The Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue Movement

Some people were surprised that in their desperation to recover from some of the damage that Romney inflicted on Obama during the Denver debate, the Democrats sprang to the defense of Big Bird. Frankly, I saw it coming as soon as Romney told Jim Lehrer that as much as he liked Big Bird and Lehrer himself, he saw no good reason for the American taxpayer to subsidize Public Broadcasting.

It figured that when recent events in the Middle East confirmed that Obama’s foreign policy is every bit as awful as his fiscal policy, the Great Pretender was going to throw up some silly smokescreen. One time, it was Sandra Fluke and her birth control pills. The next time, it was accusing Romney of being the Grim Reaper where cancer victims are concerned. It stood to reason that David Axelrod would send his hand puppet off to defend the world’s tallest Muppet.

What Obama and his liberal enablers refuse to explain is why an outfit as rich as PBS requires a federal subsidy, financed with money borrowed from China. To suggest that PBS is any more educational than the Discovery channel or the History channel or Turner Classic Movies, for that matter, is absurd. The only thing that makes PBS stand out from the crowd is that it is as liberally biased as David Letterman and Joy Behar.

If PBS is so absolutely essential to American culture, I say let the same goofballs who are donating hundreds of millions of dollars to Obama’s re-election campaign send their checks to Big Bird, c/o Sesame Street. He can then further feather his extremely plush nest, proving once again that fowls and their money will soon be parted.

What Team Obama doesn’t wish to discuss is why they denied additional security to the American consulate in Libya when Ambassador Stevens and others begged for protection leading up to 9/11, and why this administration then spent the week after the terrorist attack left the consulate in flames, the ambassador sodomized and murdered, and the al-Qaeda flag flying from the smoldering ruins, lying to the American people.

What is particularly revolting about what occurred in Benghazi is that nobody was actually surprised that the jihadists staged the attack on 9/11. What’s more, it could have been easily averted. If Mrs. Obama had decided to take one of her countless vacations in Libya, instead of in Spain, Manhattan or Martha’s Vineyard, and thrown a celebrity bash at the consulate, I can assure you that the Muslim thugs would never have breached security.

For that matter, is there any question that if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had been in the neighborhood, the mob would not have gotten within a mile of Ambassador Stevens and his three colleagues?

They tell you that America isn’t a monarchy, but don’t you believe it.

For that matter, they also tell you that America is a democracy or, depending on the time of day, that it’s a republic. But in either case, the voice of the majority is supposed to be the trump card. However, that didn’t prevent judges from overturning photo ID laws, although the overwhelming majority of Americans are in favor of anything that prevents voter fraud from corrupting our elections.

Not too long ago, one judge threw out parts of Arizona’s immigration law and another over-ruled Wisconsin’s legislation involving the negotiating rights of public sector unions. Over the past few decades, judges here in California have over-ruled honest elections involving capital punishment, illegal aliens and same-sex marriages.

When judges decide whether something is legitimate not on the basis of the Constitution, but merely on whether it squares with their personal bias, the ultimate victim is respect for the law.
©2012 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

When so many people objected to Obama’s placing people like Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court, it wasn’t because we think a woman’s place is in the home and not on the bench, but because during their hearings, they mentioned they thought they would be wonderful additions to the Court because of such things as their race, their gender and their overriding concern for social justice.

The significance of Lady Justice being blindfolded is because justice is supposed to be race, class and gender, neutral. And as I have written elsewhere, once you start augmenting justice with adjectives such as “social,” you destroy the very thing that makes America exceptional. It means that you believe that there should be one sort of “justice” for whites and another for blacks, one sort for the poor and another for the rich, one sort for men and another for women or the sexually bewildered.

Finally, this just in: In news that has stunned the nation’s capital, Barack Obama today announced that he is dropping Joe Biden from the ticket and replacing him with Big Bird.

In a prepared statement, Mr. Obama said, “My advisors think I’m nuts, but I’ve been hearing from millions of my fellow Americans. The folks are telling me they want the Bird, and I’m just the guy to give it to ‘em.”

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:
  • Pep1ron

    Burt, Just want to let you know that it is appreciated that you take the time to answer the posts on this site.

    • Prelutsky1540

       Pep: You’re very welcome.  I am curious as to whether any other writers answer here or at other websites.  In my experience, the answer is no.  But I haven’t done an in-depth study.


  • Spmpoolguy

    Why does ‘Stand with Pres. Obama’ appear at the end of this story?? I’m sure IT SHOULD NOT BE …………..

    It has surly got me (p o’d) extremely upset !!

    Joe G

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Joe G: I did not see a “Stand With Pres. Obama” at the end of the piece.  If it did appear, I assume it was an ad.  Liberals have a tendency to place ads on conservative sites.  I’m not sure what good it does them, but I suppose it costs them next to nothing.  Even at my own website, I’ve seen Democratic congressional candidates run little ads.

      Don’t let it upset you too much.  One can only hope that the ads they spend money on are equally useless.


  • wally

    Burt: I laughed and laughed. I totally agree.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Bless you, Wally.


  • Lucky3511

    Burt, That was terrific. I loved the last paragraph. Obama wanting to give us the bird.  Seeing he has been doing that for the last 4 years, it was nice to see the suggestion in print. Keep up the good work

    • Prelutsky1540

       Thank you, Lucky.  I’m lucky to have such appreciative readers.


  • cmacrider

    Burt:  Your criticism of “judicial activism” should be taken to heart by everyone who loves liberty.  The genius of the English Common Law, which formed the basis of American jurisprudence,rested on a simple idea derived from human experience.  That is this:  no person [and that includes judges] are so intelligent and objective to lay down broad general principles which are intended not only to decide the case at bar but also numerous similar cases which will occur in the future.  Omniscience and forecasting future events are not part of our genetic makeup.  The guiding principle was that a judge was to decide no more than was necessary to resolve the case at bar.  The theory was that if every judge “stuck to his own knitting” a pattern would eventually develop in this huge tapestry we call the general law.  It was said that “the life of the law is not logic but experience.”  

    As to the question “what do you do if a situation requires a broad general rule by its very nature?” the answer was very simple ….”send it back to the Legislature for them to decide because they are the elected representatives of the people.” 

    This system serves the English speaking peoples very well for centuries but I guess established truths are now out of fashion.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       cma:  Not just established truths, but truth in general.

      Regards, Burt

  • DanB_Tiffin

    $16 trillion and counting.  Spendaholics in denial!

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Dan: I don’t hear the Democrats denying it.  If anything, they tend to brag about their addiction.


      • Royalsfan67

         Burt, I was thinking back to 1976 when I was 9 years old and even then I knew Carter was going to beat Ford. Since then I have only had one election where deep down, I did not know who was going to win and that was 2000. This cycle I have no doubt whatsoever that Romney will win comfortably. I am looking for something in the 52-47 or 53-46 range. I just don’t see this as being that close come election day.

        • BurtPrelutsky

           Royal: I just want a win in the Electoral College.  It’s too easy for Obama or any Democrat to run up huge margins when it comes to popular votes in such states as New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Illinois and California, for a Republican to truly trounce his opponent these days.


  • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

    And yet, nearly 50% will vote for the Usurper in Chief (I pray it’s less than 50%). Our culture is in decline and I’m not sure what will be necessary to turn it around. People vote for who they think will give them the most freebies; healthcare, phones, no tax burden, pick your own! 

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Rick: I believe there is a good chance that Obama will receive more then 50% of the vote, thanks to the large victory margins he will run up in New York, Massachusetts and California.  It’s in the Electoral College we need to see him defeated.  It looks like it will come down to Ohio and Wisconsin.


  • Bruce A.

    There are so called Disaters & Epic disasters.  When the final history is written about the Obama Reign it will qualify as Super Epic Disaster.

    • BurtPrelutsky

       Bruce: It all depends who writes the history books.  I can promise you that in some, if not most, Obama will be portrayed as the Second Coming.


      • Larry B

        That will be following in the great tradition of books about FDR and the New Deal.  The spin was so effective, democrats are still voting for the Squire of Hyde Park.

        • BurtPrelutsky

           Larry B:  And these days, the lefties are even more in control of history departments in colleges and universities than they were when FDR died and was immediately canonized by the Left.