Coming to Grips With My Gripes

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney

I have my own problems with Mitt Romney, but I have to confess that when Rick Perry and others deride him as a flip-flopper, I take personal umbrage.  For one thing, I was raised to be a Democrat and remained one until the strain just got to be too much for me, just as it did, you may recall, for Ronald Reagan.

For another thing, talk about the obvious disadvantage for people in glass houses when it comes to stone throwing, Gov. Perry campaigned for Al Gore.  And that was back in the late 80s, when Reagan had shown all of us the advantage of being a Republican.

I, personally, don’t care if people flip-flop along the way, just so long as they wind up agreeing with me in the end.  I mean, are people never supposed to change their minds or their hearts?  What is the point of maturing and learning from experience if you go to your grave with the exact same dumb opinions you had when you were 20 or 30 or even, Governor Perry, 50 or 60?

If wisdom doesn’t come with age, what does?  Merely wrinkles, fallen arches and an aching back?

The truth is that I had expected the Occupy Wall Street movement would be over by this time.  I assumed that foul weather would send the dumb schnooks scurrying home, but I guess I underestimated the appeal of being in the media spotlight.  I say, shame on me for being so myopic.  After all, one merely has to consider all those tawdry afternoon shows, with people constantly trooping out to disclose their deepest, darkest, most embarrassing secrets, to grasp the lengths some fools will go in order to have their silly mugs on TV.

To me, the astonishing thing is that so many prominent Democrats, including Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Walters, have given the mob a big thumbs-up.  But, in case you didn’t notice, so have CAIR, David Duke and the despots of Iran and North Korea.  It’s odd the way that politics so often makes for strange bedfellows.  Although in this instance, a more appropriate term might be gutter-fellows.

Every so often I find myself being driven mad by words and terms that become the rage for a while.  In the past, we had “dy-no-mite!” thanks to a dumb sit com.  No sooner did that fad pass then “like” was being interspersed between every other word, thanks to Valley girls.  That, in turn, gave way to “at this point in time,” thanks to stupid people trying to sound intelligent, while ignoring the fact that “now” was a perfectly fine word.

These days, we are saddled with “alleged.”  Apparently, as a way to avoid legal action, media people are compelled to employ that word when referring to every schmuck until the day, even if it takes years of trials and appeals, that he’s finally led away in shackles.  If Hitler were suddenly discovered hiding out in an Austrian chalet, I assume one couldn’t get away with calling him a madman.

I’m not an attorney, but wouldn’t it be possible to avoid a possible lawsuit if a TV anchorman showed us that his fingers were crossed if, prior to sentencing, he referred to, say, Bernie Madoff as a thief and Charles Manson as a serial killer?

Herman Cain

Another term I would like to see retired from active duty is the blatantly hypocritical “With all due respect…”  The one thing you can count on is that whatever follows those four  innocuous words will be, at best, extremely disrespectful, and at worst, slanderous and just possibly obscene.

I have heard people insist that Herman Cain is not prepared to be president because he lacks experience when it comes to foreign affairs.  When you consider the state of our relations with other countries, I would think that it would be a plus for a candidate to be able to say, “I had absolutely nothing to do with it.”

On the other hand, it now appears that Mr. Cain had far too much experience when it came to affairs closer to home.

For my part, when it comes to foreign affairs, all I ask of a president is that he gets us out of the U.N., gets the U.N. out of the U.S., and that he seriously considers bombing Teheran before the end of the week.

Finally, it has been fascinating to watch Obama try to bribe his way to re-election.  The guy may have gotten a law degree, but his real passion is engineering.  Social engineering, that is.

After first seeing to it that college students would continue to be perennial juveniles by keeping them on their parent’s health insurance until the age of 26, he decided he’d double down by cutting their student loans through presidential fiat.  Then, having ensured their gratitude at least through November, 2012, he decided to keep people in homes they had no business buying in the first place by finagling their mortgage rates.

Understand, I’m not claiming to be morally superior to any of these people.  The truth is, I don’t really know how susceptible I’d be to a bribe.  Let’s just say I’m waiting to see if Barack Obama ever gets around to offering free hair transplants.


©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write Burt!

Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)



The Missing Links

When it comes to the Theory of Evolution, the religiously devout often find themselves locked in futile battle with those who lack religious faith. Those on one side are convinced that the earth is a mere 6,000 years old, and that God woke up one day and suddenly decided to create the earth, the stars, the giraffe, the camel and his crowning glory, Adam. Then, lest Adam get too big for his britches, He created Eve.

Those on the other side of the argument think that is simply the goofiest story they ever heard. They insist it ignores tons of scientific evidence, including fossils, carbon dating and common sense. The faithful counter by saying that, for its part, science conveniently fails to explain how and why evolution would have ever begun. They insist that the universe can only be explained as the result of Intelligent Design.

Because I tend to be a skeptic where both science and religion are concerned, my own belief is more in line with Mark Twain, who surmised that God was so disappointed with man, He tried to improve on His invention by creating the monkey.

However, try as they might, neither side can fully explain the existence of left-wingers. For my part, I can far easier grasp the appeal of turnips and grits than I can the stranglehold that Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez and Obama, have on leftists. I mean, how is it that anyone can look at the results of communism and socialism and not see them for the nightmares they are and always have been? After all, the evidence is in plain sight.

For all its claims to idealism, communism has invariably resulted in blood-thirsty regimes, whether in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba or East Germany. For the glories of socialism, you need only look to the riots now taking place in Greece. Tourists who have for years been attracted by the ruins of ancient Athens will now have even more reason to visit, although they will have to watch out for Molotov cocktails and tear gas.

Even here in America, which has generally been heading in the wrong direction ever since FDR adopted Norman Thomas’s socialist platform as his own, we have seen the pathetic results in our own streets. We see young dunderheads demonstrating for the end of capitalism, the destruction of corporations, and the forgiving of student loans, while simultaneously demanding high-paying jobs, free health insurance and the latest products devised by the brain of corporate billionaire Steve Jobs.

The fact that they’re too stupid to even notice the inconsistency inherent in their loony agenda tells me all I really need to know about the state of education in this country. These lunkheads represent the predictable results of allowing school teachers to belong to left-wing unions and permitting tenured professors to become propagandists rather than practitioners of the Socratic Method.

Still, it’s the often well-meaning parents, a great many of whom are conservatives, who have played a major role in creating this miserable state of affairs. After all, if you’re going to sit back and allow your sons and daughters to be indoctrinated from kindergarten on, and, for good measure, continue donating to colleges and universities that encourage this sort of thing, it’s hardly surprising that you’re going to wind up with regiments of liberal zombies who have been carefully taught to regard you as their natural enemy. In fact, when I see the allegiance that young Americans pay to Chairman Obama, I am more convinced than ever that stupidity is a hereditary condition.

When I was a youngster, parents were apt to warn their kids about the dangers inherent in associating with rotten companions by saying that if you lie down with dogs, you were likely to get up with fleas. When I look at the mobs demonstrating on Wall Street, I can see where that has become, not merely a figurative truth, but a literal one.

I almost feel sorry for the members of these mobs. That’s because they are obviously the nerdy boys and girls who never got to sit at the table with the A-crowd in high school. But my compassion only stretches so far, and by this time they should have gotten over the heartache of being genetically uncool.

The one good thing about them turning the streets of our major cities into outdoor toilets and urinals is that so many high-profile Democrats have adopted them as symbols of America’s oppressed. Obama feels their pain. Pelosi loves their spontaneity. Biden shares their grievances. Naturally, the mass media praises their courage and dedication.

Even I am willing to say something nice about these ignorant, lazy, unwashed, pot-smoking, self-righteous, slobs. But that’s only if the Democrats turn their presidential convention into a love fest dedicated to Occupy Wall Street, so that all of America can see the unbelievable depths to which the party of Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy has sunk.

I promise that if the Occupiers do even half as much for Barack Obama in 2012 as Abby Hoffman and his gang of misbegotten Yuppies did for Hubert Humphrey in 1968, I’ll invite all of them over to my house for a shower.


©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write Burt!
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)



Attention Mika Brzezinski: The Occupiers Aren’t Homeless… They Just Smell That Way

Monday, on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, lefty sidekick Mika Brzezinski got pretty emotional. She was upset… I mean really upset with comments Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich made at a recent GOP forum. In discussing the Occupy Wall Street movement, Gingrich ended a diatribe on the hypocrisy and moral falsity of the protesters by suggesting they “get a job” right after they “take a bath”.

The statement absolutely revolted Brzezinski who claimed to be “sickened” and “disgusted” by the “arrogant” and “un-self-aware” Gingrich. She tore into the former Speaker of the House for having the gall to talk down to the protesters with rhetoric that made her “skin crawl”, labeling him a hypocrite and suggesting that he’s the one who needs a bath.

Eager to affirm her outrage, she appealed to the show’s panel of fellow liberals for their thoughts. They of course, agreed.

Now, I can understand how a fierce partisan like Brzezinski would get worked up over a high-profile individual laying a knockout blow on her ideological viewpoint. However, it’s comical to listen to her speak of the Occupy Wall Street protesters as if they’re a group of helpless, neglected, and displaced individuals who have no other option in life than to sleep in parks in unsanitary conditions, and plead for others to take pity on them.

These people aren’t homeless. According to surveys down at protest sites, the majority of them aren’t even jobless. Yet, Brzezinski would have us believe that they’re some sort of protected class who shouldn’t be subjected to public condemnation on the grounds of moral decency.

The Occupy protesters are CHOOSING to stay in these dirty, sometimes disease-riddled, makeshift communities while “Help Wanted” signs are often hanging in the windows of the businesses sitting across the street from them.

They’re not above harsh criticism any more than the Tea Party movement, which commentators from Brzezinski’s own network have routinely said far, far worse things about. I don’t recall her getting terribly emotional about any of those people’s disparaging comments.

I don’t doubt that Brzezinski’s reaction to Gingrich’s words was genuine. Unlike many of her network colleagues who shamelessly play the morality card against anyone with an opposing viewpoint, she wasn’t feigning outrage. She absolutely believes what Newt said was morally repugnant… which is in itself ironic, being that she’s the one accusing someone else of being “un-self-aware”.

No one is discounting the hardships that have come with these tough economic times. As I pointed out in a previous column, I certainly haven’t gone unscathed myself. But lets be honest here… We’re talking about a collective of people who have chosen to spend both day and night seeking public attention, creating conflict, and burdening others while drenching themselves in an unsavory environment of their own creation. They could be spending their time filling out job applications and submitting resumes, but they have elected not to. Thus, they’re not hapless victims worthy of unconditional sympathy from presidential candidates, as our friend Mika has chosen to believe.




The Liberal Game Show

Because liberal politicians always want to paint life in America as bleak and miserable, a place that would be a living hell if not for their superhuman efforts, they are always telling lies and gaming statistics. For instance, when they start yammering about all the poor souls living under the poverty line, a line by the way that is only slightly more believable than the one that a lounge lizard feeds a dumb blonde, they neglect to take into account food stamps, health care, education expenses and unreported, under the table, income. The last of these includes day labor, burglaries and illegal drug sales. In fact, when you realize that nine percent of the population suffers from some form of drug dependency, it’s a miracle that our unemployment rate isn’t even higher than it is.

Of course when liberals aren’t denouncing America, some of them stay busy holding benefits for Africa. I must confess that of all the charitable activities available to Americans, those targeting Africa strike me as the goofiest. In fact, sometimes I think that the continent primarily exists so that do-gooders can feel they have a purpose in life. And, unlike some charities, such as those devoted to eliminating a disease or helping people get their lives back in shape after suffering the horrors of a natural disaster, the upside of helping Africans is that there is no end in sight. When Bono is one very elderly Irishman, I can assure you that Africa will still require his constant attention.

Frankly, I don’t know why anyone would devote so much time and effort to the place. It is a pig sty of a continent. It is home to slavery; to the vile practice of female circumcision; to Muslim terrorists and pirates; it’s a place where the rules of war invariably involve kidnapping, rape and maiming; and, for good measure, where men suffering from AIDS believe that unprotected sex with young virgins is a cure, or at least so they say.

It’s also the place where freedom from Europe’s colonial powers didn’t bring democracy, but only provided black degenerates with the opportunity to prove how much crueler they could be than the English, Spanish, French, Dutch and German, overseers had ever been.

Recently, a bunch of show business celebrities shot a TV spot where “famine” was referred to as the f-word. Afterwards, I’m sure they all patted themselves on the back for their humane efforts. But did any of them ever ask how it is that famine is as commonplace in Africa as egotism is in Hollywood? At some point, wouldn’t you think that after all this time those millions of people would have figured out how to feed themselves without George Clooney’s assistance?

Here in the States, we have the Occupy Wall Street oafs demonstrating against something or other. As close as anyone can figure, they don’t like a lot of money winding up in anyone else’s hands. What makes it so fascinating is that they’re getting a lot of shout-outs from various liberals. Even Obama, who has received more campaign contributions from Wall Street than any politician in history, has given them his personal seal of approval.

According to CelebrityNetWorth.com, the 10 richest people who have had good things to say about the street rabble have been Yoko Ono (whose wealth is estimated to be half a billion dollars); Russell Simmons ($325 million); Roseanne Barr ($80 million); Deepak Chopra ($80 million); Kanye West ($70 million); Alec Baldwin ($65 million); Susan Sarandon ($50 million); Michael Moore ($50 million); Tim Robbins ($50 million); and Nancy Pelosi ($35.5 million).

What I make of all this is that America has the richest, as well as the most insufferable, Communists in the world. Also, I now understand how, when Roseanne Barr said that everyone who had more than $100 million should be beheaded, she arrived at that seemingly arbitrary figure.

Looking at that list makes me wonder what people do with all that money. I mean, after you buy a palace to live in for, say, $20 million, what do you do with all the rest? Even if you toss in a yacht, an expensive wardrobe and a team of servants, how do you even keep track of all that loot?

I had thought that at this late date, Obama had apologized to every nation on earth, but I heard a rumor that he wanted to apologize to Japan for our having dropped the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but that Japanese diplomats had nixed it. I don’t blame them. It might call to attention the fact that Japan never apologized for Pearl Harbor; for the death march at Corregidor; for the American, British and Australian, POWs they slaughtered; for their butchery in Manchuria, Burma and the Philippines; and for kidnapping thousands and thousands of Chinese and Korean women for use in their military brothels.

But you can’t really expect patriotism or even perspective from Obama. In the history lessons he received from his radical professors and his demented religious mentors, it’s only the United States that has ever been guilty of crimes and atrocities.

Because liberals deal solely in lies, theirs is an even more vile currency than China’s corrupt yuan. One need only hear the likes of Nancy Pelosi insist that what heartless Republicans want is for women to die on the floor and for health care providers not to intervene. An obvious fabrication, at least so far as this heartless Republican is concerned. What I want is for women such as Nancy Pelosi, Loretta Sanchez, Maxine Waters, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Sheila Jackson Lee, to die on the floor of the House and for health care providers not to intervene.

Because I have a few friends who have done exceptionally well in the world of TV game shows, I am always trying to come up with a new one. My latest brainstorm involves a lie detector that would provide an electrical shock every time a contestant failed to provide an honest answer. For the pilot, I would like to hook up Henry Waxman. The typically good-looking, charming, host (feel free to picture me) would ask the congressman a series of questions. For instance, I might start out with, “Congressman, you have said that the only reason a Jew would ever vote for a Republican is because of his own personal greed. Do you actually believe that?”

“Yes, I…(yowl)…I really do…(howl)…Certainly I…(blood-curdling scream)…”

Next week, tune in when we put Harry Reid in the hot seat.


©2011 Burt Prelutsky. Comments? Write Burt!
Get your personally autographed copy of Liberals: America’s Termites or Portraits of Success for just $19.95, shipping included.   Get both for just $39.90. Liberals: America’s Termites Profiles of Success (60 candid conversations with 60 Over-Achievers)



Tea Party Envy

The ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement has found a good friend in the national media. By creatively corralling the unsavory protestors’ hodgepodge of left-wing grievances into a momentary narrative, they’ve lent them attention and credibility they wouldn’t have otherwise had. Rather than fizzling out under its own shallowness, the increased exposure has inspired similar, smaller protests around the country and the liberal media is pretty happy about that. Why? The answer is simple: Tea Party envy.

The media witnessed the rise of a legitimate grassroots movement in the Tea Party, and watched in awe and disdain as it dramatically changed the political landscape in this country. Though they’ve actively worked to discredit and demean the movement at every opportunity, they gained an undeclared respect for their results.

They want their own Tea Party that they can use to influence public opinion, and though not ideal, the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ people gave them the foothold they’ve been looking for. The Wall Street backdrop was a perfect component for liberal activism, especially with class warfare being Obama’s latest weapon of choice in hopes of preserving his presidency.

The problem is that most of the protestors don’t seem to have a clue what they, themselves stand for. Merely wanting what you don’t have isn’t a focused message, and it doesn’t bide well for longevity. The Tea-Party movement has been successful over the past two and a half years because their message is simple, they genuinely believe in it, and it resonates with most people.

There’s also the issue of demeanor. Even when the media scoured Tea Party rallies to find the worst elements of the bunch, the people watching on television saw a composed crowd who brought lawn-chairs, coolers, and American Flags. They were civil when spoken to and picked up after themselves when they left. Finding an Occupier that meets any of that criteria has been a difficult task. Far too many come across as dirty, angry, and lazy.

The ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement has already outlasted its organic components. Like flies drawn to slop, labor unions, paid activists, and most recently celebrities have latched onto the cause to prop it up. Kanye West, Susan Sarandon, and Tim Robbins have all wandered their way through the pond of objectors, applauding their determination and stance against the evil capitalistic practices from which they’ve all made their own fortunes. Apparently not content with clinging to only one fledgling liberal movement, Al Gore has even signed on.

The ride’s about over. I give it a couple more weeks before the movement’s true believers sense the commercialization that has surrounded them, become weary of the incoming Fall temperatures, and drift back to their hiding places until they feel their next great calling.

What the liberal elite can’t quite grasp is that they’ll never have a Tea Party of their own because their leftist principals don’t resonate with a significant portion of the center-right country we live in. The ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement is particularly a tough sell. For most people who have lived out their adolescence and have become productive members of society, envy is just not a priority in their lives. Family is. Prosperity is. When those fundamentals are threatened, only then do successful grassroots movements begin.