Monday, August 30, 2010

Crimes and Misdemeanors

by Burt Prelutsky

As I sit here, I have no idea how things will play out for Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters, although I find it highly unlikely that either of them will end up in a congressional trial, no matter how much the defendants claim they wish to have the air cleared. When Nancy Pelosi insisted that under the Democrats, the swamp that is Capitol Hill would be drained, she should have kept in mind that after such a draining it’s not treasure chests and fields of four-leaf clovers that are uncovered, but creepy, crawly things.

Although I have no use for either of the two Democrats being investigated, I have a special loathing for Rep. Waters. For one thing, even after a story in the San Jose Mercury was shown to be a hoax, she persisted in claiming it was the C.I.A. that had introduced crack cocaine into black communities. She also championed the teaching of Ebonics in California schools. So it figured that as soon as the Congressional Ethics Committee targeted her, she would insist it was all the fault of political racists, even though half the members of the committee are liberals. On the other hand, back in the 90s, when it was Newt Gingrich who was charged with ethics violations, Rep. Waters couldn’t contain her glee, as she happily announced, “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.” And vice versa, Rep. Waters.

Still, I find it odd that neither she nor Mr. Rangel, nor the mainstream media for that matter, see anything even slightly racist about belonging to the Black Congressional Caucus, a group that denied membership to Rep. Stephen Cohen, a Democrat from Tennessee, simply because he’s white even though his district is 60% black!

For my part, I can’t figure out how the Ethics Committee determines whom to target. The way I see it, they could probably go after every single member of the House, including themselves, with the expectation of striking gold. Or perhaps I should say striking dirt. I’m reminded of the NCAA. Every once in a while, they decide to penalize a college for infractions involving bribes and other perks bestowed by over-zealous alumni associations on student athletes. The truth is, no matter how good the football or basketball player is, he is going to join the professional ranks in a few years. Thus, the only way to ensure that a college team is going to remain a national power year after year, decade after decade, is to entice the best high school players in the country. Although the colleges aren’t above using attractive, obliging coeds as lures, nothing beats cash on the barrelhead. Back when I was a kid, I would hear the wise guys say that one All American jock after another had to take a cut in pay when he left college and turned pro. Such, alas, is not the case when it comes to professional politicians.

Something I’ve never understood is how permissive America is when it comes to acts of treason. For the life of me, I don’t understand why PFC Bradley Manning and Wikileaks chief honcho, Julian Assange, aren’t on trial for their lives. However these two punks feel about the war in Afghanistan, there can be no justification for letting the Taliban know which Afghan citizens have cooperated with the U.S. military. What makes their activities all the more reprehensible is that they believe they command the moral high ground. It is a delusion shared by those who oppose all wars, those who oppose capital punishment and, of course, by Jane Fonda.

Whenever I see career politicians, I feel my gorge rising. The fact that these sloths, whose main activity is deciding how to waste other people’s money, insist on calling themselves public servants and get to hold fund-raising testimonials on their own behalf is all the more galling. I have been to a few of those events and it’s a good thing that the food is so unappetizing because, otherwise, it would be impossible to keep one’s dinner down. Even if you skip the over-cooked chicken, you’d have to have a cast-iron constitution to stomach the blatant hypocrisy as you listen to cronies and flunkies enumerate the politician’s alleged virtues in a way denied everyone who hasn’t first had the decency to die.

Here in California, we have more rotten politicians per capita than any other state in the nation. One of the worst has been Jerry Brown. He is presently running for governor, a job he has held in the distant past. This creep has been recycled more often than a plastic bottle. Even though he’s 72 years old, he has never held an actual job in his entire life. He began his current campaign by announcing that his opponent, Meg Whitman, had a great deal in common with Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. His reason was that she had a lot of her own money to spend on her campaign. It seems to me that’s like comparing Charlie Chaplin’s Little Tramp persona to Adolf Hitler because they both had tiny moustaches. But that’s par for the liberal course.

Jerry Brown also had the nerve to claim that Ms. Whitman was going to use the governorship as a steppingstone to the presidency. That’s not a crime where I come from. But in any case, it’s an odd insult coming from the man who used his own governorship to run for president in ’76, ’80 and ’92.

The fact remains that over the past 50 years, Brown has run for president, senator, governor, chairman of the California Democratic Party, state attorney general, California secretary of state, L.A. Community College District Board of Trustees and mayor of Oakland. The truly weird thing is that, more often than not, he’s won those races, even though in a personality contest with a clam, a cobblestone and a tin can, Brown would come in a distant fourth.

The fact remains that the man who was dubbed “Governor Moonbeam” by the late Chicago columnist, Mike Royko, has spent his entire adult life running for everything but the bus.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Leaders in Name Only

by Burt Prelutsky

I suppose it’s only natural that politicians who wind up on Capitol Hill forget that they are mere mortals. After all, when everyone is vying for your attention and all the Sunday talk shows are eager to have you stop by and spout off, and you have as many flunkies at your beck and call as Marie Antoinette, it must be awfully easy to believe you have achieved royal status. In fact, all that you’ve really done is beat out some other schnook in a popularity contest.

As a result, these pettifoggers must be constantly plagued by the fear that the very next election can turn them back into the very same rodents they were before their Fairy Godmother touched them with her magic wand.

For the run-of-the-mill politician, it must be bad enough, but imagine being Harry Reid, king of the Senate one day, and just another old pickle puss the next.

In a way, it would be even worse for Nancy Pelosi, who, unlike Reid, will easily win re-election, but could still go from being the queen bee on November 2nd to losing her Speaker’s gavel and watching her jumbo jet turn into a pumpkin at midnight. How bleak her life will be if there are no more TV cameras tracking her as she strides down the House corridors in her Hillary Clinton pants suit, a dozen male courtiers trailing in her wake.

For that matter, who would want to be Barack Obama if the November elections go the way they appear headed? How bitter would it be to go from filibuster-proof majorities in the House and Senate to being the lamest of lame ducks? A while back, Obama, when asked his opinion of Kevin Rudd, the ex-prime minister of Australia, said he liked him. One of the qualities he liked best about him was his humility. “I find him smart but humble.” The way he said it suggested he might as well have been describing himself. And to think, some people are convinced Obama doesn’t have a sense of humor. The notion that Obama is a humble human being is so far-fetched that it might even strain Joy Behar’s credulity. As Winston Churchill once observed of his political nemesis, Clement Attlee, “He’s a modest man, and he’s got a lot to be modest about.”

Speaking of the president, I keep wondering why we never hear anything about his mother-in-law. Is Mrs. Robinson still hanging out in the White House and are we still footing the bill for her food and lodging?

And whatever happened to Bo? Is he happy? Is he house-broken and has he been neutered? Judging by the ease with which Obama has turned Benjamin Netanyahu into a lap dog, I assume the answer to both questions is a resounding yes.

People have observed that a camel is a horse designed by a committee. In much the same way, GM’s Volt is a car designed and manufactured by a federal bureaucracy. For one thing, it cost $50 billion in tax dollars to take it from Frankenstein’s cellar to a car dealership in your town. Now, for a mere $41,000, you can drive it home. At least so long as you don’t live more than 40 miles away. That’s how soon the batteries need to be recharged. Except for the rather steep price tag, the Volt reminds me of those tin cans the Soviet Union used to turn out for mass consumption. Instead of calling it the Volt, designer-in-chief Barack Obama should have called it the Shaft.

Finally, I wasn’t one of those spoilsports who took umbrage at the Clintons blowing $3 million on Chelsea’s wedding. She’s their only child, after all, and as we learned during the 2008 primaries, the Clintons are worth over $100 million.

Besides, it’s not as if they were holding a bonfire in Rhinebeck, N.Y., with the dough. It was going to florists and caterers, wine merchants and decorators, milliners and security firms.

In a way, the nuptials seemed as preordained as a happy ending in a fairy tale. After all, the father of the groom is Edward Mezvinsky, a former congressman and convicted felon who only got out of jail two years ago after spending five years behind bars for financial fraud. His nickname is Fast Eddie. Unlike some in-laws, I suspect he and Slick Willie will get along just fine.

While I wish Chelsea and Marc all the best, I can’t help wondering if the Clintons will ask the party faithful to reimburse them with fund raisers, as they did after Hillary’s ill-fated run in 2008. In spite of their personal fortune, I expect that will be the case. What’s more, I’m betting the DNC will pick up the tab for the centerpieces, gift bags and hors d’oeuvres.

When you’re Bill and Hillary, you see, party favors take on a whole different meaning.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Monday, August 23, 2010

Mr. Prelutsky Doesn't Go to Washington

by Burt Prelutsky

Every so often, one of my readers who has apparently dipped once too often into the cooking sherry wonders why I don’t run for Congress. The short answer is that I don’t want to ever again wear a necktie. I also don’t wish to spend my life going hat-in-hand begging for campaign contributions. Worse yet, what if I actually won the election and then had to listen to Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank mouth off endlessly? Between her nursery school delivery and his lisping, I’m sure I’d soon be popping Excedrin like peanuts.

Instead, I prefer staying home and telling everybody in Washington how to do their jobs better. So, for openers, I would make it a law that every bill would contain only a single item. No more piling on. No more legislation that contains, say, funding for the military with tax dollars for ACORN or an unnecessary bridge or airport named after some partisan hack. As things stand now, every appropriations bill comes loaded with a ton of political pork. When called on it, the weasels in both parties get to say, “Well, I had to support the troops, didn’t I?”

Conservatives who automatically deny that the Arizona immigration law is racially-based are lying. Of course it is, in just the same way that a border wall would be. How can it not be when the millions of people who have snuck into the U.S. are all Hispanics? It makes as much sense to deny that the war on terrorism is directed at Islamics. The problem is that those who favor open borders accuse the rest of us of being racists. That’s the big lie they love to promote. Americans, after all, have no trouble living and working with Hispanics who are here legally.

If the illegals pouring in were Swedes, Germans or Poles, our opposition, which is based on principles and the law, would be the same. The difference is that the very same hypocrites who favor open borders today are the ones who would change their tune overnight if the aliens weren’t Hispanic. The ugly, but unvarnished, truth is that they’re the racists.

Of course the number one racist in America is the fellow who spent 20 years soaking up Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s vicious attacks on white Americans. It’s probably not a coincidence that Barack Obama is also the biggest liar who’s ever sat in the Oval Office. In fact, if his nose grew like Pinocchio’s every time he told a fib, they probably would have had to leave Joy Behar and Sherri Shepherd in the wings in order to make room for the presidential shnoz on “The View.”

The latest proof that in looking for a role model, Obama snubbed George Washington and patterned himself, instead, on a used car salesman was his announcement that he was “surprised, disappointed and angry” when Scotland released Lockerbie bomber Abdel al-Magrahi. It seems that Richard LeBaron, Obama’s deputy head of the U.S. embassy in London let Scotland know a week ahead of the event that the U.S. preferred that Magrahi receive compassionate release than that he be locked up in a Libyan prison for what was supposed to be the final few weeks of his life. The only surprise is that apparently the change in climate did wonders for his health, and Magrahi is now expected to live at least another ten years!

The U.S. government had tried to keep LeBaron’s letter secret on the alleged grounds that it would prevent “frank and open communications with other governments.” I don’t know about you, but to me that sounds like a married man begging his mistress not to spill the beans, lest it prevent future frank and open communications with his wife!

“Every time a bell rings, an angel gets his wings.”
According to Bedford Fall’s George Bailey, every time a bell rang, an angel got his wings. If it worked the same way with lies, an entire division of angels would owe a debt of eternal gratitude to the prevaricator-in-chief.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Friday, August 20, 2010

The Barack Hussein Obama Mosque

by Burt Prelutsky

When I consider the brouhaha over the mosque at Ground Zero, the question that springs to mind isn’t why Islamics chose such a provocative site, but, rather, why so many Americans feel compelled to pander to Muslims.

Now, I understand that Mayor Bloomberg, being a New York liberal, assumes he is the perfect person to lecture the rest of us about religious tolerance. Lecturing, after all, is what liberals think they’re best at, be it from a political dais, a college lectern, a judicial bench or the editorial page of the New York Times. Still, with the enthusiastic endorsement of his colleagues in the media, Bloomberg takes idiocy to new levels. He actually believes that Muslims should be encouraged to erect a 13-story victory structure on sacred ground because we live in a democracy. On the other hand, this lover of freedom and liberty, Nanny Bloomberg, has taken it upon himself to deprive New Yorkers of their right to consume trans fats and salt.

I certainly understand why Barack Obama’s initial instinct was to back the building of the mosque, and it certainly wasn’t just because he was addressing a group of Muslims at a Ramadan dinner. That was certainly the venue, and Obama, like most people, enjoys applause, which is why we always get to see him addressing union members and deep-pocket Democrats at fund-raising events. But the main reason he backed the mosque is because, no matter where he may have been born, there is a basic disconnect between him and this nation.

That may sound far-fetched, considering that he was elected president of the United States less than two years ago, garnering about 63 million votes. But that was after he and the MSM had successfully pulled the wool over a great many eyes. He has now had time to show his true colors in his America-bashing speeches; by his banishing the little statue of Churchill, while kowtowing to Saudi royalty; by his assuming with no facts at hand that a white Cambridge police officer was stupid and clearly in the wrong; by refusing to connect the Fort Hood assassin or any of the other terrorists with Islam; declining even to prosecute the New Black Panthers for intimidating white voters. Heck, this clown won’t even cross his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.

I used to be so naïve that I assumed the reason that Obama attended Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s racist church for 20 years was merely a means to worm his way into Chicago’s black community so that he could pursue a career in politics. I have since come to believe that Obama shares Wright’s disgusting beliefs. I believe the reason that he, unlike most Americans, Democrats included, think it’s a swell idea for the 13-story mosque to be erected is because, like his religious mentor, he is convinced that 9/11 was a case of America’s chickens coming home to roost.

Consider, if you will, that the head of NASA was told that one of his primary goals was to reach out to the Muslim nations and make them feel good about their achievements in math and science. That meant that in addition to all his other responsibilities, the poor guy was going to have to bone up on ancient, very ancient, history.

Some people would point to the surge in Afghanistan as proof that Obama isn’t a Manchurian or at least a Kenyan candidate, but that raises a provocative question: Why announce a deadline for pulling out our troops when such arbitrary dates inevitably encourage our enemies and undermine our allies? Knowing that we intend to be gone within a year, what Afghani with the brains he was born with would dare assist us and antagonize the bloodthirsty Taliban? And what’s the big rush, anyway? We still have troops, for God’s sake, in Germany, Japan, Korea and Kosovo.

In poker, when a player unconsciously tips his mitt it’s called a “tell”. With Obama, his tell is when he says, “Let me be perfectly clear.” Another sure way to recognize that he’s lying is to see if his mouth is moving.

Getting back to the mosque, I kept hearing Islamic spokesmen talking about their fellow Muslims who had been killed on 9/11, suggesting that they, too, had suffered painful losses. So I checked it out. As near as I could figure, 62 Muslims died on that infamous day. That, of course, isn’t counting the 19 who were responsible for slaughtering 2,800 non-Muslims. Not to make light of the 62, but numbers are relative and I would guess that hardly a day goes by that Muslims of one sect aren’t blowing up at least 62 members of a different sect somewhere in the world.

New York’s Governor David Paterson, being yet another mushy-headed liberal, naturally couldn’t resist leaping into the fray. In an attempt to broker an agreement, he offered state land to the Muslims as a means to lure them away from lower Manhattan. When I heard that, I found myself wondering why the usual suspects, including the ACLU, weren’t raising Cain over the separation of church and state. I guess that only applies when it comes to Christianity and Judaism.

Speaking of non-Islamic theologies reminds me that Barack Obama, when he was addressing wealthy San Franciscans at a fund-raiser in 2008, dismissed millions upon millions of American Christians as “those people clinging to their religion and their guns,” but has never once described Islamics as those people clinging to their religion and their suicide bombs.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Thursday, August 19, 2010

Mysteries Solved, Lies Refuted

by Burt Prelutsky

Those on the left have made every attempt to tar those on the right as racists. They have done it so often and so ineptly that by now I doubt if even the rabid likes of Chris Matthews, Joy Behar and Rachel Maddow, take it seriously.

As far back as last March, when the Tea Party members gathered in Washington to voice their objection to ObamaCare, we all saw the way the liberals choreographed the event in order to make the patriots appear hostile to blacks. It was so simplistic, I assume that either Rahm Emanuel or David Axelrod came up with the plan. It consisted of having only the pinheads from the Black Congressional Caucus enter the House by the front steps while Nancy Pelosi and her white colleagues all snuck in using the tunnel.

The leftists counted on the Tea Partiers employing racial invective, and when that didn’t happen they simply lied and said it had. They insisted that Emmanuel Cleaver had been spat upon and that the infamous n-word had been hurled at John Lewis 15 times. Oddly enough, even when a $100,000 reward was posted for visual or audio confirmation, not even Keith Olbermann or Ellis Henican stepped forward to claim the prize.

I’m not suggesting that there were no catcalls from the crowd, but does anyone, including Juan Williams, believe the catcalls wouldn’t have been even louder and more pointed if Nancy Pelosi or Henry Waxman had dared run the gauntlet of outraged, over-burdened, tax-paying patriots? But of course even if Pelosi and Waxman had shown their faces, the lap dog media would have condemned the Tea Party members as a pack of misogynistic anti-Semites!

Speaking of the left-wing media, I believe I’ve finally figured out the explanation for Marc Lamont Hill’s frequent appearances on Bill O’Reilly’s show. He serves to make Alan Colmes seem almost rational.

The media, together with the DNC, has taken advantage of Obama’s race to insist that all objections to his radical agenda are the result of racism. What they fail to deal with is how it was that 52% of American voters, all of whom knew his racial makeup, cast their votes for him in 2008, while if the election were held today, the polls indicate that he would lose if he were running against Romney, Gingrich and Huckabee, and be in a dead-heat with Palin.

Another fact that refutes the claims that anti-Obama sentiment is race-based is that his personal approval numbers are significantly higher than those regarding his policies. Feeling as I do about his character, I’m at a loss to explain the dichotomy, but perhaps a lot of people can’t help but empathize with his pathetic efforts on the golf course.

The truth is, the man who vowed to be our first post-racial president, has proven to be the most racial president since Wilson. But whereas Wilson, who remains a hero to liberals, was blatantly anti-black, Obama has shown his own true colors in the opposite direction. In his first 18 months, he has played the race card in connection with the Cambridge police incident; in defending the openly racist Eric Holder; and in refusing to prosecute the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation. What’s more, in his constant pandering to the left-wing NAACP, ACORN and the SEIU, he has gone overboard in expressing his appreciation for the 91% of the vote blacks handed him in his campaigns against both John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

I happen to think that Obama’s decision to sue Arizona over its anti-illegal alien bill was a political miscalculation of enormous proportions. For one thing, most Americans -- and I’m going out on a limb and include Democrats and even Hispanics who are here legally -- don’t like the idea of the president of 50 states using the authority of the federal government to attack one of them. He’s not a schoolmarm and he has no business making Arizona sit in the corner as if it were a recalcitrant child. What’s next, a redesigned flag with just 49 stars?

Judge Bolton ruled exactly as one would expect a Clinton appointee to rule. Common sense would say that when the federal government refuses to enforce its constitutional obligation to defend our borders, thus forcing the individual states to do so on their own, it verges on lunacy to rule on the side of the feds. But, obviously, when Obama says, “I know it’s my job, but I refuse to do it,” he can expect nothing but high-fives from the corrupt media, Hispanic racists and agenda-driven judges.

The fact of the matter is that, by a wide majority, Americans don’t believe it is either moral or even possible to deport the millions of people who are already here illegally, but they want a very high wall -- perhaps even a double wall, with an alligator-infested moat in between -- erected at the border. After that, reasonable people can decide on the status and future of those already here. But any other policy (aka “comprehensive immigration reform”) would be premature, and would only play into the hands of Democrats trolling for votes, unions trolling for additional dues and Republicans trolling for the next best thing to slave labor. So, to paraphrase President Reagan, I say, “Put up the wall, Mr. Obama.”

A bonus is that the remainder of the stimulus money could finally be spent on what Obama promised us when he picked our pockets for the trillion dollars back in 2009; namely, shovel-ready jobs.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Wringing the Bell

by Burt Prelutsky

Sometimes, political corruption is so blatant, it almost seems like make-believe, like a farce concocted by Billy Wilder or Preston Sturges.

Here in Southern California, Bell is a small, poor, mainly Hispanic community of 40,000 that has managed to put itself on the map in the unlikeliest of ways. Although nearly 20% of its population lives under the poverty level, this community is a shining example of the can-do spirit in action. How else can you explain that it had the highest-paid city officials in the nation?

Its chief administrative officer, Robert Rizzo, was pulling down $787,637 a year. Police Chief Randy Adams was taking home $457,000, and Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia was making do on $376,288. The various council members were being paid nearly $100,000 each. Did I mention that being a member of the Bell city council is a part-time job?

There was one exception, one guy riding the rails of the gravy train. City Councilman Lorenzo Velez, who was unaware that all of his colleagues were making out like bandits until the L.A. Times broke the story, was only being paid $8,076-a-year. At least now, I guess he knows why all the other fellows used to chuckle when he suggested getting together at Wendy’s or Taco Bell after council meetings.

But before we all chuckle too heartily at those poor Bell taxpayers who were laying out roughly $2 million-a-year to these lowlifes, let us not get too cocky. Let me remind you that we’re all paying Barack Obama $420,000; Joe Biden, $171,500; Harry Reid, $193,400; Nancy Pelosi, $217,400, and that’s not counting perks that include an army of aides, personal jets and humongous pensions. Do you really think they’re doing a better job than Rizzo, Adams and Spaccia?

On the other side of the country, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who believes he is all-wise because he is all-wealthy, thinks it would be a really terrific idea for the Muslims to erect a gigantic mosque near Ground Zero. The Mayor seems to think it would be a wonderful symbol of something or other. Most normal people, and I’m happy this one time to include Democrats, think 9/11 was symbolic enough of Islamic barbarism without having our noses rubbed in it.

The fact that the Muslim who’s promoting the scheme is a guy with ties to Hamas doesn’t seem to faze Bloomberg. But I guess when his fellow council members left council meetings in their Ferraris and Mr. Velez got on his bicycle, it did nothing to raise any red flags for him, either, but, then, Mr. Velez, unlike Bloomberg, isn’t a billionaire who’s thinking of running for president.

Speaking of elections, with November just around the corner, I’m already getting annoyed with some of my email. A number of conservatives are very upset that Ronald Reagan, for reasons they can’t quite grasp, isn’t going to be on their ballot.

Even more irritating are those nincompoops who insist they’re independents and enjoy announcing that they vote for the man, not the party.

Believe me, I understand that not every Republican is a saint and that not every Democrat is evil incarnate. But constantly repeating the mantra that both parties are alike, much like Bloomberg’s belief that the mosque will usher in an era of ecumenical brotherhood, is a prime example of mind-boggling naiveté.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock since January, 2009, you should have noticed that it has been Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their flock of liberal sheep, that have shoved bigger government; higher taxes; endless perks for unions; ObamaCare; an insane energy agenda; an equally loony illegal alien policy; and deficits that will bankrupt generations of Americans not yet born; down our throats, while managing to provide leftists Kagan and Sotomayor with lifetime sinecures; and it’s been Republicans who have done their best to fight back on our behalf.

As much as anyone, I’m aware that the Republicans, including John McCain, spent 2000-2006 trying to cuddle up to Ted Kennedy. But I have to believe they learned their lessons in the past two elections. If it turns out they didn’t, there’s time enough in 2012 to take them out behind the woodshed and paddle their butts.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓ 

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Keeping Tabs on Libs

by Burt Prelutsky

When it comes to liberals, there are simply not enough hours in a day for one person to record all of their mischief. Speaking for myself, even if I had a staff the size of Mrs. Obama, I’d probably still fall behind.

For instance, liberals love to pretend that “separation of church and state” appears in the Constitution, although I’m sure that most of them are aware that the words only appeared in a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association. What’s more, they in no way contradicted the First Amendment, which merely prohibited the federal government from establishing a state religion, such as existed in England. But on the other hand, when attacking the Second Amendment on the grounds that the Founders only wanted guns in the hands of “a well regulated militia,” those same liberals never bother mentioning that it was Jefferson who said “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms” and “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

Next, I hope that once all the primaries are over, conservatives will suck it up and vote for the victorious Republican candidate in November. I know it won’t always be easy, but it is essential that Nancy Pelosi loses the speakership, and the only way that happens is if the Democrats lose control of the House.

I’m aware that on a few occasions over the past 18 months, a few Republicans have lost their minds and voted with the liberals. In one case, it was the two ditzy women from Maine, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, voting for the stimulus bill. More recently, Scott Brown, who is the closest thing to a Republican who could have gotten elected in Massachusetts, joined the two ladies to vote for Obama’s financial regulation bill. It disgusted me as much as anyone that the three New Englanders jumped ship to aid and abet the enemy, but at least they have voted the right way more often than not, which is more than you could expect of the Democrats they defeated in their last elections.

It’s not just that liberals all vote the wrong way, but when it comes to sheer, blatant ignorance, you can’t beat them when they get going. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, for instance, claimed there were two Vietnams existing peacefully side-by-side, North and South Vietnam. Of course even if there were two such nations, we’d know them as East and West Vietnam. When the error was called to her attention, she naturally said she’d misspoken.

I guess it’s thanks to omnipresent technology that when they put their stupidity on display these days, politicians no longer insist they’ve been misquoted. Now, thanks to videos, open mikes and cell phone cameras, they have instead to insist that their lies, gaffes and absurdities, are all the result of misspeaking.

So it was that when Rep. Hank Johnson claimed to be worried that the island of Guam might tip over if too many American servicemen were stationed there, he quickly explained that he’d misspoken, as did Wisconsin state supervisor Peggy West after she’d taken Arizona to task for its immigration bill when, as any school child knows, it doesn’t even share a border with Mexico.

There are subtler forms of stupidity on the Left. We have Barack Obama declaring a six-month moratorium on off-shore drilling, thus doing everything in his power to destroy the Gulf’s economy, while at the same time refusing to drill in Alaska or the lower 48, and, for good measure, sending two billion dollars to Brazil to help them finance, of all things, off-shore drilling.

To take liberal stupidity to its logical extreme, we have Barack Obama, Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank, three of the schmoes most responsible for causing the financial meltdown, concocting a 2,500-page financial regulation bill. When someone asked me if I thought the three stooges had actually read the bill, I said I was certain that they had at least carefully scanned it. After all, how else could they be certain that their favorite lending institutions, the infamous Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would be excluded from any and all regulations?

Next on Obama’s agenda is likely to be cap and trade, which will do to American energy what British Petroleum did to Louisiana’s pelicans. Considering that Obama recently appointed that eminent proponent of wealth distribution, Dr. Donald Berwick, to oversee Medicare and Medicaid, I assume he will appoint Fred Flintstone to be energy czar.

Finally, no dirty laundry list of moronic liberals would be complete without Nevada’s number one sourpuss. It was Harry Reid who insisted that although it was possible, though highly unlikely, that somewhere there might be illegal aliens working in the construction trade, it certainly wasn’t happening in his home state.

In a related story, the Senate majority leader also announced that there were no hookers in Las Vegas.
©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓ 

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Parting Shots

by Burt Prelutsky

I have long been intrigued with the final words uttered by those on their actual or figurative deathbeds. The trouble, of course, is that you never know if the words were spontaneous or rehearsed, whether they were really spoken aloud or were conjured up after the fact by someone who hoped to gain for himself a piece of anonymous immortality by acting as a giving-up-the-ghost writer.

While I have no way of vouching for their authenticity, I regard the following farewells as among the most memorable.

Henry Ward Beecher said, “Now comes the mystery,” although I would have thought “Now comes the solution to the mystery” the more appropriate assumption on the part of the notable preacher.

Heinrich Heine, a rather presumptuous fellow even for a German poet, insisted, “God will pardon me. It is his trade.”

Humphrey Bogart mused, “I should have never switched from Scotch to martinis,” although a wiser decision regarding his vices would have been to kick the nicotine habit before it kicked him.

Luther Burbank, the noted horticulturist, might have been expected to come up with something a little more flowery than “I don’t feel good” if he had only known how just far from good he really felt.

Dylan Thomas, who seems to have been a rather competitive sort of fellow for a sot, boasted, “I have just had 18 whiskeys in a row. I do believe that is a record.”

Robert E. Lee, a military genius who never wasted ammunition or words, took his leave with the brisk “Strike the tent.”

Another Civil War general, John Sedgwick, while commanding Union forces at the Battle of Spotsylvania Courthouse, put southern snipers in their place by telling his cowering troops, “They couldn’t hit an elephant at this distance” a moment before they put him in his final resting place. It was Gen. Sedgwick’s misfortune that the Rebs didn’t happen to be hunting elephants that day.

Oscar Wilde confessed that he and his wallpaper were fighting a duel to the death and “One or the other of us has to go.” Alas, the wallpaper won and got to hang around a while longer.

When a French priest urged Voltaire, a committed atheist to renounce Satan, the old philosopher replied, “This is no time to make new enemies.”

A very witty line, but in strictly practical terms, it’s hard to beat convicted murderer James W. Bridges, who, when asked if he had a final request before facing a firing squad, replied, “Why, yes, a bulletproof vest.”

Still, when it comes to send-offs, you’d have a go a long way to top the one that Charlotte McCourt’s family came up with recently. After the passing of the longtime Nevada resident, her children published an obituary that read: “We believe that mom would say she was mortified to have taken a large role in the election of Harry Reid to the U.S. Congress. Let the record show that Charlotte was displeased with his work. Please, in lieu of flowers, vote for another more worthy candidate.”

In my own case, I plan to get to work immediately on some amusing, yet profound and touching, final words. My greatest fear is that before having the opportunity to deliver them, I will slip in the shower and in that nano-second prior to fatally conking my head on the porcelain, I will take leave of the world with an inexcusably trite “Whoops!”

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓ 

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Money, Mosques and Monkey Business

by Burt Prelutsky

By this time, I’m sure you’ve all heard Senators Coburn and McCain reporting on all the goofy nonsense that has been financed by Obama’s trillion-dollar stimulus bill. But in case you missed the announcement, some of the items were new windows for a tourist center that’s been closed since 2007 and that nobody plans to re-open; a study of grandparent roles in Alaska; international ant research; repairing a sidewalk that leads to a ditch in Boynton, Oklahoma; $760,000 to study improvised music; $200,000 to help Siberian communities lobby Russian policy makers; and $700,000 to study why monkeys respond negatively to inequity.

As with all federal boondoggles, you don’t know whether to laugh or cry. But that’s what happens when politicians get to spend other people’s money. For them, it’s play money, just a variation on Monopoly. When the dough isn’t coming out of your own pocket, it isn’t real. Who, after all, gives a second thought to building hotels on Park Place and Boardwalk?

The obvious fact about the stimulus bill is that the money didn’t go, as the administration claimed it would, towards creating shovel-ready jobs. Obama promised that if the bill were passed, unemployment wouldn’t reach eight percent. So Pelosi and Reid did what they do best, which is to give their congressional colleagues the choice of taking a bribe or getting a beating, and managed to get the bill passed. Then, as anyone who’s not a liberal could have told you, two things happened. One, the unemployment rate hit 10%; two, Obama blamed Bush.

The one element that has gone missing in all the expert analysis of the bill is how much money a trillion dollars really is. When I used to subscribe to the L.A. Times, I was always amused by how often the reporters confused “million” and “billion.” Rarely a day went by when the paper didn’t have to run a correction. Well, just in case you, too, are confused by large numbers, a million looks like this: 1,000,000, whereas a billion looks like this: 1,000,000,000. It is a thousand million. A trillion, which is a thousand billion, looks like this: 1,000,000,000,000.

Now, before your head explodes, it means that instead of blowing it on all those goofy pork projects, Obama could have sent 20 million American taxpayers checks for $50,000. Or he could have sent 100 million of us checks for $10,000. I can assure you that those checks would have stimulated the economy a hell of a lot more than blowing it on angry monkeys and funding Siberian malcontents.

Perhaps this is why in a recent Gallup poll, the generic Republican congressional candidate leads the generic Democrat 48% to 43%. As I see it, the only drawback is that the GOP will have to field actual, not generic, candidates in November.

Before moving on, it bears noting that when she was pressuring her colleagues to pass the stimulus bill, Mrs. Chicken Little, otherwise known as Nancy Pelosi, warned us all that without its passage 500 million Americans would lose their jobs. Apparently, none of her cronies wanted to embarrass the House Speaker by pointing out that our entire population, counting babies, toddlers and illegal aliens, is just slightly over 300 million.

Finally, I’m annoyed but not surprised that New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg is on board for the 13-story mosque to be built adjacent to Ground Zero. But when you realize that New Yorkers keep re-electing this yutz, even allowing him to break the rule regarding term limits so that they could elect him a third time, I say they deserve to be forced to suck it up and live with the grotesque monument to Islamic barbarism.

Bloomberg, like most liberals, likes to think of himself as sensitive, wise, ecumenical, open-minded and compassionate, when in fact he is a world-class boob who just happens to be rich, and he richly deserves to be played for a sucker by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his fascistic cronies in CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), the public relations arm of Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah.

Next week, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Mr. Rauf has sold Bloomberg a controlling interest in the Brooklyn Bridge.
[Revised version posted August 6, 2010. - ed.]

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓

Sunday, August 1, 2010

Left-Wingers and the People Who Hate Them

by Burt Prelutsky

Now I know how liberals felt 40 years ago when they failed to make the cut on Richard Nixon’s notorious enemies list. Even after reading Townhall magazine’s list of the 100 Americans the Left Hates the Most, and checking it twice, I didn’t find my name mentioned. The ground rules were that you had to be living and you had to be American, which were the reasons, the editors took pains to point out, that Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, Mark Steyn and the Pope, weren’t included, but would hardly explain my own absence.

I can only assume that Michael Barone nosed me out for the final slot. In fact, at the top of my wish list is that after the November elections, there will be about 65 million of us tied for 101st place.

Even if I was beaten out by a bunch of Republican politicians and media pundits, it doesn’t prevent me from being at or near the top of the list when it comes to those who most despise liberals. For instance, how can the folks in New York City continue re-electing a yutz like Michael Bloomberg? It was he, let us never forget, who confidently predicted that the Times Square bomber would turn out to be “a home-grown, maybe a mentally-deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health bill or something.” His lack of speaking skills aside, did anyone notice that he never said “Me bad” or words to that effect when Islamic terrorist Faisal Shahzad, and not some elderly conservative pharmacist from Nebraska, was escorted off the Dubai-bound jetliner? For the record, I don’t believe the authorities ever asked Mr. Shahzad how he felt about ObamaCare.

Very often, I hear from readers complaining about the crooks, crumbs and left-wing chumps, who theoretically represent them in Washington. I can empathize, but nobody has better reason to complain than yours truly. Not only are my senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, otherwise known as Dumb and Dumber, but my congressman is Brad Sherman. In case his name isn’t quite as familiar as that of his friend and colleague, Henry Waxman, I’ll remind you that Sherman is the cluck who joined Waxman and 73 of their congressional cronies in voting to continue federal funding of ACORN even after the infamous tapes exposed the group as a willing, even eager, co-conspirator in criminal activities involving under-age Latina prostitutes.

More recently, Rep. Sherman held a Townhall meeting and raised a firestorm when he initially denied that the Justice Department had decided that it would refuse to prosecute black-on-white civil rights cases. Once his more vocal constituents let him know about the New Black Panther case, he insisted that he’d never heard of it. Which meant, among other things, that he was unaware that Department of Justice official J. Christian Adams had resigned over the issue so that he would be free to give sworn testimony before the Civil Rights Commission.

When he was then asked how it was possible that he was totally unaware of the facts, which had been well-covered by Fox News, the Drudge Report and on any number of blogs and talk radio shows, Sherman blithely announced that he hadn’t come across the news in any of his regular sources, which included the L.A. Times, the Economist, Newsweek, the L.A. Daily News, the Congressional Quarterly and the National Journal. Frankly, I was surprised not to see the New York Times or the Washington Post mentioned, and I suspect he doesn’t actually read the Economist, either, but decided the rest of his reading list wasn’t very impressive and might lead Katie Couric to make fun of him.

Unlike Ms. Couric, I would never stoop to that sort of ridicule. Instead, I’ll simply point out that if you call this schmuck a pinhead, it’s not an insult, it’s the literal truth. A while back, my wife and I actually attended one of his Townhall meetings and I was shocked to discover that not only is he even dumber and smarmier in person than he is on TV, but he has the tiniest head I have ever seen on a grown-up. It’s as if he had been captured by pygmies who decided to shrink his head while it was still attached to his neck, but were then interrupted halfway through the process. Unfortunately, that was before they got to the really good part where they sew up their victim’s mouth.

Still, as we all know, it’s not just liberal politicians and media propagandists who give us all so much reason to despise them. Not too long ago, we had Michelle Obama, pausing in her mission to take candy from America’s babies, visit the oil-smeared Gulf and tell Americans how pristine the beaches are, and how we should all go there on our summer vacations. That came right around the time we all learned that the Obamas were taking theirs in Maine, which is about as far from Florida and Louisiana as you can get without vacationing in Nova Scotia.

If I remember correctly, she also insisted that we should all become better Americans by learning to speak Spanish, not that she or Barack had any such plans. This woman hands out so much bull hockey, I’m even beginning to wonder if she feeds Malia and Natasha Cocoa Pops for breakfast.

Just before taking off for Maine, our First Lady found the time to make an appearance at the NAACP convention and lead the left-wing rabble-rousers in a chorus of blame whitey. Somehow, when the president is black, his wife is black, his attorney general is black and his friend, Oprah Winfrey, is not only black, but probably the richest woman in the country, it strikes me as fatuous, if not downright loony, to keep insisting that America is a nation of bigots.

For sheer gall, it’s hard to beat the NAACP, a group dedicated to a racist agenda, having the gall to condemn the Tea Party movement as racist. It strikes me as an obvious attempt on the part of the black pot to besmirch the innocent kettle.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to:

Want more Burt? Check the ARCHIVES →

To send this article, click the envelope icon↓