian. He could be from Michigan, I don't know -- just kidding. Doesn't matter to me what his race is. It doesn't matter. He's liberal is what matters to me. And his articulated -- his articulated plans scare me. Now, I understand we can't say we want the President to fail, Mr. Limbaugh. That's like saying -- this is the voice of the New Castrati, by the way, guys who have lost their guts. You can't say Mr. Limbaugh that you want the President to fail because that's like saying you want the country to fail. It's the opposite. I want the country to survive. I want the country to succeed. [Cheers and Applause] [Crowd Chanting "USA" ]I want the country to survive as we have known it, as you and I were raised in it, is what I mean. Now, I have been called -- and I can take it. Pioneers take the arrows, I don't mind what anybody says about me, any time ever. I don't have time for it. I don't give other people the power to offend me. And you shouldn't either, by the wasted time being offended.[Applause]I mean, there's some people you can't say you want the President to fail. Ladies and gentlemen of the United States, the Democrat Party has actively not just sought the failure of Republican presidents and policies and now wars for the first time, the Democrat Party doesn't stop at failure. Talk to Judge Robert Bork or Justice Clarence Thomas about how they tried to destroy lives, reputations and character, and I'm supposed to say I don't want the President to fail? [Applause] We're in for a real battle. We are talking about the United States of America -- and there will always be an America, don't misunderstand me -- we're talking about it remaining the country we were all born into and reared and grown into. And it's under assault. It's always under assault. But it's never been under assault like this from within before. And it's a serious, serious battle. So as you leave here, as you leave here optimism, confidence, not guilt, it's not worth it. There's nothing to be guilty about. Don't treat people as children. Respect their intelligence. Realize that there's a way to persuade people. Sometimes the worst way is to get in their face and point a finger. Set up a set of circumstances where the conclusion is obvious. Let them think they came up with the idea themselves. They'll think they're smart that they figured it out. Who cares how you persuade them, the fact they can be persuaded is factually correct, it's possible. But the main thing to do here is stop thinking that we are a minority. Stop thinking that it is being in the minority that liberates you. It is your beliefs. It is your core principles, it is your confidence that liberates you. It's not being in the minority. In fact, for those of you watching my first national address and still hanging in there, we really are not that happy about being a minority and we're out to change it. [Applause] So I have -- I've gone over my allotted time by an hour. [Applause]I want to thank all of you so much for everything that you have meant to me and my family in my life. CROWD: Thank you. RUSH: I understand it's mutual. And I hear people -- you have made my heart grow so much that it barely fits in my chest cavity here tonight. But the things that by virtue of your listening to my radio show and being active in this movement that we all cherish and love, you have meant more to me, my family and my life than whatever it is I might mean to you, even though I know that's considerable. [Applause] You still can't outdo the absolute joy and awe and thanks I feel for all of you. I've been doing this for 20 years and the numbers just keep growing. And I can't tell you how appreciative I am and proud to be in a movement with the same passions, desires and core beliefs that all of you have, because we know that it's right for the country, and we know it's right for people. It's not something that has to be forced on them. It's not something that has to be authoritatively pressed on them. We are what is, and that's why we are an enemy because we're effective. The people that do want control look at us as the enemy. We're always going to be -- don't ever measure your success by how many Drive-By Media reports you see that are fair to us. Never going to happen. Don't measure your success by how many people like you. Just worry about how they vote. And then at the end of the day how they live, but that's really none of your business once they close the doors. Thank you all very much. It's been great.