by Burt Prelutsky
If you want to Comment directly to Burt Prelutsky, please mention my name Rudy. 

Frankly, ever since Trump was elected and I’ve seen that “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) was a promise and not merely a slogan, I confess I have been gaga over MAGA. One of the many ways that Trump has been different from nearly all of his predecessors is that he has really tried to carry through on his campaign promises.

Fortunately, thanks to executive orders, keeping campaign promises is easier for a president than it usually is for senators, governors, mayors or House members – all of whom require the cooperation of state legislatures, city councils or 217 other people.

Speaking of politicians, whenever I hear one of them talk about the rigors of office, I’m reminded of tuxedo-clad Vegas crooners who inevitably loosen or remove their bowties midway through the act to let an audience composed of steelworkers, farmers and firemen, on vacation, grasp how difficult it is to sing an hour a night for a measly 50 grand-a-week.

⦿  Many years ago, Golda Meir said there would be peace in the Middle East when the Arabs loved their children more than they hated the Jews.

It occurs to me that there could be progress in Washington if the Democrats loved America more than they hated Republicans.

⦿  Whenever I hear a woman complain that men don’t want to date them because they’re too smart and that everyone knows that men can’t stand the challenge to their presumed intellectual superiority.

Because I’m married to an intelligent woman, it’s easy enough for me to see through this presumptuous hogwash. The women whom men don’t want to date are arrogant women who think they’re a lot brighter than they actually are, basing their claims on their ability to parrot the absurdities of numbskulls like liar-Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth dinky-Warren, Joy Behar, Ashley Judd, Whoopi Goldberg, Rachel Maddow, Cathy Areu, Jennifer Lawrence and Madonna.

⦿  I don’t really object to members of the media asking Ivonka Trump what she thinks of the women who accuse her father of sexual improprieties. She is a grown-up, after all, and a member of the administration. I only wish it had been equally commonplace for them to ask the same questions of Chelsea liar-Clinton, who is a grown-up and the head of the family’s billion-dollar money-laundering Foundation.

⦿  Because of all the recent attention paid to Rev. Billy Graham upon his death at 99, I was reminded how much I dislike the sound of preaching. I have no reason to doubt the decency of Rev. Graham, but I find that whenever I hear the cadence of someone like him or Martin Luther King, my ears feel as if they’re under assault. Perhaps that’s why I enjoy listening to Donald Trump so much. He speaks in public, even when delivering a speech, exactly the way I imagine he speaks in private.

No disrespect intended, but when public speakers adopt a different voice for the occasion, it strikes me as phony. If the words sincerely spoken aren’t enough to convince me, I figure there is either something wrong with the words or the speaker.

It’s not just in the field of religion, either, that phoniness abounds. Consider those scoundrels who crawl out from under rocks, people like John hanoi-Kerry, who lie about their wartime exploits or who even lie about having served or, worst case scenario, lie about having received the Medal of Honor; as if these pathetic specimens of the human race have the slightest concept of honor.

⦿  The politicians in Washington invariably carry on like headless chickens at the mere rumor of a government shutdown. But, recently the entire federal government shut down for an entire day and unless you were one of those on the federal payroll, I bet you didn’t even notice. It seems it was too windy in the nation’s capital to suit the politicians and bureaucrats, although the peons who work in banks, restaurants, shops and stores, all managed to make it to work.

In case you may have been wondering, the mighty wind wasn’t supplied by the members of Congress, but for once by Mother Nature.

Have no fear, though; everyone was paid with your tax dollars just as though they’d shown up on the job.

⦿   In a cartoon sent me by one of my enablers, a goofy-looking guy is bragging to a woman how concerned he is about women now that Trump is in the Oval Office. In the adjoining box were a series of things that equally concerned liberals have said about real life women: “Burn the NRA’s Dana Loesch at the stake,” “Make the First Lady great again – dump Melania,” “Kellyanne Conway is a blonde bimbo” and “Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a big fat idiot.”

⦿  Every time I hear the deranged Democrats calling President Trump a tyrant, a dictator or an authoritarian, I find myself wondering if they ever pause to ask themselves if they’d actually be allowed to voice such opinions if he were what they claim he is.

The really weird thing is that they usually have a soft spot in their hearts, not to mention their heads, when it comes to real-life villains like Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez and Che Guevara.

In fact, it’s not even much of a stretch to imagine they would have nicer things to say about Adolph Hitler than they do about the President. For openers, I can picture their pointing out that among Der Fuhrer’s considerable attributes were, that he was European, a vegetarian and a very snappy dresser.

⦿    In response to my questioning Christian dogma as a prerequisite to entering Heaven, Stephen Hanover of Doylestown, PA, let me know that Catholic nuns supervised his first six years of schooling. In what he believes was the first grade, when the class was informed that only baptized Catholics could make it through the Pearly Gates, he raised his little hand and asked about his next-door neighbor, a non-Catholic but a nice kid.

In response, he was banished to the cloak room.

I wrote back to say that I’d like to think that they reserve the penthouse suites in Heaven for those of us who use our God-given brains to think for ourselves and to ask legitimate questions. But, I rather expect we get banished to the cloak room.

⦿   Another reader let me know that the Second Amendment is an absolute right. I disagreed. I said that there are even limits on the First Amendment. After all, some religions used to call for human sacrifices. Heck, Islam still does.

Furthermore, the First Amendment doesn’t grant you the right to slander or libel someone or to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater that isn’t, in fact, on fire.

There is a right to vote, but that doesn’t mean the feds or the states can’t adjust the minimum voting age or require proof of citizenship.

Others are free to disagree, but I see nothing unconstitutional about requiring people to be 21 years old in order to purchase a rifle or a shotgun. That wouldn’t prevent a father from buying one and letting his son use it, so long as he’d taken the time and trouble to teach the young sprout to use it responsibly.

⦿  Jack Dorsey, the creator of the Twitter universe, has acknowledged that he feels terrible that people have taken advantage of the service to, among other offenses, bully people and spread misinformation. But, he admits that he hasn’t figured out a way to curtail these abuses and has asked the public and his technologically-adept colleagues for suggestions.

Perhaps, like Dr. Frankenstein, it’s incumbent on these technocrats to spend a little more time foreseeing the potential ramifications of unleashing their monsters on the world.
If you want to Comment directly to Burt Prelutsky, please mention my name Rudy. 

Views: 9

Reply to This


Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester


Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.


Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors. adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service