The media is fully fine and hunky-dory with the idea that they may destroy somebody, and they think that's part of the job description. But you turn around and criticize them, and that's not permitted in the vacuum in which they live. They have free rein over you, because I guess this is how they define their constitutional responsibility. And since they have constitutional recognition, somehow they've all been taught at journalism school that nobody may assail them, that nobody may criticize them.

At Ohio State University, to avoid being guilty of 'sexual assault' or 'sexual violence,' you and your partner now apparently have to agree on the reason WHY you are making out or having sex. It's not enough to agree to DO it, you have to agree on WHY: there has to be agreement 'regarding the who, what, where, when, why, and how this sexual activity will take place.

When the Democrat Party lost to Ronald Reagan in two landslides, it was the American people's fault. It was Reagan's fault.

That's what world leadership is: A willingness to point at bad guys and say they're the bad guys and to keep the bad guys from getting worse! That's leadership. Obama didn't want to go there.

Hillary Clinton has gotten rich, and she's made a lot of speeches, and she's get great book deals and so forth. But they don't love her like they loved Bill [Clinton], and they don't love her like they loved Barack [Obama], and they don't love her like they love Michelle [Obama]. The love they have for her is related to the fact that right next to her name is a big capital D on the ballot.

Forget about being comfortable at school if you're straight, if you're conservative, if you're Christian.

I am convinced that, despite what you think of Obama, I don't think Obama has a person-to-person connection with people. I think people love him because of his race and feel sorry for him, object of sympathy. I think people feel he's a victim, he portrays himself as a victim of America; he gets sympathy that way.