And yes, they have colleges.

The inverse candy corn was booked by a student-run group, using money from the mandatory student activity fee.

Now, some might find this outrageous. How dare you pay that sum of cash to a pumpkin full of sherbert when you could get someone like…. Toni Morrison!

I disagree.

I believe the Snook is an inspired choice – once you consider the pablum students have endured in the past.

Like Paul Krugman, a miserable wretch possessing the humor of sheet rock. Or that mad-tingler Chris Matthews.

Then there’s Alec Baldwin, Christiane Amanpour, Face the Nation moderator Bob Schieffer, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission chair Mary Schapiro, and Rachel Maddow.

My fave: Gustavo Esteva-who once spoke at the University of Vermont. He’s a self-described Marxist, which means he really spoke truth to power that day. I bet the air was filled with spirited debate!

Anyway, I’d much rather hear Snookie’s laundry tips and tanning tricks than how Rachel Maddow got her gig (my guess: be yourself!).

And out of all the names I rattled off, Snookie truly is an American tale of rags to riches. She had no idea her life would take this turn, and she seems to absorb the fame and its accompanying silliness with a certain level of charm that you just don’t see in self-satisfied smirkers like Maddow.

And I like Snookie’s philosophy: “Study hard, but party harder.”

Although I hate people who use “party” as a verb, I’ll give her a pass because we both wear the same bra size.

And if you disagree with me, you’re a racist homophobe.

Tonight:

Jill Dobson!

Terry Schappert!

newcomer, Dan Soder!

and some other junk!

To which I say, “Stop—you’re both wrong!”

This, in a nutshell, is the message of the new documentary about me and my work that opens nationwide on Nov. 12. It’s called “Cool It” and, yes, the title is meant to be clever. The idea is that we do need to cool down the planet, but in order to do it sensibly we first need to cool it ourselves. That is, we need to dispense with both the anti-scientific denialism and the Al Gore-ish fear-mongering. Instead, what we should be doing is facing facts—and responding to them not with rhetoric but with smarter, more rational policies.

The first fact we need to acknowledge is the reality of global warming. Like it or not, the data is abundantly clear that man-made greenhouse gases have been building up in the atmosphere for decades if not centuries, with the result that global temperatures are rising. Yes, the “Climate-gate” emails and the disclosure of funny business at the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change exposed some deeply disturbing academic chicanery and prejudice at some supposedly prestigious institutions. However, these revelations did nothing to undermine the fundamental scientific basis of global warming. What they did call into question were many of the more extreme predictions about global warming’s likely impact—such as the idea that all the Himalayan glaciers were about to disappear (they’re not) or that half the Amazon rain forest would soon be destroyed (not likely).

Of course, these extreme predictions are at the heart of the mainstream environmental movement’s position on climate policy. And this brings us to another set of facts we need to face: that while global warming is real, it is not quite the imminent catastrophe so many climate activists would have us believe. There may be some truth to the notion that in order to get people to focus on a problem, you need to scare the pants off them. But while worst-case scenarios may be a great way to get the public’s attention, they are a terrible basis for making public policy. If you believe that the southwest U.S. is about to become another dustbowl (as Paul Krugman has insisted) or that Greenland and Antarctica are on the verge of becoming huge piles of slush (as Al Gore would have us believe), of course you’re going to argue that we should do everything we can to eliminate carbon emissions as quickly as possible—even if that means amazingly costly and ineffective government policies.

And make no mistake about it—the kind of carbon cuts called for in the Kyoto Protocols and the European Union’s recently adopted 20/20 policy (under which carbon emissions are supposed to be cut to 20% below 1990 levels by 2020) are hardly a recipe for success. Not only would they rob us of trillions of dollars worth of economic output—the EU effort alone would cost an estimated $250 billion a year in lost GDP—but they would do astonishingly little to solve global warming. According to the DICE climate-economic model, if the EU plan were to be implemented every year for the next 90 years, the resulting reduction in temperatures would be too small to measure. (To be precise, the figure is a miniscule 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit.)

The good news is that there is another, better way to deal with global warming—a cure that is most assuredly not worse than the disease. As I have noted elsewhere, the big problem with the Al Gore approach to global warming is that it ignores the fact that despite all the hopeful talk about solar, wind, and other green energy technologies, we are still overwhelmingly dependent for our energy needs on carbon-emitting fuels like coal and oil. Why? Because coal and oil are far cheaper and more efficient energy sources than the alternatives. For two decades now, we have been putting the cart before the horse, pretending we could cut carbon emissions now (by taxing them) and solve the efficiency problem later. Unfortunately, this makes neither economic nor political sense. What we should be doing isn’t trying to make carbon-emitting fuels too expensive to use, but rather figuring out how to make green energy cheaper. If we could do that, we wouldn’t have to force (or subsidize) anyone to stop burning coal and oil. Everyone, including the Chinese and the Indians, would shift to the cheaper and cleaner alternatives.

This of course is a big if. But it’s not impossible. As the Breakthrough Institute has pointed out, we didn’t promote the digital revolution by taxing slide rules or restricting the supply of typewriters. We did it by investing massively in R&D. We could—and should—do the same with green energy technology. As we point out in “Cool It,” devoting roughly $100 billion a year to green energy R&D would likely produce the kind of game-changing breakthroughs needed to fuel a carbon-free future. Not only would this be a much less expensive fix than trying to cut carbon emissions directly, it would also reduce global warming far more quickly.

So why aren’t we doing this? I blame polarization. What’s keeping us from getting anywhere is the lack of any middle ground in the climate debate. As far as the alarmists are concerned, you either believe global warming poses an imminent threat to our continued existence or you are a denier. Deniers can be just as bad: in their view, if you don’t believe global warming is a nefarious hoax, you must be an empty-headed “warmist.” It’s time to retire the old shibboleths of both left and right—and stop branding anyone who dares question them a crackpot or worse.

Tackling global warming smartly is not (or at least it shouldn’t be) a political issue. Being smart is something we ought to be able to find bipartisan agreement on. For the politically conservative, the attraction of this approach is that it is a clear-headed, fiscally responsible response – and one that would actually fix the problem it is meant to solve.

In this episode, “NewsBusted” covers: State of the Union Address, President Obama, President Bush, Paul Krugman, United Nations, Himalayan Glaciers, Bob Woodward, New York Times, Roman Polanski, Childhood Obesity, and Coachella Music Festival.

The first round of protests against the Obama administration’s chaotic and rapid-fire expansion of government came in the form of grass-roots “tea parties,” which were predictably met with scorn by the Democrat-Media Complex (the natural coalition of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media.)

CNN’s Anderson Cooper and MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow led the charge, declaring concerned Americans “tea baggers,” an allusion to an absurd sexual fetish beneath describing in a family newspaper. This attack on hundreds of thousands of people practicing their constitutional right to protest speaks volumes not just about the hardened sociopolitical leanings of America’s journalistic elite, but about the brazenness with which they are now wielding their unprofessionalism.

Last week on the grounds of the once-venerated White House, Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, taking his cues from his allies in the media, referred to last week’s health care town-hall protesters as “tea baggers.”

How far we have fallen.

Stepping up the rhetoric from mockery to pure hatred, and absent any evidence, Mr. Olbermann has called the president’s public protesters “worse than racists.” Political activist and comedian Janeane Garofalo colored them “racist rednecks who hate blacks.” And at the somewhat higher end of the food chain, liberal economist Paul Krugman in the New York Times wrote last week that they were motivated by “cultural and racial fear.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is having a hard time these days explaining the president’s Israel policy to her Jewish constituents, blatantly lied and said that the protesters were wielding “swastikas and symbols like that.”

Supporters of the president understand what is going on. So do his detractors.

The mainstream media and the Democratic Party are working in concert to make sure that what happened to President Bush — sustained organized grass-roots protests (“mobs,” if you will), relentless media criticism and permanent opposition-party obstructionism — does not happen to their guy. Complicating matters, the media’s fate is directly tied to the president’s. Without them, Barack Obama would still be a backbencher from Illinois.

But the mockery. The recklessness. Unsupportable libel isn’t working. The tea parties and, now, the health care protests at town-hall meetings have only gotten bigger and stronger. The anti-big-government movement is pure. Its participants represent something close to what used to be considered normative in this country.

You can read the column in full here.

“At this point, whatever dividing line there was between mainstream conservatism and the black-helicopter crowd seems to have been virtually erased.” – NY Times columnist Paul Krugman.

Paul Krugman

Really sucks to be a conservative these days. I feel like I’m walking around with a big bulls-eye on my back. I know many of the Left, especially Keith Olbermann, Frank Rich, Paul Krugman, the New York Times editorial staff and all the pundits at HuffPo and KOS would find that statement hilariously ironic, given the recent shooting deaths of Dr. George Tiller in Kansas and security guard Steven T. Johns at the Holocaust Museum. Then again, they’re not the ones being branded en masse as co-conspirators in those murders. Conservatives are.

As a bonus, the recent arrest of Jason Bush, a national executive director of the Minuteman anti-illegal immigration group, for brutal murders committed during a home invasion, is also fueling the fire of portraying Righties as inherently violent extremists-in-waiting. Yet Cambodians and other ethnic gangs pull violent home invasions against the vulnerable in their enclaves, which have included brutal murders, on a regular basis. No one’s calling them a threat to the Republic, or branding all Cambodians as inherently violent. They are, in fact, its greatest victims.

Curiously absent in the above blanket indictments of conservatives were the facts that the Holocaust Museum shooter, James von Brunn, was a radical anti-Semite and anti-conservative with a long history of attacking the Right, even going so far as attempting to kidnap President Reagan’s entire Federal Reserve Board back in the 1980s. He was also an ardent proponent of the ‘9/11 was an inside job’ tinfoil conspiracy theory. In that respect, he has a lot more in common with Dylan Avery and Rosie O’Donnell than Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck.

Also curiously absent was the recent shooting death of Pvt. William Long and wounding of another soldier outside a Little Rock recruiting center by an anti-military Islamic convert. Again, that kind of hatred and violence toward the military has far more in common with Code Pink than FOX News. It was not radical conservatives who poured concrete on military rail lines in Olympia, Washington, nothing less than an act of sabotage during wartime. Nor was it a right wing extremist who set off a bomb in front of a Times Square Army recruiting office.

Yet I do not hold all the aforementioned esteemed MSM mouthpieces, or the Left as a whole, responsible for those violent and destructive acts. Nor do I hold the entire American Left responsible for FBI Most Wanted Terrorist Daniel Andreas San Diego’s bombings in San Francisco. Or the violent acts of other eco-terrorists, like the firebombings of scientists’ homes while they and their families were still inside, or the burning down of research labs, car dealerships and housing developments which have caused hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage. Or the highly destructive acts of the ‘elves’ of the Earth Liberation Front.

I also do not hold all left-leaning gay rights advocates responsible for the white powder mailings to Mormon churches by gay radicals. I do not hold the Left responsible for any those singular acts of violent left-wing extremist groups and individuals because of one simple fact: they all didn’t do it.

Fact is, America has always been a land overflowing with nutjobs of all stripes. Sales of the Anarchist Cookbook rival Betty Crocker’s. Some lone psychos have done incredible damage in all sorts of brutal and heinous ways. Lee Harvey Oswald. James Earl Ray. Timothy McVeigh. Theodore Kaczynski, aka the Unabomer. David Koresh. Andrew Cunanin. Olympic Park bomber Eric Rudolph. John Mohammed and Lee Boyd Malvo. Michael McDermott. Daniel Andreas San Diego. And that’s not even counting serial killers like Ted Bundy, John Wanye Gacy and Henry Lee Lucas.

American law enforcement has their hands full. Always have. Sometimes they are successful in stopping extremists from attacking, as was the case with the Fort Dix Six and Bronx synagogue bombing plotters, who also planned to shoot down military aircraft with Stinger missiles. In other not-so-fortunate circumstances law enforcement was left to deal with the violent aftermath, as was the case recently with the aforementioned Tiller, Holocaust Museum and Little Rock shootings.

There is, however, a distinct difference in America today regarding these lone nutjob killers that have plagued us throughout our history. They are now being politicized by the Left in much the same way Hitler manipulated the Reichstag Fire: to brand the entire mainstream conservative movement in the country as extremist threats to the Republic, requiring strong government intervention.

In other words, today we are all extremists.

Just ask Paul Krugman. Or Frank Rich. Or rest of the New York Times editorial staff in their ‘Hate Crimes and Extremist Politics’ oped. Want to see some real hate speech? Check out the comments sections of those Times posts. Those comments, as well as many other recent posts on left-wing blogs, reveal a stunning turnaround on the Left regarding political profiling, censorship, tapping phones and blanket monitoring of the Internet. I guess it all depends who’s being targeted. How quickly things change when it’s the Left running the show.

But all this is really nothing new. President Bill Clinton implied that Rush Limbaugh shared some culpability in the Oklahoma City bombings way back in 1995. Yet the degree to which the Mainstream Media and the Left is attacking the Right over these recent murders goes way beyond just implying. Those bloody corpses are being tossed right on the doorsteps of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage and any other conservative pundit they can think of, as well as blanket condemnation and guilt by association of all their millions of listeners.

Noticeably absent also from this discussion of political extremism was the KILL BUSH death cult on the Left that screamed for the President’s blood and brutal murder for years. Or that most Lefties falsely accused President Bush of staging the worst terror attack in American history against his own citizens. I believe the subsequent bombings by Al Qaeda of London, Madrid, Bali, Iraq, Jordan, or any of the other 13,000-plus Islamist acts of terror since 9/11, put that subject to rest with all but the most dedicated conspiracy theorists. That is clearly Al Qaeda’s modus operandi, as it was way back in 1993 during the first attack on the WTC when Bill Clinton was President.

Also no mention of the Left’s David Dukes, the black supremacist, hate-mongering Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the bloodstained, racebaiting and mayhem-inciting Rev. Al Sharpton. Or the Left’s unrepentant Timothy McVeighs, domestic terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, now Leftie icons. You want to talk hateful, extremist, violence-inciting behavior and speech from the other side of the political spectrum? I guess not, huh, Paul? Rich? Keith? HuffPo? KOS?

See how it works? One eye open, one eye closed. Guess which eye is conveniently sewn shut.

Nothing new there, either. For decades the radical Left has engaged in, equivocated or looked the other way on egregious political behavior while at the same time painting all conservatives as extremists by, ironically, adopting extremist positions themselves. This political demonization of the conservative opposition has been flourishing on the Left under the Obama administration. Worse, that demonization has even been given credence and official sanction by such top government officials as David Axelrod and Janet Napolitano.

Now, as much as the Left howled about the Bushitler regime during the past eight years, when did Bush, Karl Rove or anyone else declare all Lefties a clear and present danger to the Republic, even when assassinating the President became a cultural fad in Leftie plays, books, movies, merchandising and art exhibits, egged on even by Air America’s Randy Rhodes simulation of President Bush’s assassination on the air?

Never mind how much the Left is freaking out now over James von Brunn. Can you imagine if the far right made a popular subculture out of assassinating President Obama to the degree Lefties did under President Bush? Or if Glenn Beck simulated the President’s assassination on the air, like Randy Rhodes did at Air America? They’d all be screaming for martial law and internment camps!

I can’t help but wonder. Now that the Left controls the media and all branches of government, do they see their golden opportunity to shut down the hated Right once and for all in this country? Perhaps only now we are finding out the Left’s true definition of unity: singularity of political thought and opinion, and the silencing of all the annoying competing ideologies. What should be vigorous and thoughtful political debate on important issues that concern us all is fast becoming an ideological pogrom. Dissenting views are no longer opposing opinions. They are now thoughtcrime.

This is not right wing extremist paranoia. The track record speaks for itself.

Example. I don’t dislike President Obama because he’s a Socialist raiding the Treasury and nationalizing private industry faster than Hugo Chavez. Or for firing an Inspector-General without notifying Congress, in violation in a law he himself signed off on. Or that his Justice Department under Eric Holder just gave the baton-wielding “you will soon be ruled by the black man, cracker” Black Panther ‘poll monitor’ thugs a total pass, despite a default conviction and the assessment by Mr. Bartle Bull, a former Robert Kennedy campaign manager and prominent election observer of the Civil Rights era calling it “the worst voter intimidation I’ve ever seen.”

And he monitored elections in the South during the Jim Crow era. How bad is that?

No, I don’t dislike the President for any of that. I hate him just because he’s black. In fact, if you’re a conservative these days, you have no valid reason to oppose anything other than mindless right wing hate and bigotry. You have no valid reason to protest President Obama’s spending us into financial oblivion. You are a redneck racist teabagger, and most likely a rabble-rousing neo-Nazi or white supremacist, according to a memo passed around by liberal Democrats in Congress.

You have no valid moral, social or religious reasons to oppose gay marriage. You’re a Nazi and a homophobe. Or Nouveau Jim Crow KKK crackers, as the Boston Phoenix termed those opposing gay marriage. You have no valid reason to oppose Sonia Sotomayer. If you do, you’re a sexist and a racist, and you’d best tread carefully around her. Never mind anything she’s ever said or done, like upholding the blatantly discriminatory Ricci decision now before the US Supreme Court.

Never mind all that. She’s a wise Latina woman, and better than a white man. Watch your step!

You have no valid reason to oppose the millions of illegals flooding our country without procedure or proper criminal, medical or psychological screenings, as was done on Ellis Island, or support securing our borders as every other nation on earth does. You are a vile racist nationalist, just like that Minuteman killer Jason Bush. If you question the populist science of Global Warming that over 31,000 scientists dispute, or oppose any of the draconian taxes and regulations we are about to get slammed with via the Waxman-Markey bill, you are a heretic on the order of a Holocaust denier.

Never mind all the record low temperatures worldwide, or the discrediting of data presented by GW gurus Hansen and Gore as either defective or outright fraudulent. Or the political power and financial riches ‘green’ proponents like Al Gore and GE’s Jeffrey Immelt stand to gain that would dwarf Big Oil profits. I’m not saying that we should pollute the earth until we all choke from it, as GW True Believers will no doubt accuse me of. I’m just saying. Rational debate of the subject on the Left is nonexistent. As it is with most every political subject under the sun.

Is it really any surprise Michael Savage was banned from Britain for what is essentially thoughtcrime, given that government’s extreme left-wing bent? How soon before he is banned here, along with every other conservative pundit on the radio? But this is the mindset of today’s Left. If you do not agree with their extreme positions on the issues, you are branded as the worst kind of extremist yourself, publicly and repeatedly. Just as we conservatives are being painted right now with the same bloody brush of killers who committed acts 99.99999% of us would never dream of. That is not reasoned debate. It is ideologically driven hate and tyranny of thought.

That mindset makes no distinction between violence of speech, i.e. heated political rhetoric, which is Constitutionally protected, and violence of action and criminal speech, i.e. incitement to violence, which is not. It is that twisted perspective that made the assassinations of President Bush and VP Dick Cheney humorous and chic, yet responds to even the mildest criticism of President Obama by Rush Limbaugh with unbridled rage, petitions in Congress and demands to shut Rush up by hook or by crook, be it the Orwellian Fairness Doctrine or in the name of diversity.

Lefties commit the most egregious of slanders, yet take violent offense at every slight real or imagined. The Left even codifies that double standard by turning the language on its head in Orwellian fashion to make political evils appealing. Tolerance becomes a pretty name for exclusion, diversity a lofty term for bigotry. Censorship in the form of restrictive speech codes on college campuses around the country are enacted in the name of free speech.

But it doesn’t stop at the language. Abuse of authority and political power has become SOP on the Left. Cynthia Dixon was fired from her job as a college human resources director for her contrary Christian opinion on homosexuality, voiced in a local paper’s editorial page in response to a lefty lesbian faculty member’s pro-gay oped in the same.

The lesbian faculty member’s job, however, was never in danger, even after spewing incredibly vile vitriol at Dixon, with included the obligatory ‘racist bigot homophobe!’ Ironically, Cynthia Dixon is African-American. Where’s the EEOC when you need them? Unfortunately. Ms. Dixon is the wrong shade of black, i.e. Christian conservative. For more information on that subject, ref Michael Steele and Clarence Thomas. See, they’re not REAL minorities. They’re all Uncle Toms, don’t you know.

I’m sorry, who are the racists here again?

Harvard president Larry Summers was run out of his job on a rail for repeating a research-supported but politically incorrect scientific opinion on how men’s and women’s brains may work differently. So much for Veritas. But science is not a factor to the Left. Politics and ideology is all. State-employed climatologists were fired in Washington and Oregon for not toeing the Global Warming line. Lord Christopher Monckton, who holds an opposing view to Al Gore’s on Global Warming, was shut out of Congressional hearings the day after he flew over from England to testify.

See, to the egalitarian Left, all opinions are equal. It’s just that some are more equal than others.

The Left’s championing of women’s rights is also a sham. They routinely and publicly degrade women who don’t fit their ideological template. They publish and fall all over themselves laughing at a ‘Top Ten Conservative Women I’d Like To Hate-Fuck’ rape list and slander Sarah Palin without end, even joking about her being gang-raped. Carrie Prejean is derided as a fascist bitch and a cunt for voicing the same opinion on marriage as President Obama and most American citizens.

You see the pattern that’s emerging here? When has anyone on the Left been fired for expressing pro-gay views?  When has Al Gore ever been shut out of speaking, as Lord Monckton was by liberal Democrats in Congress? Or attacked physically, as routinely happens to Ann Coulter and other conservative speakers on college campuses like clockwork?

If you want to talk extremism, left-wing extremists in America have been guilty of some very serious crimes in the last decade, as highlighted above. Again, you won’t find any of those crimes in the New York Times extremist hit list. No, let’s forget about all that left-wing extremist mayhem and hold talk radio and FOX News responsible for the acts of politically twisted or mentally disturbed individuals, as they seek to hold all mainstream conservatives responsible today for every violent act committed by lone psychos.

You want to blame Bill O’Reilly for Dr. Tiller’s death? What if President Bush had been assassinated by some lone leftie nutjob while he was President? Who would have been responsible? The assassin? Or everyone on the Left who encouraged Bush’s assassination with relish and glee? What about the white powder mailings to the Mormon Church by radical gay activists? Should we start FBI surveillance on the Prop H8 crowd because of the extremist acts of a few?

Should we clamp down on all American Muslims because of the violence domestic jihadis plotted or carried out, as with Little Rock, Fort Dix and the recent attempted bombing of a New York synagogue? Why is all the focus on the right side of the political spectrum, and all of the evils of the extreme Left being totally whitewashed or ignored today? Don’t answer, it’s a rhetorical question.

I have to tell you, people. I’m really starting to fear for this country. Left-wing demagogues like Frank Rich, Paul Krugman, Keith Olbermann, the New York Times editorial board, and all the others in the so-called mainstream media, branding all conservatives with the same bloody brushes as lone wolf psychos that have long been a problem in this country and always will be, not to mention all the shutting down of political discourse by inspiring fear, hatred and intimidation against the minority party, are doing a lot more damage to the fabric of this society, and American democracy itself, than a James von Brunn ever could with a .22 rifle.

I’ve got a radical right wing extremist idea. Why don’t we leave the nutjobs to law enforcement, and try to engage in the honored American tradition of healthy and vigorous political discourse without enacting new Nuremburg decrees or shredding the Constitution? Isn’t championing freedom of speech and expression and human rights what the Left is all about? So they say?

It is long past time for the Left to live up that credo. Because if the firings, shutting off of debate, censorship bills now in Congress, and the relentless demonization of the political opposition continues relentlessly and without end, as it has for so many years now, I’m just liable to think the dividing line between mainstream liberalism and the hate-filled totalitarian left-wing crowd has been virtually erased. You got all that, Paul? Frank? Pinchy? Keith? Janet? David? KOS? HuffPo?

GROW UP! I’m sick of dealing with a bunch of full-grown screaming control-freak toddlers! The Right isn’t going anywhere. In fact, our stars are ascending. FOX News and conservative blogs are putting the MSM out of business. And there’s a huge amount of discontent across the political spectrum over liberal Democrat policies since the Left took power.

The 2010 elections are starting to look a lot like 1994’s. And tell the truth, guys. Doesn’t that scare the hell out of you all a lot more than one or two lone shooters? And don’t just call me a right wing extremist. Let’s talk about the issues. I’m a reasonable guy. Don’t even own a gun. But just because I support the Second Amendment doesn’t make me a gun nut. I support it because it’s a Constitutional right. See how easy rational debate works? You all ought to try it sometime.

Last word. I opposed President Obama’s candidacy from the start. I disliked his polices, and I especially disliked his associations with real bomb-throwing extremists like Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and racial hatemongers like Rev. Wright. I spoke out on blogs like this for a year against candidate Obama, and everything he and liberal Democrats stood for.

Yet shortly after Obama was elected President in November, I noticed a security vulnerability that fell within my area of expertise and called the Secret Service right away. Fortunately, they knew all about it. See, despite my extreme distaste for President Obama’s policies and associations, the American people spoke loud and clear last November. Barack Obama is now President of the United States.

As such, he represents a hallowed tradition of political stability and continuity of a government and most benevolent political system that I hold sacred, and is the envy of much of the world. I defended that system for six years in uniform, and would defend it again if need be. How ironic I must vigorously defend it today against those who profess to be its greatest champions.

There’s a right wing extremist for you, Lefties. Oh, and by the way, I and other conservatives like David Horowitz have spoken out loudly against the extremists in our ranks. Where was the condemnation of unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers on the day after 9/11, when he said in the New York Times that he hadn’t done enough? Why is he revered instead of reviled? Don’t answer, it’s a rhetorical question. But it does make me wonder who the real extremists are here.

After all, you don’t see the right glorifying politically-motivated mass murderers. Hmm. Curious.

Paul Krugman is so adorable when he’s delusional.

Today the bearded boob lays the blame for the Holocaust shooting and the Tiller murder on the conservative media and Republicans in general. Meanwhile, the AP broadens the scope to basically anyone who doesn’t light a candle before a handpainted portrait of Barack Obama. The writer Jesse Washington’s conclusion: “The potential for an increase in violence from whites who feel they are slipping from power is high, people from across the ideological spectrum say.”

“People from across the ideological spectrum?” You mean you, Jesse, you scamp!

And so the lefty media is doing exactly what they’re accusing the rest of us of doing: fomenting hate against people who hold different views from their own.

Does the “far right” do this? I have yet to read anything saying the murder of that American soldier by the American jihadist was the responsibility of Paul Krugman or Keith Olbermann. And it’s been years since the beltway shooter took out a pile of people – and still not a peep about his motivations. From the media’s perspective, only white men can be dangerously angry.

Let’s compare how two different killings were reported: in this Holocaust shooting, it was saddled with sociological musings, obsessing on the motivation, and pronouncements of a national trend of “desperate” white men. Of course, for this to work, the writer has to ignore the Jewish hatred from the far left, including our President’s own preacher. He also has to bypass the fact that the pathetic killer also hated Bush.

And as for the killing of our US soldier? The motivation is ignored.

Forget “white hate,” this is all about politics. And It’s getting Kafka-esque–every time I look at the news, I’m being told I’m a criminal for not buying into universal health care, global warming, higher taxes – in fact, my bedrock conservative beliefs are a sign of a deeper racial hatred. See Janeane Garafalo.

Wait – don’t see her.

My only conclusion – that this is a hate campaign perpetrated by the leftist media to create a violent race war.

The good news is, I think I can take Krugman. I’ve been doing Pilates.

Tonight we have the hilarious Jamie Lissow, the brilliant Andrew Klavan, the delightful S.E. Cupp and the inciteful Ron Geraci!

Plus: OS

OS = other stuff.

If you don’t believe that liberalism is a serious malady, consider that Paul Krugman of the New York Times, when addressing Sonia Sotomayor’s remark about an Hispanic woman being better qualified than a white man to be a judge, said that she was merely being entertaining.  Even if Mr. Krugman is, as his comment suggests, more easily entertained than a backward three-year-old, I have a feeling that he wasn’t nearly as forgiving when Trent Lott, on the occasion of Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday in 2002, said it was a shame that the old Dixiecrat hadn’t been elected president in 1948.Yet another recent example of liberalism in action took place at Harvard, where bright young people go to have their brains exchanged for a pound of hay and humongous egos.  It seems that the mucky-mucks at the university found $1.5 million lying around and decided that the best possible use for the money was to create a visiting professorship in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender studies.  I guess the good news is that if Barney Frank decides to do us all a big favor and get out of politics, there’s a job opening at his alma mater.  

Speaking of liberal goofiness brings us inevitably to Barack Hussein Obama, as he now proudly identifies himself — at least when he’s addressing Muslims, praising Muslims and, as usual, slandering America.  By the way, isn’t it the least bit odd that he never condemns Muslim-extremists for clinging to their religion and their suicide bombs?  And even if you’re a liberal, doesn’t it seem peculiar that during his speech in Egypt, he didn’t take a moment to mention how much blood and national treasure America has spent — and, I would suggest, wasted — defending Muslims in Somalia, Kuwait, Iraq, Kosovo and Afghanistan? 

But, then, we mustn’t forget that this is the same chap who went to France and took the opportunity to apologize for America’s arrogance without once mentioning the number of American G.I.s who died, making sure that the French wouldn’t have to give up wine and foie gras for beer and bratwurst. 

By the way, do you think the day will ever come when he’ll quit apologizing for America’s arrogance and apologize for his own? 

Before setting off for the Middle East, where he gave a thumbs-up to Iran’s nuclear program while condemning Israel for building houses, Obama mentioned that America is home to one of the world’s largest Muslim populations.  As anyone with even a passing interest in facts would know, there are roughly three million Muslims in the United States.  Just to give you some idea of how far off Obama was, Indonesia has 195 million, Pakistan has 160 million, India has 154 million.  Even Burkina Faso, a place you’ve never even heard of, has seven million.  There are, as one of his advisers should have told him before he shot off his mouth, roughly 40 countries in the world with larger Muslim populations than America. 

But, then, as we all know, Obama has notoriously weak math skills.  It certainly explains why he announced during the campaign that that the U.S. is made up of 57 states.  Heck, it may even help explain the way he tosses around our money.  It’s a scary thought, but isn’t it just possible that he can’t really tell the difference between million, billion and trillion? 

BurtPrelutsky@aol.com