The Right Opinion
The World According to Obama
When Obama said that nobody does anything on his own, I figured he had me in mind. I could even hear that annoying voice of his in my ear, saying "Prelutsky, you didn't really write all those scripts, books and articles. After all, you didn't invent the typewriter, the computer or television; and you sure didn't produce the inkjet or build the Internet highway. You also didn't produce the food you eat or purify the water you drink. You didn't even construct your own house."
The reason I could hear him so clearly is because I used to go to college, and those are the sorts of simplistic things that sophomores say when they are trying to be profound; usually after they've had more than a few beers.
But Obama is middle-aged and he hasn't been a college student for nearly 30 years. But keep in mind that he is a left-winger, which is just another way of saying he will be a juvenile until the day he dies. I would add that the reason he is so convinced that nobody does anything on his own is because he, himself, has done so little. He is essentially a creature who could have been cobbled together in a cellar, but, unlike Dr. Frankenstein's creation, Igor didn't have to rob a local cemetery in order to supply his master with a brain; in Obama's case, it came vacuum-sealed right from a factory run by the likes of Frank Marshall, Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, George Soros, Valerie Jarrett and Karl Marx.
Or, as Rush Limbaugh put it, the choice in November is between Romney's "Bain Capital" and Obama's "Das Kapital."
When Obama said in his 7,849th speech that "We rise and fall as one nation," my face turned beet red and I began to cough so hard my wife nearly dialed 911. When it comes to politicians, I generally cut them some slack because I understand, as they do, that roughly 50% of the voters are so dumb they'll generally believe the last lie they hear before entering the voting booth. But even I couldn't give a pass to a guy who talks about one nation when he has devoted the past three years to erecting firewalls between blacks and whites; rich and poor; men and women; Democrats and Republicans; and between the federal government and several states, including Arizona, Texas and Indiana.
Obama keeps accusing Mitt Romney of wishing to raise taxes on the poor, believing, as usual, that a lie repeated often enough will eventually be mistaken for the truth. The fact is Romney wants taxes cut for everyone. I'm the one who wants them raised on the poor. Well, actually "raised" is the wrong verb. Half the people in the country don't pay anything in income taxes, although that doesn't prevent the federal government from sending them bribes in the form of "refunds."
I know that the rationale is that even though the poor don't pay income taxes, they pay sales taxes and the like. Whenever I hear liberals make that claim in defense of the status quo, my reaction is that the rest of us also pay all of those, in addition to having to write the IRS a check every April.
Inasmuch as we already have a progressive tax system, meaning that the top-earning five percent pay 65% of all income taxes, I see no reason why people making less than, say, $40,000- a-year can't be expected to pay one percent. If they think that $400 is too much to pay for all those roads and bridges that Obama is always going on about, let them forego their voting rights. If they want to have a say in the way things are run and in deciding which people should run them, I say, borrowing my words from Obama, Pelosi, Biden, Reid and Wasserman-Schultz, they should pay their fair share.
A fascinating sidebar to Obama's war on Bain Capital is that Bain executives have contributed over $120,000 to his re-election campaign. To me, that sounds an awful lot like chickens chipping in to buy a birthday present for Colonel Sanders, but, what the heck, it's their money.
Speaking of Bain, when watching Obama's TV ads attacking Romney, it's worth recalling that in 2008, candidate Obama said, "If you don't have a record to run on, you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."
At the time, it sounded like he was insulting John McCain, but we now realize that he was merely thinking out loud, hoping that David Axelrod would jot it down for future reference.

53 Comments
Old Sarge in Hinesville, GA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 5:45 AM
Burt, Even when they pay sales tax those on welfare are paying it with taxpayers money. They don't actually contribute one penny to the economy. Then at the end of the year they can file a tax return and get a refund so in effect they are being paid twice. The Demorats like this system because it keeps them voting the Democratic ticket. If you are drawing any type of assistance from the government you should not be allowed to vote because it is a conflict of interest.
wjm in Colorado
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 8:51 AM
Right on the money! With no stake in the game, people should not be allowed to vote themselves the production of others. I may seem harsh to some, but someone of able mind and body should not be paid to vote for Democrats, they can work or starve.....
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:43 PM
Old Sarge: You are right. It is very like members of public sector unions getting to negotiate their contracts with politicians, who aren't looking to save their own money, but merely looking to buy votes and support with our tax dollars.
Burt
Brian in Virginia
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 11:14 AM
Benjamin Franklin said it best: "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." Gentlemen, I pray we are not already there.
tod-the tool guy in brooklyn N.Y.
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 6:06 AM
Our local community conservatives, defeated a lib dem, in the State Senate Lewis Fidler. The election ,initially was too close to call, even for our board of elections. Our guy, David Storobin, is commited to helping small business. On May 31st, The Board announced, after a hand recount, that Storobin had won by a mere 16 votes! This was a grass roots VICTORY, for a city drowning in regulations, corruption, and graft! LOL Burt Prelutsky.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:40 PM
Tod: I doubt if Mr. Storobin would have any chance of winning an election here in California.
Burt
Doktor Riktor Von Zhades in Western KYr
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 7:26 AM
Burt: I would support a flat tax wherein everyone pays 10% of income, no exceptions, no loopholes, no deductions. I would support a flat tax on corporations at 15%. I am certainly not an economics guru, nor have I a degree, in accounting. But one thing I am sure of everyone would have a dog in the fight. I would also maintain, that, as the President has said; "we're all in this together" that those receiving public assistance should have said assistance reduced by 1%. Surely, they can do without a pack of smokes and a six pack of beer once a month. I ask the question why is it, that only those that produce and pay, are forced to tighten their belts, when those who receive, (many ungratefully at that) seem to never suffer any loss or decline in the standard of living?
rab in jo, mo
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 8:47 AM
Agreed, God only asked for 10%, why should the Fed get any more than that?
I am also in favor of enacting legislation that establishes a waiver of voting rights as a condition of accepting government welfare. Said rights would be re-established upon cessation of payments.
Brian in Virginia
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 11:17 AM
What a marvelous idea! You can have the money, or you can have the vote, not both. That would negate Franklin's fear when he said "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
corvettegeorge in Santa Ana, CA
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 2:49 AM
Absolutely brilliant idea! But then there is the ACLU. :(
JR in Mountain Grove
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:16 PM
Since everyone who works for any corporation pays taxes, why do you think corporations should be taxed? Where in our Constitution does it read, "There shall be a tax on the right to conduct a business?" Corporations cannot pay taxes, not without passing that amount on to consumers - raising the price of their commidities by that amount- so it's simply a double tax on all who buy their products.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:36 PM
JR: Speaking of which, when Obama gripes that Romney is only paying taxes at a rate of 14% because his money comes to him as a result of investments, he would do well to mention that he already paid income taxes on the money when he earned it. And unlike Obama, he actually did something to earn it.
Burt
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:39 PM
Doktor: I agree. Voting should be a privilege, not a right.
Burt
corvettegeorge in Santa Ana, CA
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 2:52 AM
Originally, only land owners could vote. What an antiquated idea! But what the heck, lets try it again. Also, women were not allowed to vote. Lets try that too!
MNIce in Minnesota
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 1:11 AM
What is income? The Supreme Court long ago defined it as "profit or gain." Do you get a profit or gain from your wages? Remember, when you work for wages or a salary, you are providing labor and time out of your life to your employer for his use and benefit. You will never get that time back. Now, are you being paid more than your time is worth? If not, then you have not made a profit or gain. The Federal government arbitrarily defines your 2000 hours or so of labor per year as being worth only $5500 (amount of personal deduction). This is absurdly low.
If you itemize deductions, you are making a more detailed accounting of your expenses of working. However, you should be able to deduct all reasonable costs of keeping yourself ready for work, i. e., food, clothing, shelter, health care, and the cost of transporting yourself to and from work. The IRS' Schedule A accounting for this is very inadequate.
The point is, the Federal government does not have blanket taxation powers. The income tax is a very limited exception to the general ban on unapportioned direct taxes. It does not authorize the Congress to tax any and all of your receipts, only whatever profit you might actually get from them.
The income tax as presently administered is a scam. An even bigger set of scams would be the sections of the Tax code starting with, "There is hereby levied a tax on income equal to (fill in fixed amount or percentage of something that is not in itself income)." Examples include the payroll taxes (based on wages, not income) and most recently the Obamacare penalty/tax, which is not even a tax on a source of income. These are illegal direct taxes thinly disguised as income taxes.
So, now that you know wages are not income, what do you mean by a flat tax? Do you mean simply going to a single tax rate instead of increasing rates on higher income levels? Or do you mean imposing a direct tax on all receipts? The former is constitutionally permissible, but would not by itself expand the number of taxpayers. The latter is an illegal direct tax.
Brian in Virginia
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 11:25 AM
As originally written, the constitution disallowed income taxes. Income taxes, taxes paid for no other reason than being alive (and earning an income, as opposed to a tax on goods) are direct taxes. Direct taxes were mentioned twice and in both cases it specified that they be "apportioned" meaning everyone pays the same amount. We need to get back to this requirement.
Alex in NJ
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 7:43 AM
Perhaps a high school diploma should be a requirement to vote, and civics and history courses a mandated curriculum.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:34 PM
Alex: High school diplomas don't prove anything. The only people under the age of 25 who should be allowed to vote are members of the military. The only people over the age of 25 who should be allowed to vote are those who are paying income taxes or, if over the age of 65, paid them in the past. That would eliminate most of the yahoos whose votes currently cancel out our own.
Burt
MNIce in Minnesota
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 1:20 AM
Not paying income taxes does not prove you don't have an interest in keeping government costs down. There are people who make too little income to owe taxes, but who scrape by on what they have rather than lining up for government handouts. These people earn the right to vote as much as anyone; when government policies drive up the cost of living, they are the first ones to get hurt.
If we are to deny the vote to any group, it should be those who have received direct government assistance in the two years preceding a Congressional election. This would include those who go to college on the taxpayer's dime and recipients of such programs as Food Stamps and Medicaid, etc..
Brian in Virginia
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 11:26 AM
How about a requirement to pass a test on the Constitution before being allowed to hold public office!
TAE in PlanetUtah
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 2:03 PM
When I was in grade school, there was a state (CA) requirement that you couldn't 'graduate' eighth grade without having passed 'The Constitution Test'. You had to know the line of succession, heabeaus corpus, the preamble, and answer a LOT of questions on the Bill of Rights and subsequent changes to the Constitution. You also had to know a lot about the Declaration of Independence. Yet a mere fourteen years later, no one going to school had never even heard of the Constitution Test!
I think you need to pass the Constitution Test before you be allowed to vote! And if you aren't contributing, you shouldn't be allowed to vote, either. That would eliminate most students and all Welfare recipients, except the spouses of military members - many of whom are on welfare because their Soldier/Sailor/Marine/Airman doesn't make enough to support their family, which I feel is criminal!
Adrien Nash in Crescent City, CA
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 2:14 AM
Immigrant foreigners who take the naturalization test know twice as much about America as today's uneducated know-nothings. Perhaps everyone under a certain age (40?) should be required to take that citizenship test at least once, particularly those who have never registered to vote. If they are unwilling to do so then their commitment to American democracy is either non-existence or far too feeble to deserve the right to vote. Having such a requirement would surely serve to "nudge" the ignorant to obtain the related historical information (offered free of charge of course) to study and learn before taking the test. There seems to be no other way to get them to learn the basics about the nation on which their freedom depends, since the socialists in today's classroom. and their supervisors in the school-boards aren't interested in teaching it. Teaching American history and tradition would have to involve teaching about the religious foundation of the country, about the strong connection between patriotism and belief in a higher power that sustained the nation through the perilous fights. That can not be allowed! No God in the classroom, no connection to religious faith. All much be secular and agnostic and any past that isn't must be scrubbed. And it has been scrubbed. Not a trace left except in the textbooks that are 50 years old.
Ready4AChange in Illinois
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 9:36 AM
BURT FOR PRESIDENT!!!!! Burt, you are truly a breath of fresh air! Keep up the great writing!
p3orion in Midland, Georgia
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 12:38 PM
Burt's way too smart to be sucked into politics.
Ready4AChange in Illinois
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:15 PM
I can hope - can't I?? :)
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:15 PM
p3: You said it. Nothing is worth having to put on a suit and tie every morning. At least nothing involving the world of politics.
Burt
Brian in Virginia
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 11:31 AM
You got that right! I am sure Burt would not have been concerned about Guam capsizing under the weight of added troops or thought for one moment that you have to pass a bill to find out what's in it!
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:17 PM
Ready4: Since I would only settle for being a dictator, freeing myself of having to deal with the likes of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Sheila Jackson Lee, I guess I'll have to stick to writing.
Burt
Richard Ryan in Lamar,Missouri
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 10:46 AM
I just want to put in a plug for Burt`s latest book, Barack Obama You`re Fired. I just received my copy in yesterday`s mail and have only read the first 38 pages. Those 38 pages are already worth more than the $25.00 purchase price. I highly recommend it for all Prelutsky fans. It would be enlightening for non Prelutsky people as well.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:13 PM
Richard: Thank you for the wonderful endorsement. Now if people would only stop buying O'Reilly's books and start buying mine, this would be a much better world.
Burt
corvettegeorge in Santa Ana, CA
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 3:03 AM
At least his 'Killing Lincoln' and 'Killing Kennedy' are great history books. Also, he gives a lot to charity.
p3orion in Midland, Georgia
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 11:44 AM
Ma, why don't you get a job?
There ain't no reason, son
'Cause we can live on East Street
With cash from Washington.
Since I ain't got no man around
To work and care for us
The gummint takes your Daddy's place
(Whichever one he was.)
Food stamps and WIC, Obamacare,
And even cellphones too!
Just be sure you vote Democrat,
They'll hand it all to you.
The lady down at ACORN said
That all I gotta do
Is register the cat and dog
And vote a time or two.
Obama has it all worked out,
So don't get all upset.
You'll never have to work a day
To get all you can get.
But if Obama pays it all
And feeds us milk and honey,
There's one thing I don't understand:
Where does he get the money?
Don't worry, son, there ain't no hitch
Obama's got a plan:
He's gonna soak the evil rich
To help the common man.
But don't they build the businesses
That give some folks the jobs
So they can pay the income taxes
That Obama robs?
That ain't my problem, I don't work.
Don't care where money's found
Long as Obama keeps his word
To "spread the wealth around."
But Ma, I still don't understand:
If they can't make some dough,
Then wouldn't they just close up shop
And move to Mexico?
You're talking like some "one percent"
Those suckers never learn.
How dare they think that they should keep
The money that they've earned!
But Mama won't there come a day
When they run out of cash?
If Obama takes it all away
Where will he get his stash?
You're giving me a headache, boy
You smartass little brat.
Stop thinking so much if you want
To be a Democrat.
-Larry Cline
Adrien Nash in Crescent City, CA
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 2:25 AM
A most excellent poem, of the finest quality. Thanks for taking the amount of time I'm sure it took to make it seem like it was no effort. You can be proud of a job well done, and not done easily.
Orf in Pennsylvania
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 12:09 PM
Liberals, aka Progressives, naturally love progressive taxation because it enables them to continually say the rich don't pay their fair share. They believe the rich should not be able to keep a million out of the 10 million they make in income. The libtards believe it is fair only when everyone gets to keep 10,000 and gives the Dumbocrud rulers the rest to redistribute. Everyone then would be dependent on the government to survive. This is the libtard utopian dream for America, equal poverty for all. May they all fail in their attempts to destroy the greatest and freest country in the world.
I agree with the above that the income tax should be ended in favor of a sales tax. Then only those who have the most money to spend will be taxed the most. Those whose income is a government check should not be allowed to vote. I would also go one step farther and say only those who own property in America have a sufficient investment here to have the privilege of voting.
McGoo in The Villages FL
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 12:40 PM
We are not a democracy but rather a Republic governed by a Constitution and that constitution doesn't guarantee any citizen the right to vote. I think our voting laws need to change just as much as our tax laws need to be reformed.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:11 PM
McGoo: Much easier to change tax laws than voting laws, which is unfortunate.
Burt
enemaofthestatistquo in Monroe, GA
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 3:10 PM
& whenever either changes, it is always: more people vote, & fewer pay taxes.
corvettegeorge in Santa Ana, CA
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 3:08 AM
And then they gave the vote to 18 year olds (youngs?) ! That's Ok if you are in the military.
mark in massachusetts
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 1:13 PM
Burt,I love the part about cobbling together the Frankenstein monster.Apparently when they put Joe Biden together they must have gotten the brain from Abbey someone. Oh yeah! Abbey Normal!
Howard Last in Wyoming
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 3:04 PM
Mark: me thinks it was Bozo's brain. No I take that back, Bozo was way more intelligent and he was not rude.
KN in Arkansas
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 8:25 PM
Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [to Igor] Now that brain that you gave me. Was it Hans Delbruck's? Igor: [pause, then] No. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: Ah! Very good. Would you mind telling me whose brain I DID put in? Igor: Then you won't be angry? Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: I will NOT be angry. Igor: Abby someone. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [pause, then] Abby someone. Abby who? Igor: Abby... Normal. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [pause, then] Abby Normal? Igor: I'm almost sure that was the name. Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: [chuckles, then] Are you saying that I put an abnormal brain into a BIDEN? [grabs Igor and starts throttling him] Dr. Frederick Frankenstein: Is that what you're telling me?
Steve in Florida
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 3:19 PM
Why who really pays taxes isn't right out front in any discussion of federal receipts is unbelievable in my mind.
WTD in AZ
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 3:56 PM
"roughly 50% of the voters are so dumb they'll generally believe the last lie they hear" That's what Obummer relies on, the whole Dumbocrat campaign is based on, and what puts us in so much jeopardy come November.
rippedchef in sc
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM
best bumper sticker ever-My 2 dogs eat out of their own bowls-why can't you? NOBAMA 2012
Steve in Georgia
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 5:47 PM
I hear your argument about having a financial stake in the game as a prerequisite to voting. I think a much more important prerequisite is competence and a minimum understanding of U.S. history, the U.S. Constitution and current events. I have long proposed a VOTER LICENSE for competent voters that requires a test. I realize there's a long history of special amendments on voting rights and Jim Crow laws, measures and counter-measures. My purpose has nothing to do with race or gender; the country's best interest is served in having competent citizens qualified with a minimum knowldge and awareness to vote.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 12:05 AM
Steve: I like my rules for voting. I'd like your rules in place for Supreme Court justices.
Burt
David Leonhardt in Texas
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 6:30 PM
Great piece Burt, you really nailed it.
Burt Prelutsky in North Hills, CA
Friday, October 19, 2012 at 12:06 AM
Thanks, David. Much appreciated.
Burt