In case you missed it, here's the jump we were talking about this morning.

I just hope I can remember most of them......

• Israel fighting back against Hamas ... and the world's reaction.
• That idiot attorney who used to represent the PLO and her insane observations on the Middle East situation.
• What is in store for our country with leaders elected by the less-educated and poorly informed?
• Al Franken will probably be named the winner of that Senatorial race in Minnesota. How many of you really doubt that there was some funny business in the counting of the ballots. Franken, by the way, is a jerk.
• Obama is dead set against the idea of school choice ... for you. Today his spawn start school at an exclusive private institution in Washington DC. Choice for the Obamas. No choice for you.

We - and by "we," I means those of us who actually work and pay the taxes that keeps this government behemoth well fed - have completely lost control.

Have you heard about some of the people lined up at the stimulus trough? The latest? Newspapers! You got it .. newspapers want some of the bailout money. This isn't new, actually. I remember an article a few weeks ago where someone was suggesting that the government set up a fund - taxpayer money of course - to pay journalists and writers who lost their jobs. An excuse? Yup - this joker had an excuse. These people and their precious journalistic abilities were just too important to our culture to let them actually go out and have to find a job out of their field if they find themselves laid off. So ... to save them the pain of having to find a job they don't particularly like, the government needs to step forward and pay them ... I guess pay them to write stuff. Of course, if the government is paying them you can bet they're going to write stuff that will make the government happy. Just like those government-funded global warming "scientists."

Right now Ford Motor Company is offering cars with 0% car loans. Do you want to know how they pulled this off? With GMAC, that's how. It seems that General Motors only has a minority stake in GMAC, and GMAC is now using bailout money to make these car loans available to Ford buyers. So, what's wrong with this? Well, if you will remember, Ford said it didn't need any bailout money. They were going to do this on their own. So now we have Ford competing against the other two-thirds of the Big Three with 0% car loans made possible by government bailout money. In short, the politicians picked a winner here, and the winner was Ford. You didn't get to pick .. the government picked for you. The one company that didn't need bailout help now has a government-funded advantage over the two companies that did.

Also in line .. in case you aren't keeping a scorecard here ... the U.S. steel industry. Orders of steel from domestic manufacturers are down. What to do? Why, get the government to spend more taxpayer money on steel orders, that's what? These companies can't sell their products on the free market, so they ask the government to make a consumer choice the consumers clearly don't want to make.

Back to my theme: Clearly we have lost control of this process. Government is in the ascendancy, individual liberty, self-reliance and economic freedom are the losers. The politicians in Washington have no real fear of the voters. They know that in all probability they are going to be reelected no matter what they do. The true allegiance of these people in the congress is to the big donors and business interests that provide the bulk of the campaign cash. They just spend year after year building a power base and adding on the privileges and perks. It truly has become an imperial congress. If you want a definition of "imperial," try this one: "characterizing the rule or authority of a sovereign state over its dependencies; domineering; imperious."

Several weeks ago I made a suggestion as to how we might put the fear of God into our rulers in Washington. I got the idea from Georgia's Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine and just expanded on it a bit. Since we all have rather short attention spans (go ahead, name your two Senators and your Congressman) I thought I would remind you of the idea here today.

We need a Constitutional Convention. More specifically, we need a Constitutional Convention called for the sole purpose of adding three specific amendments to the United States Constitution. The convention would consider these three amendments ... and nothing further. Two-thirds of the States need to pass a resolution calling for such a convention, and those resolutions need to be specifically worded so as to limit the purpose of the convention to these three amendments. Without that limitation we're going to have left-wing fools trying to add amendments guarantying such things as a right to a job, a place to live and health care. Not good.

So .. what are the three amendments? (You don't listen to me all that much, do you?) Very simple ...

1. An amendment to the Constitution repealing the 16th Amendment. What is the 16th Amendment? That would be the income tax. By repealing the 16th Amendment the Congress would be forced to come up with a new way of generating the revenue needed for the legitimate functions of our government.
   
2. An amendment repealing the 17th Amendment. The 17th Amendment calls for the popular election of U.S. Senators. Before the 17th Amendment each state legislature would appoint that state's two Senators. The congressmen were in Washington to represent the people, and the Senators were there to represent the states. Right now the government of Mexico has an official representative in Washington; the government of New Mexico does not. This enables the federal government to run roughshod over the states with unfounded mandates and other federal demands. Give the state governments a voice in Washington .. repeal the 17th Amendment.
   
3. An amendment setting term limits for members of the House of Representatives. Give them three terms, then send them home. Yes, I know, there are some people we would truly like to keep up there to pursue some worthy objectives, but in the balance we're hurt by those who spend taxpayer money to solidify their power than we are would be by sending the few good representatives home at the end of six years.

Now .. here's the reality here. The Congress would probably never permit this Constitutional Convention to be called. As soon as they saw state legislatures passing the resolutions to bring these things to pass we would see the members of congress trying to beat the citizens to the punch. No ... they're not going to send the choice of Senators back to the states, and they're unlikely to set term limits for themselves. But we might actually see some movement on the repeal of the 16th Amendment and serious consideration given to the FairTax.

Dreaming? Maybe so, but maybe not. Get the right grassroots organization formed to push this idea for a Constitutional Convention and you just might rattle some cages in Washington. Who knows? Maybe the people might start counting again.

Come on, you have to be kidding me. Yeah ... I've heard all of this nonsense over the weekend about the Democrats blocking the door to the U.S. Senate to prevent Roland Burris from being seated. Yeah ... sure.

So what if Governor Blago appointed Burris while he was under a rather dense cloud of suspicion. Are you forgetting the most important point here? Burris, in case you haven't noticed, is black. When he is seated he will be the only black in the Senate. Now you tell me that the Democrats are going to prevent the swearing-in of the only black in the Senate. Don't hold your breath. Political correctness will rule; just as in the forthcoming appointment of Caroline "you know" Kennedy.

Fact is, since Blago hasn't stepped down, he still has the legal right to appoint Obama's replacement. And he did .. despite his own party's wishes. He appointed former state attorney general Roland Burris. As far as Burris goes.. we'll get into him another time. Like the fact that he is an advocate for a national handgun ban. But again .. I digress.

So Harry Reid decides that he isn't going to allow Burris to be seated. Reid says that he has the "legal authority" under the Constitution to bar anyone that is selected by Rod Blagojevich. He points to Article I, Section 5 which says that "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members..." Reid's interpretation of this is, "We determine who sits in the Senate. And the House (of Representatives) determines who sits in the House. So there's clearly legal authority for us to do whatever we want to do. This goes back for generations."

You'll be interested to read this piece in the Wall Street Journal about a legal precedent for cases like this, set by the Supreme Court back in 1969. Like it or not, the only way Harry can get rid of Burris legally would be to allow him to be sworn in and then get two-thirds of the Senate to vote for his expulsion.

Enter the race card. Yep, so Roland Burris is black. As we have been reminded many times .. Obama's seat was supposed to be filled by a black man. I guess that's some sort of a law. Blagojevich held up that end of the bargain. But aides for Burris are now saying that Harry Reid won't allow Burris to be seated because of his race. Who didn't see that coming? A senior consultant to Burris told Politico, "It's interesting that all those who are viable are white women and the ones who are unacceptable are black men." Oh, you didn't hear about that? Apparently Harry Reid talked to Blagojevich about who should fill the Senate seat just six days before Blagojevich was arrested. During that conversation, Reid didn't want any of Blagojevich's suggestions (which all happened to black men) and favored two women who happen to be white. So there's that ..

We operate under a rule of law here ... Seat Burris. Uphold the Constitution.

You've heard me talk about James Hansen of the Goddard Institute .. this is one of Al Gore's global warming sock puppets. James decided that he wanted to write a personal letter to Barack and Michelle Obama with his suggestions on how we can save the planet from this phony global warming crisis. He outlines three ideas for the Obama's. One of them I can agree with: the need for nuclear power. The other idea is one that Barack Obama has already said he would do .. bankrupt the coal industry. Hansen refers to coal-fired power stations as "factories of death." Isn't that pleasant? But he wants a moratorium and phase out of these "death factories."

But my favorite suggestion is to enact a tax on carbon emissions. But not just any tax .. a tax that would take money from the evil rich and give the proceeds to the less fortunate. Don't ya just love that phrase? Here's the basic gist .. Hansen wants a carbon tax and 100% dividend. Carbon would be taxed at the source -- aka. those people who produce more would pay more .. we are assuming the evil rich are in this category. But then the revenue from this tax would be equally distributed among all tax payers. So the "less fortunate" who don't produce as much carbon would be making money from the exploits of the evil rich. Sounds like wealth redistribution to me!

Here's a little taste of Hansen's letter, but you can read the whole thing here.

The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend. Not one cent goes to Washington. No lobbyists will be supported. Unlike cap-and-trade, no millionaires would be made at the expense of the public....

A carbon tax is honest, clear and effective. It will increase energy prices, but low and middle income people, especially, will find ways to reduce carbon emissions so as to come out ahead.

Sooner or later ... hopefully sooner ... we're going to put this idea of man-made global warming to rest. In the meantime, enjoy this record-breaking cold winter.

There is one certainty in these uncertain times .. this unionization by intimidation bill, otherwise known as the card check bill, will come up in the Congress. And it will be supported by Democrats who have to repay their union supporters for getting them elected. Knowing the inevitable, some states have decided that they are going to have to take the matter into their own hands. Five states are gearing up for state initiatives to enacting a constitutional amendment that would protect the right to a secret ballot in union elections. People are already starting to gather signatures in Arizona, Arkansas and Missouri. Utah and Nevada state legislatures are also considering the amendment.

The amendment says, "The right of individuals to vote by secret ballot is fundamental. Where state or federal law requires elections for public office or public votes on initiatives or referenda, or designations or authorizations of employee representation, the right of individuals to vote by secret ballot shall be guaranteed."

There is a new twist to this card check nonsense. It seems that many Democrats are starting to bail. They could vote for this absurdity when they were assured of a Republican filibuster or a Bush veto. Now they're concerned that it might actually become law - and the support of many of these Democrats is starting to weaken. If you want a law that would cripple American business and prolong this recession/depression or whatever it is ... pass this Unionization-by-Intimidation bill. That would do it.

If you're a long-time listener to the show you know that I'm not a big fan of out-of-control, screaming kids. I prefer restaurants that do not have high chairs available, and I would love to see an airline ban children under 12 from first class. Constantly kicking the back of someone's seat should be treated as seriously as smoking in the lavatory, and the captain should land the airplane and kick the offending little brat off.

Actually, I shouldn't call that wonderful child a little brat. After all, It's not his fault that he is an out-of-control misbehaving menace. The fault lies with the parents; parents like that hideous woman I encountered in that Mackinac Island restaurant a few years ago. You remember her, don't you? Every time her toddler would utter a long, ear-piercing screech, would lean over and softly say "Are you through making noise now?' Dammit woman! Shut that kid up!

OK ... here's the latest. Kids in club-level lounges at swanky hotels. This is an adult lounge folks ... not a freaking day care center. They serve drinks there, not chocolate milk. This time it was a great hotel in Las Vegas. We were spending New Years in Vegas with friends, and we managed to score rooms on the Club Level. This was a great place to go after dinner to have a cordial or a cup of coffee and unwind. Well --- it would have been a great place if it hadn't been for the toddlers. There was one particular family at this hotel .. an extended family .. that had about five toddlers in tow. These people seemed to spend virtually their entire day in the lounge. I'm sure they were saving money on meals big-time, because every breakfast, lunch and dinner there they were ... with dishes piled high on a coffee table. As soon as their kids finished a stack of appetizers they immediately set about making a complete pest out of themselves to everyone else in the lounge. They would get out some board games and sprawl right in the main walkway through the lounge. To get from your table to the bar you had to step over about three game boards and countless game pieces. Through it all the adults just sat on their butts stacking up more plates on the coffee table.

What in the hell is the matter with parents out there? Are they blind? Can't they see that their children are creating a problem for other people? Now I can tell you exactly what would have happened if someone would have said something to the parents. The mother would immediately have started yelling "We're paying for a room here just like everyone else, and our kids have as much of a right to be in here as you do." Yeah, lady; you're right. Instead of complaining about your misbehaving children we should be congratulating you because your womb works.

We really do need a better breed of parents out there.

I really hope you didn't miss Kathy Griffin with Anderson Cooper on New Year's Eve on CNN. If you did ... you might want to click here and listen to this. Get the kids out of the room.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is out. He won't serve as secretary of Commerce for Barack Obama because of a "pending investigation." Can't say I'm that broken up about it.

Obama's "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan" claims it will create 600,000 new government employees. Just what we need .. more government incompetence. With our government schools they should have no problem finding qualified applicants.

The next industry up to the government trough: the steel industry.

Al Franken will be declared the winner of the Minnesota Senate race today. It still isn't over quite yet though.

The Democrat governors of New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Ohio and Wisconsin want Obama to spend $1 trillion on aiding state budgets.

Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine will probably be the next chairman of the Democratic Party.

Harry Reid believes that President Bush is the worst president we've ever had.

A federal commission has decided that we need a 50% increase in federal fuel taxes in order to make up for revenue shortfalls.

Here are Peggy Noonan's thoughts on a new year, a new presidency, a new economic era and then some.

Is the bailout going to need a bailout? So says a blogger for the Heritage Foundation.

Georgia has a new sex offender law that forces all sex offenders to give their online passwords to the government.

Ah, don't you just love the IRS? Stories like this wouldn't be possible if we had the Fair Tax .. and that is a good thing.

Did you know that America is an empire in decline? So says the Times of London.

How about $1 million of your tax dollars for San Francisco to study "congestion pricing" options. In other words .. the government would charge you a fee to drive in certain parts of the city.

While we are talking about San Francisco, people flying out of San Francisco International Airport will soon be able to buy certified carbon offsets at airport kiosks to offset their air travel.

Here's a concept, the governor of Washington state wants illegal aliens serving time in state prisons to be deported in order to save her state $9 million over the next 2 years.

When you go to a brothel, there are a few people you would rather not run into. Your wife may be one of them.

How many of you would like to have this problem? I'm guessing around 50% give or take.

Here's a handy guide to converting to metric. Warning, some bad language.