Guilt By Association

Liberals are contemptuous of those who believe that associating with bad apples might be an indicator that you yourself are rotten to the core. In fact, if you dared point out that Robert Byrd, who wound up serving 51 years in the U.S. Senate and not only became the Senate majority leader, but the President pro tempore — placing him third in line of presidential succession — had jump-started his political career by forming a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan in Sophia, West Virginia, they’d accuse you of McCarthyism.

Joe McCarthy, for the youngsters in the audience, was a junior senator from Wisconsin. He was a drunk and a boor, but that’s not why his name has come to be equated by liberals with the very worst elements in American politics. After all, Lyndon Johnson was a bigger drunk and a bigger bully, and if you look up “boor” in the dictionary, you’ll find his picture. In spite of that, LBJ is hailed as a shining star and a champion of civil rights by Democrats.

McCarthy’s sin is that he dared to point out that communists had infiltrated the federal government under FDR and had remained steadfastly loyal to the Soviet Union under Harry Truman and, ultimately, under Dwight Eisenhower.

What liberals most detested about McCarthy isn’t that some of those he mistook for traitors were merely muddleheaded pacifists — the sort of boneheads who thought it was a swell idea for America to share our atomic secrets with the Soviet Union, so that Joseph Stalin didn’t have to have American turncoats steal them for Mother Russia — but that so many of those in the State Department, people like Alger Hiss, whom McCarthy claimed were communist agents actually happened to be communist agents.

Getting back to Sen. Byrd, in 1946, he wrote to segregationist Sen. Theodore Bilbo (D, Mississippi) to say: “I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.” Is it any wonder that he rose to the KKK rank of Grand Cyclops?

But that didn’t prevent his Senate colleagues from granting him their greatest honors. And yet, we now see the Democrats baying for the blood of Rep. Steve Scalise (R, Louisiana) for no other reason than that 12 years ago, he gave a speech at a convention of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization.

Never having heard of the group, I looked up the EAURO and found that I pretty much agreed with their eight principles: (1) Equal rights for white Americans through an end to affirmative action; (2) An end to desegregation busing, which is to blame for declining educational standards, rising racial tensions and the wasting of public money; (3) Welfare reforms that would see welfare recipients work for their money, and the encouragement of family planning; (4) Tougher sentencing for violent crimes, alongside the repealing of hate crime legislation; (5) Very strict limitations on immigration; (6) An end to media portrayal of whites as oppressors; (7) The preservation of white heritage; and (8) A demand for excellence in all things.

I confess that number eight is rather vague, but there’s no sin in hoping for the ideal.

This is not to say I’m sending away for my membership card and decoder ring. After all, the group was founded by David Duke, proud racist/convicted con man and tax evader/both a Holocaust and 9/11 denier/ and who, for good measure, spent a lot of time at LSU jack-booting around campus wearing a Nazi uniform.

Still, Scalise didn’t show up at the convention hoping to take part in a lynching. He gave a breakfast talk to a small group on the subject of taxes. Taxes, for God’s sake! And for that, because he has a leadership role in the Republican-controlled House, the Democrats want to see him lynched.

Keep in mind these are the same hypocrites who turned a blind eye during the 1990s to the fact that Yasser Arafat, killer of Jewish babies, spent more time at the White House than Bill Clinton, and that today Barack Obama spends even more time playing footsies with America’s number one race hustler, Al Sharpton, than he does playing golf.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I wish to state that a few years ago, I was informed by a reader that something I had written – possibly an attack on Obama or on the 75% of Jewish voters who insist on voting for progressives every chance they get — had been posted on a neo-Nazi website. My first reaction was shock: Don’t they know I’m Jewish?! Have the Nazis initiated an Adopt-a-Jew program I hadn’t heard about? But when the reader asked me if I wasn’t going to demand they take down my article, I thought about it and decided I wouldn’t.

After all, as I explained at the time, I have no problem with people agreeing with me just so long as I don’t have to agree with them.

Burt’s Webcast is every Wednesday at Noon Pacific Time.
Tune in at His Call-in Number is: (818) 570-5443

©2014 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write

NBC News, the KKK and the State of Journalism

By now you probably have heard about the MSNBC drive-by aimed at Mitt Romney; the one that said he used the same slogan on the campaign trail as the Ku Klux Klan used to use.

Well, not really.

MSNBC got the “story” from a liberal blog which claimed that Romney had used the term “keep America American” during a campaign speech.  The blog said he did it twice, once last year and then against this month.  The blog then said, correctly, that “Keep America American” was a phrase used by the Ku Klux Klan back in the 1920s.

Get it?  Mitt Romney, a frontrunner for the GOP nomination for president, spouts the same hatred as the racists in the KKK.

What Romney actual said was “Keep America America” on both occasions, but frankly it doesn’t matter all that much.  Let’s say he did use the same term as the Klan used:  Are we supposed to really think he did it on purpose?  Why would he do that – because he wants to be associated with the Ku Klux Klan?

You would have to be nuts to believe that.  So then, how can something this irresponsible happen at a cable news network run by the once iconic NBC News.

Corruption of this type almost always starts at the top.  Management at MSNBC has set the tone, which pretty much comes down to this:  Progressive and liberal Democrats = good; conservative and Republican = bad.

In that atmosphere, some chucklehead anchor and his equally brainless producer thought it was okay to smear a front-running candidate for president; he’s a Republican, after all.  Of course, they’d never do this to a prominent liberal Democrat.  Not simply because it would be morally and journalistically wrong, but also because it doesn’t fit the MSNBC business model.

MSNBC management has apologized, calling the smear “irresponsible and incendiary” and said that it “showed an appalling lack of judgment.”

True enough, but make no mistake:  MSNBC management created the atmosphere in which this “irresponsible and incendiary” smear was allowed to happen – because they’re the ones who over the years have “showed an appalling lack of judgment.”


NBC News has announced that it has formed a series of partnerships between its local stations and several non-profit news organizations.

“The partnerships will in some cases allow the stations to cover more news and conduct more investigations without adding more staff directly,” according to the New York Times.

One of the non-profits NBC has aligned itself with is an outfit called Pro Publica, which the Times simply described as, “the acclaimed investigative journalism nonprofit organization.”

Well, yes – and no.  Despite the fact that Pro Publica has won two Pulitzer Prizes, it isn’t simply a journalist organization; it has a political agenda – a distinctly liberal one which is funded by liberal money bags.  On its Web site, Pro Publica explains its mission this way:

“ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories, stories with ‘moral force.’ We do this by producing journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them.”

This is a variation on an old journalism theme — that our role is to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.

No.  That may be the work of priests and ministers and rabbis, but not of journalists.

Pro Publica may do outstanding reporting but only when it fits its liberal agenda.  Don’t hold your breath waiting for Pro Publica to go after progressives and liberal Democrats – unless. perhaps, if they’re not progressive enough.

In a way semi-news organizations like Pro Publica are like semi-media watchdog groups like the Media Research Center.  I say “semi-“ because while the MRC does great work in exposing liberal bias in the media, it goes deaf, dumb and blind when it comes to conservative bias.  Fox News may legitimately have MRC guests on the air commenting on liberal bias, but it should never go into business with the Media Research Center.  MRC is not made up of journalists.  It’s made up of conservative activists.

And NBC News shouldn’t have gone into business with left-wing activists, no matter how many Pulitzers they may win for stories about the “exploitation of the weak by the strong”

I know that in this hyper-partisan media age in which we live, it sounds corny to say journalists should go after the truth, whether it helps or hurts Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives; that journalists should never have an agenda.  It may sound corny, but it’s true.