There isn’t a doubt in my mind that leftists are certifiably insane. I don’t mean that as an insult. At least not entirely. It’s just that after years of analyzing the subspecies, that is the only conclusion I can arrive at with any degree of certainty.

For instance, two people with equally good intentions can arrive at differing conclusions when it comes to achieving certain shared goals. But when one of those people intentionally lies, and for no apparent reason, gaining no obvious advantage, what other explanation can there be?

You should understand I am excluding politicians. After all, they will say or do just about anything if they have reason to believe it will help them get elected. But what excuse do liberal voters have for enabling politicians to get away with it?

For instance, when liberals defend sanctuary cities as being necessary in a humane society, how is it they don’t recognize that compassion has nothing to do with it? What their politicians want are millions of potential voters. But why should normal people want to encourage sneaks to invade America? Surely they know their tax dollars, along with everyone else’s, will be spent housing, sheltering and providing health care for these scofflaws. In addition, they will not only take jobs away from American citizens, but are likelier than others to commit crimes because they have relatively few marketable skills.

Why do liberals insist that women are paid less than men when they know that the law has prevented inequality in wages since the 1960s? The discrepancy between genders exists, but it’s because objective studies have shown that on average men work longer hours, are obviously going to take less time off for pregnancy and child care and, typically, take higher-risk jobs that happen to pay above average wages. It is not a coincidence that men are far likelier than women to have accidents or even to die on the job when they are generally the ones who work as cross-country truck drivers, deep-sea fishermen, coal miners and loggers. Seen a lot of female welders working on the 60th floor of a skyscraper under construction lately?

Liberals get away with the obvious lie by pretending that a kindergarten teacher or social worker is comparable to a chemist or a physicist, and then cry “Foul!” that the far better-educated male is paid more. The truth is that female chemists and physicists also earn more. But there are just a lot fewer of them.

Another convenient lie on the Left is that photo IDs are racist in spite of the fact that blacks never seem to have a problem providing the photos when they get on a plane, buy a six-pack, drive a car, collect welfare or enter any venue where Barack Obama is giving a speech.

Among other lies, there’s the one that insists that guns in the hands of law-abiding people are any more dangerous than screwdrivers, pliers and juicers, when everyone knows that the only time that guns are really dangerous is when they’re being used by loons and inner-city gangbangers, just as pressure cookers only become lethal when they fall into the hands of young Muslims.

Two other big fat liberal lies spring to mind. The first is that it makes no difference whether a child is raised by a mother and a father or by a same-sex couple, although liberals seem to favor the latter. The second lie involves trans-genders, whom liberals seem to regard as an endangered species. The notion that people should be entitled to use any bathroom facility they like, and that to deprive them of that license is the equivalent of Jim Crow laws, is so absurd it could only be seriously put forth by left-wing morons. Especially those with college degrees.

Finally, why do they perpetuate the lie that college campuses are the happy hunting grounds of sexual predators? What is the purpose of insisting, as feminist activists do, that 20-25 % of American coeds are doomed to be raped before they graduate? The proof that everyone knows this to be a totally bogus statistic is that liberal parents continue sending their daughters off to college.

On top of which, if college campuses were really that toxic, why would so many young women pursue advanced degrees? Doesn’t what passes for logic in liberal circles dictate that the more time one devotes to getting an education, the greater the likelihood that a young man will become a rapist and a young woman, a rapee?

Another annoying aspect to liberalism is that although they have nothing but contempt for capitalism and the motivation it inspires, they never even stop and consider what other reason there was for people much smarter than they are to have invented and then improved upon computers or any of the other technological gadgets they can’t live without. Do they really believe that Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg weren’t looking to make millions, even billions, of dollars?

For that matter, considering the contempt they have for money and those who have it, how is it that they’re always fawning over the super wealthy, people like the Clintons, rock stars and the Obamas? And why is it that their attention is so often focused on money — whether it’s in the form of welfare, free college tuition or a higher minimum wage?

Speaking of millionaires and billionaires, why is it that aging rock stars never follow the example of those old generals who simply fade away? Why are we still being lectured to by the likes of Bono, who demands that America throw open its doors to Islamic immigrants, even though I don’t see him inviting them to come live in his castle?

Then there’s Bruce Springsteen, the self-righteous punk who cancelled a concert in North Carolina simply because the state passed legislation denying trans-genders the right to decide for themselves which bathrooms to use. Did The Boss even consider the fact that in promoting a boycott, the people who suffer the most aren’t the legislators in Raleigh, but the working stiffs all over the state who lose jobs when the economy tanks?

It continues to confound me that so many conservatives continue to carry the water for Donald Trump. Some explain their infatuation by saying he expresses their anger. That makes even less sense than the Germans who elected Hitler. Thanks to the Versailles Treaty, they actually had a great deal more to be angry about.

When you see how upset Trump got just because the Cruz campaign outplayed him in Colorado, it should make you wonder just how well he would fare when it came to competing with Mexico, China and Russia.

As for the rules being stacked against him, Trump took every advantage of them when they worked to his advantage. In Florida, for instance, he only received 47% of the vote, but he got nearly all the delegates. I don’t recall his saying that was undemocratic. But, then, this is the same schnook who keeps threatening to go third party if he isn’t treated fairly. By this time, it’s pretty obvious that if he fails to get the nomination by acquiring the mandatory 1,237 delegates, that would, to his way of thinking, constitute being treated unfairly.

It makes as much sense to say that just because one baseball team leads another 5-4 going into the bottom of the ninth, they deserve the win even if the other team scores two in the bottom of the inning.

If, God forbid, Trump and his most zealous supporters were to desert the GOP, it would hand the White House, the Supreme Court and the nation, over to Hillary Clinton. Cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s country is an expression that comes to mind.

On the other side, things are even worse. As lousy as the Republican primary system is, at least we don’t allow several hundred political big wigs to overrule millions of voters, the way the Democrats do.

The most troubling aspect of the race between Clinton and Sanders isn’t merely that a bunch of congressmen, mayors and major donors, have a bigger say when it comes to nominating a candidate than all the voters in California, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Florida and Massachusetts, combined, but that the majority of those voters don’t care about Secretary Clinton’s role in Benghazi, her private server or the fact that when it comes to honesty and trustworthiness, she polls worse than Vladimir Putin.

Recently, I received word from a friend in Wyoming that California liberals, escaping those higher taxes they pretend to favor, were invading his state. I have received similar complaints from folks in Oregon, Washington, Texas and Arizona. The problem is that like those escaping from such pig sties as Mexico, Honduras and Syria, they tend to bring their values and politics with them.

If it were up to me, before a liberal could re-settle in another state, he would have to arrange for at least one or more conservatives to take his place. It would be similar to working out a trade in baseball where, if, say, the Yankees want a certain pitcher, they have to be willing to give up an outfielder, an infielder and, often, a player to be named later.

It is once again time for another Prelutsky poll. At this time, which of the three Republican contenders would you prefer to see at the top of the ticket? Please send your vote for Trump, Cruz or Kasich, to me at [email protected]. Just put one of those three names in the subject line, as I won’t be opening the email in search of comments or explanations. The sooner you vote, the sooner I can report the poll results.