YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.
Also: check up some Kant. He didn't agree with the blank slate as much as you do: he, like you, felt there were some fundamental 'categories of understanding' implanted from birth. How else could there be understanding if the only thing that happened was an imprint of sensory information? If you just write something on a piece of paper, is there intelligence in that paper? Of course not. In a similar vein: if you just write something on your 'hard disk' inside of your brain, is there intelligence in that brain, then?
So, Kant asked, doesn't the information have to be processed in some sort of meaningful representation that the brain can work with? If so, there should be categories of thought inside of you from the very beginning? Concepts like 'quantity' and 'if->then' relationships?
So, even though there are valid criticisms to Kant, if you feel like it (since it is pretty interesting from a historical 'evolution of western philosophy' point of view), read Kant's 'critique on pure reason'.
Else (or in addition to that, of course), just go check up some studies of neuroscience/developmental psychology. I'm sure there is some good information out there pertaining to these kinds of a priori knowledge (think instincts, etc. Of course, see Pinker above as well).