Monday, November 28, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

When it comes to the Theory of Evolution, the religiously devout often find themselves locked in futile battle with those who lack religious faith. Those on one side are convinced that the earth is a mere 6,000 years old, and that God woke up one day and suddenly decided to create the earth, the stars, the giraffe, the camel and his crowning glory, Adam. Then, lest Adam get too big for his britches, He created Eve.

Those on the other side of the argument think that is simply the goofiest story they ever heard. They insist it ignores tons of scientific evidence, including fossils, carbon dating and common sense. The faithful counter by saying that, for its part, science conveniently fails to explain how and why evolution would have ever begun. They insist that the universe can only be explained as the result of Intelligent Design.

Because I tend to be a skeptic where both science and religion are concerned, my own belief is more in line with Mark Twain, who surmised that God was so disappointed with man, He tried to improve on His invention by creating the monkey.

However, try as they might, neither side can fully explain the existence of left-wingers. For my part, I can far easier grasp the appeal of turnips and grits than I can the stranglehold that Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez and Obama, have on leftists. I mean, how is it that anyone can look at the results of communism and socialism and not see them for the nightmares they are and always have been? After all, the evidence is in plain sight.

For all its claims to idealism, communism has invariably resulted in blood-thirsty regimes, whether in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba or East Germany. For the glories of socialism, you need only look to the riots now taking place in Greece. Tourists who have for years been attracted by the ruins of ancient Athens will now have even more reason to visit, although they will have to watch out for Molotov cocktails and tear gas.

Even here in America, which has generally been heading in the wrong direction ever since FDR adopted Norman Thomas’s socialist platform as his own, we have seen the pathetic results in our own streets. We see young dunderheads demonstrating for the end of capitalism, the destruction of corporations, and the forgiving of student loans, while simultaneously demanding high-paying jobs, free health insurance and the latest products devised by the brain of corporate billionaire Steve Jobs.

The fact that they’re too stupid to even notice the inconsistency inherent in their loony agenda tells me all I really need to know about the state of education in this country. These lunkheads represent the predictable results of allowing school teachers to belong to left-wing unions and permitting tenured professors to become propagandists rather than practitioners of the Socratic Method.

Still, it’s the often well-meaning parents, a great many of whom are conservatives, who have played a major role in creating this miserable state of affairs. After all, if you’re going to sit back and allow your sons and daughters to be indoctrinated from kindergarten on, and, for good measure, continue donating to colleges and universities that encourage this sort of thing, it’s hardly surprising that you’re going to wind up with regiments of liberal zombies who have been carefully taught to regard you as their natural enemy. In fact, when I see the allegiance that young Americans pay to Chairman Obama, I am more convinced than ever that stupidity is a hereditary condition.

When I was a youngster, parents were apt to warn their kids about the dangers inherent in associating with rotten companions by saying that if you lie down with dogs, you were likely to get up with fleas. When I look at the mobs demonstrating on Wall Street, I can see where that has become, not merely a figurative truth, but a literal one.

I almost feel sorry for the members of these mobs. That’s because they are obviously the nerdy boys and girls who never got to sit at the table with the A-crowd in high school. But my compassion only stretches so far, and by this time they should have gotten over the heartache of being genetically uncool.

The one good thing about them turning the streets of our major cities into outdoor toilets and urinals is that so many high-profile Democrats have adopted them as symbols of America’s oppressed. Obama feels their pain. Pelosi loves their spontaneity. Biden shares their grievances. Naturally, the mass media praises their courage and dedication.

Even I am willing to say something nice about these ignorant, lazy, unwashed, pot-smoking, self-righteous, slobs. But that’s only if the Democrats turn their presidential convention into a love fest dedicated to Occupy Wall Street, so that all of America can see the unbelievable depths to which the party of Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy has sunk.

I promise that if the Occupiers do even half as much for Barack Obama in 2012 as Abby Hoffman and his gang of misbegotten Yuppies did for Hubert Humphrey in 1968, I’ll invite all of them over to my house for a shower.
©2011 Burt Prelutsky.Comments? Write!
Don’t miss a single article! Subscribe to by Email

Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, postpaid.

Get both for just $39.90.
Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Saturday, November 26, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

Heterosexuals are always being accused by homosexuals of being narrow-minded and intolerant, but have any of them ever said they understood why straights might regard sodomy as disgusting behavior?

Have they ever said that although we all grasp the fact that not all homosexuals are pedophiles, it still behooves them to speak out against adults having gay sex with “consenting” teenagers and, furthermore, why it would be inappropriate and criminally irresponsible for the Boy Scouts to allow homosexuals to be Scout Masters and to oversee camping trips? Just as an aside, I can’t help reflecting on the fact that “camping” is a word long used to describe gays acting out in the most outrageous fashion.

Also, when they defend their life style because they were “born that way,” are they blind to the fact that pederasts and rapists and, I dare say, serial killers, could, in their own defense, make the identical claim?

I happen to know a great many conservatives, and I don’t know a single one who believes that gays should be bullied, beaten, persecuted or ostracized by their families. That’s not to say there aren’t any, but I’m happy to report that I haven’t run into them. At the same time, I don’t know why a crime committed against a homosexual should be deemed a “hate crime” and carry a heavier penalty in a court of law than the very same offense when the victim happens to be a heterosexual.

For that matter, I have no idea why after thousands of years of Judeo-Christian civilization, the concept of marriage should be turned on its head simply to accommodate same-sex couples because they insist they love each other. People love all sorts of things, ranging from their dogs, horses and cats to their cars, their hobbies and their hometown football teams. All of that is simply a matter of personal preference. It’s only when gay activists make demands that Love is assumed to trump tradition, the law and common sense.

I don’t hate gays. Having worked for decades in Hollywood, I have known a great many of them. How could I not? As in any group, some are decent and some aren’t. Some are excellent co-workers, others are just silly and annoying. Some are extremely talented, while others just think they are because they happen to be gay.

But one thing I have noticed is that I never hear any of them campaigning for the same privilege they demand for themselves being extended to others, such as incestuous couples or would-be polygamists. After all, if love between consenting adults is all it takes to radically transform the concept of marriage from being a sacred relationship between one man and one woman, why shouldn’t the same rights be extended to those other eccentrics?

What gives a man proclaiming his undying love of another man greater moral authority than a back-sliding Mormon who insists that he loves and wishes to marry a dozen consenting waitresses he met at his local Hooter’s?

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Don’t miss any Burt! Subscribe to by Email
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, postpaid.

Get both
for just $39.90.
Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Thursday, November 24, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

Although the general election is still a long way off, the primaries are right around the corner, unless you happen to live in California. Out here, I think we get to vote sometime in July or August. But since we west coast Republicans comprise such a small band of rebels, it probably doesn’t matter that New Hampshire and Iowa, whose cumulative population is about half that of L.A. County, actually get to play a major role in determining who will be the GOP nominee.

But, unlike some perpetual pessimists, I remain confident that whoever our candidate turns out to be, he or she will defeat Chairman Obama even if he’s armed with a billion dollar bankroll. All that dough squandered in a losing presidential election only means the Democrats will have less money to spend in their futile attempt to maintain control of the Senate.

Counting down to

Still, at this point, I think just about all the contenders have made some major gaffes. Mitt Romney should have disowned RomneyCare the first chance he had. Rick Perry should not have called Republicans heartless bigots. Herman Cain should not have stooped to calling Rick Perry a racist. Michele Bachmann should not have engaged in pissing contests with Rick Perry or Tim Pawlenty. Newt Gingrich should not have cheated on any of his wives. Jon Huntsman should not have believed the person who said he should throw his hat in the ring simply because he looks like a smaller version of Mitt Romney. Ron Paul should not have believed the person who said he should throw his hat in the ring simply because he looks like a bigger version of Mr. Magoo.

This being an election year, it figures that I am hearing a chorus of “Throw the bums out!” from my readers. If they were merely referring to Obama and his cronies in the House and Senate, I would sing right along with them. But, in most cases, they’re referring to everyone in Congress. Although I can share some of their frustration with politicians in general, the fact remains that there is no good reason to toss out people like Allen West, Paul Ryan, Michele Bachmann and Marco Rubio.

Furthermore, the problem isn’t simply with liberal politicians, as awful as they are. After all, if term limits applied to the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Charles Rangel, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Bernie Sanders, Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, Dennis Kucinich, Brad Sherman and Sheila Jackson Lee, do you actually imagine that their constituents would belatedly come to their senses? Don’t you realize that they would simply go out and elect younger versions of those very same leftwing knuckleheads?

Speaking of leftwing knuckleheads, I wouldn’t want anyone to get the idea that I favor socialism or that I have an anti-capitalism bone in my body, but I have to confess that when I see billionaires in their 80s, guys like Warren Buffet and George Soros, still devoting so much of their time and attention to making more and more money, I find myself wondering what part of “You can’t take it with you” they don’t get.

Finally, I haven’t yet made up my mind which of the people vying for the GOP nomination I will support. The one thing I do know for certain is that whoever it is will be a crazy person. I’m not happy about it, but what else can it mean when in a nation of 310,000,000 people, someone decides he or she is the one person best-qualified to be the boss?

When I was young, if a cartoonist wanted to show us a crazy person, he would draw a little guy with his hand tucked in his vest insisting he was Napoleon. How does that differ in any appreciable way from someone insisting that he or she is cut out to be leader of the free world?

Perhaps if they all wore fancy coats and three-cornered hats, and spoke with a French accent, you would notice the resemblance.

In a sane universe, you wouldn’t allow such people to take up residence in the Oval Office, at least not until you’d padded the walls.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write!
Don’t miss any Burt! Subscribe to by Email
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, postpaid.

Get both
for just $39.90.
Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Monday, November 21, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

Some of us imagined that Barack Obama couldn’t possibly have a lousier, more corrupt, circle of friends and advisors in Washington than he had back in Chicago.  But is it possible that we simply underestimated the man’s uncanny ability to attract vermin?

For instance, there is Eric Holder.  He’s the knucklehead who kicked things off by accusing white people of being cowards because they wouldn’t honestly address racial matters.  But when he demurred from prosecuting the Black Panthers for intimidating voters, and told his Department of Justice staff that under his watch only white people would be prosecuted for such crimes, some of us were dying to have an honest discussion with him.  In fact, for his convenience, it could have been in the alley behind his office.  But he was nowhere to be found.

Then, in the wake of “Fast and Furious,” he told a congressional committee under oath that he knew nothing about hundreds of guns being sold to Mexican gangsters.  When it turned out that he had been receiving memos about the operation for months before his testimony, his response was along the lines of “I’m the Attorney General.  I write memos, I don’t read them.”  On balance, that probably beats, “I was going to read them, but our dog buried them in the backyard before I had a chance.”

If there’s any justice in the world, Holder will wind up in the hoosegow where he can have all those honest conversations he was just dying to have; this time, with his cellmate, Bubba.

Another of Obama’s appointees is Jeffrey Immelt, the head of General Electric.  Because Immelt is Obama’s good friend and America’s Jobs Czar, some of us were confused when Obama started whining about millionaires and billionaires flying on corporate jets and not paying their fair share of taxes.  G.E., as we all know, paid no corporate taxes last year.  And, really, just between us, does Obama think that when Mr. Immelt commutes to Washington, D.C., he does it on a Greyhound Bus?

To compound matters, Immelt, apparently unclear on his job description, seemed to think that by transferring a large part of G.E.’s industrial capacity to China, he was fulfilling his obligation to increase employment.   In fact, one can easily imagine this exchange between Immelt and Obama: “You’re telling me I was supposed to create jobs in America?” “Well, yeah, I guess so.  Is that a problem?”  “Well, duh!  Do you have any idea how much money I’m saving by using slave labor?”  “Did you say slave?”  “Don’t get your undies in a knot, Barack.  We’re talking Chinese.”  “Oh, that’s right.  Never mind.” 

And so it goes.

In San Francisco, otherwise known as Bedlam by the Bay, there is a legislative proposal to make convicted felons members of a protected class, so that landlords and employers would be prohibited from asking applicants about their criminal past.  I swear, folks, you can’t make up this kind of stuff.

That brings me to Rand Paul.  I had assumed that Sen. Paul was at least 50% saner than his old man, Rep. Ron Paul, the fellow who doesn’t worry about a nuclear Iran, but is having a cow, perhaps a herd of cows, over our execution of the Yemen-based, American-born, jihadist, Anwar Al-Awlaki.  I was listening to Hugh Hewitt’s radio talk show when he asked Sen. Paul if he really believed, as he had stated, that the reason we are hated in the Middle East is simply because America supports Israel.

As I said, I had assumed that he possessed the lion’s share of common sense in the Paul family.  That was until he replied, “Well, that’s what they say.  That’s what they write.”

They say a lot of things, Senator Paul.  They write a lot of things.  That doesn’t make it so.  Inasmuch as the jihadists have slaughtered innocent people in England, Russia, Indonesia, Ethiopia, the Sudan, Holland, India, Lebanon, China, Nigeria, Armenia, Spain, Japan and the Philippines, I would think that even a U.S. senator could grasp the simple fact that most of these countries are not allies of Israel.  In fact, a number of them despise Israel.

Perhaps, I dare say, every bit as much as he and his father do.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write!
Don’t miss any Burt! Subscribe to by Email
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, postpaid.

Get both
for just $39.90.
Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Assorted Nuts

by BurtPrelutsky

Who was the dunderhead who came up with the primary system? I’m not referring to the primary elections themselves, but to the order in which they must be conducted. There are ancient religious rituals that aren’t held to be this sacred.

When Floridians quite reasonably suggest that their primary should come earlier than it has in the past, the GOP hierarchy threatens to excommunicate them and deny them full representation at the national convention.

But nobody has come up with a reasonable explanation why Iowa and New Hampshire should come first. If anything, there are good reasons why they shouldn’t. For one thing, Iowa doesn’t even hold a statewide election; they have something silly called a caucus. How dumb is that!

As for New Hampshire, it has such a small and unrepresentative a population that if they didn’t have an early primary, most of us could ignore the state all the time, and not merely, as we do now, three out of every four years. Instead, their importance is inflated in much the same phony way that the Wizard of Oz had his own magnified by billows of smoke, a curtain and a world-class public address system.

That brings us to the elections, themselves. I accept that we need to have a president, although the more I think about the ones we keep electing, I’m beginning to waver in that belief. But the truth is, as I have long contended, anyone who seeks the office is obviously insane, a mental case whose ego must live in a rented room somewhere because no human being could possibly cart around anything that huge.

I’m not kidding. I mean, just imagine that you wake up one day, look around at your fellow 310,000,000 Americans, and decide, “Yep, I’m the guy (or gal) who is best-equipped to run the most powerful nation on the face of the earth. I’m not saying I know everything I will need to know about the monetary system, Islamic terrorism, the military, the stock market, farm subsidies, Social Security, nuclear energy, the banking industry, the Middle East, education, the IRS, the SEIU, health care or even how to talk to members of the Black Congressional Caucus without giggling, but, doggone it, I’ve always been a fast learner. Now I just need to raise several hundred million dollars in order to run. I wonder how much my neighbor Charley will be willing to kick in.”

Or, as Thomas Sowell told Reason Magazine, in relating one of the most dangerous trends coming out of the current administration: “It’s the presumption that Obama knows how all these industries ought to be operating better than people who have spent their lives in those industries, and a general cockiness going back to before he was president, and the fact that he has no experience whatever in managing anything. Only someone who has never had the responsibility for managing anything could believe he could manage just about everything.”

Finally, the other day I received an email from one of my readers, an American currently living in Argentina. He started out by letting me know that on 9/11, he was living only a short distance from Dulles Airport, not all that far from the Pentagon. He decided that if someone wanted to kill us that badly, he should find out why. In the intervening years, he has read 40 books about Islam.

Because I had written an article in which I wondered why a suicide bomber wouldn’t realize that even though he started out with 72 virgins, he would soon have 72 disgruntled ex-virgins on his hands, my correspondent found that “Islamic theology states that virgins in heaven maintain their virginity for eternity. If you think this is strange, it also maintains that even though martyrs do a great deal of eating and drinking, that is when they are not too busy entertaining all of their sex slaves, there is neither feces nor urine produced.”

I wrote back to tell him that once a woman loses her virginity, it doesn’t merely change her physically, but psychologically. So the only logical explanation is that these “virgins” must be those large rubber dolls lonely guys purchase from mail order outfits. As for there being no need for bathrooms in the Islamic Paradise, the obvious answer is that in death, as in life, the suicide bombers are ambulatory cesspools.”

“Please don’t ask for a cogent explanation for any of this,” he went on, “because there isn’t one. Islamic theologians are still wrestling with a way to explain it.”

“Well, now that I’ve solved the mystery, you can tell them they can all go back to having sex with goats.”

“By the way,” he concluded, “I use the word theologian loosely, for in reality, Islam utterly rejects the need for theology. God’s word is simple, plain and clear, and it does not need interpretation. It only requires memorization and obedience. Even the idea of trying to interpret and understand God is considered heretical. Saludos, Richard.”

“Oddly enough, that’s pretty much how I feel about my own words. Regards, Burt”

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Why Won’t Al Franken Leave Me Alone

by BurtPrelutsky

I used to sympathize with my wife because every day’s mail brought her half a dozen requests from the likes of the RNC, Newt Gingrich and Dick Morris, to send money. She rarely sent any money, but she would faithfully fill out the enclosed questionnaires. No matter how often I would tell her that they weren’t interested in her opinion, only her checkbook, she would labor on. When she was in one of her feistier moods, she would ask me what made me think anyone was interested in my opinion. I blamed such outbursts on her youth.

But things have changed. Although I rarely receive the sort of junk mail Yvonne gets, over the past few months I have started receiving political email requesting my financial support. What makes it so foolish, aside from the fact that I can barely make ends meet as it is, is that it’s all coming from the Left. I don’t know how or why it happened, but I have suddenly found myself the recipient of political junk mail from Frank Lautenberg, John Kerry, Al Franken and Jason Rosenbaum, who works for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC).

Jason alerted me to the fact that “the Senate Democrats cleaned up the House Republicans’ mess again, narrowly averting a government shutdown.” He claimed to need $210,000 in the next 72 hours to keep the Boehner-Cantor crew from taking over the Senate, and he assumed I could kick in at least five dollars to help keep the barbarians at the gates. Well, for openers, he must know something I don’t know about the date of the next election because I assumed it wasn’t taking place until November, 2012. For another thing, I would only consider kicking in a few bucks if it would help cause a government shutdown.

In his letter, John Kerry reminded me that if the Democrats lose just four of the 23 Democratic seats in the Senate that will be up for grabs in 2012, the GOP will have free rein in Washington. He was also willing to settle for $5 from this notorious cheapskate, but he insisted that the DSCC absolutely needed $235,000 within the next 72 hours. I could only assume that Teresa has put him on a strict budget and the extra $25,000 he was asking for was to augment his allowance.

In his letter, Sen. Kerry warned that if the DSCC didn’t hit its financial goal immediately, “We will cede the megaphone and the whole playing field to the most radical voices that keep on saying America can’t get the job done.” I assume it’s his contention that the real troublemakers are the folks voicing their pessimism as opposed to those who presently control the White House and the Senate and who obviously can’t get the job done.

Kerry went on: “This election is a choice. Either we come together as Americans to solve tough problems, or hide under a rock and pretend that if we just don’t ‘believe’ the science, our problems don’t exist.” What is fascinating about that sentence is that nowhere else in the message is anything said about “science,” but one has to assume this is code for “global warming” or “climate change” or whatever term the Left is using this week when referring to Al Gore’s favorite weather hoax.

In Al Franken’s message, he suggests that, again with a $5 contribution, I can “stick it to the Tea Party.” But, Al, being a true Leftist, is never a piker when it comes to other people’s money. He doesn’t suggest that Armageddon can be staved off by an infusion of a mere $210,000 or even $235,000 in the next 72 hours. Not hardly! Al Franken, who has looked into the crazed eyes of Tea Party members and seen madness lurking in the depths, claims that nothing less than $364,000 will keep us all safe from the evil clutches of America’s hostage-taking grandparents.

In case you’re curious, yes, I have written back explaining my own political position. But they must see me as a challenge because the requests have only increased over the past month. Perhaps they’re thinking that if they can get me to part with that five dollar bill, it could spell the difference between victory and defeat in 2012. Perhaps they’ve heard the old truism that as Prelutsky goes, so goes the nation.

All I can say, to paraphrase Charlton Heston, is that they will have to pry that five dollar bill out of my cold, dead, hands.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Monday, November 14, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

[Burt has been unusually prolific of late. Please enjoy the bonus article which follows this one.-ed]

By now I’m sure that even people who have less interest in college football than I, if such a thing is possible, are aware of the sex scandal that tore Penn State apart. It does not surprise me that Jerry Sandusky got away with his vile activity for so many years or that Joe Paterno and the college administrators basically turned a blind eye to it. College football, after all, is a cash cow that is far more sacred in America than the cattle that wander blithely through India’s countryside. Even when I was just a kid, a popular joke was that such college super stars as Charlie “Choo Choo” Justice, Doak Walker and Hugh McElhenny, would all have to take pay cuts when they turned pro.

Joe Paterno statue outside Beaver Stadium
on the Penn State Campus
In all the years since, I have yawned whenever the NCAA would suspend various programs for infractions which generally consisted of bribing their top athletes. It always seemed to me that the folks at the NCAA would periodically flip a coin to determine which college would next be targeted for their wrath. I mean, really, do you actually believe that any college can play by the rules and field a top-20 team year after year after year? It’s one thing for the NY Yankees or the Boston Red Sox to be competitive decade after decade when they pay their players more than everyone else. But how would a college manage to rule the roost when their best players have to move on after three or four years? Quite simply, by emulating New York and Boston and spending more money than the competition!

That being said, what I found most disgusting in the aftermath of the Penn State scandal was the fact that hundreds of students rioted on behalf of Mr. Paterno. Just because he kept turning out winning teams year after year, decade after decade, these young pinheads felt compelled to rally on his behalf, looking and acting exactly like the scumbags who comprise the Occupy Wall Street mob. But, unlike those unwashed morons, the students actually knew why they were out there creating mayhem in the streets. They were, by god, showing their unflagging support for a man who had kept a child rapist on his coaching staff!

I’m sure that in their defense, the young louts would say that Paterno wasn’t the pervert. But would they say the same if the coach had been employed not at Penn State, but at LSU or Alabama, Oregon or UCLA? Would they say the same about the many priests and cardinals who had never engaged in pedophilia, but who maintained their silence about the small number who did?

Elbert Hubbard once observed, “Every man is a damned fool for at least five minutes every day. Wisdom consists in not exceeding the limit.” I’m afraid that the students at Penn State have already exceeded their limit for at least the next 50 years.

But it’s not just at Penn State that corruption runs rampant. Take a look at Washington, D.C., where any number of politicians who opposed ObamaCare nevertheless voted for it because they were bribed or intimidated by the likes of Harry (“It’s just business as usual”) Reid and Nancy (“You’ll find out what’s in the bill after it’s passed”) Pelosi.

Or consider Barack Obama who comes out four-square against what they call swag, which consists of souvenir pens, pins and cufflinks, handed out by politicians. But he sends his family off to Africa at a cost to tax payers of $800,000. He then uses tax dollars to buy two buses so that he can conduct presidential business -- business that apparently can only be conducted in what figure to be swing states in the 2012 election -- thus saving the DNC’s war chest hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Or, for that matter, consider Solyndra, a beneficiary of 500 million tax dollars and personal visits by Obama and Biden, but which we’re told had nothing to do with the company being owned by a major Obama contributor.

But when it comes to corruption, unfortunately it’s not limited to Penn State and our nation’s capital. It seems that in New York, by the time they retire, 90% of railroad workers -- including those who only held desk jobs -- have applied for disability, which just happens to add $36,000 a year to their pension payments. In California, 82% of state troopers retire with some sort of disability. It almost makes you wonder why anyone would even dare consider taking such jobs. Am I the only person who worries about his health?

Finally, you have all these various women accusing Herman Cain of acting inappropriately. Not having been there at the time, I don’t know what he did or didn’t do. What I do know is that whenever a woman shows up in public joined at the hip with Gloria Allred, it is safe to assume that she either belongs in jail, a brothel or a psycho ward.

At this point, I suppose we should all be grateful that Anita Hill hasn’t yet come forward to claim that Mr. Cain once gave her a funny look.
©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write!
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, postpaid.
Get both for just $39.90.
Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

The Political Facts of Life

by BurtPrelutsky

After years of being exposed to the American media in all its forms, I’ve concluded that conservatives resent being lied to nearly as much as liberals hate being told the truth.

It has also occurred to me that expecting socialists to be logical and to learn the lessons of history, even very modern history, is totally unrealistic. You might as well ask Gloria Steinem’s famous fish to ride that bicycle she once suggested a fish needed as much as a woman needed a man. Of course, to be fair to Ms. Steinem, that was many years before she met the millionaire of her dreams and married David Bale. Although rumor has it that she only married him because he faced deportation for overstaying his visa, who’s to say that at the age of 66, Ms. Steinem hadn’t simply outlived her voguish cynicism?

In a cheap and typically simpleminded shot at Governor Perry, Barack Obama recently blamed the horrific wild fires in Texas on, of all things, global warming. You can bet that Al Gore is kicking himself for not coming up with that one. But to make up for that glaring oversight, the fatuous and fat-headed Mr. Gore is now blaming global warming for the $15 trillion deficit, the late-season collapse of the Boston Red Sox and the rising cost of Twinkies.

As you’re probably aware, the Justice Department has been harassing the Gibson Guitar Company. Gibson is of course an American institution that has been turning out world-class instruments for decades. Eric Holder, otherwise known as Obama’s hit-man, denies that Gibson has been targeted because the company’s chairman and CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, is a longtime contributor to the Republican Party. They further deny that they are scapegoating him for negatively impacting the environment by using too many letters in his last name. (Scrabble enthusiasts, by the way, might be interested in knowing that if proper names were allowed, his would be worth 217 points.)

In spite of the fact that Attorney General Holder refused to prosecute the Black Panthers for intimidating voters; oversaw the program known as Fast and Furious, which saw to it that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of semi-automatic weapons wound up in the hands of Mexican gangsters; and has berated white Americans for, essentially, being guilty of being white Americans; I’d like to give him the benefit of the doubt. But in order to do so, I’d also have to be the sort of bonehead who believes that Solyndra would have been the recipient of half a billion taxpayer dollars and personal visits from Obama and Biden if its snarky owner, George Kaiser, hadn’t been a major bundler for Obama’s election campaigns.

That brings us to a question that has long plagued me. Namely, why would politicians, people who live inside a large fish bowl, people, moreover, who are despised by at least half the population simply because they have a (D) or an (R) after their name, tempt fate and their countless enemies by taking graft and/or indulging in sexual escapades?

What on earth would ever lead these dunderheads to believe that they will somehow elude public exposure when the likes of Wilbur Mills, Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Gary Hart, Anthony Weiner, William Jefferson, Duke Cunningham, Eric Massa and Mark Sanford, were all found out and suffered the predictable consequences?

Was it the appeal of danger? Was it sheer hubris? Or were they all simply high on crack or heroin when they tossed their careers, their reputations and their families, under the proverbial bus?

Which leads me to wonder why it is that thanks to cheaters like Barry Bonds, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa, we now have drug tests for baseball players, along with race horses, but not for the creeps who decide our tax rates, write our laws and determine whether, in our old age, bureaucrats will get to tell doctors and surgeons whether to treat our ailments or turn us into mulch.

One can envision in our brave new ObamaCare world a little boy picking up a pack of wafers from the breakfast table, reading the label and asking his father what Soylent Green is; and the father tousling the lad’s hair and replying, “Why, Jimmy, that’s Grandma Becky.”

©2011 Write! . Comments? Write Burt! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Peeking Behind the Liberal Curtain

by BurtPrelutsky

Even though I’m of their generation, I used to wonder how it was that so many people could stand listening to Bob Dylan and Mick Jagger sing. Even allowing for honest differences in taste, I couldn’t figure out their popularity. Then one day I decided that their fans, most of whom were my contemporaries, were the sort of folks who would listen to their caterwauling and think to themselves as they played on their air guitars: “I can sing as well as that.”

In much the same way, by his mere presence in the White House, rock star Barack Hussein Obama must give hope to millions of other liberal dingbats.

In case you missed it, Obama recently referred to his latest stimulus project as intercontinental railroads. I guess that’s the one that we mainlanders will be able to take to Hawaii, aka our 57th state. I take it that from now on, when he’s not busy blaming Bush, he’ll blame his damn racist, homophobic, hostage-taking Teleprompter.

Speaking of he who must be evicted, whenever I hear someone assert that Obama is an eloquent speaker, I assume they would say the same about Charlie McCarthy, Mortimer Snerd, Jerry Mahoney and Lamb Chop.

When leaders on the Left, those like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer, speak of compromise, what they really mean is acceding to their demands. It’s a characteristic they share with Islamists. It’s just one of several, now that I think about it.

In 2012, the Republican nominee might consider using “Hope and Change” as his campaign motto. It would certainly make a lot more sense next year than it did in 2008. At least this time we’d all know what it is that needs changing in the White House besides the initials on the towels.

Looking back on the first three years of this administration, I can’t decide which I’ve found more repulsive -- Obama’s loony policies or his unmitigated arrogance. After all, he was the guy who vowed to heal the planet, lower the ocean and make America everybody’s sweetheart. And yet, in spite of a trillion dollar stimulus, this oaf has seen unemployment and underemployment soar; has seen nation after nation treat us like a toothless, foul-smelling, tiger; has seen his party lose one election after another; has seen his own approval numbers approach Jimmy Carter’s; has overseen the loss of our triple-A credit rating; and spent nearly two years twisting arms and bribing politicians to pass an unpopular 2,000-page health care bill that, in the end, is likely to be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

So, how does The One explain this series of disasters? First, by blaming Bush, and then by blaming Republicans in Congress, referring to them as obstructionists. Just in case he hasn’t been paying attention to election results since 2008, most Americans want more, not less, obstructions to his socialist, power-grabbing, agenda.

Then, for good measure, instead of submitting a budget or offering to slash federal spending or doing something about runaway entitlements, he spent months trolling for campaign funds and golfing, pausing only long enough to vacation on Martha’s Vineyard before telling his betters to eat their peas.

Nero had nothing on this buffoon. The only difference is that Obama diddled while America burned.

Finally, like every other American, I was delighted when our State Department was able to bribe Iran to release the two hikers, Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, but that initial euphoria only lasted until their plane landed, and Bauer’s first words were: “Two years in prison is too long,” adding that he hoped that their release, “will also bring freedom for political prisoners in America and Iran.”

It was at that point I decided I needed to find out more about these two nature lovers who couldn’t find a more benign place for a stroll than the bleak Iraq-Iran border.

Inasmuch as this jerk felt compelled to find a moral equivalency between the country that had tossed his sorry ass in prison and the country that had spent a great deal of time, effort and money, to gain his release, I wasn’t shocked to discover that Bauer is a freelance journalist for the San Francisco-based, far leftwing New America Media; that Fattal describes himself as an environmental activist; and that Bauer’s fiancé and fellow hiker, Sharon Shourd, who had been released a year earlier, is a member of Just Cause, an Oakland-based group that favors racial reparations, continues to oppose white colonialism decades after it ended, and even, ironically enough, finds nice things to say about Iran’s Ahmadinejad.

In a word, this nation has moved mountains in order to obtain the freedom of three typically ungrateful, brain-dead, Berkeleyites.

I sincerely hope that after their upcoming wedding, Shane and Sharon Bauer, along with best man Josh Fattal, spend the honeymoon taking a hike.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Thursday, November 10, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

When liberals insist that the reason Obama is faring so badly in the polls is because most of us are racists, does it never occur to them that they’re like the boy who cried “Wolf!”?

Let us say that, unlike Michael Bloomberg, Henry Waxman and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, you’re not a career politician, but merely a run-of-the-mill Democrat. Wouldn’t it ever occur to you to wonder why it is that if we’re all racists, how it is that Obama won the election three years ago? And how is it that a guy who’s much blacker than Obama, Herman Cain, is doing so well with conservatives? And how is it that the likes of Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Walter Williams, Ward Connerly, Condoleezza Rice, Clarence Thomas and Allen West, are universally liked and admired by Republicans?

Why aren’t white liberals repulsed when such corrupt public figures as Maxine Waters, Charles Rangel, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, take it upon themselves to determine who is “authentically black”? Inasmuch as liberals constantly repeat Martin Luther King’s admonition that people be judged on the basis of their character and not their pigmentation, how is it that in their circles decent character is inevitably trumped by party affiliation?

When I think of liberals, both in and out of public office, I’m reminded that Groucho Marx once cracked, “These are my principles and if you don’t like them, I have others.”

One of the amazing things about those on the Left is that they switch words around so often that it’s hard to keep track of what they’re blathering about. People got so upset with ACORN once they discovered that the group was quite happy to help fund a brothel that was going to be populated by underage Guatemalan girls that they insisted that their tax dollars no longer be allocated for their loathsome activities. No problem. ACORN simply changed its name.

When the scandal at East Anglia revolving around scientists destroying evidence that suggested that “global warming” was a hoax came out, Al Gore and his enablers, reluctant to allow their favorite cash cow to be slaughtered, simply started referring to “climate change”.

When American taxpayers finally had enough of Obama and his crew trying to raise taxes during a recession, a move that Senator Obama had insisted was goofy, and a move that helped prolong the Great Depression when FDR did that very thing twice during the 1930s, the liberals simply started referring to taxes as fees and revenues. For an example of the way that taxes are raised without our having to sit down in April and write a check to the IRS, consider that $61 of a $400 roundtrip ticket on an airline goes straight to the feds. Here in California, when the rest of the country was whining about gasoline going for $3.70-a-gallon, we were paying well over four dollars, all thanks to Jerry Brown and his band of merry fee collectors in Sacramento.

Recently, radio talk show host Dennis Prager pointed out that people are not, as some lunkheads insist, basically good. Even babies, he said, aren’t good; they are merely innocent. If they were good, they would occasionally say to themselves, “Mom and Dad are really tired. Even though I’m hungry and a little thirsty, I’ll let them sleep.” It led me to realize that not only was Prager absolutely right, but that liberals and babies have a great deal in common. Like babies, liberals will holler and whine whenever they want something, fully expecting the government to feed them, clothe them and change their nappies.

Actually, you could say that Obama will likely go down in history as the Family President. After all, none of his predecessors ever did as much to keep the family unit intact. First off, Obama saw to it that people would remain on their parent’s health insurance policies until they reached the rather advanced age of 26. Then, because Obama’s economic policies have destroyed the job market, he saw to it that young college grads had no option but to move back in with their parents. That is why you now see so many morose middle-aged parents breaking out those old “Child on Board” cards and sticking them in the back window of their SUVs.

Finally, if you’ve ever wondered what the Augean Stables were, wonder no longer. It seems that King Augeas owned a herd of 3,000 oxen. For reasons I’m not clear about, he neglected to have the stables cleaned out on a weekly, monthly or even yearly, basis. In fact, by the time he thought about it, 30 years had flown by. So when he told Hercules to take care of it, it wasn’t simply a matter of breaking out a hoe and a hose. Faced with this seemingly impossible task, Hercules did what most of us wouldn’t have even considered. I, myself, would have burned the place down. He, on the other hand, simply diverted the Alpheus River to run through the stables and wash away several tons of accumulated oxen poop.

Reading about it got me to thinking that after January 20, 2013, someone should bring Hercules out of retirement so he can divert the Potomac and tidy up the White House.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write!
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Monday, November 7, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

When you’re a conservative, it’s just about impossible, unless you’re the sort of person who wins million dollar lotteries, to not have some friends and relatives who are liberal. The secret, I’ve found, to maintaining even slightly cordial relationships with them is to never share your honest opinions about anything important, sliding through social occasions discussing the weather, sports and, well, more weather.

The truth is I have removed a fair number of people from my social circle over the past few years simply because they support Barack Obama’s policies and respond favorably to his race and class warfare rhetoric. That may strike some people as petty and intolerant, but what would it say about me if I associate with people whose beliefs, values and behavior, I abhor? Why on earth would I want to spend time with those whom I am convinced are doing their utmost to destroy the nation I love?

I understand that most people who vote for people like Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, Waxman and Reid, are benign. They may be great neighbors and wonderful, caring parents, but they are also enablers. When people help addicts feed their habits, they’re not acting out of love, but out of fear that if they behave responsibly they will no longer be loved by the addict. But of course the addict doesn’t love anyone or anything but his drug of choice.

Liberals are by nature bullies, which is why in Hollywood, they openly boast about blacklisting conservatives and why, in Washington and the mass media, they bludgeon Republicans who stand by their principles, referring to them as fascists, racists, obstructionists and hostage-taking terrorists.

Ironically, I have found it easier to draw a line between myself and the liberals I know personally than between myself and the repugnant creatures in the entertainment world. I would love to be able to boycott the movies and TV shows that feature the likes of Matt Damon, Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte, Julia Roberts, Alec Baldwin, Janeane Garofalo, Whoopi Goldberg, George Clooney, Ed Asner, Larry David and Morgan Freeman, but the truth is I lack the requisite amount of character to go cold turkey even when these left-wing turkeys are involved.

Furthermore, in the interests of full disclosure, I should confess that for a long time I was a Democrat. But, in my own defense, I was never a liberal. For those of a tender age, I should hasten to mention that there was a time when it was possible to be one without being the other. So, for instance, I could be a registered Democrat while simultaneously opposing unilateral disarmament. I could be a Democrat and still believe that Whitaker Chambers was telling the truth and that Alger Hiss and Julius Rosenberg were lying when they denied being Soviet spies. I could oppose Jim Crow laws while at the same time regarding racial quotas as reverse racism. I could be angry about Watergate and still oppose the slandering and libeling of Clarence Thomas. I could even be a Democrat and still despise the universally beloved Walter Cronkite, whose pose as an objective newsman was as phony as Obama’s attempt to foist himself off as bi-partisan, for doing his best to make certain we didn’t win the Vietnam War.

These days, I’m not at all confident that a Democrat could make those distinctions. Not when Rep. Maxine Waters has the audacity to label Rep. Allen West, a retired military officer, an “Oreo,” and not be denounced by the media, the NAACP or the Black Congressional Caucus.

Even when I was a Democrat, I knew that nobody was entitled to sneak into this country. And if he was found out, he certainly wasn’t entitled to receive schooling, health care and financial aid. I also was bright enough to know that when a nation’s border consists of sand, deportation isn’t going to be much of a deterrent. Even I, at my present advanced age, can easily scale a non-existent wall.

I can understand why Rick Perry, running for governor in a state that has a huge Mexican population, would feel he had to speak out against a barrier on our southern border and had to promote in-state tuition for the offspring of illegal aliens. That doesn’t mean I approve, but politics isn’t a game for purists unless they have their hearts set on losing elections. However, when he appeared at the GOP debate and said that if we opposed his tuition policy we were heartless, and added that because the illegals had Hispanic names, it also meant we were racists, he stepped way too far over the line.

While it’s true that the children of illegal aliens had no say in the matter when it came to sneaking across our border, we all know that no one is ever entitled to profit from the commission of a crime. Just because the child of a bank robber, for instance, didn’t drive the getaway car doesn’t mean that he’s entitled to live off the ill-gotten loot.

So, although I had been delighted when Governor Perry tossed his 10-gallon hat into the ring, I’m no longer cutting him any slack. He didn’t simply misspeak; he went and stuck both of his expensive cowboy boots in his mouth. It had nothing to do with his lack of debating skills. It had everything to do with arrogance and stupidity. We’ve just endured three years of that combination, and we don’t need four more years of the same.

Perry simply had no business saying what he did. After all, if conservatives want to be gratuitously insulted by ignoramuses, they merely have to turn on MSNBC.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Saturday, November 5, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

For the past three years, as we’ve watched Obama try to deal with a lot of things that we can all agree are way above his pay grade, we’ve been constantly mindful of the fact that this schmuck has never really held a job in the private sector.

The good news is that we are now less than 400 days away from November 6, 2012, when we can fire his sorry butt. The bad news is that no matter who replaces him in the Oval Office, we will still be stuck with a House and Senate filled with men and women who, for the most part, have spent their entire adult lives sitting on their butts making uninformed decisions that dictate how the rest of us get to live our lives.

Counting down to

Who, after all, do you think gets to decide all the regulations that often determine if companies succeed or fail, whether employers can hire more workers or have to file for bankruptcy? Who decides if people are allowed to turn a wasteland into a housing development or have to scuttle those plans because some wacko environmentalist has found, or planted, an insect that’s listed on the endangered species list? By this time, I suspect that this sacred text has more names in it than the New York City phone book.

There is a solution to the problem, though, but first let me share a couple of facts that led up to my insight. First of all, during the Iraq invasion, a large number of reporters were embedded with the American troops. The idea was that if they lived with the troops, they would come to identify with them, and they would shed the anti-military attitude that seems to infect just about everyone who works for an American newspaper or TV network.

For the most part, it worked. The only downside was that viewers of Fox News had to endure night after night of Geraldo (“I run with the bulls of Pamplona”) Rivera’s pathetic attempts to out-machismo our young G.I.s and their top sergeants.

Next, although in a completely different venue, there is a related example that will help me illustrate my plan. When it comes to the Academy Awards, it’s the people who work in specific arenas, be they writers, directors, composers or costumers, who get to determine the nominees in their category. After that, everyone gets to vote for the ultimate Oscar winners. However, when it comes to documentary films and, possibly, foreign films, the only people who get to cast votes are those who can prove that they actually saw all the contenders. It would explain why there is occasionally a miracle, as when “The Lives of Others” beat out “Pan’s Labyrinth” as Best Foreign Film a few years ago. On the other hand, these are the same clucks who gave Oscars to Michael Moore and Al Gore for Best Documentary. When it comes to Hollywood, one shouldn’t expect too many miracles.

In any case, I give these examples as proof that even if it doesn’t always help, it never hurts when people are as informed as possible on a subject they’d otherwise know nothing about.

So, inasmuch as congressmen and senators rarely know anything about anything except how to troll for votes and campaign contributions, and their aides, whose primary function is brown-nosing or sexually servicing their bosses, know even less, I would insist that before any legislator gets to vote on anything, he has to be embedded for at least a week in the business or industry that will be affected by the proposed regulation. After all, what does a congressman from Chicago know about the oil industry? Or, for that matter, what does a senator from Iowa know about salmon fishing?

I’m not suggesting that 435 members of the House and 100 members of the Senate all take off for a week in Texas or Washington state. Maybe only five or six of them would go. But they would then be the only ones who got to vote on that specific piece of legislation.

For years, we’ve heard about these pampered pashas jetting off on “fact-finding missions.” As a rule, what they come back with aren’t facts, but very nice tans and brand new golf clubs.

Because I wouldn’t trust any of these weasels any farther than I can throw Barney Frank, I would quiz them when they returned to Washington to make certain they hadn’t just stayed in their hotels for a week, boozing and chasing women.
If they didn’t like it, they could always resign. I just don’t see any reason why these crumbs should be paid about $200,000-a-year and yet get away with less homework than a typical fifth grader.

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Write! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)

Thursday, November 3, 2011


by BurtPrelutsky

With one percent of Americans paying most of the income taxes in America, while 47% pay nothing, it figures that Democrats would decide that the fair thing to do is to force the one-percenters to pay even more. That is what liberals refer to as social justice, which they believe is better than just plain old-fashioned justice because it allows them to stack the deck. That, in a nutshell, is not only a good reason to never vote for liberals, but an equally good reason not to play cards with them.

Recently, Obama announced that seven out of 10 millionaires to whom he’s spoken -- and those are generally the only people to whom he speaks without using a Teleprompter -- agreed that they thought it would be a swell thing if they paid income taxes at an even higher rate than they presently pay them. What he failed to mention is why, in that case, they don’t simply write a bigger check. He has also neglected to mention why it is that he doesn’t pay more. What the heck is stopping him? Shouldn’t a leader lead by example?

Quo Vadis, Herman Cain?
As it so happens, I have a solution that should satisfy both Democrats and Republicans. As everyone from pediatricians to Mary Poppins knows, a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. So why not sweeten April 15th by combining Tax Day with a super lottery? Wouldn’t people be more likely to pay what they owe or even a little bit more if they stood to win, say, thirty or forty or fifty times the amount they paid? Suddenly, I’m willing to wager, even those people who currently pay nothing would be eager to enter the sweepstakes.

The question I constantly ask myself is why it’s inevitably people like me who have to come up with these simple solutions when it’s guys like Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke who get paid big bucks, get invited to address congressional committees and who never do anything but make bad economic problems worse?

Moving on, it recently occurred to me that the political playbook for liberals comes to us straight from old-fashioned melodramas. Whether the stage director is James Carville, Howard Dean, Rahm Emanuel, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz or David Axelrod, the job is easy as pie. He or she merely explains to blacks, gays, college students, union members and illegal aliens, “You’ll play the damsel in distress. The Republicans will play the mustachioed villain trying to throw granny out the door and into a snowstorm, while simultaneously trying to have his dastardly way with you. And we, of course, will play the dashing hero who rushes in to save the day, not to mention your honor.”

And, just like “The Drunkard,” which ran for years and years, it doesn’t appear that Democrats ever intend to change even a single line of corny dialogue. Why would they when the old chestnut continues to draw crowds and standing ovations. By this time, even the audience has learned when to boo and hiss on cue.

Finally, I don’t know how things will finally play out for Herman Cain. As I sit here, things don’t look good. It’s not that I have any reason to believe that he sexually harassed any of the women who were paid off by the National Restaurant Association. My inclination is to suspect that he did nothing untoward, and that his accusers merely saw a golden opportunity to get an organization to cough up some dough to avoid time-wasting and potentially expensive lawsuits.

Having said that, I don’t know why Mr. Cain wasted a lot of time pretending he was unaware of the payoffs and, like Bill Clinton parsing “is,” pretended to be confused by the words “settlement” and “arrangement.”

I also had a problem with his double-talk about abortion. He had already disturbed me when he candidly admitted that he had no idea what “the right to return” meant when applied to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Although it’s comforting to hear Mr. Cain say he will surround himself with smart people once he’s in the White House, what guarantee do I have that his smart people will be any smarter than Obama’s advisors?

And while I sometimes get tired of seeing presidential candidates dragging their wives around during campaigns, I find it puzzling that I have never laid eyes on Mrs. Cain, although I did once get to see their 43-year-old wedding photo on TV.

As I said before, I have no reason to believe that Mr. Cain is a serial sexual harasser. What’s more, I like his voice, his demeanor and his smile. In fact, I like him, which is more than I can usually bring myself to say about any politician. However, I was mystified that when he finally managed to recall a time when he and one of his accusers were standing in his office, he apparently told the woman that she and his wife were the same height. What?! I’m not suggesting that was a come-on or that he was flirting with her. But, quite honestly, try as I have, I simply can’t picture the scene.

I am 71 years old and I have never had occasion to say those particular words to any female. I can’t even imagine a circumstance in which I would. I mean, unless the woman happened to be 2-foot-7 or 7-foot-two, what would be so doggone coincidental about two women who were both, say, in the normal 5’2” to 5’7” range that anyone in his right mind would feel called upon to make such a goofy observation?

©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write! Click on the little envelope below to email this article.
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)