Welcome Huckleberries readers.

Here is the "DUH" report of the year:

 Science proves celebs really are different

DO the stars find themselves as fascinating as their fans do? Yes, says a forthcoming psychological study of Hollywood’s celebrity class. It is not just money or career that makes them seem different: it is their extreme levels of self love and their compulsive need for public attention.

Some stars have long been aware of Hollywood vanity. Beyoncé Knowles, the pop singer and actress, said recently: “It’s scary that you rarely meet celebrities that are normal. They live on their own diva planets.”

Two Los Angeles psychologists have produced the first scientific evidence that many celebrities sincerely believe that they are better than the rest of us. The psychologists’ forthcoming book suggests that many pop culture icons are heading for disaster.

Mark Young and Drew Pinsky used a mathematical formula to measure the traits, including exhibitionism and vanity, that make up narcissism. Psychologists believe that in general men are both bossier than women and show off more. However, in the “celebrity class” women are far more narcissistic than men and up to a third are more manipulative and vain about their appearance than the typical woman in the street, according to the psychologists from the University of Southern California.

Participants remain anonymous but interviewees featured on Pinsky’s website include Renée Zellweger, Jessica Simpson, Jim Carrey and members of Duran Duran, the British pop band.

“It was people like that — actors, comedians, musicians and reality TV contestants — who emerged as the most narcissistic of all,” said Pinsky. “The fewer real-life skills they had, the louder they tend to be in their attempts to hold on to attention.”

Pinsky said: “Vanity is only part of it. They crave attention, are over-confident of their abilities, lack empathy and can behave erratically. But they are often admired and well liked, especially on a first meeting, and perform well in public.”

Well the wierdness never ceases.  President Ahmadinejad of Iran has been a notorious Jew hater and anti Semite for a while, and loves to deny the holocaut.  Well apprently his staff has found a new way to top him in the ridiculous department.

Hitler was really a Jew and was in cahoots with the USSR and Britain.

Ynetnews: Iran: Hitler was a Jew  —  Advisor to President Ahmadinejad claims Nazi leader was Jew who conspired with USSR and Britain to establish Jewish state.

Just when you thought the Iranian leadership could stoop no further: A top advisor to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed in an interview with Iranian website Baztab that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler’s parents were both Jewish and that Hitler himself was one of the founders of the State of Israel.

In the interview, translated by MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute) Mohammad-Ali Ramin, a chief aide to Ahmadinejad, told Baztab that Hitler’s paternal grandmother was a Jewish prostitute and his father even kept his Jewish name until finally changing it to Hitler when he was 40.

Ramin also claimed that the reason Hitler developed such an aversion to Judaism was because his Jewish mother was a promiscuous woman. Hitler therefore, says Ramin, tried to escape his religion.

But…

Ramin cites a 1974 book by Hennecke Kardel titled ‘Adolf Hitler: Founder of Israel’, which alleges that Hitler strived to create a Jewish state as a result of being influenced by his Jewish relatives and his cooperation with Britain – which also wanted to drive the Jews out of Europe.

Ramin claims in the interview that Hitler both identified with his Judaism and was disgusted by it. It is these ambivalent feelings, said Ramin, that formed the basis for his treatment of Jews.

According to Ramin on the one hand Hitler’s relatives and the friends who brought him to power, as well as his mistresses and personal physician, were all Jewish.

On the other hand he welcomed the expulsion of ambitious and influential Jews from Europe to the British Mandate of Palestine.

Welcome to Slate.com readers. 

I read this story with great interest today.

Democrats To Start Without GOP Input

As they prepare to take control of Congress this week and face up to campaign pledges to restore bipartisanship and openness, Democrats are planning to largely sideline Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking.

House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100 hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers, raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.

Isn’t that nice and inclusive?  How bipartisian and cooperative.

Let’s flashback just a bit…

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nov. 10, 2006:

“Election’s over. The only way to move forward is with bipartisanship and openness and to get some results. And we’ve made a commitment — the four [Bush, Durbin, and &?] of us here today — that that’s what we’re going to do.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Nov. 9, 2006:

“Democrats are ready to lead, prepared to govern and absolutely willing to work in a bipartisan way.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, November 8, 2006:

“The American people voted for a New Direction to restore civility and bipartisanship in Washington, D.C. Democrats promise to work together in a bipartisan way for all Americans.”

“We will work with Republicans in Congress and the Administration in the spirit of partnership, not partisanship.”

Sounds awfully different from the more recent actions and intentions:

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

Nancy Pelosi, the Californian who will become House speaker, and Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, who will become majority leader, finalized the strategy over the holiday recess in a flurry of conference calls and meetings with other party leaders.