Monday, January 30, 2012


[Enjoy a bonus article today. When you finish this article, be sure to read "No King Solomons in Sight"] by BurtPrelutsky

When people voice their disgust with the legal system, it’s not merely because of such obvious miscarriages of justice as O.J. Simpson and Casey Anthony being found not guilty by a jury of their (really stupid) peers or the nuisance lawsuits filed against doctors, forcing them to insist on unnecessary tests and procedures simply to protect their heinies; it’s because lawsuits have become so numerous and absurd, it’s become the equivalent of trick-or-treating for grown-ups.

A while back, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce listed the most ridiculous lawsuits of the past year. The following are the four that got the most votes: A convict sued a couple he had kidnapped for not helping him evade the police; a woman sued over a preview for the movie, “Drive,” because the coming attraction didn’t show enough driving; a woman disagreed with a store over an 80-cent refund and, so, sued for five million dollars; a man suing for age discrimination, after losing his case, then sued claiming the judge in the case was too old!

The one thing I’m certain of is that the Chamber of Commerce had a hard time choosing from among thousands of similar lame-brained lawsuits. The fact that there are hordes of these people among us is no surprise. After all, who did you think was voting for the community organizer in 2008? But the fact that these people have no problem finding lawyers to represent them strongly suggests that the ethical standards of the American Bar Association are every bit as lax as those of the Democratic National Committee.

A lot of people I hear from like to quote Thomas Jefferson’s line about refreshing liberty with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants, but, unlike them, I like to believe he was referring to foreign invaders. When people quote those words today, I don’t think about the American Revolution, but about the Civil War, the conflict that left 620,000 of our fellow Americans dead at places like Shiloh, Antietam and Gettysburg. So, no matter how lousy I believe Barack Obama is, I’m not prepared to spill the blood of my fellow Americans over an honest difference of opinion. November 6 isn’t that far off. Unlike the unfortunate folks in Egypt, Iran, Russia, North Korea and Libya, we have an easy way of ridding ourselves of tyrants and would-be tyrants.

One of the issues that divides most Americans is welfare. The dole, as it was best known during the Great Depression, was introduced by FDR and his fellow New Deal liberals in Congress. As originally conceived, it was intended to be a solution to a temporary problem. Instead, once the Democrats realized how easy it was to buy votes with tax dollars, it became a permanent problem with, even 80 years later, no solution in sight.

I know that Clinton and Gingrich are still taking bows for reforming welfare back in the 1990s, but they hardly scratched the surface. Of course these days, with the expanding numbers of public sector union members, nobody refers to enormous out-of-control pensions as welfare, but, euphemistically, as entitlements. But it is welfare, nonetheless, and its purpose now, as it was then, is to garner votes for liberal politicians.

Speaking of liberals, every time you hear one of them wail against photo IDs for voters, you know what they are really grousing about is that it would make it harder to cheat at election time. As usual, they, along with Eric Holder, try to pass off their criminal activities as compassion for young people and members of the black and Hispanic communities, pretending that photo IDs would disenfranchise millions of potential voters. On the face of it, it’s such blatant hypocrisy that only born liars and cheaters like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, would even pay it lip service.

After all, as everyone knows, photo IDs are required if you want to drive a car, get on a plane or buy a six-pack of Bud. But the other day, the liberals in the Illinois legislature drove the point home when they passed a state law requiring that anyone who wanted to buy drain cleaner or any other caustic substance provide a photo ID.

While it figures that in Illinois, the state where governors regularly wind up in jail and dead people get to continue voting for Democrats, honest elections would not be a priority. Still, even in Chicago, it requires a monumental dose of cynicism to suggest that maintaining eternal vigilance over the sanctity of the hardware store trumps that of the voting booth.

©2012 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)


[Enjoy a bonus article today. When you finish this article, be sure to read "Screwballs and Screwdrivers."] by BurtPrelutsky

One good thing that candidate Gingrich did was open to discussion the role of the judiciary. Personally, I balk at his suggestion that judges should be called before Congress to explain and defend their dopey decisions. That is, unless members of Congress are then called before the judicial branch to explain their own follies. Still, there is no question that far too many judges have gotten way too big for their britches. Make that, their robes.

If it were up to me, I would limit Supreme Court justices to nine year terms. But I don’t want the president or Congress destroying the balance of power that the Founding Fathers worked so hard to create when they wrote the Constitution. Inasmuch as the president and the 535 members of Congress are every bit as prone to screw up as the Court -- and even more so when the Democrats are in charge! -- I can’t imagine why Gingrich felt those clodhoppers were qualified to judge the judges.

I, on the other hand, am quite prepared to point out any number of loons who get paid to wear their bathrobes to work. For instance, Federal Judge Susan Illston decided to lay down the law to Barry Bonds, baseball cheat and convicted perjurer. Unfortunately, what she laid down was more of a red carpet.

She ruled that, after the government had spent millions convicting the scoundrel, his punishment would consist of performing community service, being placed on probation for a short time and having to pay a $4,000 fine. To put the fine into proper perspective, Bonds was paid roughly $100,000 a game by the San Francisco Giants, meaning that he was paid more than $4,000 every half-inning. As for probation, I don’t think there was really much danger of the long-retired, 47-year-old ever juicing up again in order to hit home runs into Frisco Bay.

But to drive the point home that this was more than a mere slap on the wrist, Judge Illston also sentenced him to a few weeks of home confinement, ignoring the fact that his 15,000 square foot mansion in Beverly Hills was in no way to be confused with Soledad or San Quentin, except, perhaps, in terms of acreage.

I, myself, would have tossed his sorry butt in the slammer, not just for perjury, but for cheating and thereby erasing the legitimate accomplishments of better men, such as Hank Aaron and Roger Maris, from the record books.

It’s due to my friend Ronald Kessler, Newsmax contributor and author of The Secrets of the FBI, that I’m aware of the fact that John Hinckley, who continues to be classified as a Class III threat by the Secret Service, will soon be considered for release from St. Elizabeth’s, a psychiatric hospital in Washington, D.C.

It seems that U.S. District Court Judge Paul L. Friedman, who has been allowing Hinckley to visit his mother regularly for years now, will be the guy who makes the final call. During those visits, Hinckley, who not only shot President Reagan, but Press Secretary James Brady, Secret Service Agent Timothy McCarthy and D.C. Police Officer James Delahanty, is kept under constant surveillance by the Secret Service. So not only has this would-be presidential assassin been kept needlessly alive at taxpayer expense for the past 30 years, but we’ve had to pay extra so that his frequent furloughs could be monitored.

The questions that leap to mind are, one, why Judge Friedman has been so magnanimous to this lump of human excrement and, two, has Oscar-winning actress Jodie Foster, the object of Hinckley’s psychotic infatuation -- and his stated reason for seeking notoriety -- been informed that he may soon be resuming his interrupted courtship?

Finally, when it comes to judicial lunacy, is there a more glaring example than the fact that child rapists are ever allowed back on the streets once they’ve been caught and convicted? Every time I read about one of these monsters being released from jail on the condition that they stay a thousand or two thousand feet away from a school or park, I question whether judges or legislators, for that matter, are any saner than Mr. Hinckley. I mean, why on earth would anyone release into society a person who couldn’t be trusted not to rape another child?

Instead of counting off how many feet and inches it is to the nearest playground, why not accept that there is one very safe place to lodge these damn freaks? It’s called a prison.

©2012 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, January 28, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

All in all, 2011 provided us with some pretty good news. For one thing, our military took care of Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki, God got rid of Kim Jong-Il and, for good measure, Barney Frank finally got around to announcing his retirement.

Kim Jong-Il
It was to be expected that Jimmy Carter, who insisted on paying his last respects to the otherwise unlamented Yasser Arafat, was probably the only person in the civilized world demented enough to send his sincere condolences to North Korea on the passing of its longtime dictator, the aforementioned Kim Jong-Il. So it is that although Carter’s claim to the title of Worst President of the United States has been usurped by Barack Obama, Mr. Peanut retains clear title to being the Worst Ex-President of the United States.

Speaking of titles, I had been unaware until reading his obituary that among Kim Jong-Il’s own honorifics were Best Leader Who Realized Human Wisdom; Master of Literature, Arts and Architecture; Humankind’s Greatest Musical Genius: World’s Greatest Writer; and, contrary to Al Gore’s opinion, Greatest Man Who Ever Lived.

One of the titles I fully expected to see, but didn’t, was Greatest Golfer in the Universe. After all, even the likes of Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus, Phil Mickelson and Arnold Palmer, could only fantasize about shooting a round of 38 that included 11 holes-in-one. Although I have no reason on earth to doubt the North Korean news agency that reported such a miraculous round of golf, I have always wondered why Jong-Il required 27 shots to complete those other seven holes. I can only imagine that those damn little windmills threw him off his game.

An odd coincidence is that I believe 38 is the same score that Obama once reported bowling, a score that justifiably earned him the title of World’s Biggest Wienie.

Speaking of the man who is destined to take his place with the likes of James Buchanan, Warren G. Harding and Jimmy Carter, as America’s most inept one-term presidents, Obama has been accused of picking winners and losers in the business world by subsidizing the winners with our tax dollars. Furthermore, cynics claim that he selects them solely on the basis of the owners’ financial contributions to his re-election campaign. Pshaw! Even someone as openly partisan as I am can see how unjust that is. If that charge had any merit at all, Solyndra, as well as several other green energy concerns handpicked by this administration would be flourishing. So where, I ask on Obama’s behalf, are all these alleged winners? Instead, I say that Obama has exhibited the exact same questionable instincts when picking winners in the world of commerce that he’s shown in picking cabinet members, friends and religious mentors.

Finally, in all the squabbling between Republican presidential contenders, I have yet to hear anyone utter the unfortunate truth about Arabs and Muslims. For all the joyous blather that greeted the so-called Arab spring, the world has had no reason to rejoice over the results in Egypt, Libya or Syria. For their part, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, continue to be the same cesspools they were before America sacrificed blood and treasure in the hope of protecting one group of medieval terrorists from another.

In Saudi Arabia, one of our alleged allies in that part of the world, school textbooks continue to promote the official Islamic bilge that women are “weak and irresponsible,” that homosexuals “should be killed,” and that “the hour of judgment will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them.”

In the meantime, any Christian unfortunate enough to find himself in the Middle East is fair game for jihadists.

But all the while, we Americans are trained to parrot the lie, so often repeated by George Bush and Barack Obama, that Islam is a religion of peace and that America’s Muslims -- in spite of Major Hasan’s murderous rampage at Fort Hood, the campaign to erect a victory mosque at Ground Zero, and the Muslims in Dearborn, Michigan, who, along with their friends and relatives in Gaza, celebrated on 9/11 -- are every bit as benign and patriotic as the folks in the Tea Party movement.

Until we get a president who is willing to acknowledge that we are at war with Islamic fundamentalists; that Muslims played absolutely no role in the creation of the United States; that they are dedicated to a worldwide caliphate, whose primary goal would be the extermination of Jews and Christians; and that in any war waged between one Muslim sect and another, our place should be on the sidelines, cheering them on; we will continue being drawn into one bloody and ultimately futile enterprise after another.

©2012 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)

Thursday, January 26, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Recently, I received word from a friend named Jack who let me know in no uncertain terms why he was backing Newt Gingrich and turning his back on Mitt Romney. Mainly, he seemed to like Newt because of his rousing attacks on the media and Obama. When it came to Romney, he used such demeaning terms as “non-patriotic mute,” “phony” and that old reliable, “RINO.”

The truth is, if he was the only person I know who felt that way, I wouldn’t be terribly concerned. But I have received similar messages from a couple of other friends. And like Jack, these are people dedicated to the conviction that the only way to save America from four more years of Obama’s expansion of the federal government, war on capitalism, gutting of the military and putting his stamp on the Supreme Court for decades to come, is by electing a Republican president in November.

Although I initially regarded our views as honest differences of opinion that didn’t amount to much in the grand scheme of things, I had to reverse gears after the primary voters in South Carolina gave 40% of their votes to Gingrich. I then realized that there was actually a chance that Newt would carry the GOP flag in the general election.

It was with that grave concern in mind that I responded:

“Dear Jack: I get it that you don’t like Romney’s calm and rational demeanor. To me, it seems presidential. It is what I want in a commander-in-chief. You apparently want a president, or at least a candidate, who gets angry and nasty.

“But please tell me why you think that Newt’s insulting the moderators at every debate, garnering easy applause from the folks in the audience, and then being sweet to the media in the spin room afterwards doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and self-serving. Talk about phonies!

Mitt Romney
“Why do you ignore the fact that he was censured by House Republicans when he was Speaker for a financial shenanigan involving campaign funds, while keeping in mind they let him slide over the corrupt book deal he cut with media mogul Rupert Murdoch?

“Why, as a good conservative, don’t you hold it against him that he helped Nancy Pelosi promote the Al Gore-enriching global warming hoax?

“Why doesn’t it stick in your craw that he took $1.6 million of our tax dollars from the corrupt Freddie Mac?

“Even if you don’t seem bothered by Newt’s scuzzy personal history, why aren’t you at least a tad concerned that it will turn off a majority of independent voters, the very people who decide presidential elections?

“Why aren’t you angry that your guy referred to Paul Ryan’s brilliant economic plan as “right-wing social-engineering,” and that, motivated solely by personal pique and jealousy, blasted Mitt Romney for profiting from free market capitalism?

“Not only will the GOP stand a good chance of losing the presidency if Gingrich garners the nomination, but any number of Republican candidates for Congress are quaking in their boots, frightened that he could take them down with him, enabling vile Harry Reid to maintain control of the Senate.

“Frankly, I do not understand why any Republican who understands the very real danger that Obama represents to America and the free world would want to risk running Gingrich in November.

“The irony is that you and Obama are rooting for the very same guy. Sincerely, Burt”

©2012 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)

Monday, January 23, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Political prognosticators are a lot like Iowa and New Hampshire in that it’s only every four years that people pay them any attention. Something you can always count on is that at some point they’ll stop gazing into crystal balls and reading tea leaves long enough to remind us that the taller presidential candidate tends to win elections and that the candidate with the longer name has an even better track record. Occasionally, such notable exceptions as Richard Nixon and George W. Bush break the rules, but it’s pretty rare.

While studying up on the subject, I discovered that Barack Obama isn’t 6’4”, as I had assumed, but only 6’1”. That led me to wonder if one of the prerequisites to being invited to join his administration was to be short so that he can always appear to tower over advisors and cabinet members. I mean, 6-1 is certainly above average, but nobody that height would invariably be the tallest person in a group, unless the Small People of America was holding its annual convention.

Ron Paul
Just for the record, Mitt Romney is 6’2, while Newt Gingrich is 6 feet even, although his weight makes him appear shorter. Both have longer last names than Obama; make of that what you will.

Speaking of the GOP contenders reminds me that if Timothy McVeigh hadn’t existed, Ron Paul would have had to invent him. I mean, has there ever been an occasion when sane people have been discussing the existential danger of Islamic extremists when Rep. Paul hasn’t felt it necessary to climb aboard his portable soap box and remind us all that native-born terrorist McVeigh was not a Muslim? Apparently at some time in the distant past, someone told the congressman that he had come up with an excellent reason not to take the fight to Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Iranian mullahs, but someone should tell Mr. Paul that it’s not quite the argument clincher he seems to think it is.

Thanks to the GOP debates, people once again are talking about illegal aliens. One of the sillier things they’re saying is that we should inaugurate a guest workers program. With millions of unemployed Americans, do we really need to import workers? Of course, like everybody else, I have always heard about those jobs that Americans won’t do. I just don’t know what jobs they are. Would those be in hospitals, hotels, restaurants and the construction industry? Funny, but I seem to recall Americans doing that sort of thing.

Or perhaps they’re referring to jobs involved with agriculture. If so, I’m confused. It seems to me that with 12 to 15 million illegal aliens already here, we’d have sufficient numbers to pick the damn crops. Heck, if farmers paid a decent wage -- and with all that expensive machinery and expensive acreage, you’d think they could somehow manage to swing it -- I suspect they’d have to beat off able-bodied workers with a stick.

If it truly is impossible to grow lettuce, pay people a reasonable salary to harvest it, and still turn a profit, maybe we could simply start up the slave trade again. At least those folks wouldn’t expect welfare, in-state tuition and the right to vote. Or, if all else fails, we could simply get the “L” out of BLTs.

Finally, to show the depths to which America has fallen, radio talk show host Michael Medved recently disclosed that the two most popular names for newborns these days are Jacob and Isabella. I happen to think that both names are rather nice. The only problem is that the reason for their popularity is that they happen to be the names of the two main characters in the “Twilight” movie series devoted to vampires.

I suppose we should all be grateful that an earlier generation had more sense than that or today a lot of us running around would be named Vampira or Dracula.

©2012 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, January 21, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

A few years ago, the folks on Martha’s Vineyard, a favorite Massachusetts island getaway for New England liberals, were under siege by a wild turkey named Tom. Unlike most turkeys who can be scared off by waving your hands or shouting at them, Tom enjoyed nothing better than attacking people. Shouting and waving merely egged him on. Compounding the problem, Tom led a flock of like-minded birds. If you think of the Hells Angels, but with wattles and feathers, you’ve got the picture.

Tom would even terrorize people in cars, daring them to come out and face him man to turkey. If they chose to wait him out, he’d peck the paint off their doors.

One day, the folks who rented cribs and cradles to vacationing tourists couldn’t make a delivery because Tom was chasing them around their truck, trying to draw blood with one of his spurs. In a panic, they dumped the stuff in the front yard and drove off. When the cops were called, Tom attacked them. Four bullets later, Tom was dead.

Naturally, Martha’s Vineyard being a community of liberals, it was the cops who came in for tons of grief. These are, after all, the same folks who get their shorts in a knot when American soldiers shoot jihadists, so you can imagine their outrage over a turkey being whacked.

I am recalling this event not merely to amuse you at the expense of liberal chickens, although that would normally be motive enough. This time, I am leading up to a reason why I think it’s time we divided America. I mean, can you imagine a town in Oklahoma, Montana or Alaska, being held hostage by psychotic poultry? That bird would only have had to look cross-eyed at a Texan and his next appearance would have been on a dinner platter with a side of cranberries.

It only makes sense to divide the United States along political lines. I’m not saying it would be easy, but it’s pretty obvious that the nation is growing increasingly polarized with roughly half the population favoring a huge federal government that oversees everything from smoking to nutrition, while the other half believes that the federal government has gone from being a necessary evil with the emphasis on necessary to one that is increasingly evil.

As I see it, the entire Pacific coast, along with the Northeast, favors Obama and the Democrats. Unfortunately, those two areas are separated by about 2,500 miles. Therefore, I would suggest connecting those two parts of the country with, say, a 30 mile corridor south of the Canadian border that would run through parts of Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. That America would include California, Washington, Oregon, New York, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland and New Jersey. We conservatives would give up Hawaii in exchange for Alaska. You can see where that would make for an odd-looking country, but no odder than the congressional districts that have been gerrymandered by the Democrats here in California.

I’m not being capricious about dividing a nation that has already cost 600,000 American lives lost during the war that was waged to preserve the Union. I simply see no other way to resolve the differences when half the population regards abortion as murder and the other half feels that young girls are entitled to state-funded abortions without parental consent. The same separation exists between those who favor same-sex marriages and those who don’t; those in favor of capital punishment and those who oppose it; those who respect the Second Amendment and those who’d like to abolish it; those who favor class and race warfare and those who believe their America is above such things; those who regard compulsory union membership as a good thing and those who don’t; those who defend public schools but send their own kids to private schools and those who believe in vouchers and home-schooling; those who oppose drilling for oil and digging for coal, and those who realize that alternative sources of energy might be sufficient for a house, but not for an industrial nation; and those who think that the rights of insects trump the rights of human beings and those of us who are sane.

If you believe that the bigger the federal government grows, the better it is, you will be right at home in the new America. If you not only believe that illegal aliens and jihadists are entitled to the same rights as a citizen, but believe that the government should intrude in every aspect of your life, including those that it is precluded from by the U.S. Constitution, you might even consider running for public office.

Just to avoid any possible confusion as to boundaries, we’d build a very high wall at both our southern and northern border.

There would be no hard feelings between our two nations, but knowing how opposed liberals are to military action and how unwilling they are to fund the Pentagon, they should not expect us squander our blood or treasure racing to save them if they are ever invaded by Canada or, for that matter, by a flock of really angry turkeys.

©2012 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)

Thursday, January 19, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

As I have stated in other articles, I hate the over-use of the word “alleged.” I understand that those in the media are compelled to use it, for fear of lawsuits, when referring to people who have been indicted but not convicted, lest the jury neglects to find the person guilty. But when it is readily apparent to one and all, except for the 12 goofballs in the jury box, that, say, O.J. Simpson or Casey Anthony is guilty as sin, couldn’t the TV reporter at least wink or giggle when using the word? It would be a way of letting us know that they know that it isn’t the defendant’s guilt that should be called into question, but, rather, the sanity and commonsense of the jurors.

I suppose that carried to its extreme, Obama’s biographer will one day write that he was allegedly born in Hawaii, allegedly received good grades in college and was allegedly heterosexual, even though no woman, in spite of the fame and fortune awaiting her, has ever come forward to say that she dated him prior to his marrying Michelle when he was 31.

Speaking of people who should, by all rights, be going to jail, perhaps to share a cell with Bernie Madoff, there was Jon Corzine, the former governor and senator from New Jersey, being questioned by a congressional committee about $1.2 billion of MF Global customers’ money that’s gone missing. Mr. Corzine, who had already told a reporter that he had no intention of using any of his fortune to pay back bilked investors, sat at a table, insisting that even though he had been the head of the company, he had no idea where the money had gone. That part was all too predictable. What threw me is that this Jersey sleaze ball, this friend and confidant of Obama and Biden, got to perch behind a little sign identifying him as The Honorable Jon S. Corzine.

Now, first of all, I suspect the various politicians on the committee already knew his name. After all, they were the ones who had subpoenaed him. But how is that none of them commented on the fact that referring to this jackass as honorable was as laughable as putting a top hat on a pig. Wouldn’t you think that the sign might at least have read The Allegedly Honorable Jon S. Corzine?

Finally, what is it with some people that compel them to take entirely unnecessary risks? I’m not just referring to those who climb mountains, bungee-jump or, worse yet, run for president when they must know that their worst, most embarrassing, secrets will inevitably be splashed all over the media, scarring their wives and children?

The folks I actually have in mind are those people who are given ample opportunity to avoid scandal, jail and even death, but decide to roll the dice and take their chances. For instance, when the prosecutors offered the fabulously wealthy Martha Stewart the opportunity to avoid jail time if she’d merely admit she’d saved herself some dough by taking advantage of insider information, why did she insist on going to trial? For one thing, it’s not as if she couldn’t have afforded to take the stock loss by ignoring the information she received in the phone call from a friend. For another, I’m sure her defense lawyers wound up costing her more than the $150,000 or so she’d saved by selling off earlier than the other, outside-the-loop, stockholders.

For that matter, why didn’t Saddam Hussein, Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Gaddafi, all get out while the getting was good, and spend their golden years enjoying freedom and their ill-gotten gains?

If I were any of them, the worst part about ending up dead or in an Egyptian cage, would have been the realization that I was even dumber than a psychotic gorilla like Idi Amin, who wisely scampered off to Saudi Arabia, and, as a result, got to spend his last 24 years living the life of Riley.

©2012 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)

Monday, January 16, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Santorum, Gingrich and Perry, all condemned Mitt Romney’s Bain Financial for putting people out of work. If anyone should be sidelined, it’s Santorum, Gingrich and Perry.

For one thing, as every conservative who isn’t running behind in the primaries knows, venture capitalists put their money where their mouths are. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, as the old adage goes. When it comes to picking winners, Bain has a far better record than the Obama administration. After all, Bain was gambling on turning around the fortunes of companies that were close to death or assisting in the birth of companies that would otherwise have been aborted. Obama, on the other hand, handed out billions of our tax dollars for no other reason than that company owners had contributed heavily to his presidential campaigns.

Mitt Romney
As Romney has admitted, there were times when Bain had no choice but to shut down companies and let the employees go, but in every case those employees kept drawing salaries for a far longer time than they would have done without Bain’s infusion of cash. Clearly, those factory workers confused themselves with public sector union members. Those are the folks, let us never forget, who keep getting hired and having their salaries and pensions increased in spite of a failing economy. That’s the difference between Washington, D.C. and the real world.

Another irony of the campaigns that Santorum, Perry and Gingrich, are running is that each of them promises to shut down entire departments of the federal government if they’re elected president. Just how will they manage to keep that promise without handing out thousands of pink slips? While it’s true that the intended victims are nothing more than Washington bureaucrats, they are still more or less human beings with children to feed and mortgages to pay.

Newt Gingrich
Some people defend Gingrich’s attacks on Romney, insisting that Romney has it coming because of the ads that Romney’s supporters ran in Iowa attacking Mr. Gingrich. The obvious difference is that while Romney’s attacks could certainly be described as vicious, they also happened to be true. In fact, they could easily have been even more hurtful.

For instance, Gingrich was a serial adulterer. And while he has insisted he is a changed man and that he regrets his sins, the same holds true for every other rascal who has ever been found out. On one occasion, he even explained his adultery by stating “Partially, I was driven by how passionate I felt about this country that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.” It’s not every day, thank God, that America is basically cast as The Other Woman. Even Bill Clinton, who couldn’t quite define sex, but certainly knew it when he saw it, didn’t rationalize his boorish behavior as excessive patriotism.

Not only did Gingrich dump his first wife and their two kids, but, adding injury to insult, he refused to pay alimony or child support, thus forcing the local Baptist church to pass the hat. He eventually repaid the debt in full, though, by converting to Catholicism.

It’s true that Gingrich was the first Speaker who was ever censured and fined by his congressional colleagues. And although it was for financial shenanigans, it did not, for some reason, involve the multi-million dollar book deal he had cut with Rupert Murdoch. The deal, it so happens, had far less to do with Gingrich’s writing ability than with the fact that mogul giant Murdoch had a vested interest in befriending, otherwise known as bribing, the Speaker, who at the time chaired the committee that oversaw the granting of radio and TV licenses.

Lest we ever forget, Gingrich volunteered to sit on that dumb couch with Nancy Pelosi, and help her perpetuate Al Gore’s hoax of global warming. He has since said that agreeing to make that TV spot was the single dumbest thing he ever did. But I think he was just being modest.

Gingrich pocketed $1.6 million of our tax dollars, thanks to the generosity of Freddie Mac, for allegedly giving them advice he claims they ignored for five years. I wonder if that gig is still available. It’s a job I was born to have. After all, I’m constantly giving people advice they ignore.

Gingrich derided Paul Ryan’s fiscal plan as “right-wing social engineering” and then, for good measure, insisted that when Romney said he would enjoy firing his health insurance provider if they failed to satisfy his needs, he really meant that he took pleasure in firing people who worked for him.

Now, in desperation, after finishing near the bottom in Iowa and New Hampshire, Gingrich attacks Romney for profiting from being a free market capitalist.

The good news for Newt is that once he finally drops out of the GOP race, he can sign on with David Axelrod and start getting paid to help re-elect Barack Obama.

In conclusion, a free piece of advice for Callista: Be on the alert if Newt claims he’s working late at the office. By now, I think we all know how patriotic this guy can get.

©2012 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, January 14, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

I know that Barack Obama puts a great deal of stock in people like Timothy Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Harry Reid and Barney Frank, but they’re the folks who helped get us into this financial mess. As usual, it takes an ordinary American such as myself who relies on logic and common sense, not a bunch of pie charts and Keynesian theories, to get this economy moving in the right direction.

Bill Gates
I realize that Obama is counting on class warfare to win re-election, but I’m here to tell him that most Americans won’t fall for it. They know that Bush started that jalopy down the hill, but it was Obama who kept pushing it over the cliff or into the ditch or wherever the hell it wound up. As a result, a child of six can see that placing a two or three percent surtax on rich people is just more of the same.

After studying the problem, I am here to report that, as usual, Obama’s thinking is small and entirely inside the box. I, on the other hand, have discovered that the solution is well within our grasp. I suspect that the reason that Obama didn’t arrive at the obvious answer is that for all his grousing about millionaires and billionaires, in his heart he realizes that most of his friends, not to mention he himself, are members of those two elitist groups. I mean, who else do you think can afford to plunk down $35,000 to attend one of his fund raisers? When your nearest and dearest include the likes of Jeffrey Immelt, Jon Corzine, the folks at Goldman Sachs and George Soros, you don’t want to act too rashly.

I, as you’ve probably guessed, suffer from no such inhibitions. If you are serious about getting the deficit under control, you can’t nibble a little here, a little there, especially not if you wish to keep spending tax dollars like a fleet of drunken sailors, otherwise known as Democrats.

After conducting a little research, I discovered that there are over 400 billionaires in America. Thirty-one of them are worth more than ten billion dollars, 11 of them worth more than 20 billion. Bill Gates tops the list at $59 billion, followed by Warren Buffet at $39 billion. I’m sure it’s just the cynic in me, but when those two pals get together for lunch, I can’t help wondering which of them pretends to have left his wallet in his other jacket.

George Soros
Most of the people in the billionaires club are fairly anonymous, having come by their fortunes through mining, hedge funds, hotels, the media, banks, construction, computers, sports teams, casinos, supermarkets and real estate. A few of the better known include Meg Whitman, H. Ross Perot, Jerry Jones, Steven Spielberg, Donald Trump, Stephen Bechtel, Ralph Lauren, Michael Milken, Oprah Winfrey, Sam Zell, Steve Wynn, Charles Schwab, George Lucas, Ted Turner, Barry Diller, Mark Zuckerberg, George Kaiser, Michael Bloomberg, David Geffen, three people named Ziff, four people named Hearst, seven people named Pritzker, T. Boone Pickens and a whole bunch of heirs to Walmart and the Mars candy company.

These 400-odd people are worth over 10 trillion dollars. The way I figure it, all we need to do is confiscate all their money and we are nearly 70% of the way to eliminating the national deficit. Frankly, I’m a wee bit surprised that with all the advisors and czars who make up this administration, it took an outsider to come up with this brainstorm. Of course it’s just possible that Valerie Jarrett or Van Jones suggested it, but once Obama saw so many of his friends and supporters on the list, he had no option but to nip it in the bud.

It’s one thing, after all, to whine constantly about generic millionaires and billionaires not paying their fair share, and quite another when you have to break the news to old chums like Oprah, Bloomberg, Diller, Geffen, Spielberg, Kaiser and Soros, that their future won’t be quite as rosy as they had anticipated, and will likely consist of panhandling, food stamps and homeless shelters.

©2012 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)

Thursday, January 12, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

There seem to be two kinds of Americans. There are those who wish this nation could once again be what it used to be, a beacon for those who cherished freedom and liberty. Then there are those who look at America and wish it could be more like Cuba, of all places. Or if not Cuba, perhaps Spain or Mexico or Venezuela, with maybe just a smidgen of Iran or Egypt or the West Bank tossed in, and a dash of the Occupy Wall Street movement. In short, they prefer a swamp to a melting pot.

I can’t pretend to understand those on the Left. I don’t know why they think the way they do. Once I was being interviewed on a radio show and the host asked me if I was proud to be an American. I shocked him, and even myself a little, when I said I wasn’t. I told him that I was proud of my various grandparents, proud that they had the gumption to make their way across a continent and an ocean to get here. But what did I have to be proud of? I was simply handed a gift. I was just lucky. I won the big lottery. I got to be born an American. What I can’t fathom is why all those liberals, progressives and run-of-the-mill Democrats, don’t seem to share my sense of gratitude, harboring only resentment.

RINO = Republican In Name Only
I also have no idea why they continue to ballyhoo Barack Obama. He’s a hypocrite, a liar and he’s supremely arrogant. If he were only your neighbor, he’d be so obnoxious, you’d consider moving. But here he is the commander-in-chief, and these louts carry on as if the sun shines out of his backside.

His view of America is a place where the dumbest, the laziest and the least grateful, are entitled to everything that the smartest, most decent, hardest-working individuals have. Redistribution of wealth has a nice, uplifting tone to it, but when you cut through the slag, it comes down to taking by force what taxpaying, law-abiding people have and handing it over to those who want it.

It strikes me as pretty obvious that when you pander to those whose most over-riding emotion is envy, you destroy a nation. It is Obama’s game plan now, just as it was in 2008 . Unlike any other president, Obama hopes to conquer by dividing blacks and whites, rich and poor, union members and the rest of us. It’s atypical in America, but it is business as usual in every communist country that has ever existed.

If Obama were to be re-elected, it would be the death knell for this country. Not because of any specific thing he would accomplish over the next four years, although he would very likely have the opportunity to re-create the Supreme Court in his own distorted image, but because of what his re-election would say about us.

Were he to win in November, it would prove that less than 250 years after the creation of this republic by such giants as Washington, Madison, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson, the majority of Americans are prepared to hand the country over to moral and intellectual pygmies. It would mean that most Americans now subscribe to a life consisting of cradle-to-grave government-provided entitlements, even though anyone who has paid the slightest attention to what is happening in Greece knows the inevitable result of such insane policies.

Speaking of so-called entitlements, it is high time that pensions be re-examined. If I had my way, salaries would be raised across the board and pensions would disappear. Although nobody holds cops, firemen and members of the military -- particularly those who have risked life and limb in combat -- in higher esteem than I do, it simply makes no sense that these men and women should be able to put in their 20 years and then, starting as young as 38 or 39, begin collecting monthly checks for the next 40 or 50 years. Even alimony doesn’t last that long!

Finally, I’d like to address those Republicans who get on my case whenever I say something nice about a candidate they don’t regard as a hard core conservative. Invariably, the candidate and I get slimed as RINOs. No matter how often I contend that while I would prefer a conservative, most Republicans clearly don’t. That is why it’s people like Dole, McCain and the Bushes, who keep winning GOP primaries.

When I insist that, imperfect as they were, the Republican candidates over the past two decades were better than Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry and Obama, were or would have been, they remain unconvinced. What they like to say is that the only difference between a RINO and a liberal is that a RINO will destroy America at a slower rate.

Although I don’t happen to agree with them, what I say in rebuttal is that even if they’re right, that is a hell of a big difference. After all, we all know that nobody lives forever, but would they prefer to die sooner or later? Or would they, like dumb mules, stubbornly stick to their guns and insist it really doesn’t matter?

©2012 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)

Monday, January 9, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Ican certainly understand why Gingrich is so angry with Mitt Romney. It’s because of all the negative ads that Romney ran in Iowa. You know, the ones that told the truth about Gingrich’s having been censured by Congress for financial shenanigans when he was the Speaker of the House; that he had fully supported mandated health care; that he had joined Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore in promoting the fraud known as global warming; and that he had been paid 1.6 million of our tax dollars by Freddie Mac.

Frankly, I think that nobody was more surprised than Newt when he found himself riding high in the polls back in December. After all, this was the same guy who went off to the Greek islands with Mrs. Gingrich at the start of the primary season, leading his entire election team to quit, after having decided that he obviously wasn’t a serious candidate. It also helps explain why he didn’t bother getting his name on the Virginia ballot. All along, I figured that he had thrown his hat in the ring for the very same reason that Pat Buchanan used to throw his. It’s called branding, the human equivalent of the way that Coca Cola, GE and Disney promote themselves. By keeping his name in front of the public, it helps Newt sell books, videos and make certain that his big, fat lecture fees remain big and fat.

As for Ron Paul’s groupies, they’re always insisting that his detractors don’t really understand the subtle nuances of Paul’s foreign policy, and that, in any case, his domestic policies are utterly sublime. The problems are two-fold: one, the major reasons that young nincompoops champion his domestic platform is because it pretty much consists of legalizing drugs and making certain that the military draft is never reinstated; and, two, his foreign policy would, to an even greater extent than Obama’s, gut the U.S. military and encourage the likes of Russia, China and the Islamists, to start licking their chops.

When Ron Paul’s fans insist that voters overlook a few of his nuttier notions in order to appreciate his overall message, I’m reminded of those screwballs who want people to ignore Louis Farrakhan’s racism and anti-Semitism because, after all, he encourages his followers to dress neatly, bathe regularly and marry the mothers of their children.

I suppose that while we’re at it, we should never forget that Mussolini made the Italian trains run on time and that “Hanoi Jane” Fonda was good to her elderly father.

I read that about half the members of Congress are millionaires, and that their median worth is $913,000. And that’s excluding their home equity. Those are pretty impressive numbers when you realize that they’ve somehow managed to accumulate all that wealth in spite of having to maintain two separate residences on an annual salary of about $170,000. Isn’t it a shame that they’re never able to employ those same talents when it comes to solving America’s financial woes?

Some of my readers get irked by my insistence that liberals are not only stupider than conservatives, but far nastier. The latest example was the way that Alan Colmes went after Rick Santorum. In case you missed the news, it seems that when Rick and his wife lost their baby boy, Gabriel, two hours after he was born prematurely, they decided to take him home so that the rest of the family could acknowledge their brother’s existence.

But, according to Colmes, the Santorums took Gabriel home so that his siblings could “play with him” for a few hours. Only someone as morally rancid as Colmes, an Obama shill who regularly insists liberals are the most compassionate of people, would try to scuttle Santorum’s candidacy by insinuating that he was some sort of monster who encouraged his kids to perhaps toss their brother around like a Frisbee.

However you may feel about what the parents did, and whether or not you would have done the same thing in their tragic circumstances, I think we can all agree that Colmes, in his snide comments, proved that his inner self is even more vile than the smirking skull he presents to the world.

It also bears noting that while Colmes sheds crocodile tears over the plight of little Gabriel, in keeping with liberal hypocrisy he insists the government continue funding Planned Parenthood’s efforts to abort 350,000 babies a year.

Finally, according to the Mayan Calendar, the world is supposed to come to an apocalyptic end on December 21st. I am of two minds about the prediction. On the one hand, I’d hate to think that I might never see another Christmas or another birthday. On the other hand, if, by some awful turn of events or through some political skullduggery, Obama actually gets himself re-elected on November 6th, the end couldn’t come soon enough for me.

©2012 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)

Thursday, January 5, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

After dismissing the importance of the Bilderberg Group, the Tri-Lateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, in a recent article, I knew I would hear from those people who check under their beds every night to make certain that Henry Kissinger isn’t lurking under the box springs. I only wish I could predict Kentucky Derby winners with equal success.

The angriest of the conspiracy nuts insisted that I was intentionally ignoring solid evidence of the threat these people posed, suggesting that I just might be a closet Bilderberger. In response, I wrote to tell him that, like Groucho Marx, I refuse to join any group whose standards were so low that they’d accept me as a member. Besides, I try to never come between a man and his paranoia. But does anyone in his right mind seriously believe we are any closer to a one-world government today than we were a hundred years ago? Heck, we’re not even close to a one-nation America these days. One might as well contend that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, are planning a coup d’état.

Something else I keep hearing, at least from Ron Paul’s groupies, is that America should not be the policeman of the world. Oh, really? Perhaps we should leave it to the likes of France. Or maybe the Netherlands? Costa Rica? Or would we all be better off if we just let China, Russia and the Islamic nutcakes, fight it out for global supremacy? And when the dust settles, I suppose we can just line up on our knees to kiss the heinie of the winner.

It is such an infantile suggestion that it explains why Dr. Paul draws most of his followers from high schools and colleges. You know, the same bunch of youthful ninnies who applaud Obama for keeping them on their parents’ health insurance policies until they’re middle-aged, who turned our streets into latrines as members of the Occupy Wall Street movement and who think George Washington and Samuel Adams are the wide receivers on the Oakland Raiders.

Speaking of Ron Paul, I had been aware of the fact that no important piece of legislation carried his name, even though he’s parked his backside in the House for the past 23 years. But until I heard it on Fox, I was unaware that during that time, he had proposed 620 pieces of legislation and only had one bill passed. And that one dealt with the sale of a Galveston landmark to a Texas historical society. Just think about it. The man has been in Congress for nearly a quarter of a century, collecting roughly $3.5 million in salary, and all he has accomplished is to facilitate the sale of a building he, himself, didn’t own. I’d say that he’s the Republican answer to Dennis Kucinich, except that Kucinich doesn’t keep embarrassing the Democrats by running for president.

Still, I hasten to add that where presidential elections are concerned, it’s rarely, if ever, a contest between a great candidate and a terrible one. But, quite often, it’s a choice between someone who is just mediocre and a Democrat, who really is terrible. Having said that, anyone who fails to acknowledge the huge difference between the two is either a mere dunce or completely deranged.

When I first heard that Nancy Pelosi spent her Christmas vacation in a Hawaiian resort that ran her $10,000-a-night, I was flabbergasted. But, then, I reminded myself that the woman is worth nearly $40 million. Besides, it’s her own dough she was spending. That’s quite different from the Obamas spending over $4 million of our tax dollars to catch the rays 7,000 miles from the White House.

I suppose if you’re a liberal jackass, you don’t see that as an example of gross insensitivity during an economic crisis, but merely as the spirit-lifting equivalent of Churchill’s flashing the V-sign while touring London’s bombed-out buildings during the worst of the Nazi blitz.

But, on the other hand, imagine how they would have reacted if it had been George and Laura enjoying those expensive sunsets, and not Barack and Michelle.

For my part, I can hardly wait for November 6 to roll around, so I can bid them one final heartfelt aloha.

©2012 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)

Monday, January 2, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

It would appear that the DNC has me confused with George Soros. I don’t know why this would be. For one thing, he was born in Hungary and I was born in Chicago, so we sound nothing alike. For another thing, he has a full head of hair and I only have a cute little fringe around my ears. He’s a billionaire and I am only just getting by. And, finally, I am sane and he’s as crazy as a proverbial bedbug.

He’s not Burt!
But obviously something has gone haywire at Ground Zero of the loony Left. During the past week or so, Frank Lautenberg, Jason Rosenbaum, Dick Durbin and Ted Kennedy’s dipstick son, Patrick, have all sent me messages, urging me to donate money to help them defeat the GOP.

If I failed to kick in, the following are just a few of the dire scenarios they warned me would more than likely take place: The Republicans would dismantle ObamaCare; prevent the re-election of such party stalwarts as Elizabeth Warren and Tim Kaine; take control of the U.S. Senate; and, egad, prevent the Democrats from excising the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution!

As amusing as I found the notion that I would donate even a farthing to the Party of Obama, Pelosi and Reid, the frightening thing is that there are millions of Americans, people who actually get to vote, work in the media and teach in our schools, who receive the same requests and immediately sit down and write a check.

What is going through their minds? Who are these blockheads who, even in this miserable economy, are willing to spend their hard-earned dollars to help the current administration shove ObamaCare down our throats and disarm law-abiding citizens?

Perhaps the topper is that these people are so desperate that they even stooped to using Patrick Kennedy as one of their shills. Even though you would have to be a member of the Kennedy clan in order to state “My father and uncles fought to build a society that takes care of the least among us,” how pathetic that the Party would utilize a schmuck who has been addicted to cocaine, booze and prescription drugs, for most of his adult life; would have been in jail several times for drunk driving and assault if the Kennedy money and influence hadn’t been at his beck and call; and even been asked to refrain from taking Holy Communion by his bishop because of his pro-abortion stance as a congressman. This lump has also been known to brag that he’s never worked a day in his life. I guess in that family the fruit doesn’t fall too far from the tree.

By this time, even with Patrick Kennedy gone, you can’t really expect much from Congress. But even I was flabbergasted by the inability of the Super Committee to cut a pathetic trillion and a half dollars in spending. But unlike the dimwits who blamed the six Republicans on the Committee for the impasse, I blame Obama and his stooges in the House and Senate. It was the Democrats, after all, who insisted that no cuts would be made without the Republicans agreeing to raise taxes. I must confess that every time I heard that demand, I would rush to the bathroom and splash cold water on my face. Had I heard right? Surely, my aging ears must have been playing tricks. Or, perhaps, as usual, I had dozed off while listening to Sen. Patty Murray prattle away, doing her inimitable impression of ditzy Barbara Boxer.

On the other hand, I never heard a Republican Committee member say what I kept thinking: If our mission is to cut federal spending, why would we simultaneously consider raising taxes? Isn’t that contradictory? How is that any different from someone on the second floor announcing that he’s going downstairs to answer the phone, but instead ascending to the attic?

Finally, there are millions of people in this country who agree with Obama and the rabble who constitute the Occupy Wall Street movement. They resent rich people. In Obama’s case, he only resents rich people who don’t kick in to his re-election war chest. But even he, who is a multi-millionaire, believes that other wealthy people should hand over their money to the poor. And not in the form of charity, which has always been the American way, but through taxation and federal redistribution.

There are several reasons why this should be abhorrent to everyone. For one thing, an awful lot of poor people are leeches. They don’t work even when jobs are readily available. And when they’re given money, food stamps and housing, they aren’t even grateful. They regard it as their due.

For another thing, the weaponry used in class warfare is envy, which, along with its Siamese twin, self-pity, are the two most loathsome human emotions. Those who have less than others are told that the only reason for the imbalance is that they’ve been cheated. It has nothing to do with their sloth, ignorance and lack of initiative, everything to do with a system that allows the rich to steal what is rightfully theirs.

The folks behind the perpetration of the big lie are politicians, journalists, academics and those in the movie and TV business who invariably portray the poor as noble creatures. The truth is, there is nothing noble about poverty, especially not in America, where, thanks to limitless opportunities to improve one’s lot, it is probably more difficult to remain poor for more than a single generation than it is to become wealthy.

Thomas Edison once observed in pre-inflationary times: “From his neck down, a man is worth a couple of dollars a day; from his neck up, he is worth anything his brain can produce.”

And while we can’t all invent the electric light bulb, it behooves every one of us to get off our backsides and quit cursing the darkness.

©2012 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)