Thursday, December 30, 2010

Rorschaching the Left

by Burt Prelutsky

Back in 1921, Hermann Rorschach developed a set of cards to be used in analyzing possible personality disorders in psychological patients. Theoretically, at least, if a person “saw” certain images in the inkblots, he was considered normal. Otherwise, if, for instance, where most people spotted a butterfly, he saw Leon Trotsky getting bashed with an axe, he stood a good chance of being hatched with the other boobies.

Speaking of boobies, I have often wondered if one liberal has ever said to another liberal: “I know what the playbook says our position is, but do you actually know why we’re opposed to law-abiding citizens owning guns?” or “Why are all the people on our side, like Joy Behar, Rosie O’Donnell, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chris Matthews, Anthony Weiner, Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann and Jimmy Carter, so damn obnoxious?” or “What makes us think that George Bush is stupider than John Kerry, Al Gore and Joe Biden? Those guys seem really, really dumb to me.” or “Why are Republican First Ladies so much classier than ours?” or “Why are multi-millionaires like the Obamas, the Clintons, Dianne Feinstein, Jay Rockefeller, Charles Schumer, Barbara Boxer and Michael Bloomberg, always declaring war on the wealthy? And if they think the rich aren’t paying enough in taxes, why don’t they set a good example and pay more of their own? Instead, guys like Charley Rangel and Tim Geithner don’t believe in paying any.”

College students are known for experimenting with drugs, booze and sex. Wouldn’t it be nice, not to mention novel, if once in a while they experimented with thinking for themselves, instead of parroting the claptrap espoused by leftwing professors who are as besotted with the likes of Noam Chomsky, Saul Alinsky and Che Guevara, as teenage girls are with the Jonas brothers?

When you hear such dunderheads as Michael Moore, Bill Maher and Nora Ephron, get together to deride George Bush, Sarah Palin and Tea Party members, as knuckle-dragging Neanderthals, you realize that the liberal elite have brought the caste system over from India. Instead of the untouchables, they’ve decided that those on the lowest rung of society are those who disagree with them.

It’s fascinating how in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, leftists continue to regard themselves as the highest form of intelligent life. For instance, they persist in believing that even though private companies do a better job of delivering the mail, it makes perfect sense to continue subsidizing the postal service to the tune of billions of dollars a year.

Their faith in government goes far beyond the zealotry of religious converts. Like the rest of us, liberals will grumble about nobody ever answering the phone at the DMV; they will grouse about congressional ethics committees winking at corruption; they’ll gripe about a trillion dollars being blown on “shovel-ready” jobs; sometimes they’ll even acknowledge that it’s not right that those working for the government get more in salary, pension and medical benefits, than the folks in the private sector who have to support them with their taxes. But in spite of all that, liberals remain convinced that Big Brother knows best.

At least that’s what they believe so long as Big Brother has a (D) after his name. They never seem to fathom that any freedom and liberty they surrender to the Democrats will eventually wind up in the hands of the Republicans. Apparently because they are as stupid as a bag of rocks, that obvious fact consistently eludes them.

The latest example of liberal insanity is the program they came up with to keep airliners safe. I have no way of knowing if Janet Napolitano dreamt it up after dining on ice cream and pickles, but it seems like the sort of spooky brainstorm that the Penguin, the Joker or Osama bin Laden, might have devised in one of their more diabolical moments.

Knowing full well that liberals would rather see an American city obliterated by a nuclear device -- at least so long as it was a city in the Midwest or the South -- than run the risk of embarrassing or annoying a Muslim, it was inevitable that they’d find a new way to embarrass and piss off the rest of us. As if it wasn’t bad enough that they made it national policy to confiscate shampoo bottles, tiny nail clippers and our “I Hate the TSA” buttons, the Obama administration decided to double down by giving airline passengers the dubious choice of being sexually assaulted or being zapped with radiation.

As a result of the new policy, fewer people are flying. But airport parking lots continue to be jam-packed. That’s because a great many people, very sad and lonely people, are showing up, insisting they be patted down by security personnel on the outside chance that they may have inadvertently stuck a bomb in their underpants.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, December 27, 2010

The Lamest Duck of All

by Burt Prelutsky

The question, boys and girls, is: Just how dumb do you have to be in order to be a Republican politician?

I actually believed those ignoramuses had learned their lesson after the elections of 2006 and 2008. I was convinced that they’d seen the error of their ways, that cozying up to the likes of Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold could only lead to both liberals and conservatives holding them in utter contempt.

I was certain that the recent mid-term elections would drive home the point that most voters were experiencing buyers remorse after four years of Pelosi and Reid, and two years of Barack Obama. But, as the lame duck session proved, you can never go wrong underestimating the intelligence of Republican office holders. From this vantage point, it appeared that at the very time when Obama was on the ropes and being chastised by the most left-wing elements of his party, the Republicans decided to buck him up.

Instead of waiting for the newly elected congress to deal with the Bush tax cuts by forcing Obama to either keep them at their current level for everyone or to let them rise on the middle class, something even he wouldn’t have done, the Republicans elected to extend unemployment insurance by 13 months, thus providing Obama with his latest budget-busting stimulus program. When I was young, you got six months of benefits. Now you can get three years. At this rate, soon only natural-born suckers will bother working at all.

Then, in spite of those members of the military who are actually fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan being opposed to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the GOP used the most cockeyed poll in history as an excuse to go along with the liberals.

Finally, in order to make Christmas, 2010, the best one ever for Obama, a fair number of Republican lunkheads voted for the START treaty, which simultaneously served to fill Vladimir Putin’s head with visions of sugar plum fairies.

The first question that comes to mind is why we’re still making nuclear treaties with the Russians. Rumor has it the Cold War is over. Inasmuch as the preamble to the treaty suggests that we might be denied the right to pursue missile defense systems, which was the only reason Russia negotiated the treaty in the first place, what was the big rush to make it the first treaty ever enacted during a lame duck session?

Charles Krauthammer refers to Obama as the Comeback Kid, basing that conclusion on the fact that he rebounded so miraculously after the shellacking the Democrats received in November. Krauthammer is right, but the comeback is entirely due to the Republicans taking a collective dive. Talk about snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory!

I think that those folks who assumed that, like Clinton, who was forced to move to the center after the 1994 mid-term elections, Obama would become more moderate over the next two years, might be whistling in the dark. With the Republicans acting as his enabler, there might not be any reason at all for Obama to kick his addiction to socialist policies.

I can only hope that the new congressional Republicans will be up to the challenge facing them not only from the progressives on the left, but from the gutless biddies in their own party. If they falter, I’m confident that Tea Party patriots will be around to remind them what happens to RINOs. As any number of them learned during the last election, there’s another elephant graveyard besides the one in Africa.

In the meantime, like Santa Claus, I’m keeping my own list of who’s been naughty and who’s been nice. I don’t want to forget the names of those who filled the President’s Christmas stocking with so many goodies.

Just to help you along, the 13 “Republicans” who helped provide Barack Obama and Harry Reid with the super majority required to pass START, they were Corker and Alexander from Tennessee, Snowe and Collins from Maine, Brown (Massachusetts), Bennett (Utah), Murkowski (Alaska), Voinovich (Ohio), Cochran (Mississippi), Gregg (New Hampshire), Isakson (Georgia), Johanns ( Nebraska) and Lugar, the pride of Indiana. The reason that the vote was 71-26 when there are 100 members of the Senate was because three Republicans, Bond (Missouri), Bunning (Kentucky) and Brownback (Kansas), all decided to play hooky because they apparently had more important things to do than vote on a major arms treaty.

I’m sure that Obama’s only regret is that he didn’t ask Santa for Cap & Trade, card checks and the opportunity to make Ramadan a national holiday, while he was at it.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Trials and Errors

by Burt Prelutsky

Radio talk show host Dennis Prager posed the following question: What’s the difference between the voters in California and the passengers on the Titanic? The obvious answer was that the poor souls on the doomed ship didn’t vote to hit the iceberg.

That’s a very funny line, unless you happen to be a conservative living in California.

The problem with liberals is that they never learn from their mistakes. What’s worse is that they never stop making mistakes. Instead of changing their awful ways, the only lesson they derive from their endless failures is to double their efforts. Thus, when they find themselves in a hole, instead of climbing out, they merely dig faster.

When you consider their recent setbacks, you’d think liberals would finally conclude they don’t know squat about decision-making. For instance, Obama makes a highly publicized trip to Asia and comes back with nothing to show for it except an aversion to shrimp and another 20,000 frequent flier miles.

He got back in time to see a New York jury acquit Muslim terrorist Ahmed Ghailani on 284 charges. Inasmuch as Obama and Holder had pretty much guaranteed that Ghailani would be found guilty of everything, including jaywalking and neglecting to separate his trash, this left their decision to try him in a civilian court looking not only naïve, but down right criminal.

During the same time frame, after spending two years and millions of dollars, a congressional ethics committee found Charles Rangel guilty on all counts. His punishment was cruel and but not unusual; he had to sit and listen to his equally corrupt colleagues pretend they existed on a higher moral plane. It made Charley cry. It made me cringe.

I have always found it odd that the folks of West Virginia keep electing Jay Rockefeller to the U.S. Senate. I can see electing him once, hoping he’ll use his own money to bail out the state. But once that didn’t happen, there’s no explaining such bizarre behavior.

Recently, Rockefeller urged the FCC to knock Fox and MSNBC off the air. Aside from the fact that this senator didn’t know that cable stations don’t come under the purview of the FCC, we once again have a liberal politician exhibiting his fascistic tendencies by voicing his displeasure with that pesky 1st amendment.

The mere idea that Rockefeller would attempt to pass off this bit of verbal excretion as balanced by adding MSNBC as an after-thought shows how inept the left is even when it comes to propaganda. Is anyone really supposed to believe that this limousine lib is offended by the likes of Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews or that MSNBC comes anywhere close to having the power and influence of Fox?

What’s more, whereas conservatives are rarely invited to even make an appearance on MSNBC, the following liberals not only show up regularly on Fox, but most of them are on salary: Geraldo Rivera, Lis Wiehl, Greta Van Susteren, Juan Williams, Al Sharpton, Jon Stewart, Alan Colmes, Marc Lamont Hill, Bob Beckel, Leslie Marshall, Lanny Davis, Doug Schoen, Ellis Henican, Chris Wallace, George Stephanopoulos, Mara Liasson and Scott Fenstermaker.

What more do you think Fox could do to satisfy John D. Rockefeller’s great-grandson? Perhaps cancel Glenn Beck and replace him with “South American Idol,” starring that delightful Latin merrymaker, Hugo Chavez?

Finally, when I consider the amount of time and taxpayer money squandered on the trials of tax cheat Charley Rangel and Al Qaeda operative Ahmed Ghailani, I’m reminded once again of the dangers inherent in people being tried by a jury of their peers.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, December 20, 2010

Lamentations From LA-LA Land

by Burt Prelutsky

I continue to receive condolences from friends around the country. They’re worried about how I’m holding up after the mid-term elections in my home state. While they’ve been celebrating the results in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Florida and so many other places, they realize that what took place in California has to depress any true conservative.

The truth is that the only thing that keeps the disappointment from overwhelming me is that the election results were so predictable. This is California, after all, so why would I, or anyone other than Dick Morris, be shocked that the liberals ran the board?

Let’s face it -- if California were one person instead of nearly 40 million, that poor soul would be institutionalized for his own good.

Things are so bad out here that the one question that plagued me during the entire campaign season wasn’t, as it was with so many others, why Meg Whitman would blow $140 million running for governor, but why she’d even want the job. The money, after all, was inconsequential. Did anyone really worry whether Ms. Whitmore had a billion dollars set aside for a rainy day or whether she’d have to struggle by with a mere $860 million?

But why, when nearly every single member of the state legislature is a leftwing loon, would she imagine that a Republican governor could get anything done? I finally decided she wanted to be governor simply because she wanted to be governor, so that one day, if someone called her “ma’am,” she’d have been able to say, “Would you please call me Governor? I spent a lot of moolah to get that title.”

While I’m sure that most people are aware that Jerry Brown is once again our governor, they may not know that he is the answer to both of the following questions: One, who was the youngest person ever elected governor of California, and, two, who was the oldest person?

They may also be unaware that our newly elected lieutenant governor is Gavin Newsome. His victory, like that of Brown and Boxer, was never in doubt. After all, as mayor of San Francisco, he had pulled off the liberal trifecta. He had given his official blessing to same-sex marriages, he had made San Francisco a sanctuary city for illegal aliens and he had once been involved in a nasty sex scandal involving him and the wife of his best friend/campaign manager.

I say, keep an eye on that one. Newsome’s a comer. With his track record, it’s written in the stars that the Democrats will some day run him for president.

That brings us back to Jerry Brown. He is now 72. When he was first elected governor, he was 37. Being a liberal, it’s no surprise that his politics haven’t evolved the least little bit over the course of 35 years. You know the old saying: If a man isn’t a liberal at 20, he has no heart; if he isn’t a conservative at 40, he has no brain; and if he’s still a liberal at 72, it’s a safe bet he holds public office in New York, Massachusetts or California.

The wisdom and seasoning that normally come with marriage, children and holding a job in the private sector, was side-stepped by Jerry Brown, who didn’t get around to tying the knot until he was 68 and who has rarely spent more than a few days over the past half century when he wasn’t passing himself off as a public servant. Come to think of it, it’s not all that different with academicians who never leave a college campus from the time they’re 18 until they keel over in a lecture hall, while informing their young charges that Washington and Jefferson were villains and Che Guevara and Mao Tse-tung were heroes.

Even when Jerry Brown was first elected governor, back in the mid-70s, California was hardly ideal. It was, after all, the nation’s capital when it came to pot-smoking, wife-swapping and crackpot religious cults. But at least we still had pretty decent schools, a thriving economy, and once in a while we managed to elect Republicans.

Because the weather was great and the natural environment, which included mountains, deserts, forests and hundreds of miles of magnificent coastline, even non-believers were known to call it God’s country.

These days, as it plunges ever deeper in debt, God might very well be facing a foreclosure notice.

So, when well-meaning friends ask me how it is conceivable that the people of California would continue electing the very same creeps who created the monumental mess in the first place, all I can do is shrug and say, “Our weather is balmy, but our voters are balmier.”

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, December 16, 2010


by Burt Prelutsky

It’s easy to figure out why the various dictatorships in the Middle East have made a scapegoat of Israel. It allows the various imams and sheiks to keep their oppressed masses focused on a common enemy, lest they awaken and realize that it’s not the Jews who keep the men poor and powerless and keep the women ignorant and oppressed.

Trying to figure out why government leaders, universities and individuals, in so-called civilized nations choose to side with Arabs and Muslims, who not only out-number Israel’s Jewish population 300,000-1, but who represent the antithesis of everything Americans and Europeans allegedly hold dear is the real mystery.

A visitor from another planet would see on one side a people, Israelis, who are educated and accomplished, who believe in freedom of speech, religion and assembly, who defend a free press and who subscribe to the full equality of the sexes.

On the other side, he would see people who, in the 21st century, think, live and behave no differently than their ancestors did 1300 years ago. They stone to death adulterers, they behead their enemies, they perform female mutilations as part of their religion, they make martyrs of those who suicide-bomb school buses and pizza parlors, they rain missiles down on civilians and, proving that they nevertheless have a droll sense of humor, they refer to their religion as one of peace.

If you asked the alien which group a free and democratic people would favor, he would assume it was a trick question. When told that the majority of people in the western world favored the latter group, he would assume it was a trick answer.

His next order of business would be to get back to his space ship and get away from these lunatics as fast as he could.

The question as to why America’s leaders, academicians and young people, choose to hate Israelis, why they continue to believe the worst of them even when the photos and news stories purporting to show their villainy are proven to be clumsy attempts at propaganda, can only be explained by a deep-rooted anti-Semitism.

When Americans, who have experienced not only 9/11, but scores of other brutalities at the hands of Israel’s enemies over the past 30 years, continue siding with those same enemies, it’s impossible to explain except as rampant anti-Semitism.

When a nation that is rooted in Judeo-Christian values, whose Constitution and Declaration of Independence were based on those values, sides with those who despise liberty and freedom, the contradiction cannot be explained except as an anti-Semitism that is bred in the bone. And isn’t it odd that the very same people who go around insisting that “separation of church and state” actually exists in the Constitution have no problem at all defending Muslim theocracies?

No matter how many trains are blown up in Spain, no matter how many riots and murders are committed in France or England, Russia, Germany or Holland, the anti-Semites of Europe inevitably excuse the actual perpetrators, while holding the Jews accountable.

Perhaps if God made an appearance and announced: “When I made them my chosen people, I did not choose for them to be sacrificed to the barbarians,” the world would shape up.

Short of that, my money is on the barbarians.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, December 13, 2010

My Year-End Report

by Burt Prelutsky

There are those who still can’t believe that while the voters in most of the other states were belatedly coming to their senses, out here in California we were electing or re-electing the likes of Barbara Boxer, Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsome, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Brad Sherman and Henry Waxman. They weren’t even involved in close elections. In fact, the results were about as surprising as an Ethiopian winning a marathon.

Back when I was a kid, people were already calling this the land of fruits and nuts. Over the years, things have only gotten fruitier and nuttier. In fact, you won’t go wrong if you just think of California as one huge Mission Pak.

On weekends, when the usual talk show hosts are off the air, I often tune in to NPR. Recently, I was listening to Garrison Keillor’s “A Prairie Home Companion.” For those unfamiliar with the format, it’s an hour-long mix of music -- including country, blues and gospel -- and comedy. On this particular show, Keillor used his Guy Noir character, a private eye in “a city that knows how to keep its secrets,” to do 10 minutes of dumb jokes on the theme of George W. Bush’s alleged stupidity.

Even on NPR, you would think they’d give it a rest after all this time. I guess it’s safe to assume that even if President Bush used his free time to cure cancer, most of the pointy-heads on the left would still be taking him to task over the way he pronounces “nuclear.”

A while back, the brilliant Thomas Sowell observed, “Much of the social history of the western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good.” It’s certainly an apt description of the Carter and Obama administrations. My only quibble is that I would go back at least five decades.

Knowing how embarrassed I am, as a Jew, knowing that 75% of Jews will vote for absolutely any Democrat on the ballot, I wonder about the shame that a black conservative such as Sowell and Walter Williams must experience knowing that over 90% of their fellow blacks will vote for the party that helped destroy the fabric of the black family and continues to treat them like aborigines who are unable to cope with modern civilization. The truth of the matter is that I treat my dog with more dignity and respect than the Democrats treat black Americans.

Sometimes, I think that if there weren’t black people, liberals would have had to invent them.

Thanks to the mid-term election results, things are now looking so bleak for the liberals that I fully expect some of the Democrats in Congress to start demanding that Obama come up with a legitimate birth certificate.

Dick Morris, who is right about as often as a broken clock, has suggested that Hillary Clinton might take on Obama in the 2012 primaries if the economy continues to be lousy and if his approval numbers continue to plunge. As a conservative, I’d love to see that cat fight. But I don’t believe that, as ambitious as she is, she would commit political suicide just to make me happy. After all, can you imagine black voters trooping out to elect the white woman responsible for making Obama a one-term president?

Speaking of Obama, am I the only one who thinks he’d be well-advised to seek psychiatric help? I mean, here’s a guy who in the wake of a massive repudiation of his policies by the American voters, insisted that his only failing was in not fully explaining the beauty of ObamaCare. He said this in spite of having delivered, by actual count, 238 speeches on the subject!

I swear, those fellows who go around with their hand stuck in their shirt, claiming to be Napoleon Bonaparte, have a tighter grip on reality than this mug.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Surviving Earthquakes and Political Correctness

by Burt Prelutsky

There are still Americans around who could have stood their ground, shoulder-to-shoulder, with this nation’s founders at Concord and Valley Forge. You find them fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and you’ll see them showing up at Tea Party events. But, too many of us have become timid, terrified of offending, more fearful than school children of being called names by liberals. Somewhere along the way, we have become the land of the not so free and the home of the not so brave.

Rather than risk being accused of racial insensitivity, we stand silently by while public funds are used to build footbaths for Muslims. At the same time, we allow craven politicians to banish Christmas trees from city property and permit cowardly school boards to call “Christmas vacation” anything but Christmas vacation. And a happy Winter Solstice to you and yours!

We anesthetize ourselves with football games and American Idol while our public schools deify Islam, assigning kids to adopt Muslim names and wear Islamic garb as part of class projects, while liberal secularists pretend that the 1st Amendment makes America a religion-free zone.

Thanks to nothing but cowardice masquerading as racial tolerance, we turn a blind eye to a 70% illegitimate birth rate among blacks and a 50% dropout rate among black high school kids, and pretend that these numbers aren’t a blemish on the nation and justification for racial shame.

Furthermore, when race hustlers such as Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters, Charley Rangel and Al Sharpton, blame black poverty on white Americans, rather than on the lack of initiative and education that permeates the black community, far too many of us sit quietly and accept their insults and scorn like a bunch of sheep.

When black ministers sell their pulpits to Democrats during presidential election campaigns, we don’t make liberals explain why, suddenly, they’re not yammering about “separation of church and state” or why “reverend” so often seems to be the honorific that black racists and con men employ as camouflage.

Speaking of courage, I recently dismissed earthquakes in what might have appeared to be cavalier fashion. I’m neither that brave nor that oblivious. It’s just that major earthquakes, even here in San Andreas fault country, are quite rare.

The scariest thing about them is that, unlike hurricanes and cyclones, they don’t warn you they’re coming. Instead, like obnoxious neighbors and relatives, they just suddenly show up on your doorstep.

Having grown up in Southern California, I’ve been hearing about the mythical “Big One” for most of my life. Frankly, I’d hate to think they could come any bigger than the Northridge earthquake, whose epicenter was a scant two miles due west of our house. To best describe the sensation for those of you who have thus far been spared, imagine you’re in a dollhouse, minding your own business, sipping tea from a tiny teacup or asleep in a tiny bed, when suddenly an insane monster picks up the dollhouse and begins shaking it up and down for what seems like several hours.

After surviving these experiences, I am invariably left with two questions. The first is: What exactly do seismologists do between earthquakes? We know that in the aftermath, they show up on TV and let us know that the quake measured a 4.8 or 5.3 or 6.7 on the old seismograph at Cal Tech. But inasmuch as these so-called experts are worse than my dog at predicting the darn things, why are they drawing a weekly salary?

The other question will, I hope, go unanswered in my lifetime: When the Big One finally comes along, will California be left looking like one massive pile of rubble or will the earth lift up like a huge cookie sheet and slide everything into the Pacific?

If it’s the latter, I sure hope that the U.S. Congress isn’t in session at the time, because I’d want the entire California contingent along for the ride. That’s what I’d call an act of God.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, December 6, 2010

Trust Liberals At Your Own Peril

by Burt Prelutsky

I wonder why we still make office holders swear to defend the Constitution when, more often than not, they’re the very ones from whom it needs protection. Come to think of it, if anyone condemned our senators and congressmen for ignoring the Constitution, they could, with some justification, point at several members of the Supreme Court and say, “If they can ignore it, why can’t we?”

How much longer will we go on pretending that election days are anything but an excuse for liberals to make a mockery of the process? After all, every time there is an election that’s close, as was the case in Patty Murray’s first run for the Senate and in Al Franken’s race against Norm Coleman, the Democrats suddenly begin discovering uncounted ballots in cellars, attics, the trunks of their cars and the baby’s playpen. You would think that with union thugs, ACORN and the New Black Panther Party, at their beck and call, they wouldn’t have to stoop to such unseemly tactics.

What I find particularly disgusting is that the Democrats will happily stretch these elections out for as long as it takes to steal them, but they make dead certain that ballots cast by the members of our military in war zones never seem to arrive in time to be counted.

I heard recently that Julian Assange, the brains behind Wikileaks, the entity responsible for releasing thousands of classified documents, has hired a number of bodyguards to ensure his personal safety. Too bad that our soldiers and the more cooperative citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan, whose lives are now in increased jeopardy thanks to the leaks, can’t do the same. Actually, calling this self-important lout the brains behind the outfit is far too kind. He more closely resembles the gall bladder, the appendix or the lower colon.

Recently, I read that Muslims have murdered over 40,000 innocent people since 9/11. Which is why those liberals who are so eager to differentiate between so-called good Muslims and bad ones, but make no such distinction when referring to conservatives, Christians or Israelis, genuinely mystify me.

In spite of having financed our participation in World War I, the federal government, as of the late 1920s, somehow managed to get by with a 3% income tax rate. These days, your state’s income tax, alone, is likely to dwarf that figure. The question we should all ask ourselves is whether the federal government, a loathsome creature that is all stomach and no brain, has made America a better country over the past eight decades.

Finally, of all the leftists I abhor, I’d have to say that George Soros is at or near the top of the list. It’s not just because he is starting to look like Helen Thomas, either, although that certainly doesn’t help.

Every time I hear of some new despicable group that Soros is funding, I find myself wondering how much longer this spawn of Satan can keep it up. He is, after all, 80 years old. But it occurs to me that somewhere along the way, somebody must have said, “You know, George, you can’t take it with you when you go.” And then and there, the son of a bitch decided he’s not going!

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Liberals Are Very Bad People

by Burt Prelutsky

I realize that good manners dictate that we shouldn’t generalize about a large group of people. Some would insist that’s the case even if that particular group enjoys nothing better than condemning others -- be they Republicans, Tea Party members, the Boy Scouts or evangelical Christians -- as fascists, racists, Astroturfers and bigots.

I’ll leave it to other conservatives to play the civility game. There’s no way I’ll play in a game where my opponents not only make up the rules as they go along, but mark the cards and deal from the bottom of the deck.

For instance, Juan Williams got fired from NPR, not because he is one of the dullest men on the face of the earth, but because, according to his bosses, he’d suggested that people wearing Muslim garb at the airport made him nervous. NPR insisted that he crossed the line and made him an abomination in their eyes. Well, I must say that is one very elusive line because Nina Totenberg once wished aloud that a blood transfusion would give Sen. Jesse Helms AIDS or, if not him, one of his grandchildren!

So the same vermin who get up in arms if someone dares to connect Barack Obama to William Ayers, and start hollering about McCarthy-like guilt by association, have no problem with wishing the worst on a child whose only sin is being associated with his or her grandfather.

Ms. Totenberg is of course still drawing a salary at NPR.

Liberals go into a frenzy every Columbus Day, insisting that the day the great explorer sighted America was one of the darkest days in recorded history. They see the white man as the destroyer of paradise.

The fact is there were only a few million Indians on all of what is now the United States. We are now a nation of 305 million and there is still a lot of empty space between our major cities. Were the Indians supposed to keep everyone out for all eternity?

The idea that all the Indians lived peacefully, at one with nature, is a load of hooey generated by white historians with an axe to grind and by the sort of Indian activists who have a collective hissy fit over sports teams being called the Braves, the Indians and the Chiefs.

There were peaceful tribes, but there were others who pretty much concentrated on murder, scalping and cannibalizing, members of other tribes. It was not the white man who introduced genocide to North America.

Speaking of tribes, I always wonder if these liberals regard the African continent as the Garden of Eden. While it’s true that whites took slaves, diamonds and natural resources out of Africa, it’s also true that Africans were involved in the slave trade long before Columbus set sail, and, what’s more, they still are, a century and a half after slavery was abolished in America.

The European colonizing nations weren’t always the kindest of caretakers, but I would venture that most black Africans have it even worse under the current black despots. But don’t hold your breath waiting for liberals to utter a negative word about black villains when it is so much safer and politically correct, to attack conservatives, Christians and Israel.

It is mainly liberals who are the simpletons who took up global warming as a cause and made a god of Al Gore, ignoring the fact that Gore was making millions of dollars off the hoax. You would think that left-wingers, especially the many atheists in their ranks, would question a god who not only made a fortune out of his holy mission, but refused to debate the issue and only spoke to true believers. And how is it that the same people who so eagerly point out the big homes, the fancy jewelry and all the other signs of religious hypocrisy for which televangelists are noted, aren’t the least bit skeptical of Mr. Gore? Apparently if a televangelist like Gore talks about the weather, instead of the hereafter, liberals not only don’t denounce him as a fraud, they give him the left-wing trifecta: an Emmy, an Oscar and the Nobel Peace Prize.

Liberals pay no attention to the fact that when a few people actually noticed that the earth and the oceans were cooling, Gore and his pet “scientists” quickly began referring to “climate change” and eventually to “global climate disruption.” It didn’t matter to them if things were heating up or cooling down; all that really mattered was that they had a cause and could use it as a way to butt their way into everybody’s business.

Now we have those lousy light bulbs to contend with. Not only do they not provide decent illumination, the ugly little things contain mercury! I would have thought that these idiots who spend half their lives separating paper and plastic in their trash barrels would have had second thoughts about foisting on us a product that enclosed mercury inside a piece of fragile glass. But these morons are shameless. What’s next? Baby blankets made of asbestos?

Most liberals are zealots. That’s why the idiots glommed onto a slogan that was as insipid and unspecific as “Hope and Change.” Even “A Chicken in Every Pot” told you what you might expect if you voted for Herbert Hoover. But one needn’t be too specific with zealots. As Obama understood, you merely have to toss out a line and the annoying lunkheads, all of whom hope to change something, will fill in the blanks.

The worst thing about zealots is that they’re all terribly anxious to make the world a better place, but they never think to start with themselves.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, November 29, 2010

How to Survive Obama’s Economy

by Burt Prelutsky

Ever since the campaigns began earlier this year, Democrats, desperate to save their political hides, have been dragging up silly stuff that their opponents allegedly did during their college and even their high school days. Frankly, I’m surprised that conservative candidates haven’t been accused of causing mischief in their nursery school sandboxes.

I can certainly understand why liberals would prefer to have us concentrating on stupid pranks and childish follies than on ObamaCare, a 9.6 unemployment rate and a trillion dollars blown on shovel-ready jobs that existed only on Obama’s teleprompter.

One of the reasons I go to movies as rarely as I do is because I no longer have a reviewer I can totally rely on. Years ago, there was a fellow writing for a local paper named Dick Williams. What made him indispensable was that he was always wrong in his judgments, although, to be fair, he would have said the same about me. In any case, if he panned a movie, it was sure to be one I’d enjoy; if he raved about a movie, I learned to avoid it like the plague. It’s now that way with me and Obama. No matter the issue, if he’s for it, I know it stinks. It’s as if he’s reading my mind and then basing his agenda on no other criteria except to tick me off. Judging by the polls, I’m glad to see I’m not alone in being ticked.

Heaven knows we’ve had other mediocre men in the Oval Office, but I’m pretty certain we’ve never had another who was so contemptuous of our nation. Whether it’s because of his family background, his education or his unfortunate choice of mentors, it’s as if he views America through the wrong end of a telescope. Instead of a great, good and generous country, he sees something small and distant, hardly worth his time and certainly undeserving of his respect and devotion. Ask him what he likes most about America and I suspect his honest answer would be our golf courses.

One of Obama’s most glaring deficiencies is in the area of economics. He apparently believes he can keep throwing money to his base, which consists of unions, minorities and the callow young, and never have to pay the piper. In spite of all the hype about his intellect, he really has a second-rate mind. He fails to grasp the simple fact that the federal government doesn’t make money; it merely prints the stuff.

But because, unlike the great pretender in the White House, I put my country above partisan politics, I have come up with a couple of ways that Washington can start to pay its own way.

First off, when schools want to raise money, they often stage carnivals and, invariably, one of the major attractions is the dunking booth. For a buck or two, you get to toss three balls at a target. If you hit it, the boy’s vice principal or one of the phys ed teachers is flipped off a platform and dropped into a tank of cold water. Now imagine if Barney Frank, Henry Waxman or Nancy Pelosi, were perched on that platform. The line of customers would stretch all the way back to Kansas. Not only would it make a dent in the national deficit, but it would do wonders for the nation’s morale.

Another guaranteed moneymaker I’ve come up with combines something people hate with something they love. The first of these is paying their income taxes. The other is a lottery. With the present system, everybody is paying as little as he can get away with, trying to deduct everything from a pack of chewing gum to a trip to Cancun. But what if we tied April 15th to a lottery with first prize being, say, 20 times whatever you paid in taxes, second place being 10 times the amount, third place being five times the total, and with, say, 50 honorable mentions where you’d get your money back, plus a steak dinner? It would sure beat the heck out of that Publishers Clearinghouse Sweepstakes with all those annoying little stickers you have to track down midst all the magazine ads.

Overnight, most people -- Americans being the inveterate and optimistic gamblers they are -- would be overpaying their taxes on the chance of increasing their prize money.

Now do you see why Tim Geithner should be handing the Treasury job over to me?

Finally, a friend of mine was recently relating the problems he was having with his young daughters, and it occurred to me why dog owners have it so much better than parents: Dogs never become teenagers. They simply go from being adorable little puppies to being our faithful companions.

That led me to an equally dazzling insight: Once liberals become teenagers, they remain teenagers even if they live to be 95! Once you grasp this simple truth everything about leftist politics becomes perfectly, and frighteningly, clear.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, November 25, 2010

The World's Oldest Profession

by Burt Prelutsky

It was amusing to watch the desperate Democrats trying to turn foreign donations to the electoral process into a major issue. Voters would have to be even dopier than they are to be overly concerned with chump change from foreign donors going to the Chamber of Commerce when China holds the mortgage on America.

The funniest moment came when Bob Schieffer, on Face the Nation, asked White House hatchet man David Axelrod if he had any proof that the Chamber was actually using foreign funds to help elect business-friendly candidates. Axelrod replied, “Do you have any evidence that it isn’t?” The notion that people are guilty until proven innocent strikes at the core of American jurisprudence, but desperate times clearly call for desperate measures.

In the case of Axelrod’s boss, it meant that he would tell the New York Times that he misspoke (about a thousand times) when he announced that the trillion dollar stimulus bill would lead to millions of shovel-ready jobs. Of course Obama had no idea when he made that claim that those shovels would eventually be used to help bury his administration and the Congressional stooges who voted for the pork-filled bill.

Getting back to Axelrod and his rebuttal to Shieffer, I haven’t heard anything quite so insipid since I was in grammar school and every insult was countered with either “I’m rubber, you’re glue, and whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you” or the equally dazzling “I know you are, but what am I?” At least, Mr. Axelrod can be assured that if his present gig doesn’t work out, he can always go on tour as the world’s tallest six-year-old.

To be fair about it, there are still a lot of people out there who think Obama, Pelosi and Reid -- otherwise known as the axis of evil -- are doing a bang-up job. Most of those people are those blacks who give their ears to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and their votes to the Democrats; college students who have never had to hold down a job or pay for their own beer or income taxes; and union members, who have all the attributes of sheep except for providing us with wool and lamb chops.

Unless you are a student of history or are very old, you would have no way of knowing that once upon a time unions served an honorable purpose. These days, however, they are as necessary as an appendix, except, of course, to the DNC, which depends on them for campaign funds and “volunteers.” On the chance that you are one of those simpletons who continue to hold unions in high regard, please defend the fact that after spending millions of dollars campaigning for ObamaCare for the rest of us, the unions then turned around and demanded waivers for themselves.

Many people contend that when electing a president, it is better to go with a candidate who has been a governor, not a senator. The argument is that someone who’s been a governor has the necessary executive experience, that he has to have actually overseen a variety of departments and has had to work with a budget. Senators, on the other hand, oversee nothing but a staff of gofers and sycophants.

When you see an ex-senator like Barack Obama thrashing around in the Oval Office, it is easy to see the wisdom in such a position, especially when you recall that Ronald Reagan was a former governor. But if you then remind yourself that Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton were also former governors, you can only conclude that the only safe rule is to never elect Democrats. People you wouldn’t trust around heavy machinery or sharp tools should never be trusted to run America. The only place they’ll run it is into the ground.

Every four years, people whose candidate has just lost the presidential election start demanding that the Electoral College be abolished. But whereas a good argument can be made for the College, no such case can be made for lame duck sessions. There is no good reason why incumbents who have lost their re-election bids in early November continue to hold office until January 1st.

Perhaps in the old days, when it took a long time for people to get from one place to another, an argument could have been made. But now, when people can fly from the west coast to Washington, D.C., in a few hours, there is no good reason why losing senators and House members can’t be expected to vacate their offices immediately. It doesn’t take all that long to pack up the pictures on the wall, and they can line up their lobbying jobs on their own time.

The idea that people who have been cut loose by the voters can continue making policy and passing legislation for the better part of two months is shameful. God knows most of them do a lousy enough job of it when they’ve actually won elections. Allowing them to continue after losing is just asking for trouble.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, November 22, 2010

John Kennedy Would Be a Conservative Today

by Burt Prelutsky

I harbor no doubts that Kennedy would have joined me here on the right if he had lived. Liberals will read that sentence and conclude that if it’s true, it’s only because he would be 93 years old, and they would attribute it to dementia. But Kennedy, unlike, say, Hubert Humphrey wasn’t a knee-jerk left-winger. He was anti-Communist, he favored a strong military and he believed in lower taxes.

Kennedy, in arguing for lower taxes, observed that a rising tide lifts all boats. Of course if you mention rising tides to liberals, they all panic, assuming it’s that darn global warming melting the icebergs, and, like a flock of Chicken Littles, they begin to feel the ocean lapping at their ankles.

Unlike the Democrats today, Kennedy never pretended he was poor or even middle class; he let us know he was upper crust. And if you doubted it for a second, he’d put Jackie on display with her very expensive designer fashions. Today, kazillionaire politicians like Boxer, Feinstein, Bloomberg, Kerry, Clinton, and even a schmuck named Rockefeller, want us to believe they’re just a bunch of regular folks who carry their lunch in a paper bag and shop at WalMart.

Speaking of rich people, I saw a list recently that listed the dead people who had made the most money during the past year. Michael Jackson pulled down $250 million; Elvis Presley, $60 million; Charles (“Peanuts”) Shultz, $33 million; and Stieg Larsson, the Swedish novelist, $15 million. I assume the only thing that kept Harry Reid off the list was that he took in less than $15 million.

But it’s not just the very wealthy libs that Kennedy would despise. He would also be embarrassed by a horse’s patootie named Jim Moran, who, while running for Congress in Virginia, opined that he didn’t regard military duty as a public service. The reason he said such a stupid thing was because his opponent, Patrick Murray, a retired colonel, had served 24 years in the U.S. Army. If Col. Murray had not had a military background, I’m pretty sure Moran would have chided him for having spent his time working with Virginia charities and officiating at PTA meetings when he should have been defending his country. I suspect we all have a pretty good idea what Jack Kennedy, Navy veteran of World War II, would have said about a punk like Moran.

While I have no way of being certain, I am confident that Kennedy would have shared my low opinion of the community organizer who now sits in the chair he once occupied in the Oval Office. For openers, Kennedy was an athlete who, even with a bad back, knew how to throw a spiral pass. He would have blanched at the sight of Obama throwing out the first pitch at the All Star Game. One can almost hear Kennedy turn to brother Bobby, chuckle, and say, “He throws just like Jackie.”

But, most of all, Kennedy would have been disgusted by the race and class warfare that Obama promotes. I believe Kennedy would have viewed the Obama administration as one long act of revenge and retribution against white Americans.

Just recently, Obama, addressing a rally of leftist lunkheads, said, “We are driving and Republicans can come along, but they have to sit in the back of the car.”

The middle class, he adds, is sitting up front with him. Does that mean that he doesn’t believe there are any Republicans in the middle class? Well, considering the unemployment rate, I’m sure there are a lot fewer than there were before he took office, but surely there must be some.

Also, would a white politician, even a white Democrat, get away with telling a group of Americans they have to sit in the back of the car? Doesn’t that remind people of the bad old days when a certain group of Americans had to sit in the back of the bus?

It also seems ironic that with Obama driving the car, it’s like he’s chauffeuring us Republicans. Not exactly the image he was aiming for. On top of that, if he’s up front and driving and we conservatives are in the back, that leaves the Democrats in what is commonly known as the suicide seat.

Furthermore, Obama shows his true colors when he attacks Arizona, a state with relatively few blacks, and calls on other nations to join him in condemning it for human rights violations; and when he directs his attorney general not to prosecute cases in which blacks intimidate white voters; and when he says that the problem with the Constitution and even the Civil Rights Movement was that they didn’t deal with the redistribution of wealth; and when he continues to misquote the Pledge of Allegiance and the Declaration of Independence, so as not to mention “under God” or “our Creator.”

Isn’t it the least bit odd that he wants to go to war with Arizona, and yet join with Ahmadinejad in a chorus of “Kumbaya”? I’m almost positive that John Kennedy would have thought so. In fact, if he’d lived to see this day, I am confident he would have said, “This jerk is even a worse president than Teddy would have been.”

Which leaves us with just one last question: (a) Is Obama simply incompetent or does he really hate America? (b) Is he a Socialist? (c) Is he a racist? (d) Is he an arrogant nincompoop? (e) All of the above?

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Lawyers, Liars & Other Lowlifes

by Burt Prelutsky

As I’m sure you’re all aware, Gloria Allred, the preeminent media whore and left-wing dirty trickster, has recently garnered the spotlight by trying to scuttle Meg Whitman’s chances of defeating Jerry Brown in California’s gubernatorial race.

Ms. Allred, who may actually be brought up on ethics charges by the California Bar for placing her client in legal jeopardy by exposing her as an illegal alien guilty of perjury and forging official documents, has long carried on like the worst sort of used car salesman. For good measure, Allred shows her true colors by referring to her client not as Ms. Diaz, but as Nicky. When is the last time that you heard an attorney call a client by his or her first name, unless the client was Madonna or Cher?

The things I know about Ms. Allred are not the sort of things she includes in her resume. Some years ago, for instance, Allred, who regards herself as a gallant feminist who has carved out a career fighting alleged male sexism, hosted a party for a group of women she was then heading up, at Chippendale’s, the male strip club. When word got out, a number of her most ardent supporters condemned her as a hypocrite.

On another occasion, she was one of the lawyers my then wife hired to handle our divorce. One morning, while we were waiting to enter the courtroom, Allred and a male associate walked over to the bench where my wife and her 12-year-old daughter were seated. After they were introduced, Allred turned to the child and said, “Lily, you’re very attractive. Have you considered modeling as a career?”

Do you think if a prominent male had made such a patronizing, sexist remark, Allred would have let it pass or would she have rounded up as many TV cameras as she could and publicly condemned him as a chauvinist pig for suggesting the child rely solely on her looks instead of her brains?

Finally, to show you what an absolutely despicable human being she is, when she was a single mother, she married Mr. William Allred. That was in 1968. It was he who paid her way so that she could attend law school and become an attorney in 1975. In 1987, they got divorced, and the guy wound up having to pay her alimony.

In the passage of time, Mr. Allred went to jail for fraud. When he got out, his financial resources greatly diminished, he petitioned the court for a reduction in his alimony payments. Even though he had made her career possible by paying for her education, and even though she was by then earning a handsome living, she fought him tooth and nail.

As I recall, there is a certain circle in Hell, described by Dante, that is reserved for people who not only bite the hand that’s fed them, but kicks their benefactors in the teeth for good measure. I’m willing to bet that there’s a deep, dark cellar in that particular circle that’s reserved for Ms. Allred.

Another person whose character seems to consist entirely of a pathological egotism is our president. For my part, I am not only sick and tired of listening to that self-absorbed donkey braying 24/7 on the tube, but I’ve had it up to here with those damn shirtsleeves.

God knows I’m no fashion plate, but I’m just me and he’s supposed to be America’s commander in chief, the leader of the free world.

I used to think it was hilarious when Las Vegas entertainers like Tony Bennett and Steve Lawrence would pretend that singing was the equivalent of shoveling coal by undoing their bowties halfway through a performance. But at least they were working up a sweat under those hot lights. Obama, on the other hand, shows up in his shirtsleeves even when all he’s doing is reading from his teleprompter in an air-conditioned auditorium.

In a country with nearly 10% unemployment and a deficit that’s not only burying us, but our children and our grandchildren, is this arrogant mug actually trying to get our sympathy? I’m afraid he’ll have to settle for our contempt.

Of late, rumors are floating around that if his approval numbers continue to tank, Hillary Clinton will challenge Obama for their party’s nomination in 2012. At first blush, one can imagine thinking that anyone but Obama would not only be an improvement, but could work as a campaign slogan. However, we should all keep in mind that Mrs. Clinton not only tried to push through HillaryCare when her husband was up to his usual monkey business in the Oval office, but more recently charged Arizona with human rights violations at the U.N., this putting it on a par with China, Iran and North Korea.

In short, she is every bit the loony lefty that Barack Obama is. In fact, there are only two real differences I’m aware of; one, he’s 50% blacker than she is and, two, she manages to keep her jacket on during working hours.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, November 15, 2010

Myths and Misses

by Burt Prelutsky

A lot of the things that people accept on faith are nothing more than time-honored, widely accepted lies. For instance, ever since its inception, we have all come to accept as gospel that Israelis are the most formidable fighters in the world. At one time, that may have been true. They certainly made quick work of the Arabs during the Six Day War. But that was then and this is now.

Back in the 40s, 50s and 60s, Israel was a pit bull of a nation. But during the intervening years, thanks to a left-wing population and a series of left-wing prime ministers who more closely resemble Michelle Obama than Golda Meir, Israel has been reduced to the condition of a toothless poodle that wags its tail anytime someone utters the words “peace process” within earshot. By the way, “peace process,” when translated into Arabic means “Give us more land and, in return, we might stop firing missiles at your civilians for the next five minutes.”

Another bit of hooey that’s enjoyed credence, at least in right-wing circles, was a recent survey that indicated that whereas only 20% of Americans identified themselves as liberals, twice as many call themselves conservatives. Frankly, I’m astounded and embarrassed that so many of my fellow conservatives accepted this as solid evidence that Americans were coming to their senses. I have to wonder how could so many otherwise intelligent people overlook the obvious fact that the survey wasn’t a scientific measurement. It merely asked people what they were.

Well, I would think that everyone realizes that there are a great many people who are liberal but would prefer not labeling themselves as such for the sake of a survey. After all, all by themselves, blacks -- 90% of whom are Democrats -- constitute about 14% of the population. Toss in Jewish voters, 80% of whom are Democrats, and you add a couple more percentage points. Add youngsters between the age of 18 and 30, most of whom are registered Democrats, and you can easily see how absurd those survey numbers are.

The truth is that in every presidential election, 40% of the people will vote for any Republican and 40% will vote for any Democrat. It’s that remaining 20% who regard themselves as moderates or independents, but are actually political nincompoops and can be swayed by slogans as mindless as “Hope and Change,” who unfortunately determine election results. It’s from their ranks that you also find the five or ten percent who, even a week before an election, remain undecided. That isn’t because they are carefully weighing the pros and cons of the candidates or the issues, but because, more often than not, they are totally clueless.

What I find scary is that even some of my fellow pundits bought into that survey, somehow ignoring the obvious fact that in spite of the 20% showing by liberals, twice that number think Obama is doing a swell job. Who do they think those additional people are? Erstwhile conservatives who’ve seen the error of their ways? Whigs who had second thoughts and have snuck back in from Canada?

The problem is that the pundits forgot that most liberals, in and out of the media, are so delusional, they actually believe their positions on such matters as ObamaCare, Cap and Trade, the stimulus bill and card checks, are sensible and middle of the road, and that they, themselves, are moderates.

Their lunacy is in such an advanced stage that they never even wonder why it is, if they’re so darn moderate, that on every major issue, they are in total agreement with socialists like Bernie Sanders, communists like Noam Chomsky and Van Jones, and just plain crazy people like Barack Obama, Henry Waxman and Harry Reid.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the archives →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Every Day Should Be Veterans Day

To all veterans,

We don't say it as often as we should:

Thank you for your service to our country. Here's a little something for us to remember.

Burt and Yvonne and Kenn (editor)

Post-Election Elation

by Burt Prelutsky

On a whole, I thought it was a wonderful election. It wasn’t just that I astonished myself with my prognostications, which consisted of predicting a pick-up of seven seats in the Senate and 65 in the House, but that a couple of candidates I truly despised went down in ignominious defeat. Even if, God forbid, I were a Democrat, I like to think I would have cheered the departure of Florida’s Charley Crist and Alan Grayson from the political landscape.

Now that they are unemployed, Grayson will have time to seek some much-needed professional help, while Crist can continue working on his tan and devoting himself to the career he was born to pursue; namely, squiring rich, elderly, widows across a dance floor.

I was so elated with the election results, I even managed to spot the silver lining in Harry Reid’s victory, keeping in mind that even if he had lost, the Democrats were going to maintain control of the Senate. The way I see it, Reid, who owes his political success to the unions and Nevada’s gambling interests, is one of the most despised people in politics. So, if Obama doesn’t object to the old pickle puss being the high-profile promoter of his policies, I certainly don’t. Making my joy complete is the fact that Reid’s re-election means that Charley Schumer’s dream of ascending to the position of Senate majority leader is now placed on hold, probably forever.

Some people, as happens during and after every election, bemoan negative campaigning. To which I say, some people should have to sit and eat at the children’s table. So far as I’m concerned, if you don’t have bad things to say about your opponent, you not only shouldn’t be running, you should probably stay home and vote for him!

It’s been a lot of fun watching the liberals fulminating about the ignorance, not to mention bigotry, of the American voter. Isn’t it amazing how dumb and racist those voters became since 2008?

Some liberals even went so far as to accuse Republicans, along with those Independents who abandoned them, of being crazy. I find it fascinating that they’ll label 70 million reasonable, responsible, tax-paying Americans as crazy, but these politically correct loons will turn right around and have a gigantic hissy fit if you refer to actual paranoiacs and schizophrenics as crazy people.

Speaking of those knotholes on the left, in spite of their loudly proclaimed munificence, it’s worth noting this holiday season that socialists and communists make up the majority of Americans who subscribe to the belief that it is better to receive than to give.

Lest the GOP misread the election results, they should keep in mind that Obama, Pelosi and Reid, America’s axis of evil, made it very easy to vote against the party of stimulus bills, ObamaCare, card checks, Cap & Tax, and kowtowing to our sworn enemies. In short, this wasn’t a coronation, but merely a stay of execution for a party that arrogantly blew off conservatives from 2001-2007.

Finally, speaking for Glenn Beck and myself, the best news of all was that Woodrow Wilson wasn’t re-elected.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, November 8, 2010

A Once Golden, Now Tarnished, California

by Burt Prelutsky

My more compassionate readers often write to me, wondering how I can stand to live in California. Believe me, I feel very shallow when I start describing the weather, but 320 really pleasant days a year mean a lot at my age. It means I can expect to play tennis just about any day I feel like it. It means I don’t have to worry about putting up and taking down storm windows, driving on icy roads, concern myself with cyclones and tornadoes or deal with humidity or condor-sized mosquitoes.

On the other hand, people like to point out that I miss out on the change of seasons. Which, translated, means I don’t have to suffer through three awful seasons in order to better appreciate the fourth.

We Californians do have an occasional earthquake, and drought is a constant concern. But no place is perfect. At least no place you can get to without first shuffling off this mortal coil. Drought is bad, but I’ll take it over, say, Seattle’s constant deluge. If the choice comes down to brown grass or the persistent aroma of mildew, I know which one gets my vote.

Speaking of voting, I’d really rather not, at least when it comes to California. But when discussing the pros and cons of my home state, it’s impossible to avoid our moronic voters and our sleazy politicians. I have no doubt that people all over America woke up on November 3rd, checked the election results and concluded that their spouse had had one of those phony newspapers printed up as a belated April Fool’s Day gag.

Surely we didn’t once again elect Jerry Brown to be our governor. No way we returned Barbara (“Don’t call me ma’am”) Boxer to the Senate. But, indeed we did. Missouri may be the “Show Me State,” but California is the “We’ll Show You State.”

Unfortunately, what we insist on showing the rest of you is how brain-dead we are when it comes to voting. We are in the midst of a financial meltdown that rivals Greece’s, so, naturally, our response is to keep re-electing the morons who caused it in the first place.

It’s like a weird game of poker. New York opens the betting with Charles Schumer, Anthony Weiner and Charley Rangel. California not only sees the bet, but raises with Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Jerry Brown, Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman, Gavin Newsome and Brad Sherman, and hauls in the pot.

Propositions are one of the zaniest aspects of our elections. The way these things are written is so confusing that you might think that James Joyce returned from the dead in even-numbered years to compose them. More than once, if you favored a specific proposition, you were required to vote NO.

While it’s true that the election booklets contain pro and con arguments, they occasionally read like treatises written by a committee consisting of Jesuit priests, Talmudic scholars and Groucho Marx. For my part, I skip all the flapdoodle and check out the groups supporting or opposing the measures. If the Teachers Union or La Raza is for it, I’m against it.

In conclusion, I should state that months ago, when Bill O’Reilly’s favorite seer, Dick Morris, insisted that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina were certain to defeat Jerry Brown and Mrs. Boxer, I said that, while marijuana wouldn’t be legalized in California, perhaps it already was in Morris’s home state.

What I don’t know is if he made an honest miscalculation or simply decided to take a wild guess, knowing that if his predictions came true, he would be hailed as the new Nostradamus, and if they lost, nobody would remember.

In either case, that’s show business. It’s quite a different thing when, one day, Obama tells Hispanic voters that Republicans are their enemies, and the next day he claims he’s anxious to work with Republicans for the good of all Americans. That’s not show business, folks. It’s not even politics as usual. It’s cynical racism at its worst.

The guy in the White House is constantly trying to divide Americans, and it doesn’t seem to matter to him whether it’s rich against poor, blacks against whites, Latinos against non-Hispanics or 49 states and the U.N. against Arizona. This is the creep who promised to bring us all together? Liberals used to wail about Nixon’s notorious enemy’s list. How is it they’re not the least bit concerned with this creep’s?

It seems that, instead of modeling himself on Washington, Adams and Jefferson, Obama decided to use Yasser Arafat as his role model. Arafat enjoyed nothing better than sounding reasonable and conciliatory when hoodwinking American presidents, and then showing his true bloodthirsty colors when addressing his followers in Arabic.

The disadvantage for Obama is that while he has a forked tongue, he can only speak one language.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Juan Big Hullabaloo

by Burt Prelutsky

If I had ever imagined for even a second that Juan Williams would be at the center of a controversy, I would have guessed that he had appeared on TV wearing a turtleneck instead of his customary tie and jacket.

Mr. Williams, after all, has done very well for himself being the well-mannered, soft-spoken, black house liberal on the various Fox opinion shows. He is less moronic than Alan Colmes, less egotistical than Geraldo Rivera and better-looking than Leslie Marshall.

So imagine my surprise when I woke up one morning to discover that NPR had fired him because of some innocuous comments he had made about Muslims on The Factor. He had merely confessed that he gets nervous when he sees Muslims in full regalia at the airport. Well, with apologies to Steve Martin, excuuussse me. But if Muslims aren’t supposed to make us nervous at airports, why do I have to stand in line for an hour going through security, remove my shoes, belt, keys and wallet, and flash my ID 27 times before boarding an airplane?

Is it, perhaps, because those darn Swedes are acting up again? Is it possible that those rascally Aussies are planning an invasion? Or have the Amish finally decided it’s high time we all got rid of our cars and phones, and started getting around in horse-drawn surreys, the way God intended? One can almost hear their blood-curdling battle cry: “Today, Pennsylvania; tomorrow, the world!”

Everyone who has the good fortune not to be Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar or any of those other politically correct creeps on the left, knows that most of the worst mischief being caused all around the globe has Allah at its source. Does that mean that every Muslim is a terrorist? Of course not. Some of them merely fund the terrorism.

We should never lose sight of the fact that not every Russian was a Communist and not every German was a Nazi. But enough of them were, so that tens of millions of innocent people died before the reigns of terror ended. And just because a Muslim isn’t cold-blooded enough to be a killer of women and children doesn’t mean they disapprove of those who are. Otherwise, why have so many of them cheered on Arafat, bin Laden and Ahmadinejad, and why have so few, even here in America, spoken out against the butchers who act in the name of their religion?

Be all that as it may, it was my friend, Ron Radosh, who contended in an early morning email that NPR had wanted to unload Williams ever since he spoke out against the NAACP and the racist policy it adopted after its glory days in the 60s. These days, the NAACP is as anti-white and as leftwing as any group in America. But how would it look, Radosh mused, if NPR axed a black man for speaking out against a black group? But once Williams voiced his rather benign comments about Muslims, it provided NPR with the perfect cover to do what they’d been aching to do for
the past year.

Speaking of the NAACP, isn’t it rather insensitive for them to continue calling themselves the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? Even David Duke doesn’t call them colored people. I guess the reason they don’t change “Colored People” to “African Americans” is that the NAAAA sounds too much like an auto club.

One thing I hope a Republican House will do is to finally quit funding NPR with our tax dollars. They don’t have to say it’s because National Public Radio does nothing but parrot whatever crapola it’s fed by the DNC. To disguise their true motives, they can follow NPR’s sneaky example and merely blame it on the economy.

When, later in the day, Radosh praised Juan Williams for speaking out against NPR for firing him, I suggested he was over-reacting. Mr. Williams is neither a martyr nor a hero. For one thing, before the day was over, Fox had extended his contract and given him a raise. I am betting he will also get his own show, although between his regular appearances with Bret Baier, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Greta Von Sustern, I’m betting he already has more camera time than any of them.

Furthermore, nothing had changed during those 24 hours except that NPR had fired him. He had been quite happy to cash their checks for several years in spite of NPR’s being nothing but a propaganda machine for the loony left. There was nothing noble or heroic about Williams biting the hand that had fed him so well. It was merely a case of sour grapes. It’s much like the career criminal who finally sees the error of his ways…once the handcuffs have been slapped on his wrists.

I do have a question, though. For years, the definition of a conservative was a liberal who’d been mugged. I wonder if now that he’s been mugged, Juan Williams will finally see the light.

But for those of you who don’t believe Radosh when he suggests that NPR had been biding its time, waiting for a politically correct excuse to dump Williams without alienating its fan base of unrepentant 65-year-old hippies, I’ll whisper just two little words: Helen Thomas.

Don’t you suspect that the Hearst organization was overjoyed when she made her vile comments about Jews and Israel? I’m betting there were champagne corks popping all over the home office.

Or do you really think they wanted their White House correspondent to be a nasty, senile 90-year-old crone whose face had been stopping clocks and frightening children all over Washington, D.C, for the previous 20 years?

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:
To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, November 1, 2010

Plain Talk About Voting and Church Attendance

by Burt Prelutsky

No matter how much attention a person tries to devote to the political scene, some questions appear to be unanswerable. For instance, with Nevada, a state suffering from an unemployment rate hovering around 15%, why is Harry Reid, a man with the personality of an unsuccessful undertaker, running neck-and-neck with Sharron Angle? Is it that extra “r” in her first name? Do Nevadans fear that someone given to wasting letters is a greater danger than a senator who doesn’t think twice about squandering their tax dollars?

And what’s with the voters in West Virginia? Barack Obama vowed in 2008 to bury the coal industry and send our energy costs soaring, and the folks in West Virginia can’t decide between the Democrat and the Republican in the Senate race? Perhaps all that coal dust has affected their brains.

For that matter, what is it with those undecided voters? According to the polls, in some congressional races, there are still 10% of the voters who haven’t made up their minds. After nearly two years of Obama, Pelosi and Reid, running America into the ground, why would anyone remain undecided? I realize that conservatives and sensible Independents will vote for the GOP, just as I understand that dopey left-wingers and youngsters, who are convinced that other people should pay their way through college and that their parents should pay for everything else, will vote for Democrats, but who the heck are all these lunkheads who will apparently flip a coin on election day?

Much has been made of Barack Obama foregoing golf so that he could take his family to church services on Sunday, September 19th. Cynics wrote it off as a political, not spiritual, gesture. But it seems that there might be more to it than that.

Perhaps because St. John’s Episcopal Church is just across the street from the White House, folks assumed the choice was merely based on its convenient location. But I’m not so sure that was the case.

For one thing, St. John’s pastor, Rev. Luis Leon, delivered a sermon that day that dealt with Matthew 20:1-16. Apparently the parable tells of a landowner who needed to have his crop harvested quickly, and at the end of the day he paid those who had only worked for the final hour the same amount that he paid those who had labored in the heat throughout the entire day.

According to Rev. Leon, “The full-day workers believed in the world of merit, not the world of grace.” In their eyes, according to the pastor, the owner’s graciousness was seen as injustice. Instead of seeing themselves as selfish or self-absorbed, they saw the landowner as unfair, and the tragedy, Rev. Leon told his congregation, is that they estranged themselves from the source of graciousness.

The pastor, it seems, believes that payment should be determined not according to ability or even effort, but simply according to need. Or, in other words, he was making a case for the redistribution of wealth. I’m sure he got a big shout-out from at least one person in the congregation that day.

At St. John’s, where apparently the Gospel According to St. Marx is promoted, they have a series of guest speakers. On that particular Sunday, the speaker was Dr. Ziad Asali. Dr. Asali is described as a Middle East activist. If that sounds something like a community organizer, there’s a good reason. It seems Dr. Asali has addressed Congress on more than one occasion, demanding additional aid for the Palestinian Authority and complaining about “Israel’s disproportionate use of force in Gaza.” In case you haven’t noticed, “disproportionate use of force” is Arab and Muslim code for “How dare the Jews defend themselves!”

Among Dr. Asali’s nefarious activities was serving as a member of the U.S. delegation to Yasser Arafat’s funeral. Which strikes me as a highly questionable honor unless it was to make certain that the Nobel Prize-winning terrorist was, in the words of the coroner of Oz, “not only merely dead, but really most sincerely dead.” The corpse in this case wasn’t the Wicked Witch of the East, but of the Middle East.

I know that many people were disappointed that as a self-proclaimed Christian, Barack Obama had only attended church three times in a year. But I suspect that now that he knows that Washington’s St. John’s isn’t all that different from Chicago’s Trinity United, he and Michelle will be occupying the amen corner from now on.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Jesse James Obama

by Burt Prelutsky

A great many people like to make heroes of those who are, by no stretch of the imagination, even slightly heroic.

Back in the 1800s, we had Jesse James. In the 1900s, we had Bonnie and Clyde, as well as John Dillinger. These days, we have Barack Obama. One thing they all have in common is that their fans regard them as modern day Robin Hoods. The fact is they are much closer to being robbing hoods.

Jesse James and his older brother, Frank, began their criminal lives as Confederate guerrillas during the Civil War, specializing in committing atrocities, which included scalping Union soldiers.

After the War, the brothers took to knocking over banks and trains. Because the media was nearly as vile as it is now, the brothers were often described as folk heroes who took from the rich and gave to the poor, although no amount of research ever disclosed a single instance when the guys gave anyone anything except a bullet in the belly.

Because the brothers had fought for the Confederacy, many 19th century southerners, a people much given to fanciful and romantic notions -- and perhaps because Jesse and Frank occasionally donned Ku Klux Klan robes in order to instill additional fear in their innocent victims -- had a special reverence for the robbers. Those idiotic fans chose to ignore the fact that these two good-for-nothings were as likely to rob southern banks as those north of the Mason-Dixon Line.

It is a conceit of Hollywood that it took people like Wyatt Earp, Bill Hickok, Doc Holliday and Bat Masterson, to stand up to the villains. But as anyone who has ever read the well-researched novels of Louis L’Amour knows, a lot of Americans in those days owned guns and knew how to use them. Back then, the 2nd amendment was clearly seen as the one that guaranteed that the rest of the Constitution would amount to more than mere words on parchment.

So it was that on September 7, 1876, Jesse and Frank, along with Cole Younger and his gang of outlaws, rode into Northfield, Minnesota, determined to rob the First National Bank. The citizens of Northfield had other ideas once they realized what was going on. That was their money and they’d worked hard to earn it. They weren’t about to just sit back and let a bunch of shiftless no-accounts ride off with it in their saddlebags.

There wasn’t a quick-draw artist in the entire town. These were shopkeepers and ranchers, not professional gunslingers with notches on their revolvers, but when the smoke cleared, there were a couple of dead outlaws lying in the street. Jesse and Frank escaped, but without a single dollar that didn’t belong to them.

Why am I telling you about an incident that took place 134 years ago? It’s because I see Obama as the latest in this line of glorified thieves. He, too, believes that it’s just fine to take from those who have worked to earn their money and hand it over to those he favors. He doesn’t have to use six-shooters; he has Congress and the IRS to do his dirty work. And just like his predecessors, he can rely on the corrupt media to promote him as a folk hero.

But what he failed to take into account is what Jesse and Frank also overlooked; namely, that no matter how glorious the press tries to make it sound, stealing is stealing -- and at a certain point, folks aren’t going to just sit back and take it. Not when it’s their own money that’s being confiscated by thieves and scoundrels.

When I look at the members of the Tea Party movement, I see the good citizens of Northfield, Minnesota, and I anticipate that on November 2nd, Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their gang of cheap grifters will be mowed down.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky>

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the archives →

To send this article, click the envelope icon ↓

Monday, October 25, 2010

Death, Taxes and Trash

by Burt Prelutsky

In the old days, an expression one often heard was that the good die young. I don’t know how it began or why, unless it was an acknowledgment of the fact that in wars, it was generally the young who were most often called upon to sacrifice their lives. That still holds true, and if further proof were needed that the expression is close to gospel, we need only realize that, at 80, corrupt Charley Rangel is still going strong, and that, at 84, 86 and 86, so are Fidel Castro, Frank Lautenberg and Jimmy Carter.

The Democrats, faithfully doing Obama’s bidding, are apparently going to allow George Bush’s tax cuts to lapse on January 1st. It’s their contention that the current tax rates governing not only income, but capital gains and death levies, unfairly favor the wealthy. The liberals, who are never happier than when they’re fomenting class and race warfare, will never admit that left-wingers like George Soros, Bill Gates and Ted Turner, along with the likes of the Clintons, Oprah Winfrey, the John Kerrys, Barbara Boxer, Michael Bloomberg, Dianne Feinstein, Jay Rockefeller and the various Kennedys, are all among the super rich -- and the one thing they all have in common is that they don’t pay a single dollar more in taxes than they absolutely have to.

What’s more, they do everything in their power, ranging from employing top- notch tax attorneys to creating family trusts and offshore accounts, to reduce their tax obligations to the absolute minimum.

There is, after all, no maximum limit to the amount one pays. The U.S. Treasury is only too happy to accept all contributions, and if, as Joe Biden insists, it’s our patriotic duty to pay taxes, it’s high time these left-wingers put up or shut up.

There is a saying that goes “garbage in, garbage out”. It refers to the fact that if bad data is programmed into a computer system, you have to expect it will feed you misinformation. But there is another area in which the saying holds true. I refer to those occasions when progressives get together. Whether it was Obama’s inauguration or the recent One Nation gathering in Washington, D.C., the one thing you can count on is that these slobs, who never shut up about how badly the rest of us treat Mother Earth, will leave the area looking like a dumpsite.

Prior to the One Nation get-together, I kept seeing representatives of La Raza and the NAACP being asked why they would agree to include the American Communist Party in their ranks. Frankly, I couldn’t understand why they didn’t, instead, ask the head of the American Communist Party why he was willing to associate with the creeps from the NAACP and La Raza.

The most amazing thing about the gathering of dunces is how few people showed up in spite of the fact that in addition to those three groups, some of the others included the SEIU, the National Education Association, Code Pink, Planned Parenthood, the American Muslim Association of North America and the ever-popular Massachusetts Transgender Coalition.

If you were to estimate the size of the One Nation Rally by the amount of garbage they left in their wake, you would have guessed that the crowd was five times as large as Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor event when, in fact, the actual turnout was closer to one-fifth its size.

One final observation is that the trash these slobs left behind at the Lincoln Memorial was only slightly less disgusting than the trash that left it there.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, October 21, 2010

The Ugly Truth About Politicians

by Burt Prelutsky

A while back, in writing about Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell, I accepted the rumors about her financial difficulties. Since then, I’ve heard that she has explained them all away. I wouldn’t know. My point in writing about her alleged problems in the first place was that I didn’t care. I wanted her to win the Senate race in Delaware because if elected, she would vote the way I wanted.

Some people were disappointed in me. I hate to disappoint people, but if I’m not going to write what I believe, why bother?

I’m afraid that a lot of people, especially among the ranks of my fellow conservatives, confuse electing politicians with selecting a pastor or a priest. Politics is not a higher calling. It’s not a calling at all, even though politicians would have you believe that theirs is a life of self-sacrifice that compares favorably with Mother Teresa’s. The world of politics primarily provides an escape hatch for failed lawyers, rich people who want to add “celebrity” to their resumes, physicians who have grown weary of dealing with bureaucratic paperwork, and other various mediocrities seeking to put some buzz into their humdrum lives.

If people asked me to list the qualities to which I aspire, they would be honesty, reliability, courage, kindness, loyalty and optimism. They are the qualities I look for in my friends. They are not the qualities I expect to find in politicians. What’s more, when I hear people go on about how wonderful their favorite office holders are, I think they sound like very naïve children.

The fact is, most of us don’t know the people we’re called upon to elect. We may hear their speeches or see them interviewed on TV. We might even hear them debate their opponents, but we don’t know what sort of parent they are, what sort of neighbor or sibling, what sort of boss.

Let’s face it -- every single time a politician is caught having an adulterous affair or taking a bribe or trying to pick up someone in a men’s room or selling out his country for the sake of his party, millions of people react exactly the way young children do when they find out the truth about Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. But not I.

I think that, by and large, politicians are a bunch of weasels. I wouldn’t trust them to tell me the time of day. I only ask that they vote exactly the way I would, if I had nothing better to do with my life than constantly raise money so that I could retain my cushy job; a job, by the way, that really only requires casting votes.

When you get right down to it, voting is something we all do. The difference is that these stiffs get paid to do it, and then have bridges and airports named in their honor, as if they’d covered the construction costs with a personal check.

Speaking of votes, I can’t help noticing how many Democrats seem to be running against Obama. In order to carry off the illusion that these schmoes are independent-minded individuals, they’re running ads proudly proclaiming their opposition to, say, ObamaCare or the stimulus bill. These lumps aren’t blue dog Democrats, though, they’re yellow dogs. These were the folks who were given dispensation to vote with the Republicans because Pelosi and Reid had counted noses and concluded they had more than enough votes to pass whatever piece of left-wing lunacy they were shoving down our throats that particular day.

In its own way, those dispensations were every bit as sleazy and cynical as bribing Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu to get them aboard the ObamaCare express.

If, like me, you have ever wondered how these people can bear to look in the mirror, I think the secret is that when you spend day after day looking at the likes of Harry Reid, Alan Grayson, Nancy Pelosi and Anthony Weiner, after a while the loathsome creature in the mirror doesn’t look so awful.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, October 18, 2010

The Fifth Season

by Burt Prelutsky

We are all aware of the four seasons, but every election year provides us with a fifth. Thanks to politicians and those who rely on politicians for their daily bread, we find ourselves in the silly season.

It seems that you can’t turn around without finding yourself bombarded with so many political platitudes and inanities that, were they only bricks, you could use them to build a 30-foot wall at our southern border.

Just recently, Barack Obama gave a vote of confidence to his economic advisors. And why wouldn’t he, with the economy zipping along on all cylinders, at least according to Joe Biden? Still, if I were Tim Geithner, I think I’d get to work on my resume. As anyone who follows professional sports knows, any time a team owner gives a coach or manager a vote of confidence, it’s code for “Don’t let the door hit you in the fanny on your way out.”

While there’s no sure way to predict who would replace Geithner, we can get a start on narrowing down the candidates. After all, if history tells us anything, it’s that whomever Obama appoints will be a tax cheat.

A number of people I like and respect believe it is disgraceful that Christine O’Donnell won the GOP primary in Delaware. I am not one of them. What I find disgraceful is that her opponent, Mike Castle, called himself a Republican and yet voted with the Democrats nearly as often as Henry Waxman.

Do I believe that Ms. O’Donnell is an ideal candidate? I do not. But, unfortunately, Ronald Reagan wasn’t available. I have heard that Ms. O’Donnell has a checkered past when it comes to money matters. Inasmuch as she’s never stiffed me, I really don’t care. When it comes to financial shenanigans, she’s a mere piker compared to Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and Barack Obama. She only loused up her own credit rating; those goobers loused up America’s. Her record does suggest that if she loses in the general election, she might land the gig as treasury secretary.

Those of you who might be surprised that I’d support someone with questionable character should get over it. When it comes to my friends and associates, I’m quite concerned with such matters; when it comes to politics, my concern is with how the candidate will vote once elected.

I found it rather astonishing that after her primary victory, Karl Rove dumped all over Ms. O’Donnell. It seems to me that if Mr. Rove regarded the Delaware election as so important, he should have gone there and campaigned for Mr. Castle. To wait until after the votes were counted to attack the duly elected Republican candidate strikes me as inexplicable, not to mention reprehensible. My theory is that when it comes to recognizing the power of the Tea Party movement, the only folks who are more disturbed than the Democrats are those former Republican king makers who cower at the thought they might be losing power and influence to the amateurs.

After Bill Maher ran a segment from one of his 1999 “Politically Incorrect” shows, on which young Ms. O’Donnell admitted she had once dated a kid who was into witchcraft, she was asked about her involvement with the occult. I thought her response was spot-on and funny, to boot. She pointed out she had been in high school at the time, and suggested that most people did stupid stuff in their teens. Then she added that if she were really into witchcraft, Karl Rove would probably be supporting her.

It strikes me that Rove, who enjoys being referred to as The Architect because he helped George Bush win two elections, can hardly claim to possess impeccable conservative credentials. For not only did Bush set Obama a bad example when it came to squandering tax dollars, but he and The Architect helped pave the way for Democratic victories in 2006 and 2008.

That reminds me that Obama and his cronies keep referring to “the last decade” in their sorry attempt to blame the Republicans for the present state of the nation. The truth, however, is that the GOP only ran things for the first six of those 10 years. Once the liberals took control of Congress in 2006, it was Dodd, Frank and Obama, along with their good friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who brought about the housing meltdown and the ensuing financial collapse. Since 2008, it’s been the Obama administration that has sent the national deficit soaring through the stratosphere.

Speaking of the silly season, it would be difficult to imagine anything goofier than giving Jew-hater Helen Thomas a journalism award, but that is exactly what the folks at the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) have decided to do. It’s not often that an award tells you as much about those bestowing it as those receiving it. In fact, the only comparable occasions that spring to mind were when the Motion Picture Academy gave Oscars to Al Gore and Michael Moore; when the Norwegians gave the Nobel Peace Prize to Yasser Arafat, Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama; and when an L.A. jury presented O.J. Simpson with a Not Guilty verdict.

Finally, though, for sheer zaniness, nothing quite compares to Jimmy Carter telling Leslie Stahl on “60 Minutes” that he had a successful administration, and only hopes that Barack Obama has an equally successful one.

Well, frankly, the way it’s been going so far these past two years, I guess I hope so, too.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓