Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Hilarity with Hillary

I know that a lot of people are waiting to hear Mrs. Clinton answer tough questions from reporters, but I’m not one of them. I’m pretty old and I’m not sure I have the time to sit through too many of her answers.

For instance, Morton Michaels reminds me that in 2014, when asked about her accomplishments as Secretary of State, she responded: “Well, I’m glad you asked me that! My proudest accomplishment in which I take the most pride, mostly because of the opposition it faced early on, you know…the remnants of prior situations and mindsets that were too narrowly focused in a manner whereby they may have overlooked the bigger picture and we didn’t do that and I’m proud of that. Very proud. I would say that’s a major accomplishment.”

The scariest thing of all is that tens of millions of Democrats would listen to that incoherent drivel, nod and say, “Yep, she’s the smartest woman in the world.”

Pundits never tire of pointing out that Hillary has a frosty relationship with the members of the media. Well, I know why I despise them, but I can’t figure out her attitude. It strikes me that theirs is one of the great tales of unrequited love, taking its place alongside “The Great Gatsby” and “Cyrano de Bergerac.” The members of the media, after all, wear their hearts on their sleeves when it comes to liberals, but it’s as if Hillary takes it as an affront that they seem to adore Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer and Elizabeth Warren, every bit as much as they love her.

Because Hillary treated the members of the media with the contempt they deserve, the twerps were forced to read great meaning into the fact that in Iowa she visited a Chipotle restaurant and ordered a burrito bowl with a side of guacamole, as if they were reading tea leaves or Tarot cards. Was she reaching out to the Hispanic population or perhaps the avocado growers of America? Or perhaps this woman of the people simply had no idea what a burrito was and thought she was ordering a donut.

How can one not enjoy her attempts to pass herself off as just a typical granny in spite of having $200 million in the family checking account? She can’t even say something as non-partisan as referring to “all the truckers I saw on the I-80 as I was driving here” without reminding us that this self-proclaimed champion of the middleclass hasn’t even driven a car in 25 years.

I expect when she is finally forced to answer for those millions of dollars that flowed into the Clinton coffers even while she was serving as Secretary of State, she’ll channel her inner Bill, and respond in typical Clintonian fashion: “It all depends on what the meaning of ‘bribery’ is.”

In the meantime, her utter contempt for journalists is the only thing about her I like.

If the media didn’t see its mission as being the propaganda arm of the Socialist Party, someone would ask Obama why, if Islamic terrorists are not really Islamic, he continues to supply Gitmo inmates with Korans, a Muslim diet and prayer mats, and why he insisted that the Navy provide Osama bin Laden’s carcass with a religious send-off at sea.

Even I know that as soon as the Federal Reserve stops keeping the economy afloat by printing funny money and maintaining interest rates at zero, the Stock Market will crash and burn. It’s inevitable, just as it was in 2008. How could it have been otherwise, thanks to sub-prime mortgages?

The banks were happy to cash in, but it was the Democrats who got the ball rolling. They assumed that allowing people with lousy credit to buy homes with no money down would provide them with a windfall on Election Day. After all, on page one of their playbook, it says the best way to win elections is to buy votes with other people’s money.

Of course one reason the Democrats were able to carry it off is because people like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the bureaucrats at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lied about the actual number of sub-prime loans, waiting like time bombs to go off. They told us there were six million. Turns out there were 31 million.

Here in California, Jerry Brown and his stooges blame the drought on the lack of rainfall without mentioning that we are never more than a few years away from the next drought. What they fail to mention is that they haven’t built a new reservoir in 40 years or even considered taking advantage of a 700 mile coastline by building desalinization plants.

They even have the audacity to accuse farmers of wasting water, never once blaming the environmental lobby for denying water to farmland in order to safeguard such after-thoughts of Mother Nature as the delta smelt, the spotted owl and the flaky self-important members of the Sierra Club.

In the ongoing debate, even without knowing any of the pertinent facts, who would you imagine to be the more responsible stewards of the earth: rich San Francisco snots who gather regularly to drink white wine spritzers and nosh on brie or the San Joaquin farmers who depend on the earth for their livelihood?

In other news, when the PBS documentary series, “Finding Your Roots,” discovered that an ancestor of uberliberal Ben Affleck had been a slave owner, Affleck persuaded the show to conceal the fact. Naturally, PBS obliged him, explaining, once the story broke, that it wasn’t censorship; they had merely come up with a more interesting ancestor.

Pardon my cynicism, but would PBS have cut a conservative celebrity, someone like Jon Voight, Pat Boone or Pat Sajak, the same slack? Not likely unless the more interesting ancestor turned out to be Benedict Arnold.

Over the course of the past week, I have received a few more questions addressed to Dear Burt, everyone’s favorite seer.

“Dear Burt: What do you think of presidential debates as a way of deciding on a Republican candidate? Curious in Chicago.”

“Dear Curious: If they actually proved anything, we’d probably be better off electing members of high school or college debating teams. Which, considering some of the candidates we’ve come up with, might not be the worst idea in the world. A better process would involve arming the combatants with long knives and placing them all in a deep pit. The person who finally climbed out would then be in a better position to run against Hillary.”

“Dear Burt: What did you make of the melee that recently took place when a large group of demonstrators carrying signs reading “Captivity is Slavery,” “Animals are Innocent” and “Stop the Injustice,” got into a scuffle with employees of the Ramos Brothers Circus? Anxious in Augusta.”

“Dear Anxious: Frankly, I don’t enjoy seeing elephants being forced to parade around the ring like a bunch of showgirls. But the only surprising thing about watching liberal pinheads brawling with circus clowns is that for once it took place in San Bernardino, CA, and not in Washington, D.C.”

©2015 Burt Prelutsky. Comments?