One is always hearing about safe zones being set aside for Syrians and collegiate liberals, but never even one for rational American patriots. Why is that? Why can’t we be protected from the constant barrage of insults and left-wing stupidity hurled our way? How is it that nobody ever gives us stuffed toys, modeling clay, warm blankets, sugar donuts and comfort dogs?

Even at Fox News, a network created in order to serve as a counterpoint to the nonsense spewed at the other TV networks and the various propaganda outlets posing as newspapers and magazines, there’s no getting away from the asinine opinions stated as gospel by the likes of Juan Williams, Geraldo Rivera, Lanny Davis, Kirsten Powers, Richard Fowler, Leslie Marshall and Alan Colmes. Their chatter is simplistic and their opinions so predictable that they resemble those little Russian matryoshka, or nesting dolls, that contain several smaller versions of themselves tucked inside one another.

I, for one, can easily picture one of those little circus cars pulling up at the curb outside Fox News and watching the whole gang of liberal clowns climbing out and spilling onto the pavement, creating a mash pit of mush-heads.

On top of everything else, liberals are extraordinarily rude. A friend and former editor of mine, the late Geoff Miller, once told me about showing up at a Hollywood Christmas party with his wife, Kathryn, in 2000. Most of the other guests had already assembled when the Millers arrived. Just as they were stepping into the den, one of the other guests, Gene Reynolds, a TV producer whose credits included “MASH” and “Lou Grant,” said: “Well, personally, I don’t know a single asshole who voted for George Bush.”

Without skipping a beat, Geoff said, “Well, you do now.”

I had my own experience with Reynolds when I attended a MASH reunion luncheon that the Writers Guild threw to honor the producers and writers of the highly-acclaimed series. I wound up at a table with the gentleman along with six of my fellow writers. At one point, Reynolds let us know that he was getting fed up with the L.A. Times. I told him I was surprised to hear that inasmuch as the paper prided itself on being the most liberal daily west of the NY Times.

Reynolds replied: “The problem with the paper is that it’s not liberal enough!”

When I suggested that he might wish to subscribe to Pravda, not only did he throw up his arms in mock outrage, but the writer who had been sitting between us not only shot me a look of utter contempt, but jumped up and moved to another table.

It’s not easy being a conservative — that is to say, a rational human being — in Hollywood.

Over the years, when I have compared liberals to such things as termites, rodents and rabid dogs, readers have chastised me for being unfair to termites, rodents and rabid dogs. In a way, that’s how I feel when people compare the Islamic terrorists to Nazis.

There’s no question that the Nazis were evil, bloodthirsty and utterly satanic in their actions and their goals. But in one way, they were superior to their Muslim cousins. For, as vile as they were, the Germans were recognizably human. To a lesser or greater degree, they appreciated wine, good food, great art and music, as well as beautiful women. In short, they wanted to run things, but they wanted to run them in the 20th century, whereas those now following in their bloody footprints wish to turn the clock and civilization all the way back to the eighth century.

That is why it is easier for some of us to identify with Martians than with Muslims.

Those who are convinced that because twice within a 16-year period, presidential candidates who received the most votes didn’t get the keys to the White House means that we’re on the verge of dispensing with the Electoral College have misread those events as clearly as they mis-predicted the outcome of the recent election.

The fact that neither Al Gore nor Hillary Clinton was allowed to ascend to the highest office in the land is the very reason that the Electoral College will retain its place in the Constitution long after Gore and Clinton take their rightful place as the final question on Jeopardy: Name two people who lost presidential elections in spite of garnering the most popular votes.

And don’t be too surprised if, say, ten years from now, the three finalists are stumped.

I draw my confidence from the fact that it requires 38 states to amend the Constitution. Now, really, does anyone think that states with fewer than, say, 15 electoral votes are ever going to agree to let CA with 55 electoral votes, FL (29), GA (16), IL (20), MI (16), NY (29), NC (15), OH (18), PA (20) and TX (38), decide every four years whom the next president is going to be?

Does anyone, even those pitiful specimen who tune in to Fox specifically to listen to Juan Williams, Geraldo Rivera and Kirsten Powers, believe that AK (3), AZ (11), CO (9), DE (3), HI (4), IA (6), ME (4), MT (3), NM (5), SD (3), VA (13), WY (3) or any of the other 28 states are going to say “Don’t worry about little old us. We don’t care if the presidential candidates ignore us entirely and just concentrate on winning over you guys. After all, why would any of us ever think to question the superior wisdom and judgment of California, Illinois and New York?”