The Right Opinion
The Obama Event Administration
As I'm sure you all know by now, Obama has suggested that for the next few months, nobody should send anyone a wedding, anniversary, birthday or bar mitzvah gift, and should, instead, send the money to him.
I must confess that my first reaction was one of elation. It seemed a great way to get out of having to buy all those pricey gifts. I could simply send a card that announced that in lieu of a waffle iron or a bed spread, I was sending a generous contribution to Obama's re-election campaign. But it immediately occurred to me that my friends and relatives would take it as a sure sign that either I was even cheaper than they had previously suspected; or, worse yet, that I had taken total leave of my senses, and the next step was to have me committed to a loony bin.
Frankly, I am amazed that, according to the polls, Obama is tied with or running slightly ahead of Romney. It makes no sense. When you realize how great the nation's debt has grown over the past three years, how static the unemployment rate has remained and how much respect America has lost world-wide, Obama's approval numbers should be single digit, consisting solely of his Chicago cronies, college students and aging Bolsheviks.
In the old days, liberals believed everything they read in Pravda and the Daily Worker. Today, they believe everything they read in the New York Times or see on ABC, NBC and CBS. Once I realized that, it occurred to me that those on the Left are so hopelessly addicted to lies that it's a shame that interventions are limited to those whose demons are alcohol, drugs or gambling. In a pinch, however, excellent results have often resulted when the innocent victims of left-wing professors and network news anchors have been treated with the business end of a baseball bat.
Speaking of liberals, something that sets them apart from rational human beings is their devotion to abortions. It was bad enough when they danced in the streets after the Roe v. Wade decision was announced. But all these years later, after science has provided them with any number of pills and devices with which to avoid pregnancy, and schools have spent more time teaching kids how to prevent bananas from getting pregnant than how to spell "Mississippi," you would think that the issue would be about as relevant as whether we should revolt against British rule.
But if you listen to the way that liberal women carry on, you would think that such things as a nuclear Iran, a 16 trillion dollar national debt and ObamaCare, all take a backseat to abortions on demand for teenagers. The logical conclusion is that liberals are simply too dumb to have sex and chew gum at the same time.
Speaking of ObamaCare, I admit I was one of those people who was blindsided by Chief Justice Roberts siding with the four crazies on the Court. Even when earlier in the week he voted the wrong way on Arizona's immigration law, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I thought he might have been engaged in the sort of horse-trading that frequently used to go on in Congress, when a Republican would agree to vote the wrong way on one issue in order to get a Democrat to vote the right way on another. I know that's not how it's supposed to work on the Supreme Court, but people are people even if they get to wear their bathrobes to work.
Although I prefer to concentrate on the bright side -- namely that Obama is now forced to campaign with ObamaCare connected to him like a tin can or like a strip of toilet paper trailing from his shoe -- it does raise serious questions about John Roberts. Why has he sold out his conservative principles? Why has he, the appointee of a Republican president, gone so far astray, reminding many of us of those earlier scoundrels, Earl Warren and Harry Blackmun?
I have come up with two scenarios. One, perhaps Roberts has passed out and bonked his head on a dock more times than we've been told about.
Or, two, he's been seduced by those three notoriously saucy vixens, Kagan, Ginsburg and Sotomayor.
In any case, I'm taking a page out of Obama's playbook. I blame George Bush!

89 Comments
wjm in Colorado
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 2:13 AM
Hey, don't lose hope, we now have the best cause to run against since malaise, and more wil b e abe to relate to it, Failure is Failure!
Burt Prelutsky in CA
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 3:59 AM
wjm: I still believe Romney will defeat Obama. But it is very disheartening that Obama remains as popular as he is because of what that says about America.
Burt
sfj in Alabama
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 8:18 PM
Amen. It seems the majority of those polled are besotted idiots. Otherwise, why would they support an illegal president who never held a job and acts like a spoiled brat? I don't have good feelings about the election. After all, what is their election slogan -" vote early and often".
E.J. Carroll in Bangkok
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 4:26 AM
I think that his (Obama's) 'popularity' in the polls should be taken with a grain of salt. Seems to me they must only be asking a person first if they are a liberal or democrat before they ask what they think of the clown. And any question gauging 'popularity' can be asked in a way to make even someone with a modicum of sense to answer the way the pollsters want them to answer. Obama has done more damage to our Country and our Constitution than all the other liberal fools we have elected since day one.
Jim in Alabama
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 7:42 AM
True enough...Mark Alexander has had a lot to say about pollaganda...but remember that in 2008 there were many who could not believe the polls that suggested we could actually elect this clown.
Holmes Simons in Florida
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 8:45 AM
Burt, given Big John's propensity to hold court naked underneath his ankle-length nightie, it is more than plausible that he is a closet whatasexual susceptible to spicy food and masochistic manipulations of the batter's end of a softball bat, so I buy your conclusion of his seduction by Goober's appointees, who have never before gotten a point that was not battery operated. But Ginsberg is a slimy old frog who sits around muttering, "Croak, Croak, Croak", like it's an imminent threat that further violations to our now nonexistent unalienable rights may become a reality before November. God save the Queenies, at least until the Fat Ladies sing and the lame duck limps into The Peabody.
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 9:09 AM
I don't get it. Explain the batters end metaphor. You seem to know a lot about this stuff.
Holmes Simons in FL
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 10:34 AM
Delaware is close to Queerville. I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself. HINT: It's hard to sit down while using this technique. Read Barney Fwanks autobiography, "How I use Instruments from the Locker Room When My Ferret is Sleepy".
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 10:53 AM
Still nothing. Can you not sit down because the bat is too large?
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 10:56 AM
Also where is Queerville? Maryland?
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 9:08 AM
Burt I am seriously questioning your taste in women if you describe those three as "saucy vixens". Everything alright Burt? Next thing you know you'll be talking about Pelosi in swimwear.
Of course you might have been being sarcastic in which case I apologize. Although someone should tell Holmes Simons that if he uses too much naked "Big John" imagery he may be gay. Break it to him nice.
Merry Colin in Cave Creek, Arizona
Monday, July 9, 2012 at 1:35 PM
John, are you really as stupid as you sound? Troll!
wjm in Colorado
Monday, July 9, 2012 at 2:21 PM
He doesn't even realize where he lives! I do hope he keeps posting though, very comical yet sad.
BlueShadow in Texas
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 9:16 AM
I know; SCOTUS decisions are apolitical. I am much more certain, however, that I would never, ever play poker with Justice Roberts. What decision on Obamacare could have been worse for Obama? If Romney doesn't follow through with a landslide victory, it won't be Roberts' fault; he's done everything he could.
Somebody said Roberts is playing chess while the rest of us are playing checkers. I think the gap is wider than that.
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 9:26 AM
You don't think that perhaps he was doing his job and being objective and unbiased do you? I fail to see the conspiracy here, although I do see how this could turn out bad for Obama in November.
Blue Shadow in Texas
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 12:08 PM
Not suggesting a conspiracy here, John, unless one person, acting without consulting others as to the purpose of their combined action, can be called a conspiracy. In other words, I agree that there was a conspiracy of four justices to find Obamacare constitutional, but I don't believe that there was a conspiracy to do so in an effort to damage the Obama campaign.
Objective and unbiased? Those are pretty slippery words. In a perfect world, ALL circumstances surrounding a crime would be completely explained by corroborating evidence found by tireless detective work. In most real world cases though, a 'preponderance' of evidence is deemed sufficient or, better yet, a confession closes the investigation. I think I'm suggesting that the other conservative justices, had they as strongly wanted to save Obamacare for Sir Romney to slay, might have persevered long enough to arrive at the same "objective and unbiased" opinion.
The real bottom line for all of us though ought to be electing Romney and a Congress that is as conservative as possible. Then we hold their feet to the fire until Obamacare is history. All else is superfluous
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 2:57 PM
Fair enough I suppose. You're just speculating and I'm just speculating so who knows. Why do you hate Obamacare so much?
Richard Ryan in Lamar,Missouri
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 1:52 PM
John in Delewar: Whether you know it or not, the feds took over a brothel out west when it had not paid it`s income taxes. They tried to run it as a business, but eventually had to close it down because they couldn`t even make it running a whore-house and selling whiskey. What could possibly go wrong with them running our health care?
John in Delaware
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 9:19 PM
What? Ok the argument you're trying to make is that the government wastes a lot of money and that due to the size and the organization the private industry, in most cases, does a more efficient job. That is a perfectly valid, reasonable argument that would be tough to oppose.
The argument that you made was about some whore house in the west and how the government tried to run said whore house. Come on man, you can't get mad at people when they read stuff like that and think that you don't know what you're talking about. You need to be less passionate and more level-headed if you want to convince people that you're right.
And please don't tell me that I'm too simple minded or liberal or whatever to understand you. You just have to be the better man Richard.
wjm in Colorado
Monday, July 9, 2012 at 2:24 PM
It couldnt' have been a better analogy, the government can't and doesn't run anything efficiently. I find you incredibly ignorant.
Tex Horn in Texas
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 11:01 AM
"Frankly, I'm amazed that, according to the polls, Obama is tied with or running slightly ahead of Romney."
Why, Burt? Maybe potential Romney voters are wondering what his economic plan is for America, what his healthcare plan is if he is truly against Obamacare, what his stance is on Second Amendment Rights, what his plan is for dealing with the European situation, his plan for the current "wars." Fact is, he's in a position of being one who simply retorts, simply defends himself and his party against Obama's accusations. While I have every intent to vote for Romney (an anti-Obama vote), I'm wondering, like many of my friends, what does Romney stand for?
In a related matter, I recently read that 30 odd percent of people surveyed wasn't even aware of the Supreme Court ruling on healthcare. These are some of the people who will vote Obama: the ignorant.
Jim in Agoura Hills, CA
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Mr. Romney and the Republican leadership are still failing to announce a clear and definitive plan regarding the economy and generating jobs: tax cuts, ending Obamacare, stopping/invalidating all EPA regulations since Mr. Obama took office and more.
The GOP needs to make a clear statement that will remove uncertainty so that business can get on with business instead of worrying about the next penalty or penalties from the government.
I will vote for Romney and will continue to give some financial support to him and other conservatives, but he really needs to be up front with his plan.
JJStryder in Realville
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 12:00 PM
You contention that liberals lie, believe lies and polls showing Obama close to Romney may have a direct correlation. The pollsters, those polled and the results of those polls are lies. And Roberts lied to everyone.
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 12:11 PM
All liberals are liars and believe lies. That seems like a pretty well thought out statement. Nice.
wjm in Colorado
Monday, July 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM
What, can't handle the truth? Liberals are either liars or useful idiots supporting the liars. Which are you?
Pamela Heckel in Cincinnati, OH
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 12:17 PM
Burt, Please enlighten me. Since Obamacare is now a tax, and since it originated in the Senate rather than in the House, didn't the law violate the Consitiution? Doesn't that throw it out? Also, since it is a tax, do the states have to wait until 2014 (when the tax prvisions tak effect) to challenge it in court again?
Merry Colin in Cave Creek, Arizona
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 12:49 PM
From what I have read, the Senate took a House bill and stripped it replacing it with their plan. That is the way they were able to get this obamanation passed.
Robert in NEW MExico
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 12:31 PM
Can someone tell me why abortion is a sacred cow for liberals, yet Congress is determined to persecute professional athletes for doping?
Are they trying to preserve the last bastion of meritocracy we have, professional sports, while letting the rest of the nation reach the lowest levels of moral depravity?
God help us.
Burt Prelutsky in CA
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM
Robert: Congress did not prosecute athletes for doping; they merely asked them about it. Roger Clemens was prosecuted for lying in his testimony.
John in Delaware: One, yes I was being sarcastic in my reference to the vixens on the Court. Is this the first time you've ever read one of my articles? Two, the business end of a bat is the end that hits the ball, or, in this case, the part that knocks some sense into the heads of liberals.
Blue Shadow: Based on the fact that John Roberts mentioned that his vote did not indicate that he thought ObamaCare was a good thing and that he said that he thought it was up to Congress and the people to get rid of it if they so chose, I would conclude that he intended to provide Romney and other Republican candidates with a powerful weapon to use against Obama and the liberals in November. It is really the only motive that explains his vote and his conclusion that ObamaCare is a tax.
Tex: I think it is silly to deride Romney or the GOP for not spelling out everything he would do as president. For one thing, he has said he would repeal ObamaCare and would cut taxes and regulations. Taken together, those few things would greatly improve the economy and finally start our economic recovery. For another thing, he has said he would not stand idly by while Iran produced nuclear bombs. Finally, if all he did was his level best to undo everything that Obama, Pelosi, Reid and Holder, have done to America, he would be a hero in my eyes.
Finally, even though I still believe that Romney will win, especially if he dumps Eric Fehrnstrom, it is silly to discount polls or to predict a landslide victory. The bottom line is that millions of Americans would vote for Hitler if he had a (D) after his name, and many of them live in large states, including California, New York, Illinois and Massachusetts.
Burt
John in Delaware
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 2:36 PM
First, no I haven't read any of your articles Burt, including this one. Second, I am more curious as to the application of the bat in context, which I still don't understand. Feel free to answer for the gentleman who used the phrase originally.
Also, if I was a liberal, would you bash my head in with a baseball bat? Or were you being sarcastic again? Man up, Burt.
Holmes Simons in FL
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 9:07 AM
John, please learn this if nothing else: I need no one to answer for my comments. It is a waste of my time to engage in jibber jabber with one who has been conditioned to believe in anti-American ideology that infringes upon individual sovereignty. Perhaps the best way for you to truly understand the sarcasm often present in Mr. Prelutsky's articles, my comments, and others is to take a softball bat, like one that may have been used by Janet Napolitano's stunt double, Elena Kagan, unrecused lesbian conveyer of perverse, unconstitutional legal judgments affecting American citizens, and shove it up your rectum until you feel like Barney Fwank did on his honeymoon last night. Your comprehension of the acerbic perspective is certain to be memorably enhanced. Say hello to Odin.
John in Delaware
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 8:25 PM
This answer is exactly what I wanted. Thank you Holmes. You can go back to your baseball bat sexual fetish now.
Richard Ryan in Lamar,Missouri
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 1:59 PM
John in Delwear: For God`s sake man, either make some sense or go elsewhere to write your drive, like the Huffington Post for instance. If you have not read any of Burt``s former writing as well as this one, you have no standing here. You`re merely taking up valuable space.
John in Delaware
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 8:28 PM
The Huffington Post is not as much fun as the Patriot Post. You guys are easier entertainment.
wjm in Colorado
Monday, July 9, 2012 at 2:30 PM
As I queried before, useful idiot or traitor, You make the call!
Howard Last in Wyoming
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 11:26 AM
"Congress did not prosecute athletes for doping; they merely asked them about it. Roger Clemens was prosecuted for lying in his testimony." Isn't this hypocritical as most politicians are professional liars? I guess you heard the old saying, How do you know when a politician is lying, his mouth is moving.
jksisco in Irvine, CA
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 1:35 PM
The pollsters may be getting positive numbers for Obama, but, in this post-racial presidency it's politically correct to "like" the guy or you will be labelled a racist. The only real test will be on election day, where no one asks who you voted for during the process. Obama will be out of job come January, if likely voters have had enough, which I think they have.
zenga in va
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 2:10 PM
"he's been seduced by those three notoriously saucy vixens, Kagan, Ginsburg and Sotomayor" Burt: You should warn a person. I almost fell outta my chair.
Re why the polls don't show 0bama holding down single digit support, it is a question that has plagued me for almost 4 years now. Two points. One, there is a reason that 100 is defined as average intelligence. Two, I have always suspected that there are way more semi-functional crazy people in the country (on the order of 35% is my guess - coincidentally, roughly the same number of declared demwits) than the physciatric profession knows, or lets on. Oh, and don't forget the women who vote for 0bama because, as one of my former associates said, "he has such a nice family." don't have any idea what the heck that means, but she said it with conviction, and i've heard it from a number of other women.
Alex in NJ
Saturday, July 7, 2012 at 2:41 PM
Zenga - Me too. Saucy Vixens was damn funny. The mental image of those three orangutans (a la Planet of the Apes w/ Charles Heston), contrasting the sassy phrase, sent the left and right halves of my brain into an epileptic pillow fight.
You really gotta love Burt"s way with words.