Today's Nuze: April 24, 2007 

VIRGINIA TECH

The phone call came around 1:18 yesterday afternoon. It was someone identifying themselves as an ABC television reporter. The number was blocked, so I can't go back to find out where the call really came from. The reporter wanted to interview me about my comments on the Va. Tech shootings. I declined.

Now ... let me try to recount the conversation as best I remember it. She may have had a recorder running, I didn't. She was sitting at a desk. I was driving the Catfish. Generally, the conversation went this way:

"So, you don't have anything to say to the students at Virginia Tech?"

"I have a lot I'd like to say, but I'll say it on my show and on my blog. I don't want my words to be filtered through a reporter."

"Well, we have a transcript."

"Fine, print it. But I want people to hear what I have to say on my radio show or by reading my web page. What ever I say to you will then be printed filtered by your own agenda."

So .. no interview. Lord only knows how that came out on the local ABC affiliate last night --- if anything was reported at all.

At the center of this controversy are some of the thoughts I expressed last week in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings. Since I first uttered my politically incorrect thoughts I have apologized; not for what I said, but for how I said it.

By Wednesday of law week I was mad. Furious. This whole murderous rampage visited on the students of Virginia Tech didn't have to happen ... yet it did. Social workers who deal with trauma will tell you that initial shock and sadness will often give way to anger ... as it did with me.

I was angry, of course, at the monster who took out his personal grievances on the students and faculty of Virginia Tech.

I was angry at the Virginia legislators for denying to the law-abiding students of Virginia Tech the opportunity to effectively defend themselves from a crazed killer in their midst.

I was angry at the administration of Virginia Tech for virtually gloating when the state legislature defeated a bill that would have allowed responsible law-abiding students with concealed weapons permits to exercise their right of self defense on campus.

I was angry when I learned that a petty lawsuit under the Americans With Disabilities Act pretty much forced the Virginia Tech administration to continue to harbor a student they felt to be dangerous.

I was angry when it appeared that our colleges and universities had become not only a learning institution, but also a institution for the treatment of psychos.

I was also angry at what I view as a emerging culture of passivity in this country that praises inaction in the face of raw aggression.

Now to be sure, I received no small amount of emails from people across the country castigating me for some of the thoughts I expressed last week. I'm not going to rehash what I said on the air last week .. but in retrospect it is clear I let my passions -- my anger -- rule me last week when I discussed the events at Virginia Tech.

Negative email and comments? You bet .. but there have been just as many, perhaps more, in support of the ideas I was trying to get across to my listeners.

One common theme that has run through the supportive messages deals with the teaching of passivity in our government schools. These listeners' memories of their government school days mirror my own. If you were attacked by a bully on the playground, and you retaliated, the school officials would try to figure out who was the aggressor and who was merely acting in self defense. If the aggressor could be clearly identified he (or she) would be disciplined, while the person acting in self defense would not.

Today things are much different. Several listeners and Nuze readers told me that in today's government school environment both the aggressor and the person acting in self defense are punished. One upset father called the show yesterday to tell me that his son had received specific instructions from his teachers that if another student assaults him he to do absolutely nothing. He is to get away from that student and report the incident to his teacher. If he so much as lands one blow in self defense he will be punished just the same as the bully who started it.

Are we really teaching our children that the use of violence to protect one's self from an assault is not only undesirable, but punishable?

Let's spend a few moments to explore this idea --- the idea that acting in self defense is an undesirable trait. To do this we should begin with the leftist war on individualism.

Today the left, by its own admission, is engaged in a war against the very concept of individualism. Statements condemning individualism can be found in the words of prominent leftists from Lenin to Ted Kennedy. You'll find the anti-individualist rhetoric at the lower political levels also. "Queen" Emma Darnell, a local county commissioner, recently referred to individualism as a "sin."

It is not my purpose here to detail the reasons behind the left's animosity toward the idea of individualism. I've set it forth in one of the thrilling chapters of my (Ahem ... New York Times bestseller) Somebody's Gotta Say It. Suffice it to say that once the concept of the individual is acknowledged, the next step is having to deal with the troublesome concept of individual rights; among with are the right to property, a particularly distasteful concept to the left.

Self defense is the ultimate expression of individualism. It is a bold statement that you are a sovereign individual and that you are the final authority when it comes to what can and cannot be done to or with your person. It was the exercise of our innate right to self defense that quite probably led to the creation of the first government and the hiring of the first government employee.

The time will come where it will be appropriate to have a rational discussion about the response of the students at Virginia Tech to the killer's attack. Last week was certainly not that time. My anger caused me to jump the gun. But the discussion awaits.

Did the relentless attack on individualism by the left play a role in the events of last week? Were there students in those classrooms who had been indoctrinated since grade school that you do not retaliate when attacked at school? In asking this question I am not calling anyone a wimp or a coward. I'm just asking if some of these students might have been acting as they have been programmed to act since grade one.

Are we, in fact, creating a culture of passivity? Are we creating a culture that will not fight back when freedoms are threatened? Are we creating a culture where the growth and intrusiveness of government will go unanswered and unchallenged? Are we creating a culture of people who always look to government when security is threatened or problems arise? Such a culture would surely benefit the left, and there can be no doubt that the very people who would most benefit from a culture of passivity are the people who are in charge of educating our children in our wonderful government schools.

Did all of the students react with learned passivity when last week's attacks began? Certainly not! Some students led others to safety, others tried to block doors. We now learn that one police officer has told a reporter that from the positioning of the bodies in that classroom it looks like one student may have rushed the killer. Nobody is calling these students wimps or cowards. There were certainly examples of individual bravery; some we've heard about, others that will remain forever unknown.

We are, though, left to wonder how the situation might have changed if these students had grown up in a system where self defense and self reliance were encouraged rather than punished, and where individualism was celebrated rather than condemned.

THIS IS TERRIBLE! I'M LIKING ROSIE!

We told you yesterday that Sheryl Crow has developed her own solution to global warming. We should all limit ourselves to one square of toilet paper for each visit to the pond ... three, if things turn particularly nasty. Yesterday Rosie O'Donnell responded to to Sheryl's absurd suggestion with just five words .. five well-chosen words.

"Have you seen my ass?"

Damn ... I think I'm beginning to like that girl!

BOOKMAN RESPONDS

No .... Bookman quoted the FairTax at 30% solely because he opposes the idea and wanted to make it sound onerous. The FairTax is an inclusive sales tax. The sales taxes we have today are exclusive. In other words, the FairTax is included in the price of an item. Today's sales taxes are added to the cost of an item.

It would also seem that Bookman was told of my offer to debate him on the issue. His response? He would appear on my show if I asked.

No .. not a guest on the show. A debate. Live audience and everything. I present my case, he rebuts it. He presents his case, I rebut it. The audience listens and reacts.

Perhaps he would like to write a blurb for the next book, "The FairTax, Answering the Critics."

THE HIP HOP CODE

First it was Cam'ron on 60 Minutes. Yesterday it was M-1 on Cavuto. Rappers reveling in "The Code." What code would that be? Well, to listen to these two pillars of the community, the Hip Hop code is that you never snitch. You never help the police solve a crime. If you know who might have committed a murder or raped the old lady down the street, the code demands that you keep this information to yourself.

You think Imus was a problem? How about a celebrated "culture" such as Hip Hop that discourages cooperating with the police in solving neighborhood crimes?

ILLUSTRATING THE PLIGHT OF THE POOR

We learn today that Ted Kulongoski, the governor of Oregon, is going to live on food stamps for a week in order to illustrate the plight of the poor.

Wow! What a great idea! If the governor would permit me, I would like to suggest how he can enhance his illustration of the plight of the poor during this week on food stamps:

1. Adopt -- just for the week -- a few children you cannot afford to raise.

2. Completely abandon your work ethic for the week.

3. If you do have a job, show up late, leave early and don't hit a lick at a snake while you're there.

4. Smoke cigarettes. After all, a higher percentage of poor people smoke than rich people.

5. Become uneducated.

6. Buy lottery tickets.

There ... that ought to go a long way toward your "illustrating the plight of the poor" stunt.

SOME CHOICE READING ASSIGNMENTS

Does Whoopie Goldberg really call her company "One Ho Productions?" It would seem so! Yes, Ms. Caryn Johnson (real name) chose that name for her company in 1992. No word yet on whether or not Whoopie is going to resign (from what, I can't say) or whether she is going to be fired (by whom, I can't say) for choosing this racist name for her company. By the way, I think she's a helluva talent and should tell anyone who cares about the name of her company to lighten up and get a freaking life.

Here's an article from Slate detailing what you should do if you're confronted by a crazed gunman. Of course, from listening to the media during the last few days, if you are unable to run you should hide. If that doesn't work .... then any suggestion that you fight back is patently absurd.

People get upset with me when (among many other reasons) I suggest that it is not good business policy for an employer to hire fat people. Well .. here's the science. Print this out and try not to eat it before you read it. The story reports that experts on lard-asses hope the study will encourage employers to invest in programs to fight obesity? Why do that when all you have to do is not hire fat folks?

The Democrats are pushing their surrender agenda in Washington. Someday we'll pay for this ... but the media will find a way to put the blame elsewhere.

The governor of Massachusetts, though a Democrat, shows some common sense. Ends funding for abstinence programs.

Food Stamp programs "rewards non-work and idleness, fosters long-term dependence, rewards and promotes out of wedlock childbearing." And, while most people think of food stamps as temporary help, the majority of recipients will end up being in the program long-term. More fun food stamp facts from The Heritage Foundation.

PSA: If you're going to order a free sample of lube on the internet and you don't want future potential employers, your mom, or a partner with whom you haven't used said product to find that out, use a fake name.

4-year-old creamed [video] at Colorado State football game. Luckily, the boy will be okay.

BOORTZ BLAST NEWSLETTER
Everyone is talking about the Boortz Blast newsletter. Do you want yours? Sign up here and we'll deliver it directly to your inbox every 2 weeks. If you signed up but aren't receiving it, either your company or your spam filter could be keeping it from you. Try using a personal email address and check your spam filter's junk folder for wayward newsletters.

COMMUNITY
If you like Neal and are looking for like minded people to hang out with online or off, check out these places:

Talkmaster Yahoo Group

Fans of Boortz Community

Belinda Skelton, Ken Rogers and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!