JUST SO FRUSTRATING

I'm sorry, but Drudge was right. The debate was boring. The questions from the audience were, for the most part, unimaginative. Obama was the more boring of the two, but only by a narrow margin. That would be because he is leading in the polls and his job last night was to avoid mistakes. McCain, on the other hand, had to push harder to make some headway. I just don't see that he did it.

Every time I watch one of these debates I find myself inwardly screaming "Why didn't you say such-and-such? Finally I've come to realize a basic truth. These people - these politicians - spend most of their political lives trying to avoid telling people what they really think. Then, once every two, four or six years, they find themselves having to communicate with the people. A talk show host, on the other hand, is in the business of communicating ideas to people from 15 hours a week in most cases to my 22.5 hours a week. This is why you'll almost never hear a candidate come up with a line like this:

"Do you want a job? Are you looking for work? Tell me, are you going to go try to find a job from a member of the middle class? Probably not. Perhaps you think your chances of finding a job might be better if you go to a small business owners and large corporations. So .. while you're out there looking for jobs from these people, do you want us to be back in Washington raising their taxes? Do you want us to be plotting ways to relive them of the very money they need to hire you?"

Americans would get that.

Jobs are a big issue .. and an issue that is so easily addressed. Here's another line that you won't hear from a candidate:

"Do you know what has happened to so many of your jobs? The corporations who own those jobs sent them overseas to escape our punishing corporate tax rates. If you want to bring some of those jobs back, lower corporate taxes. What do you want corporations to do with that money? Pay it to the government in taxes, or use it to expand and provide new jobs. If we lower our corporate tax rate those companies who have been fleeing from our tax system may come back, and perhaps they'll bring some of their corporate friends with them. Now I'm suggesting a cut in corporate tax rates ... a cut that will create more jobs. When I make that suggestion my opponent counters with "John McCain wants to give big oil a huge tax cut." Instead of worrying about increasing job opportunities in this country, Barack Obama would rather demagogue oil companies."

Then Obama comes up with this "I'm going to cut taxes for 95% of the American public." Would someone please explain to me why McCain has never directly responded to this absurd line? Here's some more help from a talk show host:

"You're going to lower taxes for 95% of the people? Perhaps you don't know this, but 45% of American wage earners don't pay any federal income taxes. That places the entire federal income tax burden on just 55% of income earners. Please ... we're waiting ... tells us how you lower taxes on 95% of the people when only 45% are paying those taxes in the first place. I suspect that when you start explaining your plan we're going to learn that what you're really proposing is not tax cuts, but income redistribution."

So many lost opportunities last night ... how in the world does someone light a fire under this guy? There's not all that much time left.

THE RICH SHOULD PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE!

Did you know that a 2007 Gallup poll found that 66% of Americans think the evil rich pay TOO LITTLE federal income taxes? I bring this up because I was reading a Wall Street Journal article about the differences between McCain's tax plan and Obama's. I know, I know ... yawn. But you really need to pay attention folks! I'll point you to a little bit of the article:

According to the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture between the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, around 78% of the McCain tax cut would accrue to the top fifth of income earners, with almost 30% going to the highest 1%. This seems inequitable on its face, a point the Obama campaign and the press focus on ... As it happens, the top fifth of earners currently pay 67% of all federal taxes -- including not just income taxes, but payroll taxes, corporate taxes and death taxes. The top 1% of earners pay 26% of all federal taxes. (When you only count income taxes, the top 1% pay nearly 40%)

If the McCain proposal were passed, the top fifth would actually pay a greater share of total federal taxes and the top 1%'s share would decline by only 0.3%. In other words, high earners carry the vast majority of the federal tax burden ...

In case you are wondering, here is how the Barack Obama tax plan would compare:

By contrast, the Obama plan would increase marginal income tax rates on high earners and raise taxes on capital gains and dividends, with the likely effect of contracting labor supply, reducing rewards for saving, and increasing incentives to avoid taxes. All but the very lowest income Americans would face higher marginal tax rates under the Obama plan than the McCain proposal.

BARNEY FRANK HAS LOST HIS MARBLES

This comment from Barney Frank managed to slip under the radar ... until now. Slowly but surely, Republicans are growing the globes to criticize the Democrat party for its role in the mortgage crisis ... the fact that it was the Clinton administration that pushed for subprime loans through the Community Reinvestment Act; the fact that Barney Frank was sleeping with a Fannie Mae executive while pushing Congress to deregulate Fannie Mae; the fact that it was Democrats in 2005 who voted against reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in a party-line vote.

On Monday, Barney Frank said that Republicans are motivated by race in their "veiled attack on the poor." Just gage me ... there's that race thing again. Barney is trying to make you believe that the only reason the Republicans are pointing fingers at the Democrats is because the "GOP is appealing to its base." He can't actually refute the charges, so he pulls the race card.

Here's what Barney Frank said, "They get to take things out on poor people ... Let's be honest: The fact that some of the poor people are black doesn't hurt them either, from their standpoint. This is an effort, I believe, to appeal to a kind of anger in people."

HERE'S THE NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE FROM 1999

Okay, so by popular demand ... here, again, is the article about Fannie Mae and the Clinton administration from 1999, printed in the New York Times. I guess Barney Frank doesn't read the New York Times.

THE CENSORED SNL SKIT

On Monday in Nealz Nuze, I directed you to a Saturday Night Live skit that actually points to the Democrats being the reason for our mortgage troubles. Many of you were upset because the link to that video at NBC mysteriously disappeared. Then we come to find out that the link didn't just disappear, it was purposely censored by NBC. It has been taken down from their archives. Any YouTube videos of the skit are being deleted due to "copyright infringement."

The theory circulating the mainstream media is that the clip was pulled because former bank owners Herb and Marion Sandler (who are labeled in the skit as "people who should be shot") were upset. Meanwhile, NBC has yet to say decisively why they pulled it.

Michelle Malkin took the time to transcribe the skit ... just in case you missed it.

As of this morning we learn that NBC pulled the clip for legal reasons. They have edited out the questionable part labeling the Sandlers as "people to shoot."

THE RIGHT TO VOTE

Look, folks. Yesterday on the program I mentioned the fact that there is no Constitutional right to vote in a presidential election. There just isn't. But Webguy and Cristina forwarded me dozens of emails whining, "Boortz is wrong! I can't believe he wants to deny me my precious rights! There was no need for him to yell at callers!"

If you missed it, then tune into the Information Overload Hour today for Boortz Re-Call. Your station doesn't carry the Information Overload Hour? That's a shame. Call them and tell them you want it. In the meantime, stream it online. Decide whether or not I was mean. But here's an email to show you what I'm dealing with here:

Subject: Today's program
Name: David
Message:
Sir Boortz:
Your self-aggrandizement appalls me. I understand how you are on the radio as you can sell your misstatements to your listeners and they must be multitude. In the name of God, how can you spew your these blatant misstatements to the public and keep a conscience. Where are your values, Mr. Boortz? Take your attack on the right to vote.

(He goes on to list some amendments to the Constitution)

Where do you get off saying that an individual, no matter what their status, does not have the right to vote. Once you begin to define a person as to their right to vote, you slide down that slippery slope to discrimination. I'm in jail and I should not be allowed to vote? GET REAL NEAL.

I choose one day a year to listen to your vitriol and today is the day. You call yourself a Libertarian yet your attacks are all directed toward the Democrats.

I have been a Georgia resident since 1971, when I returned from military service overseas (VN). I find you a disgrace to the values of our country.

Respectfully,
Michael David

Now first of all .. this "I chose one day a year" nonsense is BS and Mr. David knows it's BS. Is he really ignorant enough to believe that anyone reading this letter buys that stuff? "Let's see, oh yeah. Today is October 7th. That's the day I listen to Neal Boortz ever year." This writer, you see, is so ticked off at me that the last thing he wants me to believe is that he actually listens to my show ... every day. This is just a variant on the old "I just happened to be tuning across the dial today and caught your show for a few minutes" thing. Come on folks. Grow up. We know what the truth is, so stop this childish nonsense.

This letter writer makes another mistake. He constantly refers to "the right to vote." Those are not the words I use. I'm referring to "the right to vote in a presidential election." I fully recognize that some states, mine included, grant a right to vote in state and local elections in their state constitutions.

Now ... for those of you who just don't listen until someone screams at you, we'll scream:

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that there is no constitutional right to vote in a presidential election.

Now you can argue, scream, cite sections of the Constitution, spin around on your eyebrows and spit wooden nickels all you want ... but that is the law ... and no amount of protest or childish emails on your part is going to change it. I am not to blame for your failed education.

The point here is that once we all recognize that the right to vote in a presidential election doesn't exist, we can set about getting some of the parasites and idiots off the voting rolls. We can end this running off to drug rehab centers, homeless shelters and prisons to register voters. You don't let the inmates run the asylum.

WELL ... I GAINED ONE NEW LISTENER YESTERDAY

Subject: Neals Personality
Name: Louis
Message:
Hi Neal. Tuned in to your show for the first time today and just wanted to say I loved every moment.

You are the Marine Corps drill instructor version of Rush Limbaugh. You are intelligent, informed, and a hard ass. Why don't you run for office. Thank you for your great words.

READING ASSIGNMENTS

Stanley Kurtz has another great article about ACORN, Barack Obama, and the Democrat Party.

It turns out that ACORN still got a piece of the bailout pie ... Michelle Malkin has more on how ACORN's foreclosure agenda was worked into the bailout bill by Maxine Waters and Barney Frank.

A man in London was shot because he was wearing a Barack Obama t-shirt.

Nevada state authorizes have raided the Las Vegas headquarters for ACORN because it is suspected of voter fraud.

Barack Obama lied about his relationship with Bill Ayers, and this report comes from ... CNN??

Jerome Corsi, the author of an anti-Obama book, was deported from Kenya yesterday after being detained.

The House Oversight Committee announced that it will hold hearings into the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This oughta be interesting.

We know for a fact that Barack Obama has asked for $1 million in pork for every day he has served in the Senate. Where was some of this money going? Friends, relatives, campaign contributors ...

How does Barack Obama really feel about the Second Amendment? Probably not what the mainstream media will tell you.

Big news ... Madonna has banned Sarah Palin from attending her world tour. I'm sure Governor Palin is just devastated.

A raid of a chicken processing plant (this one in South Carolina) leads to the detention of 300 suspected illegal immigrants. Gotta love it.

Another homeowner's association story. In this one, the homeowners association (which in this case would be one person) is threatening to sue a man for not properly landscaping his lawn. The reason he hasn't landscaped: he has been serving his country in Kuwait.

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:

Friend Neal on Facebook

Talkmaster Yahoo Group

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