Monday, August 31, 2009

Burt The Plumber

by Burt Prelutsky

During last year’s presidential campaign, Joe Wurzelbacher raised a lot of hackles in liberal circles when he got Barack Obama to admit he was in favor of the federal government redistributing America’s wealth.

It was a landmark moment. For one thing, it led Helen Jones-Kelley, Director of Ohio’s Department of Job and Family Services, to doing her utmost to make the poor guy’s life miserable, thus conveying the message to Obama’s critics to keep their yaps shut if they knew what was good for them. At the same time, it taught Obama to keep his radical agenda as vague and simple-minded as “hope and change,” leaving it to America’s most ignorant and gullible voters to fill in the blanks any way they liked.

Well, I think it’s high time that we all became plumbers and started plumbing for answers. For instance, wouldn’t it have made more sense if the Democrats really wanted to stimulate the economy, and not just pass a lifetime’s worth of pork at one fell-swoop, to have given the trillion dollars back to those of us who coughed it up in the first place?

I mean, let us say, for the sake of argument, that a hundred million adults are in the U.S. legally and actually pay income taxes. If you divide that number into a trillion dollars, each one would wind up with $10,000. Now you can’t tell me that if every tax-paying adult in America suddenly received a check in that amount, it wouldn’t do more to cure America’s financial woes than paying for Harry Reid’s train or that tunnel that turtles are supposed to start using down in Florida. What’s next? An elevator for elderly alligators?

I would like to ask President Obama why the Trade and Cap bill that will double our energy bills while providing less and less energy for our industries? Why all the sweet talk for our sworn enemies and harsh words for our allies? Why the $250,000 date night in New York, not to mention the pricey sneakers and the $5,000 purse for the missus when most Americans are suffering through a financial malaise? Is it any wonder that a lot of us look at the two of you gadding about and see Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI?

Before I get to my next question, I have a confession to make. Henry Waxman and I have been friends for about 50 years, going back to our days at UCLA. Now it’s true we haven’t seen all that much of each other in the three decades since he went to Washington, and that the last time we spoke, a few years ago, we got into an argument because he said he and some of his colleagues planned to investigate FOX regarding biased news reporting. I told him I had no problem with that so long as they next investigated the NY Times, the Washington Post, the L.A. Times, CNN, MSNBC and the three major networks. From the astonished look he gave me, you might have thought I had suddenly begun speaking Cantonese. It was at that moment that I first became aware that because all left-wingers are in lock-step on every conceivable issue, they actually believe that the mainstream media is totally honest and objective, and not the slightest bit partisan. It was an enlightening, albeit terrifying, insight.

All that being said, the question I would put to Henry is how he could possibly, with a straight face, say the following to Parade magazine: “President Obama recently said to us in a committee meeting that we could all lead better lives if we weren’t in public service; we could make more money, spend more time with our families. But sometimes, he said, you have an opportunity to do things that are important and make life better for millions. That’s why we’re all here.”

The fact of the matter is, the rest of us could lead better lives if those schmoes weren’t in public service. Even calling it “public service” is an exercise in propaganda. It makes it sound as if these weasels are busily washing the feet of lepers like Mother Teresa or housing the poor and crippled in their own homes. These are over-paid egomaniacs who are provided with huge staffs at no cost to themselves, who are forever going off on junkets to exotic locales under the guise of being fact-finding missions, and spend even less time on the job than tenured college professors.

I mean, a joke’s a joke, but how could Obama and Waxman believe for a second that people like Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer, Charles Rangel, John Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, and the idiots on the Black Congressional Caucus could make a better living outside of politics? Half of these people would be trolls living under bridges if they ever lost an election. Who on earth would hire them? There are, after all, only so many circuses in America, and only so many elephants in those circuses, and only so many brooms to go around.

Finally, speaking of trolls, my question to Al Franken would be, in response to his stating at Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing that she is the most qualified Supreme Court nominee in 100 years, who did he have in mind? I checked, and back in 1909, the nine justices were David Brewer, William Day, Melville Fuller, John Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Joseph McKenna, William Moody, Rufus Peckham and Edward White. The only one I had ever heard of was Justice Holmes and it turns out he was a confirmed racist.

If Ms. Sotomayor is the best since then, Franken must be convinced that she is superior to, say, Benjamin Cardozo, William O. Douglas, Felix Frankfurter, Thurgood Marshall, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Earl Warren. Even I, who can’t stand listening to his whiney voice, would certainly enjoy hearing the fatuous junior senator from Minnesota explain that remark.

If, as I suspect, the reason for Franken’s hyperbole is simply because of Sotomayor’s race and gender, the two things that make her so doggone extra special in her own eyes -- at least up until the time she was being grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee -- he shouldn’t have limited her greatness to a paltry hundred years. In fact, it’s almost insulting. After all, inasmuch as she’s the first female Hispanic nominee, he could have said she was the greatest in a billion or even, to use Obama’s favorite number, a trillion years.

Friday, August 28, 2009

The Case Against Mortarboarding

by Burt Prelutsky

I have received a number of e-mails over the years from disgruntled parents griping about the left-wing indoctrination their kids are forced to undergo at colleges and universities all over America. One minute, it seems, the kids are sane, or at least as sane as one can expect of 18-year-olds, and the next thing you know they’re parroting the likes of Ward Churchill, William Ayers and Noam Chomsky, bad-mouthing America and yodeling the praises of such left-wing troglodytes as Hugo Chavez, the Castro brothers and Barack Obama.

I feel their frustration. Even if the little nincompoops can’t do long division or write a coherent sentence, parents feel like child abusers if they don’t pony up the dough to send their kids off for what is laughingly referred to as higher education.

If I were running things, most high school grads would enter trade schools. America will always need nurses, plumbers, carpenters, glaziers and mechanics. What nobody needs is some 21-year-old schnook who’s wasted four years and most of his inheritance majoring in black, Hispanic or lesbian, studies. And, then, to make matters worse, because like the Scarecrow of Oz, they have a sheepskin, they’re actually convinced they’re smarter than their parents.

One of my readers, Penny Alfonso, of Glendale, California, shared a conversation she had with her daughter. “I told her I won’t pay the tuition for any classes that end in the word “studies”. I have also told her that while I have no right to tell her how to think, if she comes home hating America and spewing the lies of the leftists, I will tell her I love her, and that she has the right to believe whatever she wants to believe, but I don’t have to pay for it. In the 20 years of her life, if she’s learned nothing else, she has learned that I am completely serious about this.”

If more parents adopted this attitude, the state of education would improve in a hurry. The lefty professors want to mold young minds, but the administrators just want your money. So use your clout where it counts. Adopt Mrs. Alfonso’s declaration as a Bill of Parental Rights.

Of course, the other thing I would promote is an end to the tenure system. The original idea behind it was to protect professors from being fired because of their unpopular political beliefs, but in 2009, conservatives aren’t hired in the first place, so the only people whose jobs come with a lifetime guarantee are those addlebrained morons, safely ensconced in the Humanities, espousing liberal claptrap.

Somebody recently took me to task for referring to Michael Jackson as a pedophile. This yutz pointed out that Jackson had never been convicted in a court of law, as if that proved anything. The fact remains that the King of Pap had paid out millions of dollars in hush money to keep a case from going to trial. And, by his own admission, he admitted he enjoyed sleeping with young boys. Where I come from, if it waddles, swims and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck.

Whenever people use that court of law argument to make a point, I know they’re desperate. Heck, O.J. Simpson and Al Capone were never convicted of murder, and Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Idi Amin and Kim Jong-il, have never even been convicted of jay-walking.

Something else I always find irksome is when Obama’s liberal groupies, along with a few conservative commentators, deny that the President is a left-wing ideologue. All of his schemes, from gobbling up car companies and banks to nationalizing health care and redistributing wealth, show his true colors. As I say, if it waddles, swims and quacks like a duck, feel free to pop it in the oven and serve it with string beans and sweet potatoes at Christmas.

In fact, while mulling over the man who sits in the Oval Office, I was reminded of a riddle from my childhood. You’d be asked what was black and white and read all over, and the answer was a newspaper. These days, I’m afraid the appropriate answer to what is black and white and red all over is Barack Obama.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Indicting The Usual Suspects

by Burt Prelutsky

Nobody has to tell me things are going from bad to worse in America. The question that preys on my mind is when it was that we began our descent. Some would say it started when Jimmy Carter turned his back on the Shah of Iran, thus providing an impetus for latter-day Islamic terrorism. Others might say it was the first time Bill Clinton dropped his pants in the Oval Office, while still others might contend it began when the Supreme Court determined that the Pursuit of Happiness was a rationale for 80 million abortions on demand.

For all I know, things might have begun sliding the very first time some slack-jawed teenager struck a pose and struck a chord on an imaginary guitar. There was a time, after all, when most American kids were actually given music lessons and learned how to play an actual instrument, and even saved up their allowance to buy sheet music.

Whenever the slide began, in the months since Obama was crowned, we’ve slid faster and further than I would have dreamed possible. Obama keeps huffing and puffing and the federal government just keeps expanding like a gigantic balloon. It’s only a matter of time until it blows up in all our faces.

Not in my wildest nightmares would I have imagined that an American president would travel to countries we’ve bled and died to defend, and apologize for our arrogance. Neither would I have ever expected that the same man who casually dismissed our special relationship with England would curtsy to a Saudi prince; refer to a blood-thirsty Muslim cleric, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as the Supreme Leader; and butter up a Russian tyrant who cut his eye teeth working for the barbaric KGB.

After all that, I wasn’t the least bit surprised when Obama joined Hugo Chavez and the Castro brothers in demanding that Honduras allow dictator wannabe Manuel Zelaya back in the country to resume his assault on democracy.

Obama’s groupies in and out of the media used to cry “Foul!” during the campaign whenever people would question the character of a man whose intimate circle included a corrupt Chicago lobbyist, an unrepentant terrorist, a racist minister and a spouse who announced that America was a mean country. It seems that in the past several months, his circle has grown in size, but unfortunately not in character.

The President’s good friend, Al Gore, who stands to clean up, thanks to the Cap and Trade bill, has long campaigned for the greening of America. How long will it take people to wake up to the fact that his major concern is the greening of Al Gore? For good measure, the greedy oaf recently compared the battle over global warming to the war against the Nazis. And, to think, some folks thought PETA was over the top when they compared a chicken farm to Auschwitz.

Speaking of Nazis and Auschwitz reminds me that I wish Israel, a haven for many of those who survived the concentration camps, would stop referring to portions of their country as settlements. Israel was attacked by its Arab enemies, fought back and won. Part of what the Israelis won was turf. It’s how just about every country on earth wound up having its present dimensions. Referring to the land as settlements makes it sound like they’re only borrowing it until the rightful owners come by and pick it up. You might as well call California, Texas and Arizona settlements. Well, come to think of it, I guess La Raza does.

As hard as it is to accept, there’s no getting around the fact that Al Franken is a U.S. senator. On the upside, just as people used to say that any boy could grow up to be president, now people can say that any comedian who’s smug, obnoxious and not the least bit funny, can grow up to be a senator. That being the case, I guess it’s not too much of a stretch to imagine that Sen. Franken might one day be joined by the likes of Bill Maher and David Letterman.

It is appropriate, though, that Franken represents Minnesota. Its state bird, after all, is the loon.

Before signing off, I found myself wondering the other day why it is, now that Afghanistan is Obama’s war, I don’t hear the Democrats or their lap dogs in the media referring to it as a quagmire, pointing out that the Taliban didn’t attack us on 9/11, and demanding that President Obama announce his exit strategy?

Monday, August 24, 2009

Notes From The Liberal Front

by Burt Prelutsky

The question that’s been preying on my mind is who is best suited to study those strange beings known as liberals. It strikes me that they’d be fit subjects for psychiatrists, who might be in a position to figure out why they revere the people they do -- people such as Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Al Gore and Ted Kennedy -- men who haven’t a single notable accomplishment to their name, aside from either winning elections or eliminating them altogether. Or perhaps it would be more appropriate for biologists to delve into the left-wing organism, and determine how it is possible that creatures without brains could have survived so long in an often hostile environment.

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 Muslims for hanging on 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 advisors should have told him before he shot off his mouth, roughly 40 countries in the world saddled 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?

Of course an even scarier thought is that the president actually knows what $1,000,000,000,000 is, and that by burying this nation in insurmountable debt, he can make the 1,000,000,000 Muslims in the world adore him even more than they do Osama bin Laden.

Friday, August 21, 2009

I’m As Mad As Hell

by Burt Prelutsky

Frankly, I’m beginning to feel a lot like Howard Beale, the character portrayed by Peter Finch in the 1976 release, “Network.” He insisted that people get up right now and go to the window, open it, stick their heads out and yell, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore!”

I’ve always heard that misery loves company. If true, misery in America has more company these days than it knows what do with.

I realize that conservatives have felt this way ever since the Democrats nominated the Chicago crony of Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Rod Blagojevich and the assorted felons at ACORN, to be our president, but why aren’t millions of honest, decent, hard-working Democrats up in arms? I can guarantee that if a Republican president had done half the things that Obama has pulled off in his first half year, most of us on the right would be calling for his head. At the very least, none of us would be kissing his heinie.

Even before grabbing up car companies and banks, he got the ball rolling with a trillion dollar, 1100-page pork-filled stimulus package that had to be passed, he insisted, within a few short hours or America was going to be turned into a pumpkin. Well, without anyone having had time to read anything but the price tag, it was passed into law. Obama then took his own sweet time signing it. In the months since its passage, the unemployment rate has soared, entire states are going belly up and, apparently, nobody seems to know what happened to the money.

Then there’s the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill, which started out in life at a thousand pages, and then had a 300-page amendment tacked on to it in the dead of night. It was as if Dr. Frankenstein, after carefully inspecting his nightmarish creation, decided that what the monster really needed was a second head and a hunchback. Again, nobody had time to read the bill, but that didn’t prevent 219 congressmen, including eight Republicans who scurried out from under a rock just long enough to make certain that Christmas, or perhaps I mean Ramadan, would come early for the President.

As I recall, when he was a candidate, Obama assured us that taxes would be decreased for 95% of all Americans. Inasmuch as the Heritage Foundation estimates that the cap and trade bill will wind up costing the average middle class taxpayer nearly $3,000 in additional energy costs, I guess a tax isn’t a tax if you don’t call it one. Of course Obama and Al Gore and their liberal lackeys don’t mention the jobs that people in the oil and coal industries will lose while we’re busily building windmills. Perhaps those folks who were formerly occupied supplying the wherewithal so that America could continue to be a major industrial nation can be hired to stand around and generate energy by blowing at the windmills.

Maybe what Obama meant when he claimed we’d be paying less in taxes was that we’d all be on the dole before the next election rolled around.

During the campaign, when Obama vowed that, if elected, he would create or save four million jobs, I speculated that he meant that if at some point there were four million Americans who were still working, he could say he’d kept his campaign promise. I swear I meant it as a joke.

Inasmuch as Obama seems to be doing all he can to turn America into a left-wing third world nation, it stands to reason that he was far more perturbed by a military coup in Honduras than by innocent blood being spilled in the streets after a rigged election in Iran.

It’s amazing, if you stop and think about it, that George H.W. Bush lost his bid for re-election because he was goofy enough to say, “Read my lips…no new taxes,” but Obama does his level best to bankrupt America and destroy the middle class, and yet continues to ride nearly as high in the popularity polls as Michael Jackson. Imagine if the man could moon walk.

But, I guess a lot of us who find ourselves going down the financial drain don’t really mind so long as we can watch Prince Obama and his princess holding hands on their $250,000 date night in New York City.

It’s almost enough to make a person pity Bernard Madoff. That poor shmuck got a 150-year prison sentence, and he only screwed Americans out of about 65 billion dollars.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Some Townhalls Are Worse Than Others

by Burt Prelutsky

Recently, I had a very odd experience. No, I didn’t wake up 30 years younger and with a full head of hair. That would have been odd but nice, whereas the experience I actually had was merely bizarre.

Like most bloggers, I write for more than one website. It’s rather like being a syndicated columnist, except that little or no money changes hands. But, as a writer who hopes to influence public opinion, you want to have as many readers as possible.

The strange event took place on a Tuesday. It came in the form of an e-mail from Jonathan Garthwaite, who runs Townhall, a website I’ve contributed to for nearly four years.

The message read: “Dear Burt: As everyone is painfully aware, the economy is forcing companies to make difficult decisions. Townhall.com is no different. We take our commitment to our readers and our bottom line very seriously. Similarly, we are constantly reassessing our editorial lineup. We end up making tough decisions that aren’t always fun.

“I know it won’t please you to know that we’ve decided to discontinue carrying your column. It was not a decision make (sic) carelessly. Picking between colleagues, friends and talented writers is never easy.

“Thank you very much for sharing your insights with Townhall.com readers over the years. Sincerely, Jonathan.”

I must confess I was shocked to receive an electronic pink slip after all this time. I sent Garthwaite an e-mail asking which other writers were being made to walk the plank, but he said he wasn’t free to share that information. I did get him to agree to post a notice on the following Friday, lest readers simply assumed that I had died.

The reason I’m sharing this with you isn’t because I regard this as a case of blatant censorship. This isn’t the federal government silencing me. Townhall has every right to post or not post any writer for any reason. I don’t believe I or anyone else has the inalienable right to have his articles disseminated. There are many more important issues than whether or not a blog decides to cut me loose. Okay, I exaggerate. There aren’t many things more important, but there are, I’m almost certain, several that rival it.

That said, I fear that there are dark forces at play. You see, although there was the reference in Garthwaite’s e-mail to the weak economy and the bottom line, there had been no prior discussion between Townhall and me about money. At least not for quite a while. When I first started writing for them back in 2005, Townhall was paying me $35 for an article. But I was writing faster than they were posting, so they agreed to run two-a-week, and I agreed to lower the price to $20 each. And so it has remained.

But if they were cutting me loose over money, wouldn’t it have made more sense for them to suggest we revert to one-a-week or even ask me if I would write for less, even for free? Isn’t that usually how these things work?

Therefore, I think reasonable people can agree that money makes a very questionable motive in all this. And if I were popular enough with the readers to warrant Townhall’s posting two of my articles each and every week for all this time, lack of popularity wouldn’t appear to be the problem.

Now, understand, I am not the sort of person who readily subscribes to conspiracies. If anything, I tend to pooh-pooh them because I don’t believe two people can keep a secret, and I’m dead certain that three or more can’t. However, something about the timing couldn’t fail to grab my attention in much the same way that a mackerel lying under your pillow will certainly grab yours.

The piece that Townhall had posted on Monday of that week was an attack on our sworn enemies, which I had titled “The Straight Poop on Islam,” but which Townhall, in a fit of political correctness verging on insanity, had re-named “The Straight Talk on Islam.”

Perhaps it was sheer coincidence that the very next day, I was let go. Maybe the one thing had absolutely nothing to do with the other. Perhaps somewhere along the line, Cause and Effect had gone to Reno for a divorce and I just hadn’t heard about it.

But at least now you understand why I can’t help wondering if the folks at Townhall got an offer they couldn’t refuse -- perhaps a call from someone threatening to send them a ticking CAIR package.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Obama Could Work For The New York Times

by Burt Prelutsky

Back in 2008, New York Times correspondent David S. Rohde, along with Afghan reporter Taki Luden, were abducted in Pakistan by the Taliban. Because they felt it might adversely affect hostage rescue efforts, the Times requested a news black-out. The Associated Press and other news agencies respected the request and only broke the story recently, after Rohde and Luden had scaled a wall and made their escape. It would be nothing other than a story with a happy ending, except that the Times has time and again ignored the government’s requests that it not report the specific ways in which we were combating Islamic terrorists.

It’s enlightening to know that so far as the NY Times is concerned, censorship is not only moral, but mandatory, when the life of one of its employees might be at risk, but is not to be condoned when the lives of thousands of soldiers and civilians might hang in the balance.

However, when it comes to hypocrisy, the Times isn’t alone. For instance, when George W. Bush fired eight U.S. attorneys, the outrage voiced by the media would have had you believe that he’d personally ripped the Constitution into a thousand tiny pieces. Compare that to the silence that greeted Obama’s dismissal of Inspector General Gerald Walpin. It had been Walpin’s responsibility to oversee government-subsidized volunteer programs, such as AmeriCorps. Walpin’s team of investigators discovered serious irregularities at St. Hope, a California non-profit run by former NBA star Kevin Johnson. It seems that an $850,000 grant, which was supposed to go towards tutoring Sacramento students and supporting theater and art programs, instead was used to pad staff salaries, meddle in a local school board election and pay AmeriCorps members to perform personal services for Mr. Johnson, including washing his car.

When Walpin recommended that Johnson, an assistant and St. Hope, itself, be cut off from federal funds, he was fired by the president. Did I mention that Mr. Johnson is a friend and was an early supporter of Barack Obama? I guess you can take the man out of Chicago, but you can’t take Chicago out of the man. Not even when he’s sitting in the Oval Office.

Some of us have been puzzled by the personal animosity that Obama has shown towards those, like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, who oppose his radical left-wing agenda. Clearly, the man is so narcissistic and thin-skinned that he can’t conceal his contempt for anyone who doesn’t openly adore him. I don’t entirely blame him, though. Like a little brat who is never disciplined by his parents when he misbehaves, Obama is the inevitable result of a media that has mollycoddled him ever since he came on the scene.

Frankly, I can’t figure out what it is that people find admirable about the president. I, myself, was profoundly upset that he couldn’t even muster up a few inspirational words for those brave souls in Tehran who were standing up to the murderous mullahs and their hand puppet, Ahmadinejad. But, on further reflection, it occurred to me that maybe he just didn’t want Americans to get any funny ideas about freedom and liberty.

In fact, I found myself wondering if the spark that ignited the demonstrations in Iran wasn’t supplied by the example of democracy taking hold in nearby Iraq, in much the same way that the French revolution was ignited by our own.

Some people have suggested that the reason Obama kept silent during the popular uprising is because he is a Muslim. The truth is, I have no idea how much he was influenced by his early years in Indonesia or by the wish to please his absentee Islamic father. I figure it’s bad enough that he calls himself a Christian, but attended a racist church for his entire adult life, spending a thousand Sundays listening to a creepy minister heap curses on Jews, white Christians and America. While I don’t know what the man believes in his heart, I do know that he would have heard the exact same message if he’d been kneeling on a prayer mat for all those years in a Baghdad mosque.

It appears to me that Obama is bent on destroying our economy, our military and our missile defense system; while, at the same time, he promotes socialized medicine, hires a racist attorney general and nominates a Supreme Court nominee who parrots the party line of La Raza. This is a man who brags about nonexistent Muslim accomplishments, while taking every opportunity to denigrate America’s character, her sacrifices and her awe-inspiring achievements.

Ronald Reagan saw America as a shining city upon a hill. President Obama sees it as a slum that needs to be torn down as part of a massive reconstruction project.

If there were ever a site like Mt. Rushmore, dedicated not to heroic leaders, but rather to those who were unfaithful to their nation’s highest ideals, Barack Hussein Obama could take his rightful place alongside the likes of Vidkun Quisling, Henri Petain and Benedict Arnold.

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Trying To Make Sense Of Nonsense

by Burt Prelutsky

In case you were off on a different planet and hadn’t heard the news, Michael Jackson died. It was a tragedy. Not that this piece of human rubbish had died, but that the media, including Fox News, carried on as if it was a major loss to mankind.

This was, one, a man who had tried to turn himself, through weird chemicals and plastic surgery, into a white version of a black man and a male version of Diana Ross. Then, for good measure, he was a pedophile and a loon. But I guess if a person can moon walk, nothing else really matters. Frankly, though, his talent in dancing backwards didn’t seem like such a big deal. Unlike Ginger Rogers, who, as they used to say, could do everything Fred Astaire did, but do it backwards and in high heels, Jackson only managed to do it wearing a lady’s glove.

His death did strike home for me, though, the weekend after he died. I discovered that the $100,000-a-month mansion in which he died was just behind the home where I regularly play tennis. You would not believe the crowds that swarmed around the place, as if it was a sacred shrine. The scene would have warmed the hearts of pedophiles everywhere.

Jackson was sold to the world as Peter Pan, the little tyke who just never grew up. But, if Peter Pan had even faintly resembled this androgynous freak, Mr. and Mrs. Darling would have been brought up on charges for allowing their kids to accompany him to Never Never Land.

In a way, the entire sideshow was reminiscent of the grief displayed when Princess Di passed away in the distinguished company of an Arab playboy. But this was even worse because Lady Di was not a villainess, and these heartbroken shmoes were mainly Americans, not Brits, and could therefore vote in our elections.

Speaking of voting, there were only two surprises in the House vote for the insane Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill. The first surprise was that, in spite of Obama’s arm-twisting, 44 Democrats had a sufficient amount of nerve and integrity to oppose its passage. The other surprise was that eight Republicans voted for it. If even just four of them hadn’t sold out America along with their principles, it would have been voted down. The eight, for those of you keeping a list until the next election, were John McHugh (New York), Dave Reichart (Washington), Mark Kirk (Illinois), Mike Castle (Delaware), Mary Bono Mack (California) and, from New Jersey, Frank LoBiondo, Chris Smith and Leonard Lance.

One can’t help wondering what Obama offered to get the three Jerseyites on board. Perhaps it was the promise not to let the Justice Department go after the Mafia. All that we know for certain is that for those eight turncoats, the ® after their name stands for Rat.

Frankly, I’m not sure if I’m just being guilty of wishful thinking, but I have a hunch that while Obama is doing his best to destroy America and capitalism, the Lemming in Chief is leading the party faithful blindly off the cliff.

No matter how personally popular the President might be, and I am beginning to doubt those particular numbers, the same certainly can’t be said for his colleagues and cronies. The truth is, Pelosi and Reid are about as popular as mumps and chicken pox.

Even if the NY Times and Chris Matthews still get a tingle up their leg when they look at Obama, most Americans hate socialized medicine and cap and trade; they hate the idea of the feds being in bed with the unions and nationalizing banks and car companies; they hate the idea of dismantling our missile defense system at the very same time that Iran and North Korea are threatening us; they particularly hate the idea of our president going abroad and bad-mouthing America every chance he gets. Even Bill Clinton stopped doing that once he was past draft age and had gotten a haircut.

Unless I’m very much mistaken, those Democrats who are going along in order to get along are likely to discover next year that the voters are going to tell them in no uncertain words to move along.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Liberals Don't Need No Stinkin' Principles

by Burt Prelutsky

I often find myself thinking that if liberals didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.

For instance, consider the uproar from the left when Don Imus opened his silly yap about the black women on the Rutgers basketball team. Now compare that to their response when David Letterman made his smarmy cracks about Sarah Palin and the governor’s 14-year-old daughter. The liberals immediately sprang to his defense, pointing out that Letterman is nothing more than a TV personality and is therefore free to make offensive jokes without fear of censure. So what do they think Don Imus is? The secretary of state?

Or consider how choleric those on the left become any time that Dick Cheney defends the former administration. Well, if Obama and his cronies didn’t constantly attack Bush and Cheney and their policies, the chances are the ex-vice president wouldn’t feel compelled to set the record straight. Furthermore, Jimmy Carter never stopped bashing George Bush during the eight years he was the president, and yet nobody on the left ever suggested he shut up. On the contrary, he was hailed at the 2004 Democratic convention, and even had the honor of being seated next to the patron saint of left-wingers, Michael Moore. Speaking of Carter, how is it that he, who is always volunteering to monitor elections anywhere on earth, including the Westminster Dog Show, wasn’t in Iran, making sure that Ahmadinejad got 110% of the vote?

Liberals never got tired of telling us how much George Bush was despised by those in other countries, although, for the record, I kept asking the loons to name those countries, but could never prompt a response. I assume even they were too embarrassed to mention Iran, North Korea, China, Yemen and Russia. Instead, they kept insisting that America should be more like Europe. Inasmuch as conservative politicians are winning elections in England and all over the continent these days, the people finally waking up to the unmitigated disaster socialism is, I could now join in the chorus. But, of course, so far as leftists are concerned, I’d now be singing a solo.

I have to wonder, though, how much non-Muslim nations trust our current president. It’s one thing, after all, to travel to other countries and talk a lot of diplomatic flapdoodle, but when Barack Obama takes every opportunity to tell the world how awful we are -- or at least how awful we were until he got elected -- it has to make people wonder if, like his missus, he had never been proud of America prior to his canonization by the media.

It doesn’t make things a lot better when he makes obviously foolish remarks, such as insisting that the U.S. is one of the largest Muslim nations, and that Muslims played a major role in the creation of our republic.

That one really had me reeling, so I went back to my trusty old history book and looked it up and, sure enough, he was correct. Right there in black and white, I discovered that among the most influential of the Founding Fathers were Abdullah Washington, Mahmoud Adams and Osama bin Jefferson.

Saturday, August 8, 2009

Notes From The Liberal Front

by Burt Prelutsky

The question that’s been preying on my mind is who is best suited to study those strange beings known as liberals. It strikes me that they’d be fit subjects for psychiatrists, who might be in a position to figure out why they revere the people they do -- people such as Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Al Gore and Ted Kennedy -- men who haven’t a single notable accomplishment to their name, aside from either winning elections or eliminating them altogether. Or perhaps it would be more appropriate for biologists to delve into the left-wing organism, and determine how it is possible that creatures without brains could have survived so long in an often hostile environment.

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 Muslims 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 advisors should have told him before he shot off his mouth, roughly 40 countries in the world saddled 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?

Of course an even scarier thought is that the president actually knows what $1,000,000,000,000 is, and that by burying this nation in insurmountable debt, he can make the 1,000,000,000 Muslims in the world adore him even more than they do Osama bin Laden.

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Gathering My Thoughts

by Burt Prelutsky

Conservative pundits keep lecturing us about treating Barack Obama with respect instead of following the example of those nasty liberals who, not satisfied with trashing George W. Bush for eight long years, are still at it. As if we were a bunch of brats misbehaving in church, we are constantly admonished to always respect the office. To which I say, hooey!

To me, that makes about as much sense as saying I should respect the Nobel Prize because, after all, over the years it has gone to the distinguished likes of Albert Einstein, Elie Wiesel, Enrico Fermi, George Bernard Shaw, Rudyard Kipling, John Steinbeck and Milton Friedman. On the other hand, not only didn’t Jonas Salk, Maurice Hillman or Mark Twain, win one, but Jimmy Carter, Le Duc Tho, Al Gore and Yasser Arafat, did. Frankly, I’m a bit surprised that Che Guevara was never an honoree.
So far as I’m concerned, respecting the office of the president has nothing to do with loving America and everything to do with the man occupying the White House. The way I see it, it makes no sense to respect a man, whom I believe is single-handedly destroying the country, simply because he won a beauty contest last November.

Furthermore, I’m getting tired of hearing what a magnificent orator he is. Every time he starts spouting his hypocritical platitudes in that radio announcer’s voice I am reminded of an Academy Award show I watched several years ago. Sir Laurence Olivier was being celebrated for his lengthy career in motion pictures. As he began to speak, I thought either he or I had taken leave of our senses. I couldn’t make head or tail of anything he said as he rumbled on for three or four incoherent minutes and, yet, the camera kept cutting away to an Oscar-winning actor in the front row who was totally in awe, obviously entranced by Olivier’s every high-sounding syllable. Moses on the mountaintop couldn’t have been more in thrall when God handed over the tablets. At a later date, when asked about it, Sir Laurence confessed that he had blanked out on his prepared remarks. To make up for the brain freeze, he essentially wound up speaking balderdash, but in much the same fashion that in an earlier time he had delivered Hamlet’s soliloquy. So it was that the fellow in the front row was responding to theatricality and cadence, not content, much as Obama’s besotted groupies do these days.

Speaking of speaking, a reader sent me an e-mail in which she happened to mention how difficult it is to get her young daughters to talk to their grandmother, even to call and thank the old woman when she sends them gifts. It’s a common enough problem, and one I generally attribute to the way kids tend to be raised these days, when even common courtesy seems to be asking too much of them. But for once, for some inexplicable reason, it occurred to me to look at it from the kids’ point of view. While I don’t personally know these particular people, I have noticed that there is generally a lack of communication not only between kids and their parents, but between youngsters and other adults. To a certain extent, at least, I’ve decided that grown-ups are to blame.

What takes place when uncles, aunts and grandparents, get together with their young relatives? Nearly always, the adults ask the kids what’s new, how do they like their teachers and what sort of grades they’re getting. It’s a wonder the kids can stay awake long enough to say, “I’m okay. The teacher’s okay. My grades are okay.” If you really want an honest answer -- and why would you? -- you’d be better off handcuffing them to a chair and working them over with a rubber hose. Even then, the answers would probably be lies, but at least you’d have a good time.

If you have the slightest desire to talk to these young savages, spill your guts. Tell them all the stupid, embarrassing and dangerous, things you did when you were their age, decades before you turned into an old fogy pretending you were interested in their grade point average. At their age, chances are you probably weren’t all that interested in your own.

As I sit here, the Democrats, like the witches in “King Lear,” are stirring a kettle full of disgusting gruel they’re calling universal health care. Naturally, they are being egged on by the evil little imps at AARP, a group nearly as left-wing and despicable as the ACLU.

Leave it to liberals to promote a program which will cost trillions of tax dollars, and which has already proven to be a disaster in England, Cuba and Canada. And please don’t believe for a second that when he needs serious medical attention, Michael Moore seeks it in any of those three countries. If you think otherwise, you are probably the sort of person who believes that Sen. Charles Schumer will wait patiently to have his number called if he ever needs to be treated for a life-threatening disease or that Rep. Barney will sit twiddling his thumbs in some crowded clinic if he ever decides to have his over-active salivary gland removed.

We keep hearing about people who don’t have medical insurance. What we don’t hear is how many of those people are in the U.S. illegally or how many people simply prefer spending their discretionary income on booze, drugs, porn and electronic toys. I don’t know a lot of young people who budget for health care, but, then, I also don’t ask them what kind of grades they got in school.

What truly confounds me is the blind faith that liberals have in their government, at least during those years when left-wingers are running the show in Washington. What, I constantly ask myself, is wrong with these people that they’re dying to have the feds in charge of their health care? After all, these are the same bureaucratic dunderheads who mailed out at least 10,000 of those $250 stimulus checks to dead people. Just in case you were wondering, it didn’t stimulate even one of them back to life.

However, maybe it wasn’t a $2.5 million goof, after all. Maybe it was simply Obama’s way of rewarding 10,000 of Chicago’s most loyal voters for past services to the party.

Monday, August 3, 2009

Responding To Ms. Bonner And Mr. Powell

by Burt Prelutsky

In recent days, my attention was grabbed by former Secretary of State Colin Powell and Yelena Bonner, the widow of Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov.

The one I applaud is the former Mrs. Sakharov. In a speech delivered in Norway, she pointed out that the Palestinians are still being referred to as refugees even though only a tiny percentage of them have ever even set foot in Israel. According to my dictionary, and I assume Ms. Bonner’s, a refugee is someone who has fled from violence and wars. How on earth can the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who left Israel in order to avoid being killed or injured by the invading Arab forces in 1948, 61 long years ago, be regarded as refugees?

It reminds me of American blacks who, 45 years after passage of the Civil Rights Act, continue to benefit from various programs such as Affirmative Action and Operation Head Start. Is there no such thing as a statute of limitations, no point at which commonsense kicks in and people are permitted to say, “Enough is enough,” without being branded a villain?

Ms. Bonner pointed out that while every do-gooder group in the world seems to be concerned about the comfort level of Islamic terrorists at Gitmo, armed combatants who aren’t even covered by the Geneva Conventions because they don’t wear uniforms, carry a flag or even fight for a specific nation, nobody outside of Israel seems the least bit concerned about Gilad Schalit, the Israeli soldier who was abducted three years ago by Hamas. She’s right, of course. Our politicians don’t care, the U.N. doesn’t care, and God knows all those left-wing ACLU lawyers who are lined up eager to defend Islamic terrorists, up to and including Osama bin Laden, should he ever be captured, sure don’t give a damn.

That brings me to Colin Powell. For reasons I can’t begin to imagine, he has taken umbrage at Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh for suggesting he’s not a Republican. Frankly, I’m shocked that he continues to insist he is one. I, for one, began doubting it years ago, when, as Secretary of State, he publicly opposed George Bush over the invasion of Iraq. When, in 2008, he timed his endorsement of Barack Obama to do the most damage to John McCain’s campaign, I naturally assumed Mr. Powell had finally gotten around to changing his registration. After all, if you can’t support McCain, who was about as close to being a Democrat as a GOP candidate could be, what Republican could Mr. Powell get behind? Abe Lincoln?

I keep asking myself why, after supporting the most left-wing presidential candidate since Henry Wallace, the man would insist on calling himself a Republican. Frankly, I’m stumped, but, human nature being what it is, it must obviously work to his benefit.

Well, at my age, I need every possible edge I can get. Therefore, I am now announcing that I’m a Democrat. Understand, I am opposed to the bail-outs and to the monstrous debt Obama is running up. I am opposed to the feds taking over car companies, banks and lending institutions, and determining executive salaries. I am opposed to Barack Obama’s cavalier attitude towards Iran’s nuclear program; his kowtowing to Arab princes, ACORN and the UAW; his activities on behalf of Harry Reid’s re-election campaign; his endorsement of a paramilitary organization that appears to be patterned on earlier models created by Hitler and Mussolini; and to his search for a “compassionate” Supreme Court justice. I am also opposed to his bringing Cuban-style health care to the U.S., and I am opposed to the mind-boggling inflation that his profligate spending will inevitably bring to bear on all taxpayers, not just those super rich Americans he kept targeting, Che Guevara fashion, during his campaign.

What’s more, I’m not too crazy about a guy who names the family dog after his own initials. I am curious, though, considering that Bo was a gift from Ted Kennedy, whether he drinks from a bowl or a bottle.

Finally, at the risk of sounding boastful, I’d like to say that I’m the best kind of Democrat. I’m the kind who votes for Republicans.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

A Little Straight Talk

by Burt Prelutsky

Those on the Left who have trashed George Bush for this entire decade claim they weren’t being rude or unpatriotic, but were simply talking truth to power. That has a nice ring to it, so I think I’ll give it a shot.

Today, I’ll talk truth to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, potential justice of the Supreme Court Sonia Sotomayor, Pope Benedict XVI and President Barack Obama. That’s a more powerful lineup than the 1927 New York Yankees, if I do say so myself.

I have almost begun to feel sorry for Nancy Pelosi. After all, when you get past the facelifts and the Botox injections, the designer suits and the large private jet, you have an aging grandmother who, in a perfect world, would be home playing with the grandkids and letting the wrinkles show. Instead, she’s constantly on TV, telling lies and looking like a small animal staring at oncoming headlights. I think that instead of babbling about what she didn’t know and when she didn’t know it, she should claim the Twinkie defense just like that other two-bit San Francisco politician, Dan White. In case you don’t recall, when he went on trial for killing Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone, White’s lawyers, in making their case for diminished capacity, claimed he had been suffering from depression, and that his depression had been made more severe by a junk food diet that included a lot of Twinkies. I can see Rep. Pelosi taking that defense out of moth balls, dusting it off and blaming all of her recent insanity on cheap confections. Heck, forget the pastries; she’d only need to mention having to sit through meetings with the likes of Harry Reid, Rahm Emanuel or Arlen Specter, and even I would lessen her sentence.

Secretary Gates insists that Guantanamo has to be shut down because its very name is a source of embarrassment for America throughout the world. Well, I happen to think the world is an embarrassment and is therefore in no position to judge us. But the solution in any case is not to shut down Gitmo, especially when it will cost $80 million to do so and when nobody has the slightest idea where to move the terrorists, but to simply change the name of the facility. We could call it any number of things, ranging from Paradise to Fantasy Island. Or we could take our lead from the pop singer, Prince, and simply change it to the Prison Formerly Known as Guantanamo.

I don’t know Sonia Sotomayor personally and, so, I don’t dislike her any more than I do any of the other liberal judges on Barack Obama’s short list of Supreme Court nominees. The difference is that I saw a video of Judge Sotomayor addressing what I assume was a group of law students. After telling them that the courts are where policy is made, she gave a little laugh and acknowledged that she probably shouldn’t have said that when she knew she was being taped. But she did say it, and in doing so, she spoke for every left-wing judge in America. The fact that she also believes that her experience as a Latina will cause her to rule differently from other people isn’t a cause for celebration. It’s the Constitution that matters, not whether her parents were Puerto Rican, Chinese or Hungarian. Here in California, judges have over-ruled the vote of the people on capital punishment, illegal immigrants and, before this May 26th, same-sex marriage. In Washington, the Supremes expanded eminent domain in a way that would have impressed even the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Castro, and decided that when the Founding Fathers included “the pursuit of Happiness” in the Declaration of Independence, what they had in mind were millions and millions of abortions.

The bone I have to pick with the Pope involves his cockeyed sense of priorities. Recently, I read a gruesome account of Catholic schools in Ireland. Even Charles Dickens could not have dreamed up such a nightmare. Apparently, for decades, the priests and nuns running these schools based their teaching philosophy on the precepts laid down by the Nazis who ran the concentration camps. With disgusting regularity, they beat and sexually molested the children, and suffered no consequences.
At least not here on earth.

Now, I have nothing against the Catholic Church and, unlike some Jews, I don’t condemn it for ancient sins. However, a while back, when Pope John II was visiting America, he decided to use his influence to save the life of a person who had killed three people and was about to be executed in Missouri. Being the Pope, he got Governor Carnahan to commute Darrell Mease’s sentence to life without parole. At the time, I found myself thinking that if the Pope was going to go to bat for a cold-blooded killer, the taxpayers in Missouri shouldn’t be left holding the bag; instead, Pope John should have taken him back to the Vatican and let the Church put him up for the next 40 or 50 years.

Now we have Pope Benedict XVI traveling to the Middle East, spewing out his predictable platitudes, while managing to suggest a moral equivalency between Israel and those dedicated to Israel’s destruction. As usual, his words fell on deaf ears. But, then, why should Jews or Muslims really care what he has to say, especially when he refuses to speak out in the one area where his authority is unquestioned? After all, a couple of thousand years ago, Jesus said, “Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.” Jesus used “suffer” in the sense of “permit” or “allow,” but in modern times, far too many priests have perverted it to mean actual suffering. It shouldn’t be asking too much of the Pope that he excoriate and ex-communicate those priests here in America and in Ireland who have brutalized countless Catholic children for their own base pleasure and amusement.

As for President Obama, I would like to see him quit chastising George Bush while at the same time carrying forth his policies. Understand, I approve of those policies, which have helped safeguard America for nearly eight years. But, saying one thing while doing another may fool some of the people some of the time, and fool Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann all of the time, but it doesn’t make Obama look superior to the ex-president; it merely makes him look petty and deceitful.

Furthermore, I would suggest that Barack Obama quit telling us that everything he says and does garners us great respect in the world community. The majority of that community is made up of lunatics and gangsters, and most Americans don’t want to gain the love and admiration of North Korea, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, China, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkey, Yemen or Indonesia. It would be nice, though, if they were at least a little bit afraid of us.

If I had the president’s ear, I would beg him not to be a sucker, and not to think for a second that international villains will succumb to his much-publicized charm. They will applaud his speeches and return his smiles, and they’ll happily stab him in the back. I would try to make him realize that the world’s political leaders are just like Chicago’s, except that some of them have nuclear bombs at their disposal.

It’s easy, I would tell the president, to mouth all the usual cliches and be lauded by the various hand puppets and hand maidens at MSNBC and the New York Times, but being politically correct is, unfortunately, not the same thing as being correct politically.