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

Ever since I first heard Mark Levin calling for a Constitutional Convention, I thought it was one of the stupidest ideas that had come down the pike in years. It’s not that I had anything against a balanced budget. Actually, I’m all for it, but the notion that a Convention could pull off something that is far beyond the capacity of the U.S. Congress should be apparent to anyone who has considered it for more than two seconds.

After all, those who’d congregate at such a gathering would have to represent all 50 states. Passage of anything, including the minutes of the meeting, would require that three-quarters of the states, meaning 38, would have to agree, should be enough to convince even a child of the futility of the enterprise.

Keep in mind that unless Democrats played a representative role in the convention, it would carry no more weight than the decisions my friends and I arrive at during our occasional lunches at our favorite bar-be-cue joint.

When even as lousy a candidate like liar-Hillary Clinton can carry 19 states, what are the chances that 38 will agree to balance the budget or even whether to order red or white wine at dinner? Perhaps, some people took Barack liar-nObama seriously when he announced there were 57 states!

But it’s not just conservatives who believe in the magical powers of a Constitutional Convention to push their agenda. According to an article by Christian Gomez that appeared in the December issue of The New American, leftists are also looking to rewrite the Constitution in order to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in the Citizens United case and to radically revise the wording of the Second Amendment.

The Nation, a decades-old magazine known for its far left-wing editorial policy, has already begun running articles bearing titles such as “The U.S. Constitution Is Over Two Centuries Old and Showing Its Age.”

The only good news when it comes to the proposed Convention is that the crazies on the Left are even less likely to garner 38 votes than the naïve fools on the Right.

* It occurs to me that Harvey Weinstein must be an even better negotiator than Donald Trump. After all, when Satan barters for someone’s eternal soul, his standard offer, we’re told, is limited to seven years. But, Harvey somehow managed to carve out a deal that lasted for well over 30 years.

I can only assume that Satan saw Weinstein as a loss-leader, as it were, as a way to bait the likes of Matt Lauer, Al Franken, Bill O’Reilly, Charlie Rose, Roger Ailes, Kevin Spacey, Eric Bolling, Bill Cosby, Louis C.K. and liar-Bill Clinton, into signing on the dotted line.

* When I was young, I always thought it was silly when a school nurse would ask me how I thought my hearing or vision stacked up. Assuming I wasn’t constantly asking people to repeat themselves or bumping into walls, how could I tell? After all, I didn’t know how well other people saw or heard. I suppose if I had been colorblind and kept hearing people describing things as blue or red, I might have had a suspicion I was missing something.

It’s similar to the quirks in our brains. For instance, I have a difficult time grasping science and mechanics. On the other hand, I am rarely stumped or even slowed down by riddles.

Recently, while reading “The Steel Kiss,” a novel by Jeffrey Deaver, one of the characters is presented with a couple of riddles. In the first he is asked how it can be that two sons and two fathers go fishing, that each catches a fish, and yet, without first eating one of the fish, they return home with only three fish between them.

In the second, he is asked what one thing a person will find at both the beginning of eternity and at the end of time and space.

As with sight and sound, I don’t know how to measure others’ ability to solve riddles. I knew the answers to both immediately, but, unlike learned skills such as repairing a car’s engine or fixing a leaky pipe, which I don’t possess, I can’t take any credit for it. It just happens to be the way my mind operates. I will provide the answers to the riddles at the end of this article.

* One of the small mysteries of life I haven’t solved is why some women and many of the more effeminate homosexual men insist on clapping with their hands held vertically, with their fingers pointing skyward.

Is it something that comes naturally to them or is it a learned affectation, and, if the latter, what message is it meant to convey to those of us who clap normally?

* It warmed the cockles of my heart to see the New Year’s Eve revelers in Times Square freezing their own precious cockles. That’s because Manhattan could be regarded as the epicenter of the global warming hoax. If you were counting the true believers who subscribe to scum-Al Gore’s favorite fantasy, you would probably find more of them per-square mile there than anywhere else on earth. And if you tossed in the NY Times, it wouldn’t even be a contest.

Speaking of the new year, it’s shaping up to be a good one now that Donald Trump is on the pitcher's mound, and Barack liar-nObama is relegated to booing from the bleachers.

While we’re on the subject of the worst ex-president in American history, why is it that so many of the same people who are convinced that Russia attempted to interfere in America’s democratic process in 2016, were so strangely silent when it came to liar-nObama’s sending his operatives to Israel in 2015 in a failed attempt to help Isaac Herzog defeat Benjamin Netanyahu?

* Speaking of hypocrites, some writers can give politicians, even liberal ones, a run for their money when it comes to hypocrisy.

When I was young and impressionable, two of my favorite writers were William Saroyan and J.D. Salinger. They both struck me as honest, warm-spirited and approachable.

However, when in my 20s, I met Saroyan in the editorial office of a New York-based magazine for which we both had assignments, I, admittedly a fan, asked if I could interview him at his Fresno home when we both returned to California. He told me I would have to submit my questions in writing. I explained that the way I worked was to prepare a few basic questions and then to engage my subject in conversation, and see what developed. He refused to budge, as did I. So, no interview.

Therefore, I wasn’t surprised to read that when his ex-wife, Carol, who went on to marry Walter Matthau, was asked to sum up her former husband, reported: “Bill loved humanity, but he hated people.”

In the case of Salinger, he had the protagonist in his most famous work, “The Catcher in the Rye,” Holden Caulfield famously say: “What really knocks me out is a book that, when you’re all done reading it, you wish the author that wrote it was a terrific friend of yours and you could call him up on the phone whenever you felt like it.”

What a big phony, as young Caulfield would say. Not only did Salinger make sure that none of his legion of fans could call him, he became a recluse on his New England acreage and lived out the remainder of his life giving a world-class imitation of a hermit, not only making himself unavailable to fans and journalists, but threatening to sue anyone who wished to write about him or publish his letters.

Saroyan, Salinger and most of our politicians, aren’t the only people employing false fronts. From personal experience, I’ve found that some of the biggest frauds are to be found among the ranks of conservative talk show hosts, including a few who wear their religion on their sleeve.

* Although I don’t believe I’m a hypocrite, I do make occasional mistakes. Recently, I made one that was a real pip. In an article that included reasons I would probably choose some form of Christianity if I were to adopt a religion at this late date, I wrote that one of the reasons I admired Christians was that they “took to arms to protect those who were out to exterminate the world’s Jews 70-odd years ago.” It was obviously intended to read: “…took to arms to protect the world’s Jews from those who were out to exterminate them…”

I can only blame my failing eyesight and the tiny font on my new computer.

** Answers to the riddles. (1) The fishing party included a grandfather, his son and his grandson. In other words, two fathers, two sons, but only three people. (2) It is the letter “e,” which appears at the beginning of “eternity” and at the end of both “time” and “space.”

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

Views: 12

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The man does not know what the hell he is talking about. Artical 5 Of The Constitution is Convention Of States. Founded by the Founding Fathers Of America.


I suggest you contact Burt and express your thoughts to him



Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

Political Cartoons by Steve Breen


Breaking:  FBI Admits Comey Leaked Memos 
 That Were Classified   Material! 

The FBI turned over the Comey memos to Congress today after missing their deadline earlier in the week.

Congressional leaders threatened to impeach deep state leaders if they continued to stall on the memos.

Fired FBI Chief James Comey wrote about the memos in his book and leaked the documents to reporters last year. Congress has not yet had a chance to look at the memos — Until tonight.


Meaning Fired FBI Chief James Comey leaked CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS TO THE PRESS.

From the report:

From the DOJ to Congress:

Therefore, pursuant to your request, we are providing the requested memoranda in both the redacted and unredacted formats for your convenience. Consistent with your request, we are providing an unclassified version of the documents redacted to remove any classified information.

The DOJ wrote Congressional leaders this evening.

page 2

Hannity: Good news for Trump, crushing blows for the left

GOP Congressional Leaders Nunes, Gowdy And Goodlatte Release Statement On Comey Memos

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Ca.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) issued a statement on the memos later tonight.

The House chairmen note that the memos prove that fired Director Comey never felt obstructed or threatened from his relationship with the president.

And… former Director Comey leaked at least one of these memos for the stated purpose of spurring the appointment of Special Counsel.

The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence published the statement tonight:

Today House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Ca.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) issued the following statement:

“We have long argued former Director Comey’s self-styled memos should be in the public domain, subject to any classification redactions. These memos are significant for both what is in them and what is not.

Former Director Comey’s memos show the President made clear he wanted allegations of collusion, coordination, and conspiracy between his campaign and Russia fully investigated. The memos also made clear the ‘cloud’ President Trump wanted lifted was not the Russian interference in the 2016 election cloud, rather it was the salacious, unsubstantiated allegations related to personal conduct leveled in the dossier.

The memos also show former Director Comey never wrote that he felt obstructed or threatened. While former Director Comey went to great lengths to set dining room scenes, discuss height requirements, describe the multiple times he felt complimented, and myriad other extraneous facts, he never once mentioned the most relevant fact of all, which was whether he felt obstructed in his investigation.

The memos also make certain what has become increasingly clear of late: former Director Comey has at least two different standards in his interactions with others. He chose not to memorialize conversations with President Obama, Attorney General Lynch, Secretary Clinton, Andrew McCabe or others, but he immediately began to memorialize conversations with President Trump. It is significant former Director Comey made no effort to memorialize conversations with former Attorney General Lynch despite concerns apparently significant enough to warrant his unprecedented appropriation of the charging decision away from her and the Department of Justice in July of 2016.

These memos also lay bare the notion that former Director Comey is not motivated by animus. He was willing to work for someone he deemed morally unsuited for office, capable of lying, requiring of personal loyalty, worthy of impeachment, and sharing the traits of a mob boss. Former Director Comey was willing to overlook all of the aforementioned characteristics in order to keep his job. In his eyes, the real crime was his own firing.

The memos show Comey was blind to biases within the FBI and had terrible judgment with respect to his deputy Andrew McCabe. On multiple occasions he, in his own words, defended the character of McCabe after President Trump questioned McCabe.

Finally, former Director Comey leaked at least one of these memos for the stated purpose of spurring the appointment of Special Counsel, yet he took no steps to spur the appointment of Special Counsel when he had significant concerns about the objectivity of the Department of Justice under Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

As we have consistently said, rather than making a criminal case for obstruction or interference with an ongoing investigation, these memos would be Defense Exhibit A should such a charge be made.”


© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service