Monday, April 30, 2012


Due to an error by, me,  the editor, the final two paragraphs were missing from “The Best College in America.” This was my fault, not Burt’s. I regret the confusion this caused. Please go back and give it another read now that it makes sense. -ed.

by BurtPrelutsky

Now that Romney has sewn up the nomination, it’s time we all concentrated on the best way to prevent Obama and his creepy cronies from finally turning America, the shining city on the hill, into a cesspool.

When people wonder how the liberals gained so much influence, I point to the 60s. That was the era when young people first discovered how much power and influence they had so long as they acted in unison. By the time they had gotten through college, they decided the best way to hang on to power and influence was by pursuing careers in law and academics. By the time that Woodward and Bernstein managed to chase Richard Nixon out of the White House, those who didn’t have the requisite brain power to become lawyers, judges and professors, became social workers, public school teachers and journalists.

What these people tend to have in common is the notion that America is an evil, greedy, materialistic, racist, warlike nation, that fails to measure up to places like Cuba, Russia, Iran, China and the West Bank.

They believe that whites, other than themselves, are racists, but that blacks, 97% of whom voted for Barack Obama, who allow people like Al Sharpton, Maxine Waters and Jesse Jackson, to speak for them and whose ministers, more often than not, parrot the same tripe as Jeremiah Wright, are not.

My advice to Romney is to stop telling us he thinks Obama is a nice guy. We’ve had over three years of this guy cozying up to our sworn enemies while insulting our allies; redistributing everybody’s wealth but his own; saddling us with a debt that will bankrupt our grandchildren; and crippling America’s sources of energy. That may be Romney’s idea of a nice guy, but it’s my idea of a schmuck.

We already had John McCain run a campaign that was so separated from reality that he wouldn’t even permit the Party to run an ad that connected Obama to his religious mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, because he suffered from the delusion that he was behaving in a statesmanlike way, overlooking the fact that the only time a politician is referred to as a statesman is in his obituary.

I remain convinced that Romney is the best man to unseat Obama, but he will need to start waking up Americans. It’s time for another Paul Revere to warn his countrymen that the enemy is upon us, and that behind the smile, Obama is an anti-American, anti-capitalist, demon.

Unlike most politicians who lie to us during campaign season, Obama was perfectly honest. He said that his energy policy would send our energy costs soaring. And then to help him keep his promise, he appointed Stephen Chu, the man who prayed for our gas prices to hit $10-a-gallon, to be his secretary of energy.

He also said that the problem with both the U.S. Constitution and the Civil Rights Movement was that they didn’t deal with the redistribution of wealth. To ensure that the same could not be said of his administration, he surrounded himself with the likes of Timothy Geithner, Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod.

The one obvious lie Obama told us was that he would be a post-racial president. The truth is just the opposite. He is the president who appointed confirmed racist Eric Holder to be our attorney general. In that role, Holder has gone to war against a number of states for either trying to keep illegal aliens from taking root like leaches, for attempting to ensure that only living American citizens get to vote in our elections and for opposing ObamaCare. He has also overseen Fast and Furious, the sting operation that saw thousands of weapons ending up in the hands of Mexican gangsters, culminating in the death of an American border agent. At the same time, Holder has refused to indict the Black Panthers for either voter intimidation or, more recently, for placing a dead-or-alive bounty on the head of George Zimmerman.

I, personally, don’t hold Holder accountable. Clearly, Holder is merely following orders emanating from what some people have taken to calling the Offal Office.

In fact, when some folks call for Holder’s resignation, I roll my eyes. It’s like people who believe that term limits would finally rid Congress of the likes of Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters and Charley Rangel. It’s a pipe dream to think their constituents would suddenly wake up and elect candidates reminiscent of Paul Ryan or Darrel Issa. These dimwits would simply elect younger, no doubt more attractive, versions of Waxman, Waters and Rangel.

Thanks to Obama’s pussyfooting around when it comes to Iran, I recently suggested that it might be time for a chicken to replace the American eagle as our national symbol. One reader wrote in, suggesting we could compromise with Benjamin Franklin’s original suggestion, the turkey.

But, as I wrote back, isn’t it enough that we already have one roosting in the White House?

©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)

Friday, April 27, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

If you’re a liberal, you would probably insist, depending on which one you attended, that Harvard, Yale, Stanford or UC Berkeley, was the finest college or university in the country. If you went to Harvard, you would probably say, in the world.

If you were a conservative, you would probably vote for Hillsdale.

But I contend that far and away, the best one doesn’t even have a campus, an endowment fund or even a football team. In fact, it’s the one that people tend to ignore except once every four years. I’m referring to the Electoral College.

As a rule, the only time people even talk about it, they’re complaining that it should be abolished. But, as is nearly always the case, they happen to be wrong and the Founding Fathers were right.

Just as the geniuses who came up with the Constitution didn’t want the federal government to be able to lord it over the states, they also didn’t want a few larger states to lord it over the smaller ones. There is possibly nothing that makes a stronger case for those men having been divinely-inspired than Article Two of the Constitution, which declared that the presidency would not be determined by a popular vote.

Just as they sought balance by deciding that each state, whatever its population, would have two senators, they also wanted to avoid having a few large states controlling presidential elections. They had, after all, set out to create a republic, not a democracy.

So it is that Barack Obama could easily win the popular vote this November by taking such states as California, Illinois, New York and Massachusetts, by several million votes, but still wind up losing the election because his Republican opponent wins in places such as Ohio, Missouri, Virginia, Iowa, Wyoming, Nevada, Florida, Michigan, Georgia, Kansas, Alaska, the Dakotas and the Carolinas, by anything from 10,000 to 50,000 votes.

If that happens, we can all be sure that the Democrats will whine about it and cry, “Foul!”

But how is it fair that a minority of 15 or 20 states should be able to impose their will on 30 or 35 others?

Although, the Electoral College generally reflects the popular vote, that’s not always the case. For instance, in 1876, Samuel J. Tilden received 250,000 more votes than Rutherford B. Hayes, but lost the election by one electoral vote. In 1880, James Garfield only garnered 16,000 more votes than Winfield Hancock, but clobbered him in the College 214-155.

In 1884, Grover Cleveland narrowly squeaked by with a 25,000 vote margin, but he defeated James Blaine by 37 votes where it counted. However, when Cleveland ran for re-election in 1888, he wound up with 90,000 more votes than Benjamin Harrison, but lost in the Electoral College 233-168.

In 1960, JFK, thanks to typical left-wing hanky-panky in Texas and Illinois, wound up with 114,000 more votes (out of roughly 69,000,000 cast), but easily defeated Nixon in the College 303-219.

In 1968, Nixon only received a trifling 500,000 more votes than Humphrey (out of 73,000,000 cast), but buried him in the College election 301-191.

In 2000, in an election reminiscent of the ones that took place in 1876 and 1888, Al Gore took the popular vote 50,992,335 to George W. Bush’s 50,455,156, but Bush turned the tables in the Electoral College, defeating Gore 271-266.

Although I honestly believe that the men who created the Constitution were divinely-inspired, I wouldn't want to suggest that God takes an active role in our elections. Otherwise, how to explain Barack Obama’s winding up in the White House?

But, even if it’s merely a coincidence, I think it’s worth noting that in all three instances that the candidate who received fewer popular votes wound up being elected president, he just happened to be a Republican.

©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)

Wednesday, April 25, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Some people insist that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. It is true that in some basic ways, all politicians are alike. After all, they all want to get re-elected, so they have to spend an inordinate amount of time diving into various pockets seeking campaign contributions. They also have to compromise unless they have overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress, as Obama did from 2009-2011, and even he had to finally use bribery and intimidation in order to get ObamaCare, his signature piece of legislation, passed.

It’s among civilians that one sees the greatest differences between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives, as you’d know if you’ve ever attended a Tea Party gathering, tend to be civil, respectful of opposing points of view, religious and in awe of the Founding Fathers. Liberals, on the other hand, enjoy behaving like barbarians, whether it’s at Wisconsin’s state capitol, on Wall Street or in Watts; do everything they can to deprive conservatives of free speech; oppose all religious symbols and ceremonies, while pretending that’s the intention of the 1st Amendment; and regularly demonstrate their contempt of people like Washington, Madison and Jefferson, whom they dismiss as slave-owning white guys.

Russian Pres. Dimitry Medvedev
When white conservative politicians are disgruntled, they express their grievances to the media. When black liberal politicians are disgruntled, they start shouting during a committee hearing or during a House session, as Sheila Jackson Lee and Bobby Rush have done in recent months. Even when the chairman tries to silence their outbursts by pounding his gavel, they take it as nothing more than a musical accompaniment. And because white congressmen are a spineless bunch of toadies, ever fearful they’ll be branded racists, they never even think of disciplining these obnoxious yahoos.

The good news is that Obama, mainly through his hand puppet, Eric Holder, has displayed his own racism so often that I expect he will experience the appropriate blowback in November. I am convinced that a large number of Independents who voted for him last time because they wanted to feel good about voting for the first black president have experienced a depressing change of heart.

Frankly, even though I have never regarded Obama as particularly bright, his tossing in his two cents during the recent Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman contretemps struck me as being particularly idiotic. After all, he had no more facts at hand than the rest of us, but he couldn’t resist pointing out that if he had a son, he’d look like young Martin. Right, and if he donned a hoodie and a pair of sunglasses the way that Rep. Rush did, he, too, would resemble the young ne’er-do-well. So what? The truth is, if Obama’s dad had been Peruvian instead of Kenyan, it’s George Zimmerman he’d look like.

The political fact of life is that Obama doesn’t have to suck up to blacks. After all, they’re obviously every bit as willing to overlook the fact that he’s half white as he is. He received 97% of their votes in 2008, and the only way he could receive a higher percentage is if Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Shelby Steele, Jesse Lee Peterson and Clarence Thomas, all took leave of their senses this November.

All Obama did by jumping into the fray was to remind us that he did the same thing when he condemned the Cambridge Police Department without knowing what had actually transpired between his friend, Prof. Henry Gates, and the cops.

He is clearly the most racist president we’ve had since Woodrow Wilson, but because it’s white folks he dislikes -- unless, of course, they’re underlings doing his bidding or millionaires financing his re-election -- nobody dares condemn him for it.

Recently, Obama was overheard telling President Medvedev that he would have greater flexibility after his election. Inasmuch as Obama has already denied Poland and the Czech Republic a promised missile defense system and, for good measure, offered to drastically reduce our nuclear capability, while getting absolutely nothing in return from Russia, I assume Medvedev and his puppet master, Putin, took that to mean he’ll somehow bend over even further in the future.

Speaking for conservatives, anxious to see him gone, we hope that greater flexibility means that after next January, Obama will be able to sleep till noon, work on his putting, have lunch regularly with the likes of Bill Ayers, Van Jones and Jeremiah Wright, and still have plenty of time to take the kids to Chicago’s Lincoln Park Zoo.

©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, April 23, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Predictably, Nancy Pelosi applauded Rep. Bobby Rush when he donned a hoodie on the floor of the House to show his solidarity with the likes of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the Black Panthers, in their calls for George Zimmerman’s head on a platter. Meanwhile, back in Chicago’s 1st congressional district, home to Mr. Rush, during one recent Thursday night, 13 people were shot, two of them fatally. I understand that the shooters all wore hoodies. I trust that Mrs. Pelosi can provide Bobby Rush with an alibi.

In the meantime, in the NCAA basketball tournament, the Final Four consisted of Kentucky, Ohio State, Louisville and Kansas. So, Obama got the first two heavy favorites right, but didn’t foresee Louisville and Kansas beating out Missouri and North Carolina. But to be fair, the prognosticator-in-chief, as usual, was playing politics, and clearly decided to ally himself with schools located in swing states.

Although I assume that the four conservative justices on the Supreme Court will decide what to do about ObamaCare on the constitutional merits of the bill, and that the four left-wing justices will decide the case based on their political bias, I pray that Justice Kennedy will not be overly reluctant to undo what Congress has done. I am hoping that he will at least consider the fact that, even with huge pluralities in the House and Senate, Obama, Pelosi and Reid, had to employ huge bribes and thug-like intimidation in order to get a number of their fellow Democrats to pass the damn thing.

Speaking of ObamaCare, the fact is I happen to support mandated health insurance. I just don’t believe that the federal government has any business being involved in it. Between the EPA, Homeland Security and a power-mad president, the liberals have already gobbled up far too much power. That said, I believe the individual states have every right to require that people purchase health insurance, just as they can require that drivers carry auto insurance. The argument that it’s not the same thing because people who don’t drive don’t have to pay for auto insurance ignores the fact that everyone, sooner or later, is going to have to go to a doctor, a clinic or a hospital, and the idea that those who are uninsured will simply have the costs covered by other taxpayers is immoral and should be made illegal.

That’s not to say I wouldn’t change the system. For one thing, I would allow people to buy their insurance across state borders, but I would see to it that the companies would be regulated by federal law, not according to 50 different state laws. Moreover, I would deny an insurance company the ability to drop someone simply because he or she had gotten sick and might actually need the health insurance they’d been paying for. Once an insurance company accepted a client, they would be stuck with him for his entire life so long as he paid his premiums. Heck, who wouldn’t start an insurance company if they only had to cover young, healthy people?

Living as I do in California, it’s not often I have any reason to praise any of our politicians. But, miracle of miracles, for perhaps the first time ever, Gov. Jerry Brown spoke for me when he nixed $300,000-a-year salaries for Cal State University presidents, pointing out that the job mainly consists of raising money. At that point, Gov. Brown only needed to be right one more time within 24 hours to be as good as a broken clock. But, as you would assume, he wasn’t up to the challenge, and the clock won the competition.

As we draw ever closer to November 6th, I have a feeling that the date will go down in history and rival the end of World War II, when a few other notable tyrants were defeated. The difference is that Obama will survive his defeat, and go on to become even wealthier, giving speeches to besotted liberals; get to spend four or eight years fuming about President Romney; and show up on “The View” to promote the third of his best-selling, ghost-written, books. He might even get to host his own talk show on MSNBC or, in tandem with Michelle, a cooking show on the Food Network, “In the Kitchen with the Obamas.”

Finally, I would like to tip my cap to Kinde Durkee, a Democratic campaign treasurer from California who was recently indicted for defrauding 50 state and national politicians, including Dianne Feinstein and the Sanchez sisters, Loretta and Linda, of $8 million over the previous decade.

Sad to say, there have only been a handful of Republicans who have done half as much for the conservative movement as Mrs. Durkee.

©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)

Friday, April 20, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

I realize that every conservative has plenty to complain about. Everything from media bias to popular culture to the Marxist in the White House springs to mind. But I, personally, have my own particular complaints. I refer to the fact that even though those on the Left have taken to heart the Saul Alinsky dictum that in the unending war between liberals and conservatives no weapon is quite as effective as ridicule, we conservatives ignore the pronouncement at our peril.

Every time you turn around, professional clowns like Bill Maher, David Letterman, Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Maureen Dowd, Rachel Maddow, Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg, Billy Crystal, Lawrence O’Donnell, Joe Biden, Henry Waxman, Michael Moore and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, are happily mocking those of us on the Right. In rebuttal, we roll out Ann Coulter, Dennis Miller and Greg Gutfeld, and while it’s true that one conservative wit is easily the equal of a dozen liberal nitwits, these three shouldn’t be forced to do all the heavy lifting on our behalf.

Although I readily acknowledge that every time a liberal opens his mouth, he or she pretty much makes our case, and while I’d never want to discount the role that such serious-minded individuals as Charles Krauthammer, Dennis Prager, Bernie Goldberg, Mark Steyn, Steve Hayes, Laura Ingraham, Hugh Hewitt, Bret Baier, David Limbaugh, Mike Gallagher, Lou Dobbs, Neil Cavuto, Mark Levin, Michael Medved, Andrew Napolitano, Glenn Beck, Bill Kristol, Brit Hume and Sean Hannity play, when it comes to ridicule, it couldn’t hurt to go on the offensive a little more often.

You would think that conservatives would be desperate to fight back in kind, and yet I have never been able to get the Wall Street Journal, Townhall magazine, USA Today or the Weekly Standard, to publish a single one of my articles and, for good measure, have never been invited on Fox News. Go figure.

Well, enough about me. Moving on to lesser matters, I keep hearing Obama describing his energy policy as “all of the above,” while neglecting to mention that by “all,” he means everything but coal, oil and nuclear power. However, I can see where he gets the idea that an industrial nation can get by with those alternative sources of energy he keeps subsidizing with our tax dollars. After all, in search of campaign donations, he gets to fly all over the country on Air Force One, and so far as he can tell, it’s entirely fueled by his own considerable wind power.

Both Obama and Secretary of Energy Steven Chu agree that Americans are addicted to oil, apparently seeing it as akin to heroin or crack cocaine. It is the reason that both of them have done everything in their power to make gas prices rise, at least until they risked having those soaring prices jeopardize Obama’s re-election.

But it occurs to me that when fuel costs skyrocket, it raises the price of everything we buy because retailers have to adjust their prices upward to cover their own overhead. That leads me to wonder if along the way, Obama will take us to task for our shameful addiction to food and clothing.

Something else we keep hearing from the soon-to-be ex-president is that we must be respectful of Islam, even when allegedly trusted Muslim allies shoot our soldiers in the back of the head; when people we’ve squandered blood and treasure protecting have the gall to insult us; and when in 2011, in Pakistan alone, 943 women and girls were murdered for offending their family honor. Odd, isn’t it, that it’s never Muslim males who are guilty of these alleged transgressions?

Pakistan, by the way, is a nation in which there is no law against domestic violence, and so-called honor killings are casually dismissed by the police as family matters.

One is tempted to wish that these people would be bombed back into the Dark Ages, but it would be a meaningless threat because, for all intents and purposes, they’ve never left.

Finally, Joe Biden, the man who took the vice-presidency, which has traditionally been a non-speaking part, and turned it into a feature role as the Court Jester, once famously described ObamaCare as “one *%$#@% big deal.” But that was two years ago and people have short memories, so Biden recently reminded us of his well-deserved reputation by describing Obama’s role in signing off on the Osama bin Laden raid as the most audacious plan in the past 500 years.

While some of the more historically-minded among us have suggested that Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, the Boston Tea Party and the D-Day invasion, have all dwarfed Obama’s providing the thumbs-up to our Navy Seals, I wouldn’t want anyone to think I was being dismissive of Obama’s audacity for strictly partisan reasons.

Instead, having actually looked up “audacious” in the dictionary and discovering that among its various definitions are “unrestrained,” “in defiance of convention and propriety,” “impudent,” and “reckless,” I would say that one of the most audacious things Barack Obama has ever done was to select a cluck like Joe Biden to be a mere heartbeat away from the presidency.

In a related matter, it has been determined by a panel of experts that the single most audacious thing the American people have ever done was to elect Barack Hussein Obama the 44th president of the United States.

©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)

Wednesday, April 18, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Although I spend a good deal of time contemplating liberals and the enormous harm they do, I also let my brain wander into other bizarre areas.

For instance, people have a tendency to misread my face. I used to blame them, but ever since I saw David Steinberg interview comedian Steven Wright, I have begun blaming my face.

For those of you unfamiliar with Wright, who takes a surrealistic approach to observational humor, he looks as if he’s carting around the weight of the world on his shoulders. When Steinberg asked him if he lacked the ability to experience joy, Wright denied it, stating that he actually laughed a great deal, but that it was as if a circuit was missing between his brain and his face. Well, apparently I am missing the same circuit because people often conclude from my dour expression that I’m unhappy. In fact, I have often found myself surprised when I see photos of myself because I could have sworn I was smiling at the time.

As a result, people often ask me what’s bugging me, and my honest answer is that it’s people asking me what’s bugging me. Occasionally, of course, what’s bugging me is that I’ve been thinking about liberals and the enormous harm they do.

Something else I am willing to confess is that while I rarely have a problem when it comes to spelling words, there are some words I can’t say unless I take a running start at them. In fact, I actually experience a sense of awe when people on radio or TV can slide right through “similarly,” “exponentially” and the names of Islamic terrorists.

Speaking of words, or, rather, words that must remain unspoken, in New York City, the language police have recently decided that certain words must be eliminated from school tests because some students might find them troubling. Among the words that the dingbats think might “evoke unpleasant emotions” are “dinosaur,” “birthday,” “Halloween,” “dancing,” “junk food,” “wealth-related,” “poverty,” “divorce” and “disease.”

The truth is, when it comes to satirizing liberals, conservatives are inevitably a step behind. I mean, when Michelle Obama and Mayor Michael Bloomberg declared war on junk food, even I wouldn’t have presumed that the loony next step would be to banish the term.

In neighboring Pennsylvania, atheists belonging to the Freedom from Religion Foundation sued state lawmakers to prevent their referring to 2012 as the Year of the Bible because the members of the FFRF find “the violent, sexist and racist, models of biblical behavior personally repugnant.” I am assuming that members of Pennsylvania’s Freedom from Atheists Foundation will next be suing because they find the FFRF personally repugnant.

In a somewhat related matter, historian and music lover Ronald Kessler suggests that “America the Beautiful,” with its “spacious skies,” “amber waves of grain,” “purple mountain majesties,” “sea to shining sea” and “God shed his grace on thee,” be made the national anthem.

I must admit I would find it an improvement over “rocket’s red glare” and “bombs bursting in air.” Worst of all is our current anthem is saddled with a one and a half octave range, forcing American men to try to sing notes they haven’t been able to reach since passing through puberty.

Moreover, it’s not as if it was a favorite of the Founding Fathers. It was written by Francis Scott Key during the otherwise forgettable War of 1812, and only became our anthem through an executive order by the obviously tone-deaf Woodrow Wilson in 1916, and made official by a vote of the musically-challenged Congress in 1931.

Finally, just as the producers intended, the announcement that Jane Fonda, aka “Hanoi Jane,” has been cast to portray Nancy Reagan in “The Butler” has outraged just about every decent American. I, on the other hand, happen to be undismayed by the news. In fact, I see it as a public service.

The way I look at it, Hollywood can’t be expected to picture the Reagans in a favorable light. Anyone who tried it would never again be invited to a party at Steven Spielberg’s, Tom Hank’s or Barbara Streisand’s, mansion. Still, some conservative optimists, hoping for the best, might otherwise have been tempted to waste their money on a ticket. This way, Fonda will serve as a red flag just like the little flags on highways that warn us that we need to detour before we land in the ditch.

I haven’t yet heard who will play Ronald Reagan, but I’m betting it will be someone who’s made his mark portraying buffoons. I suspect those on the short list to portray our 40th president include Will Ferrell, Owen Wilson and Pee-Wee Herman.

©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, April 16, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

I realize there are perfectly decent Republicans who still hold out hope that, through divine or not so divine intervention, Santorum, Gingrich or Paul, will wind up being the GOP nominee. I have no doubt that years ago, they were perfectly decent children who believed in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. So while I hate to destroy anyone’s delusions, I think it is high time that the RNC grew up and faced reality.

For openers, if this primary season has taught us anything, it’s that the GOP needs to address its laundry list of mistakes. One, they should do away with caucuses; if a state doesn’t wish to stage an actual primary for whatever reason, they should just sit it out. Are you listening, Iowa?

Two, let’s put an end to open primaries. Why would Republicans want Democrats helping to decide who our nominee is going to be? Do you really think they have our best interests at heart?

Three, let’s stop putting Iowa and New Hampshire at the head of the parade. In a general election, neither state is all that important, but because they come first, the nation has to focus on them for weeks, even months, at a time. And no more punishing states like Florida and Michigan for wanting to move up the dates of their primaries. Instead, have a start date; say January 15th, and then allow each state to determine when they want to hold their primary. If they all decide on January 16th, so be it. At least we wouldn’t have to drag these things on endlessly.

Finally, assuming all the primaries wouldn’t take place on the same date, candidates who don’t achieve a certain level of support would be excluded from future ballots. As I write this, there have been nearly 30 primaries or caucuses, and thus far Gingrich has won two and Paul, who is making his third run, has once again won none. There is no good reason that they should continue to be regarded as serious candidates, in just the same way that a bunch of wannabes looking to garner some publicity have no business clogging up the debates. I mean, seriously, did anyone, including his daughters, ever really believe that Jon Hunstman was going to be the nominee?

As long as I’m busy making rules, I would like to make a rule that nobody ever again be tried for a hate crime. A crime is a crime, and whether the victim is a black, a Hispanic or a homosexual, should not make the punishment any more severe than if the victim is a WASP. One can safely assume that every crime is hateful to the victim. People who favor concentrating on “hate” rather than “crime” are the same noodle-heads who are unaware that “social justice” is an oxymoron. Justice doesn’t call for adjectives. Once they’re added on, it ceases to be justice, which is why Lady Justice is always pictured blindfolded and why Martin Luther King pleaded for a colorblind society.

Not too long ago, I saw Rosie O’Donnell and Angelica Houston on TV sticking up for Sandra Fluke, and pretending on Obama’s behalf that mandating contraception and abortion for employees of Catholic entities is not actually an infringement on religious freedom, but is all about women’s health.

In their discussion, they parroted the old line about men having no business being involved in women’s reproductive freedom. Even if we ignore the fact that men are fathers, brothers and boyfriends, whose own lives will be greatly affected because of the decisions made by women, by what stretch of the imagination do these two women -- one a 50 year old lesbian, the other a 60 year old who has all the reproductive freedom she could possibly want, thanks to Mother Nature -- have commenting on things that don’t involve them?

I recently got word that over 50,000 people have been killed in Mexico over the past five years. At about the same time, I learned that Malia Obama had been vacationing in Mexico with some of her school chums.

I must confess it surprised me that her mother, who seems overly concerned that your kids are eating an occasional cupcake, would send her child to a place that makes Kandahar seem as safe as Lincoln’s bedroom.

Then I heard that the kids were accompanied by 15 Secret Service agents! That’s 15 --count them–- 15!

The first thing that occurred to me was that I helped pay for that kid’s vacation.

The second thing that occurred to me was, like mother, like daughter.

©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)

Friday, April 13, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

Because Barack Obama repeats himself so often, I’m never sure when I see him on TV insisting that his energy policy involves “all-of-the-above” whether I’m watching one of his 2008 campaign speeches or one that he delivered yesterday afternoon. Either way, I know he’s lying.

The reason that he gets applause from an audience of college students or public sector union members is because these trained seals know that whenever he pauses in the middle of a sentence, it’s their cue to begin clapping. These dolts have no idea that “all of the above “ theoretically refers to gas, coal, oil, nuclear, solar and wind. If they actually understood that the only two options he favors are the last two, they might stop cheering long enough to wonder why he doesn’t just say so, instead of pretending that the other, more realistic options are actually on the table.

They might even wonder why he stopped the Keystone oil pipeline in its tracks, or why he insists on taking bows for oil drilling in the U.S. that’s only taking place thanks to George Bush’s long term policies. Or, for that matter, they might even question why he has done everything in his power to destroy the coal and oil industries in America, while at the same time sending two billion tax dollars to help Brazil finance their offshore drilling efforts.

In a saner world, they might even ask each other why he has funneled billions of our dollars to solar companies that, in the natural course of things, quickly go bankrupt. Then again, they might be curious why the American taxpayer had to pony up hundreds of millions of dollars so that Chevrolet could give birth to the Volt, a car that is every bit as unappealing as the Ford Edsel was in its day. In fact, the only major differences between the two automotive lemons is that the Ford Motor Company came up with the Edsel on their own dime, and that the Volt, with its $40,000 price tag, costs several times as much.

Moving on, if Staff Sgt. Robert Bales did what he is accused of having done in Afghanistan -- namely massacre 16 civilians, nine of them children -- he deserves to be punished. I have heard all the possible rationales for the crimes, which include a war-related brain injury, money woes, marital woes and a drinking problem, but I wouldn’t buy those excuses if those vile crimes had been committed by a civilian in Chicago or Kansas City, so I’m not going to cut him any slack just because they took place halfway around the world in Kandahar.

That being said, the notion that, as a result of the carnage, the Al Capone of Afghanistan, otherwise known as Hamid Karzai, had the gall to tell America that our soldiers weren’t to be allowed off their military bases, makes me question once again why we are propping up his corrupt regime. For good measure, this tinhorn douchebag also insisted that when Defense Secretary Panetta addressed several hundred U.S. servicemen, they had to leave their weapons at the door. Although it is still early in the year, Vegas odds makers are already making Karzai the schmuck to beat in the 2012 Chutzpah Man of the Year competition.

This is the same Hamid Karzai, by the way, who insisted that Sgt. Bales stand trial and get a taste of what passes for justice in an Afghan court, but who has not, so far as I can tell, even arrested the treacherous Afghan guards who shot seven American soldiers in the back over the past couple of months.

For my part, I would pull our troops out of Afghanistan tomorrow morning, let the Taliban deal with Karzai, and come back in the afternoon if we felt the need.

Finally, in a recent piece, I committed the sin in some readers’ eyes of paying respect to Abraham Lincoln. Even though I know that Lincoln did not fight the Civil War in order to free the slaves, but in order to preserve the Union, and that some people are still upset that he suspended habeas corpus during the conflict, I had to take exception to those who accused him of being a dictator and who likened the Civil War to our American Revolution.

The Founding Fathers did not wage war in order to free themselves from an overreaching federal government, but to free themselves from the government of a foreign power in which they had no representation. The Confederate States, on the other hand, were fully represented in Washington, D.C.

A few readers pointed out that there was nothing in the Constitution that prevented the 11 Southern states from seceding. My response was: Why would there be? After fighting the Brits in order to gain their independence, why would Washington, Madison and Adams, ever dream that 80 or so years later, half the nation would decide to go its separate way? It would be like parents leaving the house and having to remind their 12-year-old son to be sure not to remove his own appendix while they’re at the movies.

Finally, while I fully acknowledged that Lincoln was not a saint who sacrificed his own life in order to free the slaves, the South fought a war in which 620,000 Americans died for no other reason than to retain slavery. Even speaking as one who favors states’ rights and a smaller federal government, habeas corpus or no habeas corpus, that’s really not a motive I’d ever care to defend.

©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)

Wednesday, April 11, 2012


[When you finish this article, be sure to read the bonus article, “Welcome to Dizzyworld.” -ed]

by BurtPrelutsky

First off, I would like to thank all of you who took part in the first annual Prelutsky Survey.

I am pleased to report that I received responses from 43 states, plus Puerto Rico. In addition, I heard from France, the Philippines, Canada, Norway, the Virgin Islands and the United Kingdom. Actually, I heard from two readers in the U.K. and three from Canada. The seven states that weren’t represented were Alaska, Hawaii, Wyoming, North Dakota, New Hampshire, Kansas and Rhode Island.

My main motivation, I will confess, was to find out how people in Hong Kong, Russia and Finland, ever came to be subscribers. I realize that a great many people show up once because they Google someone I’ve written about, but when they keep returning, as my tracking device tells me they do, I can’t help wondering why I have a fan or fans in, say, Finland. Alas, I may never find out. In the same way, I may never find out why my regular readers in Anchorage were no-shows.

[This is a live cumulative map of visitors since Burt launched this site. Mouse on each country for individual figures. Note: the stat counter only reports the location of your service provider, not your individual personal information.-ed]

All told, I had about 320 respondents, 75% of whom were men. The majority were 55 years old or older, with about 10% falling in the 35-44 age range and another 30% between 45 and 54.

Nearly everyone was a Republican, although 17 were Independents, eight were Libertarians and one identified himself as a Constitutionalist. But even among those 26, most confessed they had voted for McCain in 2008, although some made it very clear that they had actually voted for Sarah Palin.

Romney was overwhelmingly the person regarded as the strongest possible candidate against Obama, although there were eight or nine hold-outs for Santorum and Gingrich, and one each for Herman Cain and Paul Ryan.

In terms of education, 11 stopped going to school once they received their high school diploma. About 25% attended college, while 30% stuck around to get their four year degree and 40% stuck around even longer in order to pick up their doctorates.

Racially, almost everyone who got back to me was Caucasian. The exceptions were two blacks, one Asian, one Cherokee and one wisenheimer who insisted he was second generation Irish.

When it came to favorite news sources, the great majority mentioned Fox, Drudge, CNN, various blogs and the Wall Street Journal.

Slightly over 70% of those polled are married. Of the remaining 30%, most are divorced, followed by those who have never been married, while about 5% are widowed.

Only a third of those surveyed identify themselves as urban dwellers, while two-thirds either live in the suburbs, rural areas or small towns.

I will confess that I expected that the largest response would come from Texas, and while I did hear from 35 Texans, I heard from 50 readers here in California. What that led me to realize is that Texans are simply far more likely than other people to identify their home state, and even their hometown, in their messages. The only other states that reached double figures were Florida (21), Arizona (15), Colorado (12), Georgia (12), New York (12), Illinois (11) and Alabama (10).

By a 2-1 margin, people who insist they aren’t influenced one way or another by a candidate’s religion out-numbered those who admit they are.

In something of a surprise to me, those who are influenced by a Tea Party endorsement turned out to be the exact same number as those who say they’re not.

When it came to Barack Obama, those who believe he is destined to lose the election in November out-numbered the more depressed among you 80% to 20%.

Only a quarter of those surveyed believe Obama is constitutionally qualified to be the president, while three quarters either doubt that he is a natural-born American or are absolutely convinced he is not. When it comes to his religion, nearly the same percentage of people suspicious of his nationality also suspect he is really a Muslim.

One of the survey results that gladdened my heart was that everyone who had ever written to me, which was roughly a third of you, was either “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with my response.

I was even given a reason to get over my bitter feelings about the way I was unceremoniously dumped a few years ago by It seems that nearly half of those polled had first come across my articles during the few years I was a regular contributor to that website, and once I was cut loose went to the trouble of tracking me down.

My biggest shock was the response to the question regarding what you would say to Barack Obama if you had the opportunity to sit down and talk to him for half an hour. I really had no idea that God-fearing conservatives knew half those words. Especially not God-fearing conservative women!

[Let me, your humble webmaster, add my thanks too. Although Burt believes I suggested the survey to learn about you and your opinions, I was more interested in finding out how you all use the site and if any of the features were troublesome. I was very glad to learn that most of you successfully use the site, and what’s more, enjoy it just the way it looks. There were a few of you who had some problems, which are uncommon and easily remedied, if you'll write me. -ed]

©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)


[When you finish with this article, be sure to read “Surveying the Survey.” - ed.]

by BurtPrelutsky

It recently occurred to me that we are all living in a very bizarre amusement park. We all know that if you take a few too many rides on one of those whirling contraptions, by the time you climb out, you’re going to wind up with wobbly legs and a hangover. Well, keep in mind that every second of every day the earth is spinning around its axis at a rate of 1,040 miles an hour. Is it any wonder that we’re all as dizzy as drunken mice?

But even inebriated rodents would find it amusing that both Arizona and Texas have been called on the carpet before the U.N.’s Human Rights Council. In Arizona’s case, the problem is that they are trying to put a stop to illegal immigration. In the case of Texas, the federal government is offended that a sovereign state is demanding that would-be voters provide photo IDs proving they have a legitimate right to cast a ballot.

Now, on the face of it, no sane human being would argue that Arizona doesn’t have the responsibility, let alone the right, to prevent non-citizens from bankrupting it by overwhelming its schools, hospitals and social services or that Texas hasn’t the moral and legal obligation to do everything in its power to prevent its elections from being contaminated by voter fraud. But of course, in America, in 2012, sane people seem to be greatly out-numbered by the knuckleheads on the Left.

But over and above that, consider who is opposing these two states. In each case, the war is being conducted by Eric Holder, the unrepentant racist who oversees the Department of Justice. Talk about your misnomers! It should be re-named the Department of Social Justice.

In the case of Arizona, he has the support of Mexico, a third world nation that should replace the eagle grasping a snake on its flag with a junkie wielding a hypodermic. In the case of Texas, Holder has his race-baiting chums in the NAACP taking the battle to the U.N.

Next, let us consider the Human Rights Council. In case you haven’t checked lately, a few of its sleazier members are China, Uganda, Congo, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Libya and Cuba. One can only assume that when the boneheads at the United Nations placed that scummy group on a council that is supposed to oversee human rights violations, the rationale must have been it takes a thief to catch a thief.

In a related matter, in the Washington, D.C., Superior Court building, there is a photo exhibit dedicated to honoring “Black Women Paving the Way to Greatness in Politics.”

In spite of that grandiose title, they only came up with eight honorees, so you can see that the pickings were mighty slim. I mean, aside from Condoleezza Rice, who served as Secretary of State with some distinction, two of the remaining seven were former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, who once referred to George Will as a member of the Ku Klux Klan for daring to question her misuse of campaign funds, and Michele Obama, who once got married. I guess, all things considered, we should be grateful that they didn’t stoop to including Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson Lee.

On the other hand, they did find room on the wall for Angela Davis, who once upon a time was the leader of the American Communist Party and, even more notably, once made the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List. She pulled off that coup after providing the guns used by James McClain, who used them to shoot his way out of a California courtroom where he was being tried for the murder of a prison guard. During his escape, McClain killed Judge Harold Haley with the shotgun provided by Ms. Davis.

A further sick irony of Angela Davis’s being honored in an American courthouse is that she has seriously argued that any black serving a prison sentence in the United States, even for robbery, child molestation or rape, is in reality a political prisoner.

She ultimately beat the rap and, quite naturally, wound up being a professor at UC Santa Cruz.

I find it interesting that in the Soviet Union, a utopia for leftists, political dissidents were regularly sent off to Siberia or lined up against a wall and shot; in America, the Great Satan where capitalism rules, radicals like Ms. Davis, along with Weathermen William Ayers (University of Illinois) and Bernadine Dohrn (Northwestern University), all get to be tenured professors, and Barack Obama (University of Chicago) gets to wind up in the White House.

Is it any wonder that parents, who are mortgaging their homes in order to send their tots off to be educated at American universities, wind up with bobble-head dolls they can barely recognize, who endlessly parrot Saul Alinsky, Noam Chomsky and Herbert Marcuse while praising the likes of Che Guevara, Hugo Chavez and the Palestinian Authority?

My suggestion to American parents is that you do your wallets and America a huge favor by forgetting about Harvard, Yale and Berkeley, and, instead, send your kids off to a decent trade school.

Just think how much better off the world would be if his folks had raised Karl Marx to be a plumber.

©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, April 9, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

I’m sure I’m not the only person who periodically finds himself wondering if it’s all just a dream or if he’s found himself starring in one of the more bizarre episodes of The Twilight Zone.

For instance, Bret Baier reported that Joe Biden recently had the following to say about Republicans: “Those guys don’t have a sense of the average folks out there. They don’t know what it means to be middle class.”

At the time, he was addressing a group of average folks who were attending a $10,000-a-couple Obama fund raiser at the Georgetown mansion of Senator John and Teresa Heinz Kerry. They dined on organic steaks and white truffle mashed potatoes, purchased, no doubt, with federal food stamps.

I am willing to bet that these are the only regular folks in America who aren’t concerned about the price of gas. It’s funny how that works, though. When George Bush was in the White House, Democrats and the media insisted that he had more to do with soaring costs at the gas pump than OPEC, Exxon and Wall Street speculators, put together. It’s only now, with Obama perched in the Oval Office, that we’re hearing that the president has less influence on the price of gas than I do.

And for those of us who love nothing better than to see federal bureaucrats squirm, there was Secretary of Energy Chu telling a congressional committee that the last thing he wanted was soaring energy costs just a few days after saying that’s exactly what he wanted. This is the same Stephen Chu who, in 2008, insisted that he wanted Americans to pay the same $10-a-gallon Europeans pay because it would hasten the day when wind and solar energy would power America.

Obama sprang to Secretary Chu’s defense by pointing out that he had made that remark before he joined the Cabinet. But of course Obama had admitted in 2008, before he had a Cabinet Mr. Chu could join, that his energy policy would inevitably send our costs through the roof. The telling points are, one, that Obama has waged constant warfare against the coal and oil industries, even though he now likes to boast that we are drilling for more oil than ever, even though it’s thanks to Bush’s policies and in spite of Obama’s; and, two, even though Mr. Chu longed for $10-a-gallon gas before he joined the administration, it’s because he voiced such lunacies that he was invited aboard.

Speaking of Obama’s green energy program, you may have heard that Chevrolet has stopped production of the $40,000 Volt. Apparently, people weren’t buying it, but whether it was the price tag or the fact that the batteries had a nasty habit of igniting, I suppose we’ll never really know. I did think they could at least have tried a last ditch hard sell approach. “Buy the Volt! It’s Explosive!”

On the subject of advertising, I laugh each time I hear the promos for Fox and Friends. In case you’ve missed it, a voice asks, “Why waste your time anywhere else?” In my head, at least, that’s only the start of a sentence that logically concludes, “When you can waste it with Fox and Friends.”

Although we are all justifiably suspicious of the left-wing claptrap professors are spouting to their young charges, once in a while a little good news seeps out. Not too long ago, Jack Chambless, a professor of economics at Florida’s Valencia College, asked a class of sophomores what they felt they were entitled to expect from the federal government. The list included free tuition, jobs, money for a house and a financially secure retirement.

Prof. Chambless then proceeded to ask a few of his students to place their wallets on their desks. When they did so, Chambless snatched them up and pulled out the cash. He explained that it was his dream to have a retirement cabin in the woods, and this money would help pay for it.

Some object lessons are more graphic than others. I’m sure the victims squealed like pigs and I assume he gave them back their money, but if that demonstration didn’t drive home the lesson of individual responsibility, I’d have flunked the entire class.

Finally, I would normally take comfort from a poll that reported that Obama’s approval numbers among women fell in one month from 53% to 41%. What it tells me, however, is that 12% of women must live in a cave. Where else could they have been? How is it that in spite of over three years of ObamaCare; a trillion dollar Stimulus; Cash for Clunkers; kowtowing to our enemies; insulting our allies; pussyfooting with Iran; banning the Keystone pipeline; increasing our national debt by six trillion dollars; and waging class, race and religious, warfare, 53% of American women thought he was doing a bang-up job until it was suddenly costing them $4-a-gallon to fill their SUV gas tanks?

Mothers, fathers and grandparents, listen up. Inasmuch as most of Obama’s female groupies tend to be of the unmarried variety, it’s time you started talking to your daughters, nieces and granddaughters, about something other than their grades and if they’re coming home for the holidays. The fact is, Obama won in 2008 because unmarried female voters went for him in huge numbers, and if we’re not careful, it could easily happen again.

We conservatives have seen the enemy and, Pogo to the contrary, it is them!

©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)

Friday, April 6, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

In a recent article, I wrote about a rogue turkey named Tom who had terrified the liberals on Martha’s Vineyard in much the same fashion as outlaw motorcycle gangs were often depicted terrorizing towns and vacationing families in a spate of lousy movies during the 50s and 60s.

In the aftermath, I heard from a number of readers who, like Ben Franklin, insisted that turkeys were a very intelligent bird. I wrote back to let them know about my wife’s Nebraska uncle who raised turkeys until the day of a huge rainstorm, when the entire flock drowned while staring at the sky with their beaks wide open. I then heard from several hunters who didn’t doubt my veracity, but explained that there was a world of difference between wild and domestic turkeys.

Wild turkeys, they assured me, had not had their brains and survival instincts bred out of them.

After mulling it over, I concluded that the gulf between the two types of birds was similar to that which exists between liberals and conservatives. Liberals are terrified of guns, cigarette smoke, salt, sugar, meat, Republicans, photo IDs for voters and talk radio; what doesn’t concern them are abortions on demand for 14-year-olds, jihadists, illegal aliens, illegal drugs, a $16 trillion national debt, public sector unions, the gutting and neutering of our military, an energy policy that seeks to demolish our oil and coal industries while blowing billions of tax dollars promoting the president’s cronies in the solar panel business, a nuclear Iran and a left-wing community organizer in the Oval Office.

It figures that while liberals in and out of Congress tar Tea Party members and Fox News viewers as partisan rubes, bigots and traitors, they trumpet the NY Times, the alphabet networks and such venues as the Daily Kos, the Huffington Post and Media Matters, as examples of honest and objective news reporting.

Perhaps the most appalling of them all is Media Matters, which enjoys the status of being a tax-exempt, non-profit, enterprise, passing itself off as politically non-partisan. The mere fact that George Soros underwrites it should provide sufficient proof that it is about as non-partisan as Jay Carney. Initially, Mediocre Matters, as it’s is known in certain circles, was the illegitimate offspring of and the New Democrat Network, and was housed in office space provided by John Podesta, the former chief of staff to Bill Clinton. By and large, its staff members cut their teeth and sharpened their claws working for the likes of John Edwards, Wesley Clark and Barney Frank, aka the Axis of Evil.

Further proof of its true nature is that, without sticking its tongue in its collective cheek, the group identified Dan Rather as a non-partisan anchorman and claimed with an equally straight face that the majority of America’s newspaper editorial writers are -- hold on to your hats! -- conservatives.

The question that springs to mind is where the heck do I go to obtain my tax-exempt status? Heck, I’m twice as politically neutral as George Soros.

I have come to the conclusion that the late Tim Russert was a world class practical joker. Why else would he have decided that conservative states would be designated red and liberal states blue when, for about 90 years, the world recognized that red was the color of choice for communist and socialist nations and their flags?

It made as much sense to suggest that California and Massachusetts should be considered blue and Utah and Oklahoma should be labeled red as to suggest that traffic signals should be reversed so that green means stop and red means go.

When Nancy Pelosi said that ObamaCare would have to be passed before anyone would find out what was tucked away in its 2000-plus pages, she wasn’t just whistling “Dixie.” It now turns out that, beginning in 2013, ObamaCare imposes a 3.8% tax on unearned income, which could apparently apply to proceeds from the sale of single family homes, townhouses and co-ops. In other words, even if you’re lucky enough to find a buyer for your $300,000 home, the feds will cut themselves in for $11,400. Combined with the 6% ($18,000) fee the realtor would receive from the sale, you just might decide to stay put and ultimately use the house as your crypt, thus saving your kids the cost of a burial plot and coffin.

Finally, having always wanted to have a natural law carry my name, in the way that various such laws are credited to the likes of Murphy (“Anything that can go wrong, will”) and Parkinson (“Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion”), I take pride in introducing Prelutsky’s Law (“A period of idleness will expand to meet the length of time that unemployment compensation is paid”).

©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)

Wednesday, April 4, 2012


by BurtPrelutsky

I’m well aware that every radio talk show host insists he has the smartest listeners, but I suspect I have the smartest readers. I don’t say that simply because they’re wise enough to read what I write, which would certainly be a strong indicator, but because I read what they write.

For instance, I recently heard from Patrick Miano, of Phoenix, Arizona. In his opening, he mentioned that not too long ago a wealthy, charitable Arizona couple named Shapiro had been brutalized, robbed and murdered by a gang of five professional criminals. Recalling the way the liberal media had jumped all over the lunatic who had killed six people and injured a dozen others, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, insisting on the basis of absolutely no evidence that he was a right-wing fanatic, Mr. Miano sent the following letter to Ed Montini, a liberal columnist for the Arizona Republic:

“I blame the liberal media and the Democrats for the murders of Mr. and Mrs. Shapiro and similar crimes that have occurred in this country. The president is also responsible for his tirades against ‘millionaires and billionaires flying in corporate jets.’ They incite poor people who have nothing to commit violence. They inflame the vast unstable element on the Left, fill them with class envy and resentment. Directly or indirectly, they encourage them to commit crimes against wealthy people like the Shapiros who have all the things they don’t. They rant about civility, but show none themselves. The murders of the Shapiros and other violence committed against our most productive and generous citizens are on their heads. They have created a counter-culture consumed with an entitlement mentality.

“Does the above paragraph offend you? Is it unfair? Is it based on fabrications and exaggerations? Does it wrongly attack people who have done nothing more than use colorful language to exercise their right of free speech? You’re absolutely right! It is and it does. I reject such thinking. But if you felt offended, now you know how Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, conservative news commentators and Republicans, felt when the Left blamed them and their rhetoric for the attempted murder of Rep. Giffords and the murders of six innocent people by an assassin who was accused of being a rightist fanatic, but was only a madman with no political leanings. It doesn’t feel good, does it? Ed, I know you were not involved in that slander and libel campaign, but at least some of your left-wing colleagues were. Maybe you’d like to show this to them.

“If conservatives in Arizona try to exploit the Shapiro tragedy using propaganda like theinflammatory falsehoods I wrote above as an example, remember where they got the idea.”

My only problem with the letter is that, unlike Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, conservative talk show hosts and Republicans, the Left does intentionally foment violence. You need look no further than the Occupy Wall Street movement that has devastated city streets around the country and the rioting by the public sector unions in Madison, Wisconsin, to see examples of it.

The other email came to me from Clarence MacKenzie, a reader up in Canada. A keen student of politics in both our countries, he reminded me that the Liberal Party of Canada had dominated their national scene for nearly a century. “No one,” he wrote, “predicted their sudden and almost complete collapse. However, in retrospect, it now seems obvious.”

He continued: “From the mid-70s onward, the Liberals vacated the center and moved to the left. The center right Liberals began to lose influence in the party and started retiring or jumping ship (as with Sen. Joe Lieberman and the Democrats). As they moved to the white collar unions (teachers and public employees), the traditional trade unions began to lose enthusiasm, as happened when Obama’s nixed the Keystone XL pipeline. As the Liberals became more secular, they started to lose the Catholic vote, which migrated to the Conservatives. (I call your attention to Obama’s contraception move.) The Liberals began dithering on Israel and the Jewish vote, which had always constituted a strong liberal bloc, began to evaporate. In their move to the left, they fully embraced the Anthropogenic Global Warming stuff and became the darlings of the environmental extremists. (Sound familiar?) Over the decades they had gradually lost the western farm vote and the rural vote west of Toronto. (Check the present Red State/Blue State distribution in the U.S. and it’s intriguingly similar.)

“Basically they became a conglomeration of intellectual elites, bureaucrats, teachers, environmentalists, and other dribs and drabs. Over the past two elections, they have completely imploded and even the most ardent pundits cannot see them even back in the race in the foreseeable future.

“Like the Democrats, they always enjoyed the support of the mass media, but even that was not sufficient to prevent their demise.”

There you have it, folks. Now do you understand why I am so absolutely confident that Obama will not be re-elected this November? After all, as everyone knows, as Canada goes, so goes America.

©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, April 2, 2012


After you finish this bonus article inspired by recent events, we hope you'll also enjoy "It's Time to Focus on the Main Event." ed.

 by BurtPrelutsky

In the beginning, we were told that Trayvon Martin, who was shot and killed by George Zimmerman, was a model student and a credit to his race. We were told that he had been suspended from school for tardiness. And we were constantly shown his photo, in which he looked almost cherub-like.

Then we heard that it wasn’t tardiness, but truancy. Finally, we got the news that his suspension was drug-related. Later, we learned that the photo of the smiling Trayvon was five years old. We then got to see a photo of 17-year-old Trayvon looking like a thug. We also learned that he was 6’3” and that his twitter comments hardly paint a picture of a choir boy. We also learned that he had been found to have stolen jewelry, a screwdriver and graffiti paraphernalia, in his backpack.

None of that is an excuse for being shot down in cold blood. But, then, George Zimmerman was found to have gotten his nose broken and the back of his head bashed and bloodied in the aftermath of his encounter with Martin, so it may not have been cold-blooded, after all.

What we do know is that if George Zimmerman’s father, rather than his mother, had been Hispanic and if his last name had therefore been Gomez, Lopez or Chavez, nobody would have ever heard of the incident. We certainly know that Obama wouldn’t have chimed in, and Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the Black Panthers, would never have rushed down to Sanford, Florida.

Some people have said that Obama had to respond to a reporter’s question, after all, but we all know that nobody gets to ask Obama a question he doesn’t want to answer. And while other people seem to be perfectly satisfied with his response, I’m not. For one thing, when it’s a white victim of black crime, he never says anything. This time, he felt compelled to say, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon Martin.” I wonder how the media would have responded if a white 17-year-old had been shot by a black person, and a white president had said, “If I had a son, he would look like Billy Jones.”

With Obama and his hand puppet, Attorney General Eric Holder, it always comes down to race. That’s bad enough, but the fact that Obama sold himself as the first post-racial president makes his response all the more insufferable.

While Sharpton and all the other usual suspects are screaming for justice, is there anyone who actually believes that if it’s determined in a court of law that George Zimmerman is innocent of any wrongdoing that America won’t experience Rodney King-type riots in the aftermath?

In a related matter, Rep. Laura Richardson, a black congresswoman from California, who is already being investigated by the House Ethics Committee for various violations, has now been accused by a former aide of treating her and other staff members like chattel.

This comes after Sheila Jackson Lee was voted the most obnoxious member of Congress by congressional staffers; Charles Rangel was found guilty of 11 infractions by a House committee; Maxine Waters is under investigation for questionable financial dealings; and Rep. Hank Johnson made America cackle by worrying during a House hearing whether the island might tip over if too many sailors and their families were relocated to Guam.

It’s not white America that has set back race relations; it’s Obama, Holder and the corrupt and ignorant dingbat members of the Black Congressional Caucus. It’s they, along with race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who consistently ignore black crime and the black illegitimacy rate while berating whites for alleged grievances.

It takes an honest black man such as Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson to say, “It’s hypocritical of so-called black leaders to call for the prosecution of George Zimmerman and accuse the police of racism without knowing the facts. Black-on-black crime takes place every day. And blacks kill whites in far greater numbers than whites kill blacks. Yet, we only see these leaders and their hypnotized black followers worked up when a black is victimized by another race. This is racist and evil.

“Where were the NAACP, Al Sharpton, the Black Caucus and black ministers when black flash mobs were terrorizing the city of Philadelphia and attacking whites and others? It was so bad that Mayor Michael Nutter threatened to jail parents if they were not willing to get their thug children under control. In Kansas City, a 13-year-old white kid was attacked by two black teens who poured gasoline on him and set him on fire, saying, ‘You get what you deserve, white boy.’ If these leaders were sincere, they would condemn crime across the board.

“It’s unfortunate that the parents of Trayvon Martin would associate with the likes of Al Sharpton and allow their loss to be exploited. Just imagine the support they would receive from Americans of all races if they rejected hate and called for calm and due process to allow the truth to come out.”

Instead, Trayvon’s mother has trademarked his name and hoodies just like Trayvon’s, as they’re being marketed, are selling on the Internet for $80.

Is it any wonder that Republicans of all colors can’t wait for regime change to take place on November 6th?

Speaking of the election, I just heard Rick Santorum say that he would be willing to run as Romney’s vice-president.

All I know is that if it comes to pass, President Romney would not only need a chief of staff and a solicitor general, but an official food taster.

©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)