Thursday, February 25, 2010

Judge Not

by Burt Prelutsky

I have always heard that confession is good for the soul, but I’m not so sure I believe it. Maybe it’s true if you’re a Catholic and confession plays a big role in your religion. But of course they’re dealing with professionals. Not only are priests sworn to take your tawdry little secrets to the grave, but after a week or so on the job, they’ve heard it all. I suspect you’d have to be Jeffrey Dahmer or Osama bin Laden to even get their attention.

For the rest of us, though, confession runs the very real risk of providing our enemies with ammo. Be that as it may, the burden of keeping my secret has simply become too great. You see, until he died a few years ago, one of my very best friends was a lawyer. Bad, you’re probably saying, but not so awful. But the trouble is, I did all I could to encourage him in pursuing and ultimately achieving his dream of becoming a judge. And the man was a…liberal!

I know that the more tender-hearted of you are saying, “Well, that’s not so terrible. Friendship, after all, trumps politics.” But in your heart of hearts, I know you think less of me. After all, I’m the same guy who has vowed I’d never vote for a Democrat because I never want liberals in a position to appoint like-minded judges. For long after the politicians have retired, been voted out of office or died and gone to that big pork barrel in the sky, those judicial appointments live on like a witch’s curse.

As a former movie critic, the portrayal of judges in films has always been fascinating. Back in the 30s and 40s, when westerns were in vogue, judges were usually portrayed as sneaky and corrupt – often in league with a crooked banker. If there was a dollar lying around, the western judge wanted his fifty cents.

In comedies of that period, judges were often comically cantankerous characters. They were usually honest enough, but the actors had to know how to do a slow burn, a double take, and be able to pound a gavel like Gene Krupa on speed.

Once in a while, as in MGM’s Hardy family movies, a judge was depicted as the fount of all wisdom. Interestingly enough, although there were sixteen movies in the series, I don’t recall ever seeing Judge James Hardy on the bench. We only got to see him doling out Solomon-like lectures to his son Andy. After a while, I began to wonder if he was really a judge at all. I found myself believing he was merely a harmless small town eccentric who only thought he was a judge. One never saw Mrs. Hardy ironing his robe, and he always seemed to be sitting in his den just waiting to give young Andrew a good talking-to.

But nobody has ever really shown us judges on screen in a way that truly captured their villainy. Maybe it’s because audiences would run screaming from theatres if faced with a liberal doling out his version of justice.

It seems to me that it all began in the 50’s with the Warren Court. No longer were Supreme Court justices satisfied with merely interpreting the law. They found it far more gratifying to create it. Besides if they did it themselves, thus eliminating those annoying middlemen on Capitol Hill, it was automatically constitutional. The joke in Hollywood is that everyone from half-witted actors to the pope wants to direct. The joke in Washington is that everyone wants to legislate. Only it’s no joke when it comes to activist judges.

It’s perfectly reasonable that each of the three branches of government regards the other two as totally expendable. We the people tend to go them one better, viewing all three pretty much that way. But of the three, at least until Obama and his crew of Chicago cronies came to town, it’s been the judicial branch that has enjoyed the greatest success when it came to encroaching on the turf of the other two. And, unfortunately, they’re the only ones we don’t get to vote on. So long as they don’t run amok with Uzis and shoot up Pennsylvania Avenue, they can be as crazy as poodles and there’s not a thing any of us can do about it. England has only one fanny sitting on the throne; we have nine, and that’s not counting all the folks in the wings, biding their time on the various courts of appeal.

By expanding the interpretation of the Constitution as if the thing had not been written on parchment, but on a balloon, the Court over the past five decades has intruded itself into every segment of society.

The danger, whether or not you agree with certain court decisions, is that if the folks paid to protect the Constitution are choosing to ignore its own self-proclaimed limitations, we’re all in big trouble. If the Court can grant itself the authority to legislate everything from abortion to grade school curriculum, we might as well send all the senators and congressmen home. Then, for good measure, we can lock up all the state houses and send all the governors and assemblymen packing. Actually, now that I think about it, that part doesn’t sound so bad.

In any case, if I’m going to be stuck with judges, I prefer the conservative variety because I believe they’re more likely to understand that the gentlemen who wrote the Constitution never wanted all the power of the nation vested in the hands of nine political appointees. I also believe they’re far more likely to accept the fact that in spite of the lifetime tenure, the fancy silk robes, and the horde of sycophants eager to kiss their feet and polish their halos, they’re still mere mortals, and not gods.

Gods, after all, have to actually work for a living.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.
  

Monday, February 22, 2010

E Pluribus Pluribus

by Burt Prelutsky

If e pluribus unum means, as I believe, out of many, one; America needs a new motto. The days when people came here from all over the world in order to become one people seem to have disappeared. Now we are a people with dual citizenships, whatever the hell that is, and we walk around with more hyphens than the English gentry.

You would think that instead of coming here to become Americans, pledging, in the ringing words of Thomas Jefferson, their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, they come as tourists and visitors.

Even those who aren’t foreign-born play up their status as members of minority groups. Well, it so happens that I’m a member of several such groups. I am short, bald, Jewish and male. Unfortunately, none of those groups are among those that receive special dispensations from the government or from society at large. While I hate to sulk over such matters, it really doesn’t seem fair that I am excluded when so many millions of people are receiving money, special treatment and a constant outpouring of sympathy.

For instance, consider those folks who are now referred to as Native Americans, although that strikes me as odd, inasmuch as their ancestors never called this place America. Heck, President Obama even took the time, for some bizarre reason, to praise some of them when he took the stage to initially comment on the massacre that took place at Fort Hood.

There is also a lot of phony baloney attached to those who have also been called noble savages, although there was often far more savagery than nobility in their makeup. But, as is usually the case, there were good Indians and there were bad ones. There were and are also really stupid ones, the ones who periodically get up in arms over the names of various high school, college and professional, sports teams. Call a team the Spicks, the Nips, the Krauts, the Dagos, the Chinks and the Yids, and certain people might have a gripe coming. But call a team the Braves, the Chiefs and the Redskins, and it’s hardly an insult. People of all races and creeds cheer for those teams.

There is a reason, after all, that some teams are called the Tigers, the Lions, the Bears, the Falcons and the Eagles, but none that are named the Rats, the Mice, the Shrews or the Cockroaches, although I think there are a few that deserve to be. They can’t all be the Angels, the Saints, the Padres and the Patriots.

Frankly, instead of whining about the nomenclature, Native Americans should learn to distinguish between an insult and a compliment.

Speaking of minority groups, as unlikely as it might seem, I’d like to take a moment to defend Harry Reid, Joe Biden and Chris Matthews. When Reid referred to Negroes, when Biden called Obama clean and when Matthews confessed that for an hour or so during the State of the Union address, he actually forgot that Obama was black, they were expressing -- perhaps for the first time in their lives -- exactly how they and their fellow liberals actually feel about black Americans. Some might call it patronizing or condescending, but I, for one, prefer honesty to political pandering.

What’s more, a half century after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, and after two of the last three secretaries of state, the current attorney general and the president of the United States, have all been black men and women, liberals continue to insist this is a racially oppressive society. They continue to push for affirmative action and preferential treatment for black Americans. If that doesn’t say everything you need to know about the way white liberals regard blacks, you’re either not paying attention or you have a stake in keeping 14% of the population on the plantation.

On the other hand, considering the fact that 90% of blacks continue to vote for left-wingers suggests that blacks, themselves, share that same low opinion and wish, for reasons of their own, to validate it every time there’s an election.

I forgot to mention another minority group to which I belong: sane people, otherwise known as conservatives. But I have a hunch their numbers are increasing on a daily basis and will soon become a majority. And I will then have to fall back on merely being short, bald, Jewish, male and as cute as a button.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.
  

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Conservatively Speaking

by Burt Prelutsky

Sometimes, when we’re out in public and I begin talking about the personalities and policies of various liberals, my wife Yvonne will start looking around to see if anyone is staring or throwing daggers in my direction. Such is life for a conservative in Los Angeles.

I’m sure that in other parts of the country -- Texas in particular, if I may judge by my email -- people on the right can speak more freely. What that suggests to me is that one-size-fits-all political litmus tests don’t work. So, as much as I embrace the spirit of the Tea Party movement, I don’t want to see it hindering Republicans from regaining control of the House and Senate in 2010. I don’t want to see the Democrats winning elections next November because right-wing voters have been divided and thus conquered.

I very much wish to see the most conservative candidates winning primary elections, but if it happens that moderates win in June, I’d hate to see any conservatives sitting home in November, nursing their piques while liberals high-five each other.

To a certain extent, we must make allowances for geographical differences. A Republican in the northeast is not going to be a clone of one in the southwest. Not if he or she expects to be elected. I am delighted that Scott Brown deprived Obama of his magical 60th vote, but not in my wildest dreams do I expect Sen. Brown to be as staunch a conservative as, say, John Cornyn.

The main order of business next November should be electing people dedicated to undoing all the dangerous mischief that Obama, Pelosi and Reid, have done. In fact, at the 2012 national convention, along with honoring Abe Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, I think the RNC should pay a special tribute to Barack Obama for having done so much to unite the party. The fact is, after the 2008 elections, it appeared that the GOP was ready to go the way of the Whigs, the Bull Moosers and the dodo bird.

On a personal note, I was recently gratified to find one of my quotes being widely disseminated on the Internet. It was the line about the last time that most people have encountered the likes of three women such as California’s Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi, was when the curtain went up on “Macbeth.”

Those words did appear in an article I wrote a while back, “The New and Improved Iron Curtain,” but, just to set the record straight, the article did not appear in the L.A. Times. Although I did write a humor column for the Times for 11 years, the relationship ended in 1978. These days, the rag exists mainly as a propaganda machine for Obama. They won’t even run my letters to the editor, let alone my articles.

Also, on a personal note, I wish to announce that I plan to run for president or at least vice-president in 2012. I always knew that one of the best ways for a conservative to get a book published and sold was to host a radio or TV show, but not only don’t I have my own show, but nobody who does have one, aside from San Francisco’s Lee Rodgers, seems the least bit inclined to have me on as a guest.

The other way to get on the Best Seller lists is to be a former president. But I didn’t want to be a politician and have to spend my life hanging around people like Charles Rangel, Robert Byrd, Arlen Specter, Barbara Lee or Henry Waxman. Would you? It’s one thing, after all, to sacrifice your life for America, as members of our military do every day, but quite another to sacrifice your sanity.

But when I saw how many copies of “Going Rogue” Sarah Palin sold compared to my shorter, wittier and far more readable “Liberals: America’s Termites (or It’s a Shame That Liberals, Unlike Hamsters, Never Eat Their Young)” I realized I wouldn’t actually have to win an election; I’d merely have to run.

Getting back to my second favorite subject – namely, liberals -- doesn’t it seem odd that left-wing big wigs keep getting their political ambitions caught in their zippers? A short list includes Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, Jesse Jackson and John Edwards. Even Jimmy Carter embarrassed himself in a Playboy interview by announcing that at times he had had lust in his heart. Of course only a sanctimonious phony like Carter would suggest that lust lurks in the heart when everyone knows that it’s love that resides in that particular organ. Lust, as even Carter should know, hangs out in the lower regions.

Unlike his left-wing cronies, apparently Al Gore only lusts after money, adoration and cheeseburgers.

Finally, we should all acknowledge that people can manage to live exemplary lives without being religiously observant. But when one looks back over the past several months, a period that includes the elections in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts, along with the passing of Ted Kennedy and John Murtha, it’s pretty tough for any honest conservative to deny that God not only exists, but that He’s been working overtime.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.
 

Monday, February 15, 2010

A Few Good Reasons To Despise Liberals

by Burt Prelutsky

When it comes to politicians in general, it’s extremely difficult to avoid using obscenities. In fact, when it comes to left-wing politicians, I find it takes every last bit of will power I possess. Really, aside from those occasions when I’m cut off in traffic by some yutz who’s busy texting or twittering or when I commit an unforced error on the tennis court, I’m not given to cursing. But five minutes of liberal blather and I find myself turning into a reincarnated George Carlin.

My problem with left-wingers isn’t simply that I believe they’re wrong about everything, but that they’re such blatant hypocrites. They not only don’t say what they mean, but even in the face of objective evidence, they will deny having said what they said and will never admit they made a mistake. What’s more, they will condemn conservatives for having done and said what they, themselves, said and did. That includes demanding regime change in Iraq, voting to invade Iraq, making racist remarks and engaging in voter fraud.

Those on the Left incessantly blame George W. Bush for the financial meltdown even though it was primarily Christopher Dodd, Barney Frank and Barack Obama, along with their congressional cronies, who forced the banks and lending institutions to give home loans to people who could barely afford to rent a cave. For good measure, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both of which had contributed generously to the campaign coffers of Obama, Frank and Dodd, turned a blind eye to the insane practice.

Those who support progressive politicians are prone to be guided by their desire to be regarded as compassionate even though, time and again, history shows the end results to be catastrophic. Liberals who want the federal government to run every aspect of our lives because they’re convinced that is the path to utopia, are certifiably nuts. The reason I say that is because even if they were correct in believing that Washington, D.C., should be all-powerful, half the time all of that unlimited power will be in the hands of Republicans! If I’m terrified of a government run by liberals, why aren’t they equally fearful of one led by conservatives?

It doesn’t surprise me that single women without children inevitably favor the Left. They are, after all, generally inexperienced when it comes to thinking about anyone but themselves. As a result, they are quite content paying lip service to a federal government that will take pretty near every responsibility off their shoulders, leaving them free to concentrate on their careers, available men and their hair.

With Washington doling out tax dollars to the poor and needy, they don’t even have to bother donating to charity. However, it does surprise me how many single men feel the same way. In the past, I used to wonder where all the girly men came from, but then I remembered 50 years worth of rock concerts where young guys would shamelessly stand and gently sway while holding lighted candles aloft. Where, I’d like to know, are the Hell’s Angels when you really need them?

A recent Rasmussen poll showed that 45% of us believe a group of people selected at random from the telephone book would do a better job of addressing the nation’s problems than the current Congress, while 36% disagree and 19% are undecided. The 36% are clearly hopeless cases, but I think I could win over the 19% who are on the fence by pointing out that such big wigs as Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, Waxman, Murtha, Grayson and Rangel, aren’t listed in the phone book.

I am not a big fan of John McCain because I don’t believe that a Republican -- let alone a Republican presidential candidate -- should be in favor of shutting down Gitmo and offering amnesty to illegal aliens or opposing enhanced interrogations and drilling in ANWR. Having said that, I would like to use a baseball bat on the NY Times’ Frank Rich for having written that Sen. McCain “epitomizes the unpatriotic opposition.” Apparently, in some addled minds, spending 30 years at the NY Times, going to plays and pontificating, trumps five and a half years residence at the Hanoi Hilton.

Finally, can I respectfully ask that Barack Obama shuts up and not deliver a speech for, say, the next half hour?

It’s not just the sound of his voice that grates on my nerves, it’s all the damn lies he spouts. It’s the constant jibber-jabber about transparency, about bi-partisanship and putting an end to pork barrel politics. It’s about announcing that there will be no place for lobbyists in the Obama administration and then rolling out the red carpet for 30 of the weasels. It’s also about painting Goldman Sachs as evil incarnate and then surrounding himself with a slew of advisors who are -- gasp! -- former Goldman Sachs executives.

Where, we should ask ourselves, does the president muster sufficient chutzpah to blame Republicans for obstructionism when his own party has overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate? For all the talk about Scott Brown’s costing Obama that magical 60th vote, he had 60 votes for over a year and, let us not forget, it only takes 51 votes to pass most bills. But even with 60 Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid’s bribes and Nancy Pelosi’s magical pole vault, Obama was unable to get CastroCare passed.

I only wish I could give credit to the GOP, but it was the American people, otherwise known as astroturfers and tea-baggers, who stopped that runaway freight train.

Finally, proving that I can be every bit as bi-partisan as Barack Obama, is it too much to ask of conservative pundits that they stop telling us that the president gives great speeches? I happen to know a great speech when I hear or read one. Some of them have been given by Jesus Christ, Abe Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan and even by Franklin Roosevelt.

But, anyone, after all, can read lines off a script, but the one thing that makes a speech memorable is that you believe that the words are coming straight from the heart.

Frankly, I don’t even know if President Obama has a heart or merely an agenda. What I do know is that I, for one, have yet to hear him give a single address, unless it concerned the redistribution of wealth, the glorification of unions or the nationalization of entire industries, that wasn’t entirely contradicted by his actions.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Palin And Prelutsky Sitting In A Tree

by Burt Prelutsky

Because of Joe McCarthy’s critics, we have been told time and again that guilt by association is a cardinal sin. But I contend it makes perfect sense to judge people by their friends, but also by their enemies. Who hasn’t said, upon meeting another person, “Any friend of so-and-so is a friend of mine”? And who doesn’t subscribe to the adage that the enemy of my enemy is my friend?

I only wish that more people had paid closer attention to Barack Obama’s circle of friends in Chicago before he got to move to Washington and form an even more vicious circle.

What brings this to mind is the unending vituperation directed at Sarah Palin. So far as I’m concerned, anyone who can give conniption fits to Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, Ellis Henican, Keith Olbermann and David Letterman, the way that Alaska’s favorite daughter can is aces in my book.

One of the things that motivates their contempt for Mrs. Palin is her alleged lack of smarts. However, if she were as dumb as they claim, they wouldn’t have to shove words she never spoke in her mouth. After all, when it comes to leftists such as Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Alan Grayson, Henry Waxman, Charles Rangel and Barbara Boxer, we on the right merely have to quote them verbatim to make our case. I mean, I know Mrs. Palin didn’t attend an Ivy League school, but does any reasonably rational person actually believe that she doesn’t know the difference between North and South Korea?

For another thing, it does not require a 180 I.Q. to be president of the United States. I realize that liberals, who generally regard themselves as big brains, place undue emphasis on intellect. As a result, they have convinced themselves, against all evidence, that Jimmy Carter, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama are positively brilliant, and that in their presence Albert Einstein would turn absolutely green with envy. But, as usual, they confuse egos with brains.

What an American president requires is noble character, an abundance of common sense and the sincere conviction that America, as created by our divinely-inspired Founding Fathers, is, by any measure, the greatest nation ever conceived.

Having now read Sarah Palin’s “Going Rogue,” I am convinced that she is eminently qualified to be president. She probably won’t win any prizes for her book, no matter how many copies she sells. After all, unlike the darling of the Left, she doesn’t boast about smoking pot in college, seeking out radicals and revolutionaries among the student body or Communists among the faculty.

Finally, there are three particular items in Palin’s resume that convince me that she possesses the right stuff to serve honorably in the Oval Office. One, she was never a lawyer. Two, in line with her principles -- and proving that she has principles that aren’t a mere bagatelle she dusts off during elections -- she never hesitated to give birth to Trig, her Down syndrome baby. And, three, unlike Gore, the Clintons, Barney Frank and the Obamas, she, like Abe Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, didn’t, I’ll remind you, attend an Ivy League school.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.
 

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Searching For Intelligent Life On The Left

by Burt Prelutsky

It’s easy to see why liberals are convinced that they’re superior to conservatives. For one thing, in nearly all cases, professors in the liberal arts and members of the mainstream media are left-wingers. But you don’t have to be very intelligent or even the slightest bit honest to make one’s living in either field. To be a liberal arts professor, the major prerequisite is a willingness to endure sitting in classrooms from the time you’re six years old until the day you die. Once you’re into your post-graduate years, you merely have to concentrate on your specialty, be it Elizabethan poetry or the mating habits of the loon. That hardly bestows genius status on anyone. In fact, if you spot one of these bores headed your way at a cocktail party, my advice is to either feign a case of the vapors or grab your hat and go home.

The requirements for working in the mass media are even less stringent. You merely have to be hired. If you work in front of the camera, it goes without saying that you do have to have nice hair.

While I acknowledge that being a member of these professions is not absolute proof that one is an ignoramus. But neither is it a sign of superior intellect. Least of all is it an indicator of wisdom.

In fact, just about the only thing one can garner about these people is based, not on their occupation, but their politics, which shows them to possess the intellectual curiosity and independent thought of sheep.

There is a reason, after all, that liberals will unquestioningly accept all sorts of claptrap. For instance, like small children covering their ears and chanting, “Can’t hear you!” they ignore the fact that the earth’s temperature has been declining over the past decade, that Al Gore has been lining the pockets of his parka with bald-faced lies and that the East Anglia emails, aka Climategate, prove that academics, along with “scientists” affiliated with the United Nations, have been promoting the global warming hoax for their own selfish purposes.

Liberals want to expunge the Second Amendment from the Constitution even though the data proves that wherever law-abiding citizens, and not just the criminal element, carry concealed weapons, the crime statistics quite logically decline. Because liberals ignore facts about guns just as they do about freezing temperatures, even as their teeth are chattering like castanets, they refuse to debate the opposition, preferring to merely debase them.

Liberals don’t even question their like-minded politicians when folks like Obama, Pelosi and Reid, insist that it is possible to add millions of people to the Medicaid rolls, lower the minimum age for coverage to 55, and simultaneously cut costs without affecting care for the elderly. I do seem to recall Obama’s stating that a massive savings would come about through the elimination of medical fraud, but you can forget about a true blue left-winger ever asking him how he intends to go about it; or why, after all this time, he hasn’t even begun.

Liberals can be counted on to oppose drilling for oil in ANWR because they’re so concerned about the caribou and about spoiling the ecological state of frozen tundra. The fact that drilling for oil in Alaska would no more bother the caribou than drilling in Texas annoys jack rabbits, and that anything that affects frozen tundra would obviously be an improvement, doesn’t faze these blowhards in the least. But, then, neither does the fact that ANWR is nothing more than a tiny speck in our largest state, or the indisputable fact that the overwhelming majority of Alaskans are in favor of drilling.

But, of course, there aren’t a lot of academic pinheads residing in our 49th state and the only time the MSM types ever set foot within a thousand miles of caribou is when they head north, panning for dirt about Sarah Palin.

If the only thing that those on the Left lacked was intelligence, it would be bad enough, but that wouldn’t necessarily make them insufferable. But their ignorance is compounded by their snobbery. I mean, when egotistical lunkheads like Joy Behar, Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, Henry Waxman, Bill Maher, Janeane Garofalo, Barbara Boxer, Barney Frank, Keith Olbermann, Al Franken and Danny Glover, are convinced that they are intellectually superior to Charles Krauthammer, Andrew Breitbart, Glenn Beck, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Rush Limbaugh, Jonah Goldberg, Ralph Peters, Michelle Malkin, Ronald Radosh, Dick Morris, Ann Coulter and Bernie Goldberg, you have to wonder if they also believe that the moon is made of blue cheese. But, of course, if it were, Al Gore would be out peddling Uncle Al’s Roquefort Dressing.

But worst of all is the belief widely held by liberals that they are nicer and far more decent than those Americans who happen to be conservatives; you know, the poor besotted folks that those compassionate liberals are only too happy to label fascists, Nazis, racists and astroturfers. Their conviction seems to be based in large part on the peculiar notion that if you object to Obama’s transformation of America from thriving free-market capitalism to state-run socialism, you must be a bigot. However, when they dismiss Condoleezza Rice, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas, as oreos and Uncle Toms, that merely proves that they, rather than DNA or pigmentation, can truly determine racial identity.

Ideologically, these moral cretins embrace the beliefs of Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara, and physically embrace the likes of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez.

These self-anointed intellectuals are people who think that those who believe in God and Jesus Christ, those who “cling to their guns and their religion,” are a lower form of animal life, while they, themselves, have no problem whatever accepting Obama as a messiah and, in the past, deifying the likes of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.

Let’s face it, when you kneel in a church, you’re accepting that there is something greater and wiser than yourself in the universe. When, on the other hand, you kneel to a left-wing politician, you’re merely emulating Monica Lewinsky.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: Burt@BurtPrelutsky.com.
 

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Obama And FDR: Birds Of A Feather

by Burt Prelutsky

The way that the axis of evil -- otherwise known as Obama, Pelosi and Reid -- are trashing the Constitution, you’d think it was parchment toilet paper.

That’s why I would give anything to see the likes of Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison and Franklin, come back to life and treat the liberal rabble the way that American patriots once dealt with English tea.

If the Founding Fathers were to make a return appearance and see what has become of their noble experiment, they would have reason to regret all the time, blood, sweat and tears, they expended wrangling over the wording of that sacred document.

This isn’t the first time that a president with a dictatorial bent has tried to ignore the Constitution. Most notably, in the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, aided and abetted by his own versions of David Axelrod, Van Jones, Andy Stern and Cass Sunstein, tried to transform America’s economy from free-market capitalism to Soviet-style socialism.

Because, like Barack Hussein Obama, FDR had a lap dog Congress, willing and eager to rubber-stamp his loony left-wing agenda, the only thing holding him back was the Supreme Court. But, instead of accepting limitations on his authority, FDR responded by attempting to pack the Court. His plan was to raise the number of justices from nine to 14. He figured that if he could personally select five additional justices, it would ensure his controlling all three branches of the federal government.

So it was that long before Obama’s favorite hatchet man, Rahm Emanuel, announced that a crisis is a terrible thing to waste, FDR attempted to use the Great Depression to gobble up unlimited power.

Fortunately, there were a number of Americans, including Democrats, who were noticing what was taking place in Germany, Italy and the Soviet Union, at the time, and were not anxious to see FDR take his place alongside Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin.

By this time, every American should realize that financial downturns, much like the earth’s climate changes, are cyclical in nature. However, tyranny, like suicide, is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

As things turned out, thanks to death and retirement, FDR was able to appoint eight justices, seven of them between 1937 and 1941, including such fawning disciples as Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter and William O. Douglas.

Although George Washington was content to serve eight years and then retire to Mount Vernon, it took death to finally evict FDR from the White House.

Obama, who not only shares FDR’s addiction to cigarettes, but his hunger for power and his determination to radically transform America, is, I believe, the greatest threat that has ever faced our nation. As bleak as things are, the silver lining is that he is the man who campaigned on behalf of R. Creigh Deeds, Jon Corzine and, most recently, Martha Coakley. At this point, it’s only a rumor, but I’ve heard that the RNC is negotiating with the president to campaign non-stop for Democratic candidates later this year.

It would appear that any liberal who thinks that he can be re-elected next November by riding Obama’s coattails will be in for a rude awakening. Based on his record thus far, if Obama was a baseball team, he would be the Chicago Black Sox; if he was a disease, he’d be the bubonic plague; and if he was a ship, he’d be the Titanic.

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: Burt@BurtPrelutsky.com.
 

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

My State Of The Union Speech

by Burt Prelutsky

Although I much prefer pointing out the shortcomings of others, honestly compels me to confess my own. In my case, my mortal sin is envy.

As I sat home watching Barack Obama deliver the latest of the 6,897 speeches he’s given since assuming the presidency, and trying to figure out if Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi had made a friendly wager as to which of them could stand up the most times in 90 minutes, I realized that I wish that people would respond like trained seals for me the way they do for whomever happens to be the commander-in-chief.

Even though I like to imagine that my readers are laughing, nodding in agreement and applauding on cue, I realize it’s at best only a boyish pipedream. Still, I was raised to believe that in America, anything is possible.

With that in mind, let us continue.

Recently, I learned that in California schools, they use history textbooks that devote 55 pages to the glories of Islam, roughly one page to Christianity and a single line to Judaism. What’s more, there are days set aside during the semester when the children are expected to show up dressed as Muslims. I believe that, for extra credit, the kids are encouraged to perform honor killings. (laughter and applause)

When President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, he said that he was planning to donate the 1.4 million dollars to a charity to be named later. So far as I’m aware, he still hadn’t named the lucky charity. Which may be the reason that rumors are going around that the recipient of his largesse is the Society to Enhance Michelle’s Wardrobe and Spare Her Having to Wear Oprah’s Hand-Me-Downs Foundation. (general laughter)

Liberals, who never had a kind word to say about Dwight Eisenhower, the man who twice saved us from having Adlai Stevenson in the White House, never weary of repeating his dire warning about the military-industrial complex. I always found it peculiar that Ike decided to make that remark as he was leaving the White House in 1961. Funny how differently General Eisenhower felt about that particular complex when he was waging war against the Nazis two decades earlier! (applause)

During the State of the Union speech, it was pretty obvious from their stern looks how the Chiefs of Staff felt about Obama’s promise to do away with their don’t ask/don’t tell policy, but harder to read the nine Supreme Court justices when he told the world how he felt about their reversal of the clearly unconstitutional McCain-Feingold bill. There are few things more entertaining than watching a guy who received upwards of a hundred million dollars in campaign contributions from left-wing union bosses announcing how terrible it would be for corporations to taint the election process by giving equal amounts to conservative candidates. This, by the way, is the same political hack who first said he would accept public funding of his presidential campaign, but then changed his mind once he discovered how deep he could dive into the pockets of George Soros, the SEIU, ACORN, the UAW, defense attorneys and Hollywood airheads. (applause and occasional shouts of “Hear! Hear!”)

Speaking of paying for political favors, inquiring minds want to know if Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu have to return their bribes now that ObamaCare has been given the big thumbs down by one of Obama’s very own death panels. (laughter and applause)

The other day, while thinking about the fact that things such as the Copenhagen global-warming fiasco; the East Anglia Climategate scandal; Obama’s absolute lack of transparency; his packing his administration with lobbyists and tax cheats; the lock-outs of Republicans by Pelosi and Reid from the legislative process; the trashing of the Tea Party participants by the Democrats; and the insistence by Obama that conservatives sit down and shut up; are either ignored or sanctioned by the mass media, I found myself wondering what actually takes place at an editorial board meeting at the New York Times and the Washington Post. Do these left-wing elitists really, as I suspect, just sit around and ask one another which major news stories they won’t cover in tomorrow’s edition? (laughter and applause)

Finally, Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner are obviously babes in the woods when it comes to the world of high finance. As our national deficit soars in the general direction of Jupiter, I have come up with the obvious solution. I suggest we borrow every last dollar we can squeeze out of the Chinese. Then, when they finally refuse to lend us another red cent, we go to court and declare bankruptcy. (laughter)

I say, screw China! (laughter)

And God bless America! (standing ovation)

© 2010 Burt Prelutsky

Write to: Burt@BurtPrelutsky.com.