MCCAIN SMEAR?

Looks like the New York Times is playing its hand a bit early in this election. The front page of today's edition contains a story about an alleged affair John McCain had with a lobbyist about eight years ago. The story cites no named sources and no details other than reports from unnamed (and apparently disgruntled) former aids who talk about having to keep the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, away from McCain in public. Pretty weak stuff.

There will certainly be a lot of conversation across the airwaves about McCain and the lobbyist. But how about Huma Abedin? Where is the front page New York Times story about Huma Abedin? Go ahead ... Google the name. You'll find no shortages of stories suggesting that Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin have been engaged in a long-term lesbian relationship. These stories are as well sourced as the story about McCain and the lobbyist. So ... where's the New York Times story?

Man .. I must have taken the wrong pills this morning.

COULD IT REALLY BE OVER?

Here is comes, folks. Slowly but surely we are getting assured predictions that it is over for Hillary Clinton's campaign. How sad. Really ... I'm serious. Do you know how much I've been looking forward to hosting this radio show while that horrid woman was running for president? Now my good times are going to be cut short. It's just not fair, I tell you.

It looks like Rodham is about to go tango uniform. Trust me, that isn't going to be a pretty sight. There may still be hope.. but you need to read this column by Lawrence Kudlow that was yesterday's big hit on the Internet Kudlow is the Economics Editor at National Review Online and hosts a TV program on CNBC. He believes that it is over. He says that "Obama got to the far left faster than Hillary did. He out-organized her, out-fundraised her, out-speechified her, out-hustled her, out-dressed her, and out-presidentialed her. He outbid Hillary for votes, one promised government check at a time."

Kudlow points to that desperate speech Hillary made in Ohio where she trashed business, free trade, and free-market capitalism ... he recognized it too. It was an act of desperation. Hillary was grabbing at straws, and it just doesn't seem to be working. He points out the exit polls from Wisconsin. Here's a little list:

Trade protectionist voters - Obama
Union members - Obama
People worried about the economy - Obama
People who aren't worried about the economy - Obama
People making less than $50,000 - Obama
People making more than $50,000 - Obama

Are you starting to get the picture, folks? The list continues ... religious or non-religious, college degree or no college degree, white males, blacks ... all of them voted for Obama.

For the sake of wanting Hillary to succeed (which is purely to further my talk radio career), she did win the women vote by a margin of 52 to 47. But even when it came to those infamous unmarried women, Hillary tied with Obama in Wisconsin. In other words, according to Kudlow, "The market has officially pulled the plug on Hillary."

So where is the Hillary campaign focusing on next? Puerto Rico. Looks like all of those terrorist pardons from Bill may pay off yet again. The Clinton campaign says that Hillary will be in a position to "clinch the nomination" by the time Puerto Rico votes. It is the last caucus, which does not happen until June 7th.

DEBATE TONIGHT ...

In the meantime, there's an Obama - Clinton debate tonight. It will air on CNN at 7:00 Eastern. The debate comes from the land of the teasips .. TU in Austin. Hillary is going to have to pull out the stops on this one .. go for the kill. Without an astounding appearance tonight she's very likely dead in the water. Desparation time. Can't miss television. Here's more info.

THIS IS GETTING JUST A BIT ABSURD

First we have all of these females fainting at Obama appearances. Now we have the crowd actually applauding when Obama blows his nose. Just how serious do you take supports who faint and applaud nose blowing. Are these people who really know what's at stake here, or are these celebrity worshipers who would be watching reruns of American Idol if they weren't at an Obama rally?

SORRY ... BUT IT'S HARD TO DEAL WITH THE UNEDUCATED SOMETIMES.

Now I know that with our system of government schools there is every excuse for people to be badly misinformed on critical issues. Let's face it ... these government schools have been more interested in feeding you dogma than the truth. Let's take the idea that our country is a democracy, for instance. I would guess that virtually every government school in this nation teaches its hostages (students) that the United States is a democracy. Now don't you find this just a bid odd, considering the fact that neither the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution or the constitutions of any of the 50 state even contain the word "democracy?" Isn't it odder still that the Constitution specifically says that our form of government is "Republican?"

Yes .. there's a reason for this. Around the time of Woodrow Wilson the idea of government welfare programs that were outside of the grant of authority in our Constitution began to take hold. Politicians knew that if they continued to tout the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, they would have a rather difficult time getting their government welfare programs enacted. So, the idea started to spread that we were a democracy .. a country ruled by men and not the law. Whatever the majority of the people (voters) wanted .. they got. After all, isn't that what democracy (majority rule) means?

You might find it interesting to know what our founding fathers thought of the idea of a democracy. There's an incredible book out there titled "Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation. Here's your link if you might like to get a copy. The author, historian Joseph Ellis, tells us at the very beginning of this book just what our founding fathers thought of the idea of democracy. Here's what they thought of democrats:

"... the term "democrat" originated as an epithet and referred to 'one who
panders to the crude and mindless whims of the masses.'"

I know ... it truly is amazing how that phrase pretty much describes the Democrats of the day. For the most part the oratory of both Obama and Hillary have been little more than examples of pandering "to the crude and mindless whims of the masses."

So .. why have our government schools been so anxious to spread the "democracy" lie? Because the more people believe that crap the stronger government becomes. If the dumb masses can be convinced that, since we are a democracy, the government should be able to do whatever the political class convinces the majority of Americans it should do ... then we have stronger politicians and weaker protections for our rights.

OK .. enough about the democracy thing. Let's move to another area of widespread ignorance among the American people. Again ... you came by it honestly. Government schools. I speaking here of the almost universal belief that you have a constitutional right to vote in a federal election. Hint .. .you do not.

I talked about this right to vote thing on the show a few days ago, and Web Guy (the poor SOB) tells me that we have been receiving a string of rather unfriendly emails from people calling me a moron, an idiot and other similar names for my statement on the right to vote. Some of these emailers cite various Constitutional provisions in an attempt to prove their brilliance and my abject ignorance.

Look .. I don't really mind the fact that many of you have been indoctrinated into this "right to vote" bit by our government schools. You were had. You were intentionally misinformed. You should not feel ashamed that you were fooled this way. After all, every where you go you hear about this right to vote BS ... so it's no wonder you've bought it. The shame is in sticking to your erroneous beliefs when the facts are presented to you.

Facts, you say? Yeah ... here are a couple of points for you to consider:

Let's make our first stop at Wikipedia. We'll make two stops. First, the entry for "Voting rights in the United States." There you will find the following sentence:

There is no "right to vote" explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution, but only that they cannot be denied based solely on the aforementioned qualifications, however, the "right to vote" may be denied for any other reason (i.e. being convicted of a felony).

Next stop .. .the Wikipedia entry for "Sufferage." A subsection of this entry covers the history of suffrage (the vote) in the United States. Here you go:

In the United States, suffrage is determined by the separate states, not federally. There is no national "right to vote". The states and the people have changed the U.S. Constitution five times to disallow states from limiting suffrage, thereby expanding it.

• 15th Amendment (1870): no law may restrict any race from voting
• 19th Amendment (1920): no law may restrict any sex from voting
• 23rd Amendment (1961): residents of the District of Columbia can vote for the President and Vice-President
• 24th Amendment (1964): neither Congress nor the states may condition the right to vote in federal elections on payment of a poll tax or other type of tax
• 26th Amendment (1971): no law may restrict those 18 years of age or older from voting because of their age

Moving right along now, here's an article written by Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. entitled "The Right to Vote." Jackson writes: "And yet the right to vote is not a fundamental right in our Constitution." I guess that you folks who have been sending in those emails are right, and the Congressman is wrong ... right? Jackson has introduced a voting rights amendment in the congress. Now just why would he need to do that if the right already existed?

I'm not through with you yet. Let's go to Michael C. Dorf. Dorf is the Vice Dean and professor of law at Columbia University. Dorf wrote this article entitled "We Need A Constitutional Right to Vote in Presidential Elections." Tell me, would a law professor write a column calling for a constitutional right to vote if we already had one?

Final stop ... the complete text of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of George W. Bush, et al., Petitioners v. Albert Gore, Jr., et al. Take a look at Section II, Paragraph B. The very first sentence there reads: "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College. U.S. Const., Art.II, 1."

Enough? I would certainly hope so. So you clowns out there keep sending all of those emails telling me what an idiot I am for saying that there is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election. Read the sources I've presented to you above ... and send me another email.

Some would say that intelligence can be measured by your ability to recognize that you're wrong on an issue. Many times in my 38-year talk radio career I've had to admit that I got something wrong. I hope I never grow too old to learn. Some of you are already there.

By the way ... why is this issue so important to me? Well .... Look what these damned voters are doing to the greatest experiment in governance in the history of the world! Once we have accepted the truth - that they don't have a constitution right to vote - then we can set about the task of getting some of these dumb masses out of our voting booths. Think about it ... we offer parasites the opportunity to register to vote when they sign up for welfare! What the hell kind of sense does that make?

The hell with the idea of pandering to the poor, poor pitiful poor. We didn't put them there. They did it to themselves .. .and I damned sure don't want them making decisions that can affect the way I live my life .. and how much of the money that I earn I can keep. If we must, we'll take care of them and make sure they don't starve, get basic medical care, and have a place to go when it rains or gets cold. Fine. That's nothing we wouldn't do for stray animals .. .but they sure don't need to be voting.

Oh ... and you people at Media Morons can kiss ole' Rusty.

SAN FRANCISCO'S OWLGORE

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has decided that his city is not doing enough to combat climate change. So what is his solution? More government! Not only more government, but a new government bureaucrat will be added to the payroll in San Francisco. Looking for a job? San Francisco's Director of Climate Protection Initiatives will make a generous $160,000 a year. Not bad for a government bureaucrat dedicated to hack science and a phony cause.

Wait .. there's more. Newsom could, perhaps, get away with this new position ... if he didn't already have 25 employees on the city's roster that are dedicated to "climate issues." This means that the taxpayers of San Francisco are already paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to tackle climate issues, and now they will only be paying more. Not to mention that the city is bracing for a $233 million budget deficit next fiscal year. So while lawmakers are sitting in the chambers trying to figure out ways to cut down on emergency room hours and delaying playground improvement projects, Mayor Newsom gets to sit in his office and create a new job in the name of climate change.

So who are these 25 employees already dedicated to fighting the good fight against global warming? And how much are they costing the tax payers?

$160,720: Salary for the Director of Climate Protection Initiatives in the mayor's office.

$800,000: Combined salary for the eight-person Energy and Climate Program team led by a climate action coordinator - at a total cost of more than $800,000

$207,500: Salary for the Head of the city's Environment Department, which has a staff of 65 and annual budget of about $14 million.

$146,218: Salary for the projects manager for the climate action plan of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission

$156,655: Salary for the assistant to the general manager for water enterprise (works on how climate change is going to impact the region's water supply)

$130,700: Salary for the "Greening Director" in Mayor Newsom's office

$190,091: Salary for the manager of environmental services at San Francisco International Airport

$116,584: Salary for the manager of emissions reductions and sustainability programs at the Municipal Transportation Agency

You San Francisco taxpayers must be absolutely orgasmic in your appreciation for your mayor and his spending priorities.

ANTI-SEMITISM TASK FORCE

Representative Keith Ellison (a Muslim Democrat from Minnesota) has been assigned to a Congressional Task Force on Anti-Semitism. That would be like assigning me to head a task force for universal suffrage. That wouldn't be a wise appointment. Now some groups are calling for Chairman Joe Kaufman (a Democrat from Florida) to remove Ellison ... and perhaps with good reason.

It's ironic that a man with direct contact with radical Muslim organizations would be placed on a task force on anti-Semitism. Ellison has ties to both the Muslim American Society and our favorite Council on American-Islamic Relations ... both of which have been linked to the Muslim Brotherhood by the US government. And CAIR has been linked to Hamas. Ellison spoke at CAIR's national convention in November of 2006 as an honorary guest. He was the keynote speaker at a Muslim American Society event, which at the very time he was speaking boasted statements on its website calling for the murder of Jews. On top of which, the Muslim American Society is believed to be the political front in the U.S. for the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the ideological basis of al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist organizations. And for a time, Ellison was highly involved with the Nation of Islam. As a law student at the University of Minnesota, he helped to bring speakers to campus who spoke against Jews, Israel and white Americans.

Ellison says that he has publicly denounced the anti-Semitism in these groups ... but we find no evidence to support his claim. Perhaps he's lying. Muslims, you know, are free to lie as long as they're lying to us dirty infidels. This is the closest you will find to an "enlightening" moment from Ellison, a letter he wrote to the Jewish Community Relations Council claiming that he was unaware of the Nation of Islam's anti-Semitism. But actions do speak louder than words. Nonetheless, Joe Kaufman says that Ellison will stay on the task force.

REDNECK SCRAP BOOK

How do you know a band on tour just might be redneck? More in the Redneck Scrap Book.

READING ASSIGNMENTS

It seems that some black Americans are upset with Barack Obama. They say he's not "black enough." Well .. you just knew it was going to come to this, didn't you? What does he need to do? Demand reparations?

What has Barack Obama accomplished in the Senate? Texas State Sen. Kirk Watson on national TV couldn't name one legislative accomplishment ... and he is a state Senator and a big Obama supporter.

Here's some insight into this obsessive Obama cult that is forming... actresses proclaiming they will do "anything he says," people fainting, what's next?

The Chicago Sun Times has decided to "return to its liberal, working-class roots" and dedicate an entire section of the paper to Barack Obama.

Will John McCain be able to get those independent votes like he claims he will be able to?

A lot of you wanted the link to the information I gave you yesterday on this global warming scam. So, your wish is my command!

Here are some questions about health care that the lamestream media will probably not ask Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton in their next debate in Texas.

I know you all were really worried, but Cynthia McKinney says that her bid for the presidency will not hurt Barack or Hillary's chances for becoming the first African American or woman president. I sure miss that insipid, idiotic woman.

A city in Pennsylvania is caught in a controversy over whether residents can display political signs in their yards 30 days before an election.

Reuters has decided to define the word "jihad" for its readers: a Muslim's a spiritual struggle. Yes I am sure the 3,000 victims of 9/11 would agree. Reuters sucks.

CAIR is asking the FBI to investigate supposed threats that were made on a blog against a mosque in south St. Louis. I looked into it .. I haven't said anything about any Mosque (Arabic for ant hill) in St. Louis.

This is what one Swedish politician had to say about Muslim radicals in his country: "If they want to live in a religious dictatorship so badly, they can go to those countries in the Middle East where such dictatorships exist."

Did you know that 55% of health care costs are due to smoking, poor diet, and lack of exercise? Makes you really want universal healthcare ... so your tax dollars can fund the health habits of lardasses and idiots.

Islam's version of dog fighting ... remember, they can't have dog fighting because dogs are impure according to Islam.

Liquor companies in China are fighting to government for their right to drink alcohol during their lunch breaks.

Today's time waster...the 25 greatest duets of all time...with videos!

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

Belinda Skelton, Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!