Is Boxer really dumber than Pelosi?
May 14, 2010
Bert Prelutsky
wnd.com
In case you missed it, Speaker Pelosi recently urged Catholic priests to use their bully pulpits to promote immigration reform, which, translated into English, means an amnesty that would immediately entitle illegal aliens to vote for Democrats. Now, I'm not a Catholic, but it seems to me that someone who believes that abortions on demand are guaranteed under the Bill of Rights has a lot of gall telling priests what to say during their Sunday sermons.
When it comes to abortions, something that has confounded me for the longest time is why those in favor of it got to identify themselves as pro-choice. After all, the opposite of pro-life isn't pro-choice, it's pro-death.
When I was a youngster, a popular putdown was "If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?" But when people like Michael Moore, Michael Bloomberg and George Soros say so many really dumb things, it seems a more appropriate question would be, "If you're so rich, why aren't you smart?"
That brings us to Sen. Barbara Boxer. Recently, the L.A. Times, a newspaper so infatuated with the left that they'd endorse Hugo Chavez if he moved here and ran for public office, announced they wouldn't be backing Boxer in the primary because she lacked "intellectual firepower." For those of us who have listened to her blather on for the past 18 years, that description smacked of English understatement.
Read Chuck Norris' inspiring foreword to the beautiful new illustrated book "Don't Tread on US!" featuring the most pointed and poignant tea-party signs to date
Still, what does that say for all those other liberals who vote exactly the same way she does, and what does it say about the Times editorial staff that they have no problem endorsing any of them?
I wonder if, after she loses the election in November, Mrs. Boxer will continue to admonish Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh if they run into each other and he refers to her as "ma'am."
One can't help thinking that the L.A. Times, which has been on life support for the past decade, is, at this late date, attempting to con all of its former conservative subscribers into thinking it's seen the error of its knee-jerk liberal ways. Well, speaking for myself, it won't work. Fool me 4,893 times, shame on you; fool me 4,894 times, shame on me.
The MSM has been dying for years, and I, for one, can't wait to attend the official wake. Something that will hasten that happy day is the shameful way in which the mass media has covered the tea-party movement. If the media weren't so myopic, they would have realized that by labeling its members as thugs, Nazis, rubes and racists, it was slitting its own throat. The members of the media actually chuckled when Obama, Pelosi and their various stooges maintained that this authentic grass-roots movement was really composed of Astroturf, bought and paid for by the Republican Party.
The people who turned out for tea-party events were regular, decent, patriotic Americans who had been content to go to work, raise their kids, pay their taxes, love their country and occasionally go to war to defend it. The one thing they weren't prepared for was finding themselves, their friends and their neighbors vilified for their virtues. But once they woke up to the fact that their gatherings were either ignored completely or, when covered, had the turnout reported as a fraction of their actual numbers, they began to see the members of the MSM for the liars, bigots and insufferable snobs they are. What's more, when the tea-partiers saw their president, who ran as the post-racial unifier, demean them to a fawning media, they could see for themselves that those of us who had been calling the MSM a gang of Fifth Columnists had been speaking the God's honest truth.
The big surprise is that these days, Barbara Boxer agrees with us. |
