Why America Is on Life Support

| March 30 2013
Burt Prelutsky

Anyone who watched Mitt and Ann Romney being interviewed on Chris Wallace’s Sunday morning show and didn’t regret that they aren’t ensconced in the White House, instead of the Obamas, has a very weak grasp on reality.  When even Bill O’Reilly, who was busy telling his viewers just a few short months ago that Barack Obama was a nice guy and didn’t have a socialist bone in his body, has finally seen the light, I say that any Republican who sat home last November because he didn’t think Romney was conservative enough or because he couldn’t bring himself to vote for a Mormon, should take himself out behind the woodshed and give himself a good tanning.

When the presidential debates were taking place and I warned Romney to keep his eyes open for incoming drones, I thought I was kidding.  Recent developments involving Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Attorney General Eric Holder, suggest otherwise.  Those of us who have been paying close attention know how much Obama hates being thwarted, so perhaps Romney was lucky he lost the election, after all.

Recently, I wondered why Democratic senators even bothered showing up for work when they allow Harry Reid to make every single decision for them.  Why don’t they just sign over their proxies to him so they can stay home with the wife and kids?  I had the same thought recently when I learned that the speaker of the Colorado legislature, a creep named Mark Ferrandino, refuses to allow his colleagues to vote on Jessica’s Law, which ensures long prison sentences for people convicted of raping a child.  In spite of Ferrandino’s insistence that Colorado already has tough sentencing guidelines for such crimes, Fox News managed to come up with a number of cases in which child rapists have gotten off with one and two year sentences.

Instead of protecting Colorado’s children, Ferrandino spends his time campaigning for same-sex marriages and the legalization of marijuana.

For my own part, I think Jessica’s Law is too lenient.  If there’s a crime that screams for capital punishment, I’d say this is it.  No insufferable defense attorney can ever argue that his client destroyed a child and a child’s family because he was driven to it by poverty or acted in self-defense.  It is an act of absolute evil, and any society that believes it is showing itself to be civilized by doling out anything less than a life sentence is sadly, even tragically, mistaken.

Speaking of which, have you ever noticed that liberals, who believe that abortions should be performed for any reason under the sun on anybody of any age, are forever insisting that whether it’s raising taxes to pay for foolishness like Operation Head Start or increasing outlandish salaries and pensions for teachers, it’s being done for the children?  Children, these hypocrites incessantly parrot, remain our most precious resource.  It would make as much sense for these arrogant bastards to argue that trees and flowers are proof of God’s existence, but the seeds from which they sprout are worthless trash.

Another group of people who mean everything to liberals are The Poor.  Because one of the surest ways to remain poor and voting the straight Democratic ticket in America is to remain uneducated, it figures that Democrats devote most of their waking hours to ensuring that poor people remain that way.  That’s why left-wingers are always prepared to ballyhoo all those lousy public schools with their inept teachers and administrators, who devote more time to demonstrating the proper use of condoms and suspending little kids for pointing their fingers at someone than they do to teaching reading, writing and math.  Liberals have no reason to motivate people to achieve and succeed, which might very well result in their becoming Republicans.  They would much rather encourage failure by coming up with new goodies to hand out to those individuals residing under that mysterious demarcation known as the poverty line.

What makes that line so illusionary is that most of the people allegedly lurking beneath it somehow manage to own color TVs, air conditioners, cell phones, automobiles, refrigerators, hand guns and fully-stocked liquor cabinets.

The fact is “poor” is merely a relative term.  Some of us are richer than others and some of us are not, just as some of us are taller or shorter than others.  Poor Americans would be middle class or even well-to-do in many, if not most, parts of the world.  To believe that through the redistribution of wealth, one can do away with poor people is such an idiotic notion that you would have to be a Marxist zombie to believe it.

You might as well say that you’re going to do away with dumb people through the redistribution of brains or eliminate short people through the redistribution of height.

Those, at least, could very well be noble enterprises.  But only a fool would confuse being poor with being deserving.  In this marvelous country, with all the advantages it offers to everyone, regardless of race, gender or national origin, poverty is far more often a sign of sloth and/or dumb choices involving sex, booze and drugs, than of any of the societal sins a liberal would blame it on.

I realize that the Bible claims that the Meek, which could be taken to mean poor people, shall inherit the earth.  But it doesn’t state how much earth.  I have always taken it to mean a plot measuring roughly six feet by three feet.

Unlike Obama, I don’t believe it means poor folks are entitled to everything their neighbors have.  Otherwise, as I see it, coveting would be the equivalent of jay-walking, and we’d only have nine Commandments.

0 comments