Monday, March 2, 2015

"Is Obama A Patriotic Christian" and "Bait & Switch"

Ithink the way you answer that question, which is really a combination of two questions, depends entirely on how you define a patriot and a Christian.

Obviously those who believe that even the lies that Obama has told about Benghazi, the IRS targeting of conservatives and ObamaCare, were well-intentioned will defend his patriotism, just as those who take him at his word accept his claims to being a Christian.

On the other hand, those of us who have not had our brains washed, rinsed and blow-dried, do not accept that which is blatantly false. How can someone who has spoken incessantly about America’s sins, apologizing for our history and insulting our allies – going so far as to exile the bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office – be regarded as a patriot?

Does a true patriot treat Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, one of the world’s most distinguished leaders, as if he were one of those crazies who periodically scales the Pennsylvania Avenue fence and tries to crash the White House, while constantly rolling out the red carpet for the likes of Al Sharpton?

One can certainly identify Obama as a socialist. After all, he has insisted that the major failings of the Constitution and the Civil Rights movement were that they didn’t deal with the redistribution of wealth. And God knows he has done everything in his power to correct that historical oversight by taking from the rich and the middle class and giving to the poor, including illegal aliens who have no business even being in America. Theirs are the boots that should never be on the ground; at least not in Texas, Arizona, California or New Mexico.

As for the claims that Obama is a Christian, that strikes me as being even more far-fetched. For openers, he doesn’t attend church, and neither do his wife and kids. When he deigns to attend the annual Prayer Breakfast, he winds up comparing Christian Crusaders of the 12th century to terrorists beheading and burning Christians today. He mentions Christian slave owners, but never refers to the Christian ministers who led the abolitionists or the legion of Christian soldiers who died trying to end slavery, whatever Lincoln’s own motives may have been.

What’s more, he chooses to ignore the fact that the Crusades were in retaliation to Islamic aggression. Instead, he lies about the major role that Muslims played in the creation of the United States. Was he, perchance, referring to the Barbary pirates? I suppose you could give those particular Muslims credit for the initial glorification of the U.S. Marines Corps, the gallant troops that Thomas Jefferson sent forth to wage war against the thieving Arab bastards.

Obama has even lied about the Muslims playing a role in NASA’s space exploration program. The only thing I could come up with is that they provide motivation for Christians and Jews to seek life on other planets as a way to get as far away from these barbaric freaks as is humanly possible.

Even in his personal history, Obama’s only connection to Christianity was as a member of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s racist congregation. This was a church in which sermons were devoted to damning white devils, America, Jews and Israel. This was a church in which Rev. Wright celebrated 9/11, describing it as a case of “chickens coming home to roost,” meaning that America had brought this tragedy down upon itself by her evil ways.

Because it was obvious to me even before he threw his hat in the ring in 2008 that Obama had a Senate voting record that was to the left of Ted Kennedy’s and that, as a member of the Illinois state legislature, had voted to allow doctors who botched abortions to kill the little survivors, I knew he would be a disaster of historical proportions if elected to the White House. It was for that reason that I hoped, as much as I despised her, that Hillary Clinton would defeat him in the primaries.

Unfortunately, millions of blacks trooped out to vote for one of their own, even though, considering that his mother was white and his biological father was an Arab, he was about as black as I am. But, luckily for him, he looked black, which explained why millions of white voters who would normally never have even considered voting for such an unqualified lout, felt compelled to prove they weren’t racists by voting for the guy who could at least pass for black.

And in doing so, they exposed their own racism by ignoring Martin Luther King’s injunction to judge a man by his character and not by the color of his skin.

Bait & Switch

In spite of constantly lying and cheating, liberals always claim to hold title to the moral high ground.

Their instinct is always to pretend to care about things they don’t. For instance, the House Republicans, in an attempt, to prevent Obama’s granting legal status to five million illegal aliens, tied funding for Homeland Security to defunding Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional power grab. Predictably, the Democrats in the Senate said that proved Republicans didn’t care about protecting us from terrorists without even referring to the actual sticking point.

And Mitch McConnell, who is as useless as a human appendix, never bothered making the Democrats explain why they were willing to sacrifice national security for the sake of providing illegal aliens with Social Security numbers and the ability to collect tax refunds for taxes they never paid!

But, thanks to a corrupt media, the liberals are always able to say or do anything they like without having their motives questioned. Years ago, they declared war on the Boy Scouts because the Scouts quite reasonably decided that homosexuals would not be allowed to be Scout leaders. To do otherwise would have doomed the Boy Scouts to losing one inevitable lawsuit after another.

Even a New York Times columnist would have to agree that it made no sense to send gay Scout leaders off into the woods overnight with impressionable 13 and 14-year-olds, but nobody on the Left ever suggested that if gays so yearned for the scouting experiences, they could simply have formed a group of their own to be known as the Gay Scouts of America.

But, then, that would be too simple. In the same way, there would have been nothing easier for gays than to find a baker or florist in town who would have happily supplied cakes and flowers for their weddings. But, instead, they had to hunt down those whose religion condemns homosexuality, and taken them before liberal judges who were only too happy to dole out fines and jail time.

How stupid are liberals? Well, for openers, they wear Che Guevara’s likeness on their shirts, passing him off as a freedom fighter, even though he was Fidel Castro’s chief executioner. Che’s targets were anyone who opposed the Cuban dictator, including union leaders, writers and teachers. Che even boasted that he knew that many who were lined up for the firing squads hadn’t been guilty of anything. The psychopath simply enjoyed having the power over life and death.

Heck, Che even banned the music of the Beatles. You’d have thought that alone would have been enough to turn off liberals, but you would be wrong.

The truth is that once you start listing the things that liberals have been wrong about over the decades, there’s no end in sight.

In the 30s, even after Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians to death for refusing to surrender their farms to the state, and murdered all of his political rivals, American Communists were calling the Soviet Union a workers’ paradise and referring to its blood-thirsty despot as “Uncle Joe.”

When Hitler signed a non-aggression pact with Stalin so that he could concentrate on conquering the rest of Europe, America’s liberals pushed FDR to stay out of the war. But once Hitler turned his attentions eastward and attacked the Soviet Union, the same people insisted that we enter the fray. As uberliberal playwright Lillian Hellman famously announced at a New York cocktail party the day German troops crossed the Soviet border: “We’ve been invaded!”

In the 50s, when the liberals weren’t busy spying for the Soviet Union and sending our atomic bomb secrets to their favorite uncle, they were pushing Truman and Eisenhower to end the Cold War.

By the 1960s, the liberals were insisting that the U.S. unilaterally disarm, confident that the Soviet Union would then follow suit. But, then, liberals always believe that if we only set what they regard as a good example, even the most brutal dictatorships will be moved to do the same. And yet even they should realize from personal experience that if you speak reasonably to your children and even call for a timeout when they misbehave, unless they know that some form of corporal punishment is waiting in the wings, the message rarely sticks.

Those on the Left also believe you help poor people by confiscating wealth from the productive and handing it to them, even though the poor are often in that state because they spurned education and sexual abstinence, got hooked on drugs, and decided that in the great drama of life they would cast themselves as helpless, but demanding, victims.

Inasmuch as there are so many very wealthy liberals, you would think they would at least champion the cause of capitalism. Instead, they promote socialism and communism, although capitalism is the only economic system which doesn’t inevitably morph into a sewer nation boasting gulags, death squads and re-education camps.

Liberals believe that all religions and cultures -- except our own, of course -- are equally exceptional, ignoring the fact that in most important ways, those others are vile, intolerant, oppressive and barbaric.

Furthermore, liberals believe in the sanctity of something they refer to as the international community and the moral authority of such organizations as the League of Nations, although it sat by while Italy invaded Ethiopia, and Germany consumed Czechoslovakia; and the United Nations, which sat idly by while millions were butchered in Rwanda.

Liberals pretend that photo IDs are essential if you wish to buy a beer, board a plane or attend an Obama speech, but evil if they’re required for voting.

Liberals are so stupid, they believe the federal government is a money-making enterprise, pretending that printing and spending money is just the same as earning it. Their thinking is so muddled they don’t even believe there’s a problem with America’s having run up a debt of $18 trillion. Perhaps that’s because they never took the time to count up all the zeros in $18,000,000,000,000.

That number is so huge it means that if it were equally divided between every man, woman and child, in America, each would have to cough up $60,000. But, of course, Obama would see to it that not only would the illegal aliens not have to pay a single red cent, but would receive a check in the mail.

I recently advised people that if they wanted to do something for veterans, instead of donating to the Wounded Warrior Project, which seems to eat up a lot of contributions in salaries and expenses, they should consider Fisher House, which provides free housing for the families of the vets being treated at medical facilities.

Another worthy charity is the Injured Marine Semper Fi Fund, which like Fisher House and the Salvation Army, relies on volunteers and not pricey CEOS, fancy offices and an expensive staff, to perform its good works.

It has now come to my belated attention that dog lovers should stop donating to the Humane Society of the U.S. The group pulls in over $130 million-a-year and doesn’t maintain a single animal shelter. Worse yet, it donates less than one percent of its charitable donations to supporting local shelters.

Its CEO pulls down $400,000-a-year and the staff pulls down $44 million. What’s more, the group recently settled a multi-million dollar racketeering and bribery lawsuit brought against two of its in-house lawyers. It may have had something to do with the $50 million the HSUS has stashed in Caribbean tax shelters over the past two years. It sounds to me as if the only dogs this group is interested in helping are those who have two legs and a numbered account.

So if your concern is with those who have four legs and a tail, I suggest you support your hometown shelters, even if it means forgoing all those little address labels the HSUS sends out with the pictures of adorable dogs and cats.

In conclusion, as a rule of thumb, I would suggest that if a charity is spending a ton of money waging a national TV campaign, they are probably shortchanging the cause to which you assume you’re contributing.

The February drawing was won by Father Richard Aylward of Maryknoll, NY. A copy of "Liberals: America's Termites" is on its way.

©2015 Burt Prelutsky. Comments?


Friday, February 27, 2015

The Buck Stops Way Over There

Harry Truman, who apparently really didn’t wish to be President, but was thrust by FDR’s death into the job, had a sign on his desk that announced “The Buck Stops Here.” It meant that if you had a problem with his administration, you took it up with him, not one of his underlings.

So, if you didn’t like the fact that dropping two atom bombs on Japan brought World War II to a quick and satisfactory conclusion, your problem wasn’t with Secretary of War Henry Stimson or Secretary of State Edward Stettinius, but with the man who ordered them dropped. It was Truman’s way of saying that if you can’t take the heat, stay the hell out of the Oval Office.

In Barack Obama, we have a man who never takes responsibility when something goes wrong, such as ISIS filling the vacuum he left behind in Iraq, but credit for anything that goes right, such as the execution of Osama bin Laden. When he reported the good news to the world, judging by the number of times he said “I,” “me” and “myself,” you would have thought that, like Brian Williams, he had been the first Navy Seal, guns blazing, into bin Laden’s compound.

I will now confess that I am so bourgeois in my taste when it comes to art that I really only like paintings or pictures that have recognizable people in them. Whereas I understand that some people hate it when their friends bring back snapshots from their trips that show themselves standing in front of the Eiffel Tower or the Taj Mahal, in my case, I prefer to see the friends.

That, no doubt, is why I prefer, say, Rembrandt and Norman Rockwell to Picasso and Pollack.

On the other hand, it might explain why I can never recognize embryos in sonograms or archers, scorpions and crabs, in the evening sky.

Moving on, I hope you all understand that nobody holds the Second Amendment in higher regard than I do. But why on earth did Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield think it was a good idea to take Eddie Ray Routh to a gun range and stick a loaded gun in his mitts, especially in light of the fact that during the drive to the range, they exchanged text messages agreeing that Routh was obviously a dangerous loon?

I get it that they were two terrific guys who wanted to reach out to a fellow veteran, one suffering from PTSD, and let him know that he wasn’t alone. But was the zoo closed? Were there no bowling alleys in town? Was taking him for a quiet walk and talk in the countryside out of the question? Would playing a game of gin rummy have been in violation of the macho code?

Long before Routh murdered the two Samaritans, I was confounded by the fact that Andrew Tahmooressi, who wound up spending months in a Mexican jail, and had also been diagnosed with PTSD, had set off on a hunting trip with three loaded guns in his truck.

We are repeatedly told that these victims of battle stress can be set off by loud noises, so don’t their friends and loved ones have a responsibility to keep guns out of their hands the same way they would do everything in their power to protect a child?

Speaking of Eddie Ray Routh, why is insanity a legitimate defense against murder? Whether a person kills you because he wants your money or because he hears voices telling him you’re in league with the devil and are trying to steal his eternal soul, you are still dead as a doornail. To me, that simple fact would trump his motive, no matter what it was.

Speaking of which, the lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are naturally seeking a change of venue, feeling that he might not be able to find an impartial jury in Boston. To my way of thinking, if he didn’t want to be tried in Boston, he and his brother should have set off explosions somewhere else. Preferably, I’d suggest, in Teheran.

In addition, the Sixth Amendment states, among other things, that "...the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed..."

Defense attorneys will insist that it would be impossible to find an impartial jury in the district where a particularly heinous crime has taken place. Well, it may take a tad longer to find 12 people in the specific area who are genuinely unaware of what's been going on around them, but eventually they'll turn up. And inasmuch as 70 million Americans voted to re-elect Barack Obama, I'm betting it won't take long at all.

There are times when liberals say such silly things when trying to defend their sleazy actions, I’m almost willing to give them a pass because I find their excuses so pathetic and so amusing.

For instance, when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and her husband were discovered having used her congressional campaign funds to attend the recent Grammy Awards, Rep. Wasserman-Schultz, head of the DNC, announced she just happened to be in L.A. on a fact-finding mission to learn the issues most important to the music industry. And of course, being a congresswoman in Florida, which isn’t all that far away from Nashville, that would be of utmost concern to her.

I expect that the main fact she carried away that evening was that Kanye West didn’t think that Beck David Campbell, who calls himself just plain Beck, should have accepted a Grammy that West was convinced Beyonce deserved. When West ran on stage to make his objection known, Beck, who looks like a combination of Don Knotts and a used mop, must have thought West was after his milk money.

Proving himself to be one Beck that you can judge by its cover, Mr. Campbell quickly assured Mr. West that he, too, thought Beyonce deserved the award.

Once she realized that there were no Republicans involved in the contretemps, Mrs. Wasserman-Schultz saw no reason to take sides, and went home.

©2015 Burt Prelutsky. Comments?