Boiling Frogs

ObamaCare is merely the natural extension of the welfare state we’ve evolved into over the past century. We now offer 99 weeks of unemployment insurance, which acts to discourage its recipients from seeking employment; affirmative action, which officially condones racism; a disability insurance program that’s an open invitation to fraud; food stamps for nearly 50 million Americans, including the young and able-bodied; an immigration policy that encourages foreigners to sneak into the country and become wards of the state; the unionization of civil servants, which means that those bureaucrats, whom it’s nearly impossible to fire, now make more money, have bigger pensions and better health care, than those of us who are forced to pay their salaries; and Social Security, which was a Ponzi-like con game from its inception.

In addition, we have a public school system that is more concerned with indoctrinating students than with teaching them. We have a mass media that sees its role, not as objectively reporting the news, but as cheerleading for socialism. Some of us still can’t understand how all of this has happened. We feel like Rip Van Winkle, waking up and finding his nightmare was the new reality. The explanation is that like the frog in the pot, the heat was being turned up so gradually, we never noticed that we were the main ingredient in frog soup.

Adding to the downfall of America is a politically correct language code that makes even bruising some other person’s feelings a crime, unless, of course, it’s Obama and his stooges labeling law-abiding Republicans “thugs,” “arsonists,” “extortionists,” “bigots,” “haters,” “astroturfers” and “baby-killers.”

And just for the record, someone who does what he can to eliminate or exterminate the Affordable Care Act” is not, as Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Durbin, would have you believe, an obstructionist. The word to describe such people is patriot.

It occurs to me when I consider the Constitution-trampling gang in Washington that includes, but is in no way limited to, Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken, Eric Holder, Maxine Waters, Charley Rangel, Barbara Boxer, Sheila Jackson Lee, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Patty Murray, Kathleen Sebelius, Jay Carney and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Hell will someday have to be expanded to make room for all the new arrivals.

How is it that in civilian life, people are always being arrested and charged as accessories to various crimes, but when every senior officer at Fort Hood turned a blind eye to the fact that Major Nidal Hassan openly proclaimed his allegiance to Osama bin Laden and jihadism, not one of them has been indicted as an accessory to mass murder?

Although the media takes great delight in focusing on fissures among the Republican ranks, I can’t help wondering how they will deal with it when Hillary Clinton starts to rev up her 2016 campaign. Clearly, she will have to separate herself from some of the more noxious elements of Obama’s reign. Those would include the looming disaster of the Affordable Care Act, his anti-Israel bias, his skyrocketing national debt, his coddling of Vladimir Putin, his betrayal of allies and his employment of IRS agents as his personal attack dogs.

One has to assume, though, that she will not be mentioning the massacre at Benghazi in any of her campaign ads or replaying her cold-blooded testimony (“What difference at this late date does it matter who killed them?”) in any of her TV spots.

Although I am much happier taking Democrats to task, honesty requires that I treat Republicans with equal disrespect when they ask for it. During a radio interview, Ohio’s governor, John Kasich, while discussing the economic recovery in his state, told talk show host Hugh Hewitt, “You know, there’s a biblical part of this. It’s called the Good Samaritan. You know, the Good Samaritan was hated in the Jewish culture.” For one thing, as non sequiturs go, that’s a pip. For another, unlike Kasich, I happen to be Jewish, and I have never heard a Jew say, “I don’t know about you, but a guy I really can’t stand is that big phony, the Good Samaritan.”

One thing that has surprised me about the disastrous manner in which the Affordable Care Act has rolled out is that Barack Obama hasn’t blamed it all on George Bush.

Not yet, anyway.

©2013 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

Author Bio:

Burt Prelutsky, a very nice person once you get to know him, has been a humor columnist for the L.A. Times and a movie critic for Los Angeles magazine. As a freelancer, he has written for the New York Times, Washington Times, TV Guide, Modern Maturity, Emmy, Holiday, American Film, and Sports Illustrated. For television, he has written for Dragnet, McMillan & Wife, MASH, Mary Tyler Moore, Rhoda, Bob Newhart, Family Ties, Dr. Quinn and Diagnosis Murder. In addition, he has written a batch of terrific TV movies. View Burt’s IMDB profile. Talk about being well-rounded, he plays tennis and poker... and rarely cheats at either. He lives in the San Fernando Valley, where he takes his marching orders from a wife named Yvonne and a dog named Angel.
Author website:
  • potemkin_village_usa

    __Yes indeed, toss a frog into boiling water and it will jump out straight away, but, if you put the frog in tepid water and slowly turn up the heat, the frog will remain and be cooked. First it was Social Security in 1935, then AFDC, then Medicare in 1965, and food stamps, then, it was Medicaid, now we are accustomed to getting more back in taxes than we put in!! Now 50 million Americans are on the SNAP supplemental food coupon program, and now, the Pièce de résistance, Obama-Care!
    __Entitlements through the redistribution of wealth work like giving free samples of heroin to drug enthusiasts. Once hooked from the free drug (entitlement) samples, the entitlement class demand the “drug/entitlement” to continue being supplied…or….they will riot in the streets, like they did in Europe when austerity was introduced to save the failing EU welfare states from collapse.
    ****Please see the Cloward and Piven model.

    • D Parri

      Yes, although the Part D is partially financed through patient premiums (13% monthly premiums), it is still funded primarily via general fund revenues (73% taxes, etc.). An additional 14% comes from state payments and interest. So, the biggest burden will still wind up on the shoulders of taxpayers, but at least there is some shared responsibility that has to be picked up by the patient in the form of premiums and co-pays. Not so in the SNAP program.

      • potemkin_village_usa

        Yes indeed, the slippery slope has co-pays and financing structures. Thank you for the info.
        “As iron sharpens iron, so a person sharpens his friend.”
        Proverbs 27:17

        • D Parri

          I hate to look at the true reality of this current government and the uncontrolled spending that has led to various political interests pushing their own individual agendas, but the greatest financing burden will fall on our future generations. Try to place yourself in the position of second, third or fourth generations that will struggle to pay off the debts incurred within our days and time. We may not have personally contributed one penny to that burden, but it won’t be apparent to anyone in the future who is struggling to help pay the debts of someone they have never seen.

          That is a travesty.

          • potemkin_village_usa

            How True!! There is no Congressional representation for the yet unborn generations where the debt, which benefits our consumption today, will fall without any benefit to them. You mention puting ourselves in the position of the second, third or fourth generations. It seems that empathy for our kids and grand-kids, who will shoulder today’s debt, is taking a backseat to our present spending spree and gluttony for our culture’s ever evolving ‘me-me-me’ paradigm.

          • D Parri

            Yes, and if the onus is never placed upon the current participants for today’s spending, then what option will the prospective members of tomorrow’s society have in shifting the burden even further? At some point it will become impossible to ‘kick the can’ even further down the road.

            I feel that it is a truly cowardly thing for our politicians to fatten the entitlement roles of today at the cost of starving future generations. It is an evil thing that has happened for many years and it appears that it will continue until reaching the ‘breaking point’ of financial collapse. It is very sad that ours leader maintain a blinded eye towards this threat.

  • Wheels55

    Not blaming the ObamaCare mess on Bush does not mean Obama hasn’t tried to think of a way to do it. He now blames the insurance companies, as if they suddenly were supposed to act differently than they always have acted – as businesses working to maximize shareholder profits. Anyone with half a brain that crafted a wonderful thing like ObamaCare had to know what the insurance companies would do – don’t you think?

    • D Parri

      Surely. Why, I’m equally sure that the whole plan was discussed at great depth amongst all conspirators…I mean, architects…of the ACA plan.

  • Bruce A.

    Burt. Are you ok? You seem a little soft on this column.

  • therealguyfaux

    C’mon, Burt, Kasich probably was referring to how Samaritans and Judeans got along back in 29 AD, when that parable was taught.

    What was Jesus’s point, if not “The Priest of the Temple wouldn’t help that unfortunate Judean man, but a member of a sect you don’t even consider ‘real Jews’ would– so who ‘loved his neighbor’ and performed a mitzvah, the priest or the ‘bogus’-Jew?”

    Kasich rather inartfully and infelicitously was saying that there are those, like the priest, who would not help the unfortunate man because of some legalistic reason (which takes them off the hook), and they would begrudge the Samaritan his right and duty to help the unfortunate man, because that man really shouldn’t have accepted help from the Samaritan nor had the Samaritan any business offering it.

    You WERE kidding, weren’t you?

    • Thewryobservator

      That’s a good response – to nuanced statement made by Kasich. Probably most folks wouldn’t read the statement to that depth. I know what he meant -you know what he meant – but I’m guessing you’ve some context and interest that informs you – as likely does Kasich. That may not be so for most. The popular understanding and modern context of what are potentially loaded terms may render that statement less congenial than it actually is, I’m thinking. That may be why this statement could be seen as faux pas on the Kasich’s part. His reference is for a choir that knows the music. It’s out of tune for those who don’t.