Monday, June 28, 2010

Obama v. Hayward

by Burt Prelutsky

I happen to find polls fascinating, but, unlike some people, I think they often raise more questions than they answer. For instance, I’ve noticed that occasionally Obama’s job approval numbers will rise for no apparent reason other than that he’s been pictured holding his wife’s hand or shooting a basketball. It’s a sobering thought that after doing all in his power to radically transform America into something resembling Greece, that’s all it takes for some people to give him a big thumbs-up.

I am also mystified by the fact that although most people think he’s doing a lousy job, they claim to like him. Is it because, as Joe Biden once put it, he’s clean? I understand that personal hygiene counts for a lot, but, for those of us who don’t come in close personal contact with him and must judge him solely on his record, he’s as dirty as any other politician who’s ever swum in the sewer of Chicago politics and is now joined at the hip to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

In spite of his toothy smile, I don’t even think he comes across as a nice guy. I’ll never forget the way he put Sen. McCain in his place at the so-called bi-partisan summit, when he snidely remarked, “John, the election is over.” Boy, talk about your sore winners!

Sen. McCain was certainly not my dream candidate, but he had served honorably in the U.S. military and been a guest at the Hanoi Hilton for several long, torturous years. Mr. Obama’s service to his country, when you get right down to it, had consisted of working hand in glove with the thugs at ACORN.

I wonder if Michelle Obama swoons when her husband talks tough to the Israelis and the folks at British Petroleum. To tell you the truth, even I might get one of those little Chris Matthews-like quivers up my leg if he ever tried it with an actual enemy of ours, such as Mahmud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il, Hugo Chavez, the Turks or the Palestinians. But, clearly, that’s too much to expect of this empty suit.

I would say that Obama’s announcement that if it were up to him, he’d have fired British Petroleum’s Tony Hayward was the last straw, except that every day the president provides me with a new last straw. For one thing, if I had to choose between Obama and Hayward, I would go with the fellow who has more executive experience, better managerial skills, a more successful track record and a speaking voice that doesn’t grate on my ear. That would naturally be Mr. Hayward.

For another thing, Obama, who’s very quick to say who in the private sector he would fire, has allowed Janet Napolitano and Eric Holder to stick around long after, by word and deed, they’d displayed their monumental ineptitude. In case you may have forgotten, the only reason the jet over Detroit didn’t get blown up was because the underwear bomber was an incompetent, but Ms. Napolitano, in the aftermath, assured us that the system had worked like a charm! A few months later, when the Times Square jihadist failed to kill a few hundred New Yorkers because he had apparently taken the same course in bomb-making, the lady took a few more undeserved bows.

She wasn’t even embarrassed by the fact that the creep had successfully boarded an airliner bound for Dubai even though he had purchased a one-way ticket for cash! That should have raised more red flags than one sees in Moscow on May Day. But, heck, it’s no wonder Secretary Napolitano is so doggone proud of her crackerjack system. After all, everyone knows dumb luck trumps competence every day of the week.

That brings us to Attorney General Holder who, in spite of rushing to Mirandize enemy combatants, electing to hold civilian trials for Islamic terrorists in Manhattan and swearing to a Congressional committee that he hadn’t bothered reading the Arizona immigration bill long after threatening to litigate against it, is still holding down his job.

But Obama would fire Tony Hayward, a man who, unlike Holder and Napolitano, doesn’t owe his position to the color of his skin or to gender politics.

I know that a lot of people -- at least those in the MSM -- thought it was terrible for Mr. Hayward to go on TV and say he wished the oil leak would be capped so that he could get back to living his normal life. I saw nothing wrong with it. I’m sure that’s what everyone on the Gulf Coast was thinking. But for the president, who was busy greeting college basketball players in the Rose Garden, playing several rounds of golf and hosting White House galas for the likes of Paul McCartney, Jerry Seinfeld and Elton John, to take umbrage at his remark was, for me, just one more of those last straws.

Tony Hayward has vowed that BP will make good for all the financial losses suffered by fishermen, motel owners and everyone else on the Gulf with a legitimate claim, even if it costs his company more than a billion dollars. Obama, on the other hand, is destroying America’s economy to the tune of several trillion dollars, and he promises us nothing but more of the same.

Frankly, if Obama is looking for people who deserve to be fired, he need only look in the mirror.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.   

Thursday, June 24, 2010

The Alvin Greeneing of America

by Burt Prelutsky

A lot of people were left shaking their heads after Alvin Greene, who hadn’t done any campaigning or spent a single dollar on advertising, won the Democratic primary in South Carolina. It made perfect sense to me that a 32-year-old guy that nobody had ever heard of, who was facing a felony charge and who, for good measure, had lived with his father ever since the U.S. Army had invited him to leave the service, would win his party’s congressional primary. After all, he had a (D) after his name and, what’s more, his name came first on the ballot. What better reasons would an ignorant and lazy electorate need to have before casting their votes?

Apparently Nancy Pelosi was grief-stricken when David Obey of Wisconsin, a senior member of Congress and the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, decided not to run for re-election this year. In announcing he was bowing out after more than 40 years in office, he said that his proudest achievement was presiding over the House during the March vote for ObamaCare. Can you imagine such a thing? That is one of the saddest things I ever heard. Imagine spending four decades in power and the thing you’re proudest of is helping to pass a bill that is reviled by most Americans, a bill that was so bad that even with huge Democratic majorities on Capitol Hill, Pelosi and Reid had to resort to bribes and intimidation to get it passed. But, then, I expect that on his deathbed, Benedict Arnold probably said that betraying America was his own proudest moment.

Recently, I found myself wondering why it is that liberals and conservatives have such opposing points of view when it comes to both foreign and domestic policy. I decided it had a great deal to do with one’s perception of human nature. For instance, practicing Christians, who, in the main, tend to be conservatives, believe there has been only one perfect being. Liberals, on the other hand, are convinced that human beings would be perfect if only capitalism was destroyed and they could run things as they wish.

Liberals actually believe that under socialism, everyone would share equally because everyone would work equally. I would think that anyone over the age of six would recognize the fallacy of that foolish notion. There are and there will always be a large number of people who are along for the ride. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not necessarily a villain, but he is hopelessly naïve. I also suspect that most of them are subscribing to notions they don’t believe for a minute.

For instance, consider how many liberals who insist that dependence on fossil fuels is a crime against the earth ride around in limos, SUVs and private jets. Consider that people like Al Gore, Arianna Huffington and Oprah Winfrey, reside in homes that are five or ten times larger than one would deem necessary, considering their alleged convictions and the size of their families.

Speaking of families, don’t liberals have them? Haven’t they taken note of the fact that members of a single family are often at odds? I, myself, know people who haven’t spoken to their own siblings in decades. So, how is it exactly that millions and millions of perfect strangers are expected to work, live and share, in perfect harmony?

Heck, liberals don’t even want to deal with conservatives, let alone share the fruits of their labor. Which is why in Washington, left-wingers never compromise with the opposition, choosing to denigrate them as nay-sayers if they balk at rubber-stamping Obama’s radical agenda; and why in Hollywood, conservatives are forced to conceal their political beliefs, lest they be blacklisted by the very folks who are still whining about a blacklist that ended over half a century ago.

In the 1960s, a Democratic president said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

Today, we have a Democratic president who appears to have dedicated his administration to seeing what he can do to our country.

I figure if 62 million people could vote for that guy, it’s really no wonder that Alvin Greene won his election.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.  

Sunday, June 20, 2010

The Trojan Ship

by Burt Prelutsky

Clearly, the only people who actually believe that the flotilla that attempted to break the Israeli blockade was on a humanitarian mission are so dumb they’re living proof that a person doesn’t have to be in a coma to be brain-dead.

Ever since the Israelis were naïve enough to hand Gaza over to its sworn enemies, Hamas has shown its appreciation by showering them with thousands of missiles. I keep wondering how many more times Israel will cede land for peace before they finally figure things out. Lucy couldn’t pull the football trick on Charley Brown half as many times as the Arabs have conned Israel into believing that their actual demands can be met with mere acreage.

One of the big lies concocted over the past half century by those on the Left is the one in which they deny that they’re anti-Semites, that it’s not Jews they despise but merely the policies of the Israeli government. Inasmuch as those policies consist of not allowing their Arab and Muslim enemies to slaughter them, it’s a denial that’s awfully hard to swallow. How is it, you have to ask, that demonstrations against the national policies of China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Cuba, never seem to take place in our streets or on our college campuses?

Anyone who’s the least bit objective recognizes that Israel has to do everything in its power to prevent Iran from smuggling bigger and better missiles to Hamas. And for its efforts, Israel finds itself being condemned by the U.N. As bad and as ineffective as the League of Nations was, at least it gave its dais and its applause to Haile Sellassie and not to Mussolini. The U.N., which has already greeted Hugo Chavez and Mahmud Ahmadinejad like rock stars, just as it used to do for Yasser Arafat, is a cancer in the midst of New York City. It’s high time we booted it out of America, thus saving ourselves a lot of money and a lot of unnecessary annoyance. This is a group, let us keep in mind, that did nothing about the genocide in Rwanda, and ignored North Korea’s sinking of the South Korean naval vessel and the murder of its 46 sailors. But they couldn’t wait to defend a bunch of Hamas supporters who were, typical of humanitarians on the Left, armed with knives, iron clubs and Islamic curses.

It’s not too surprising that Obama’s old chums, William Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, along with Jodie Evans, who founded Code Pink, helped plan the flotilla. Based on recent history, I fully expect that the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize will go to Mr. Ayers.

Speaking of North Korea, when the Deepwater Horizon platform exploded and sank under mysterious circumstances, a rumor went around that a North Korean submarine had torpedoed it. That sounded far-fetched, but so did the earlier sinking of the South Korean ship. When I later discovered that the oil rig had been built by a major South Korean company, it didn’t sound unreasonable that Kim Jong-il would take the opportunity to strike South Korea and the U.S. a devastating blow for the price of a single piece of ordnance.

It’s odd the way that Obama keeps telling us that the buck stops with him, and then immediately follows that up by blaming Bush and the Republicans for everything from the oil leak to his nicotine habit. But one can’t help noticing that Obama much prefers talking tough to British Petroleum than to an actual enemy of this country, even though BP donated $71,000 to his 2008 campaign. I guess those are the only bucks that actually stop with him.

When he’s not kicking BP around, Obama is busy attacking Arizona. You would think, judging by his passion, that Arizona had done something really dreadful, like sinking a shipload of sailors or attempting to build a nuclear bomb with the stated purpose of annihilating a neighboring state. But those aren’t the kinds of things that tick off this president. However, let a state decide to take a federal law seriously and try to enforce it, and watch him blow his stack.

Some people have been shaking their heads over the incompetence Obama and his cronies displayed in trying to get Andrew Romanoff and Joe Sestak to bow out of their Senate primaries. But I blame the media. By this time, Obama had come to believe that he could get away with just about anything, and the media would cover his back. After all, when Harry Reid said that bribing senators to vote for the administration’s health bill was just “business as usual” and Pelosi said there would be plenty of time to read the bill after it had been voted on, the ladies and gentlemen of the press had winked, chuckled and exchanged high-fives.

My witty friend, Merrill Heatter, suggested that for the scuzzy role that Bill Clinton had played in the Sestak affair, he should be impeached and no longer get to be an ex-president.

While I find it impossible to be bi-partisan when it comes to major issues, it’s a whole different story when it comes to political sleaze. There’s plenty to go around. Consider Mark Kirk (R), Richard Blumenthal (D) and Jan Brewer (R). Both Kirk and Blumenthal lied about their military service. In the case of Gov. Brewer, she had boasted that her father was killed fighting the Nazis. But in fact he worked as a civilian supervisor at a naval munitions depot in Hawthorne, Nevada, during World War II, and died 10 years after the war ended.

The governor, once her lie was discovered, explained that she meant that he had become ill while working around harmful chemicals at the depot, and that it eventually did him in.

I see. And if someone had died in a car crash while driving to the Lockheed plant in Burbank, California, in 1944, I suppose his survivors could claim that he’d died in battle… battling traffic.

Isn’t it amazing that all these people who want us to trust them with our futures and the futures of our children and grandchildren can’t even be trusted to tell a simple truth about themselves? And what will it take before these louts figure out that their lies are going to be found out and made public by their political foes? Is it because they are constantly sheltered by their cronies and their boot-licking aides that they appear to be so oblivious to the hostile world outside their little cocoons?

Well, just in case I ever decide to run for public office, there are probably a few statements I’ve made along the way that you may have somehow misconstrued. To begin with, when I said that I had won an Academy Award, I meant to say that I had won an Academy Award bet when I wagered that “Hurt Locker” would beat out “Avatar” for the Oscar. And when I said I was in the Baseball Hall of Fame, I meant that I had once visited the museum in Cooperstown. And finally, when I said that I had served in the military and been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for my heroic efforts in Vietnam, when I single-handedly wiped out 148 enemy soldiers and rescued twice that many of my fellow soldiers by carrying them piggy-back through a mine field, I misspoke. I only meant that I had seen a lot of war movies when I was growing up.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.   

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Who's a Racist?

by Burt Prelutsky

One of the great mysteries of life is how Democrats have managed to tar Republicans as America’s racists. I mean, unless I’m entirely mistaken about their party affiliation, FDR’s favorite Supreme Court liberal, Hugo Black, and that grand old man of the U.S. Senate, Democrat Robert Byrd, were proud members of the Ku Klux Klan.

George Wallace, Orval Faubus, Strom Thurmond and even Theophilus “Bull” Connor, all came to political prominence with a (D) after their name. What’s more, a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The bill, by the way, had spent months bottled up in the Rules Committee, thanks to its chairman, Rep. Howard W. Smith (D). The fact of the matter is that the Democrats spent 83 days filibustering against its passage until Republican Senator Everett Dirksen used his power and prestige to get it enacted.

On the other hand, it is worth noting that the first three black men elected to the United States Senate, Hiram Revels; Blanche Bruce, who was the son of a slave; and Edward Brooke, were all Republicans.

Therefore, one has to assume that the reason that over 90% of black Americans troop out to vote for any left-wing bozo, be he black or white, is that down deep they agree with patronizing liberals who regard them all as ignorant and shiftless. Otherwise, why would they parrot left-wing talking points about conservatives? Why would they continue to invite liberal politicians into their churches to use their pulpits for campaign purposes? And why wouldn’t they question the morality of liberals who not only conveniently ignore “separation of church and state” on such occasions, but on all other occasions, are leading the attack on Christian leaders, symbols and traditions?

They would also have to ask themselves why it is that they get to blame their crime stats and mind-boggling rate of high school drop-outs and illegitimate births, on white racism, whereas Asians somehow out-do whites on average when it comes to education and earning power. If America is such a racist nation, wouldn’t it figure that whites would subjugate Asians? After all, not only are they easily recognizable, but over the past 70 years, we have waged war against Japan, North Korea and North Vietnam.

So, just exactly how is it that all those people who come here from Cambodia, South Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan and the Philippines, seem to flourish, while people who were born here, speak the language and have been the recipients of billions of dollars worth of government programs, including Operation Head Start, small business loans and affirmative action, continue to whine about racism and continue to support white liberals and the various crooks, creeps and communists, collectively known as the Congressional Black Caucus?

If white Americans are racists, we’re certainly the most selective ones the world has ever known, inasmuch as our bigotry seems to be reserved solely for illegal aliens and black ingrates.


©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.   

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Surveying The American Scene

by Burt Prelutsky

I noticed recently that Barack Obama was holding out an olive branch to the Taliban. He claimed to recognize that some of them were not as radical as others. I find it odd, though, that he can somehow spot nuances in terrorists 7,000 miles away, but every member of the Tea Party looks like a thug and a racist to him.

If and when British Petroleum seals the oil leak at the bottom of the ocean, I hope they turn their attention to the current administration, which is leaking money at a record pace. What’s more, I am in favor of their using mud, rubber tires or tar and feathers, just so long as it stops Obama, Pelosi and Reid, before they squander more.

If you have ever wondered if the MSM is really as biased as people like Bernard Goldberg and I claim, you merely have to compare the way they covered the flooding of New Orleans in 2005 and the way they, not to mention Obama, ignored the flooding of Nashville this year. Aside from the fact that the earlier disaster affected a city with a population that was 61% black and the Nashville flood affected a city in which only a quarter of the population was black, one would be hard-pressed to explain why the one in Louisiana was treated as if it were a tragedy of biblical proportions, while the deluge in Tennessee’s capital received the equivalent of a TV weatherman’s remarking that humidity had reached 100% in Nashville.

The first time I heard that a huge mosque was going to be erected on the site of Ground Zero, I remember waiting for the punch line. The next few times I heard the news, I assumed I was having a nightmare and would soon be awake. Now I can only shake my head at the insanity. What’s next? A statue of Osama bin Laden on Capitol Hill? As I understand it, it’s supposed to be a tribute of some sort to decent Muslims. My question is, how many times are we going to honor Islam? I would have thought that electing a guy named Barack Hussein Obama a scant seven years after the barbarians murdered 3,000 Americans was more than enough.

Speaking of the president, I recently saw a bumper-sticker that read: What do Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden have in common? They both have friends who bombed the Pentagon.

But I suppose 2010 is no time to be asking for a reality check. After all, three of the people who were most directly responsible for the economic meltdown -- Obama, Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank -- are the same three mugs who insist they’re going to safeguard the American economy by making sure there are no restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!

Inasmuch as I reside in a state that keeps electing people like Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters and Brad Sherman, I realize I am not in the best position to throw stones, but will somebody please explain how it is that Barney Frank, who looks and sounds exactly like Elmer Fudd, keeps getting re-elected by the folks in Massachusetts. Where’s Bugs Bunny when you really need him?

Finally, proving that stupidity is no impediment to making a billion dollars, Ted Turner recently surmised that the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico could very well mean that God doesn’t want us to drill offshore. He added that the recent mine disaster strongly suggested that the Lord is also tired of our digging for coal. The interviewer, CNN’s Poppy Harlow, who is perhaps harboring the dream of some day being Mrs. Poppy Turner, didn’t bother asking the amateur theologian if the deaths and destruction caused by hurricanes and cyclones indicate that God also doesn’t want us to employ wind power, and if skin cancer tells us all we need to know about how He feels about solar energy.

If only 80-proof bourbon could be used as a substitute for oil, we’d only have to hook up some wires to Mr. Turner and we’d soon be free of our dependence on the black gooey stuff.

I must confess that every time I hear Turner bloviate, I’m grateful that he and Hanoi Jane didn’t have any children. One can only imagine that the attending physician in the delivery room would have been Dr. Frankenstein.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.   

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Parsing Liberalism

by Burt Prelutsky

I believe it was Freud who was first got credit for saying he didn’t know what women wanted. Frankly, I don’t think he was half-trying. Quite simply, women want a man who is rich, handsome, sexy, is as interested in fabrics and color as they are, who can get weepy at sunsets, tear up at Judy Garland singing “Over the Rainbow,” and whose favorite movie is “The English Patient.” In short, they’re looking for a very successful interior decorator. I say, good luck to them. But it’s no wonder that so many married women feel they wound up settling.

The folks who mystify me are liberals. For instance, consider the way they speak. Without even blushing, they refer to the “peace process” whenever they’re slapping down Israel. No matter what that little tiny country does -- be it defending itself against missile attacks and suicide bombers or building houses in Jerusalem -- the lunkheads on the left will insist the Jews are jeopardizing the peace process.

And just what exactly is the peace process to which Arabs, Muslims and just about every U.S. president since Carter pay lip service? When you get past the P.R. spin, it’s the extinction of Israel!

Another term the leftists toss around is the “international community.” That has a high-sounding ring to it, which is why the nincompoops love it so much. In fact, if by that particular community, one is referring to the members of the U.N., one is referring to a gang of chiselers, cowards and incompetents, representing the interests of gangsters, rogues and butchers.

Frankly, I wouldn’t trust the creeps at the U.N. to run a 7/11, let alone the world. Only a mushy-headed liberal would endow the organization with moral authority. In fact, between the two groups, if I had to pick one, I’d vote for the Mafia, if only because it doesn’t rely on American tax dollars to survive.

Another term liberals like to use is “misspeak.” Recently, Richard Blumenthal, candidate for the U.S. Senate, claimed he misspoke when he went around claiming he’d served in Vietnam. It seems he’d never even been there for a vacation, let alone a war.

When a person says, “They is coming over for dinner,” he has misspoken, using “is” for “are.” What Blumenthal did was lie. Then to compound his sin, he held a press conference after his lies were uncovered by the NY Times, and claimed he was taking complete responsibility. Yet another lie. If this schlimiel was taking complete responsibility, he would have said, “I have lied to all of you. I have shamed my friends and family. At no point in my life have I possessed even an ounce of the courage displayed by the men who actually served and suffered in Vietnam. If I stood on my tiptoes, I couldn’t reach their shoelaces. I stand here today completely disgraced by my past words and actions in order to announce that I have tendered my resignation as attorney general of Connecticut and to withdraw from the Senate race.”

Instead, this punk told the world that he was proud of his years of public service. What’s more, he was applauded by several of the liberal yahoos in attendance, thus turning what was supposed to be his public confession into just another campaign speech.

Years ago, liberals hated those who had served in Vietnam. Back in the 1960s, mollycoddled left-wing kids who tried to make a virtue of the fact that they’d lacked the guts to serve in the military actually spat on returning vets and called them the vilest of names. Flash forward and you have the disgusting spectacle of presidential candidate John Kerry donning a military jacket and announcing to cheering yahoos that he was “reporting for duty” and now you have Senate candidate Richard Blumenthal lying about having faced not only the horrors of war, but the public vilification by people exactly like himself!

Yet another thing that liberals love to lie about, on behalf of the corrupt teachers union, is the importance of a public school education. For one thing, no politician in Washington, D.C., would think of sending his own children to a public school -- and that means every beneficiary of the union’s slush fund, including Obama and the members of the Black Congressional Caucus.

Also, if education is so bloody important, why is it that the Democrats seem to have turned Capitol Hill into a no-read zone? First there were all those 2,000-page bills being voted on by people who bought into Nancy Pelosi’s suggestion that there would be plenty of time to figure them out after they were passed; and there was Arizona’s immigration bill that had the liberals in a proper tizzy even though such administration heavyweights as Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano and P.J. Crowley, all admitted weeks after its passage that they’d all been too busy to read it.

I mean, as lies go, this one probably isn’t quite as egregious as Blumenthal’s. Besides, it was so darn blatant, it actually made me laugh. I mean, did anybody in America really believe that the attorney general, the head of homeland security and the assistant secretary of state, couldn’t spare five minutes to read a bill that was just slightly longer than a menu, before attacking it with pitchforks?

The really embarrassing thing about this particular lie is that it highlights just how contemptuously these airheads regard those of us who aren’t Obama’s acolytes.

Otherwise, wouldn’t Holder, Napolitano or Crowley, at least have said, “I took it home, fully intending to read the bill, but my dog ate it.”

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.   

Monday, June 7, 2010

Arguing Politics

by Burt Prelutsky

There was a time when people could disagree about politics and still feel mutual respect and even affection for one another, but I think that time has passed. Although there are still a few liberals in my circle of friends and acquaintances, the circle keeps getting smaller, and the price of maintaining the relationship is generally biting one’s tongue.

In this day and age, I feel no qualms about judging another person’s character, values and patriotism, by the politics he espouses. Which should explain in general terms why I despise Barack Obama.

We’ve been constantly reminded that the Koran justifies Muslims lying with impunity to non-believers so long as it’s done to further the cause of Islam. How is that any different from the belief system of left-wingers?

Whether it’s insisting that global warming is going to raise ocean levels by 20 feet; that heterosexual AIDS is a major health concern; that law-abiding Americans can’t be trusted with guns; that every nation and every culture is superior to our own; that illegal aliens and Islamic jihadists are entitled to all the rights and privileges of U.S. citizens; that providing 31 million additional people with health insurance will save us billions of dollars; that Supreme Court justices should essentially be social workers who get to wear their robes to work; that drilling for oil and digging for coal are evil endeavors; that windmills and sunbeams can supply all the energy a modern industrial nation needs; that Christian symbols should be eliminated from the national landscape; and that the redistribution of personal wealth is a moral imperative; liberals display an arrogant disdain for traditional American virtues, not to mention logic and commonsense.

When someone like Eric Holder, after weeks of threatening to litigate against Arizona’s immigration law, tells a congressional committee that he hasn’t had time to read its 15 pages, and then compounds that lie by refusing to acknowledge that radical Islam might even partially explain the peculiar behavior of Major Hasan, along with the underwear bomber and the Times Square terrorist, you realize that the only person scarier than the attorney general is the psychopath who appointed him.

Whenever I write a general attack on liberals, I can count on hearing from someone who denies my contentions by pointing out, say, that he’s not for gun control or that he recognizes that Nancy Pelosi isn’t exactly Mother Teresa. Although I always try to reply in courteous fashion, in my head, I’m thinking, “Well, duh.”

Such people should understand that when I or anyone else on the right complains about the evils of liberalism, we’re not pretending to have interviewed every single idiot who opted for Hope and Change in 2008. We are referring to the leaders who speak for them, nincompoops like Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Napolitano, Waxman, Schumer, Kerry and Barney Frank, who pay lip service to democracy, but then label millions of their fellow Americans who happen to be engaged in the Tea Party movement -- which, by the way, is a far more demonstrably democratic group than the House or Senate -- as thugs, racists and brainless rabble.

Liberals call conservatives intolerant, but their own tolerance never seems to extend to those who disagree with their plan to radically transform America. On college campuses around the country, these lovers of free speech constantly shout down those trying to take advantage of the First Amendment.

On those same campuses, the professors praise the likes of Mao, Fidel and Che. As a result, the students voice hatred of Israel, and they demonstrate on behalf of suicide bombers and other Islamic fruitcakes.

High profile members of the pop culture such as Michael Moore, Rosie O’Donnell, Jon Stewart, Joy Behar, Bill Maher and Janeane Garofalo, pander to the dumbest of the dumb, and are then heralded for their candor, their courage and their cutting-edge wit.

Oliver Stone proudly strolls hand in hand with Hugo Chavez at a film festival, and Sean Penn wants anyone who calls Chavez a dictator to be arrested. Steven Spielberg confesses that the seven hours he spent with Fidel Castro were the most important hours of his life.

James Cameron, who condemns American technology for destroying the planet, sees no irony in the fact that he spent hundreds of millions of dollars on American technology in order to make a 3-hour movie about the evils of American technology. Being as intellectually myopic as he obviously is helps explain why there is not even a glimmer of humor in any of his films.

Half of Hollywood has signed a petition on behalf of child rapist Roman Polanski, demanding that he not be prosecuted for his vile crime. For my part, I would have thought it was more than enough that the shameless brown noses showed their support for the pervert by giving him an Oscar a few years ago.

Woody Allen, who’s old enough to know better, said, “It would be good if Obama could be dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly.” Allen, who was also old enough to know better than to take nude photos of his teenage step-daughter, added, “I am pleased with Obama. I think he is brilliant. The Republican Party should get out of his way and stop trying to hurt him.”

In case any of you have ever wondered why all the Jews who might have left didn’t get out of Germany before Hitler could translate “Mein Kampf” into national policy, perhaps Woody Allen’s remarks will provide at least a partial answer. Maybe they, too, thought it would be a good idea if Hitler could be dictator for a few years.

Hollywood is a community of like-minded idiots who are terribly concerned with things that pollute the atmosphere, such as cigarette smoke and carbon emissions, but take no responsibility for polluting the culture with pornography, vulgarity, rap music and movies that inevitably portray businessmen as villains, American soldiers as sadists and conservatives as morons.

In the meantime, we see the President of the United States talking trash to the people of Arizona while bowing and scraping to the President of Mexico. We also see his assistant secretary of state, a guy named Michael Posner, a wuss who no doubt spent his high school years being given well-deserved wedgies, denouncing Arizona to those paragons of virtue and defenders of human rights, the Red Chinese!

Speaking of Obama, I must confess that I long for the early days of his administration when it was simply the content of his speeches that made me nauseous. But I guess he got tired of being teased about having to rely on teleprompters to say “Good evening,” because, of late, as if to pretend he is speaking off the cuff, he has begun swiveling his head like a metronome every few seconds.

Someone should tell him it’s not fooling anyone. We all know that he’s now using two Teleprompters, one on each side, and I, for one, wish he’d stop. Listening to him was bad enough, but watching him these days is making me seasick.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.   

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Listen Up, Gyrenes!

by Burt Prelutsky

It’s a common misconception that the Civil War was waged over slavery. The fact is there were southerners who opposed the evil practice of slavery and northerners who didn’t. Abe Lincoln’s primary motive was the preservation of the Union, even if he had to suspend habeas corpus to do it, and even if it cost the lives of 600,000 Americans.

Slavery was of little concern to Lincoln. That’s why the Emancipation Proclamation proclaims “all persons held as slaves within the rebellious states are, and henceforward, shall be free.” That meant that the status of slaves residing in the border states remained unchanged. What’s more, the Proclamation wasn’t even issued until January 1, 1863, which was nearly two years after a Confederate commander, P.G.T. Beauregard, triggered the bloodiest war in American history by firing on Fort Sumter.

The reason I’m bringing up this ancient history isn’t because I’m growing nostalgic for mint juleps on the veranda, but because I just found out about a young man who was denied the opportunity to enlist in the U.S. Marines because he had a tattoo of the Confederate flag on his arm.

Now, I can understand why the Marines wouldn’t want someone decorated with a gang tat or a swastika in the barracks, but making the Corps a Confederate flag-free zone just strikes me as asinine.

The argument is that there are other Marines who would take umbrage at the tattoo and would regard it as racially provocative. No doubt the Corps includes many men whose great-great-great-grandfathers were slaves. The assumption, therefore, is that the only people who’d adorn themselves with the Stars and Bars are racists. Well, even though I’m not a southerner, I’m ready to believe that most people who sport the flag are merely paying tribute to their own great-great-great-grandfathers, men who fought and often died fighting for their belief in states rights, and who felt a greater love for and loyalty to Mississippi, Georgia and South Carolina, than they did to Washington, D.C. They were also fighting to protect their homes, their wives and their children, from the likes of Gen. Sherman and the various gangs of marauders who laid waste to everything and everyone below the Mason-Dixon Line.

In short, most southerners were not slave owners and neither were they Satan’s spawn.

All my life, I’ve thought that the Marines were the tough guys who, against impossible odds, fought our country’s battles from the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli. Now they suddenly appear to be terrified of the way they’ll be perceived from the lecture halls of Harvard and the editorial boardroom of the New York Times.

Personally, it strikes me as a very sad day when the motto of the Marines goes from semper fi to semper P.C.

Just for the record, I don’t like tattoos. For the life of me, I don’t understand why people would put art on their bodies that they’d never think of displaying on their walls. Still, if a guy can’t have a Confederate flag on his bicep, why is it okay to have an American flag? After all, slavery only existed under the one flag from 1861-1863, but it had existed under the Stars and Stripes for 85 years, ever since 1776.

Inasmuch as anyone enlisting in the Marines knows that he is quite likely going to be taking orders from black NCOs, it figures that only a racist who is also a masochist would even consider entering the ranks of the few and the proud.

Racists, as we all know, join the Aryan Nation, the KKK and the Democratic party. Patriots join the Marines.

©2010 Burt Prelutsky Write to: BurtPrelutsky@aol.com.