Down through the years, people have constantly reminded me that nature abhors a vacuum. But I always felt that was overstating the case. While nature may not be too crazy about vacuums, I doubt if it really abhors them. On the other hand, it’s evident that politicians hold logic, not to mention honesty, in utter contempt.

Consider, if you will, that after meeting with the president, Sen. Jon Kyl said that Barack Obama told him he wasn’t going to do anything to close the Mexican border because he planned to use the closure as leverage, thus forcing the GOP to go along with “comprehensive immigration reform,” which we all know is left-wing code for amnesty.

The president denied saying any such thing, painting the Arizona senator as a bald-faced liar.

Now, I wasn’t in the room with the two of them, but logic tells me that senators don’t make a habit of lying about the president, whereas Obama has spent the past year and a half telling one whopper after another. Also, if he didn’t say what Kyl says he said, what other reason would Obama have for not closing the border, and why would he sue the state of Arizona for simply attempting to do what the federal government hasn’t done? And why wouldn’t Obama and Holder lower the boom on so-called sanctuary cities, those sanctimonious municipalities that pride themselves on flouting federal law?

The ultimate expose on the radical nature of our 44th president: “The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communists, Socialists and Other Anti-American Extremists.” The best-seller as an audio book is also available.

Frankly, the only thing that surprises me about the entire episode is that Obama actually told Kyl the truth. I can only assume the moon was blue or hell had just frozen over.

Everyone knows that Obama is happy to see millions of Mexicans sneak into America, because eventually most of them, being poor, illiterate and obviously quite willing to break the law, will vote for Democrats.

When you attempt to apply logic to liberals, you wind up with a brain freeze, much like when you bite into a Popsicle. For instance, ask yourself why liberals will promote marijuana, but go to war over soft drinks. Why do they hate Jan Brewer, Michele Bachmann and Glenn Beck, but idolize Fidel Castro, Mao Zedong and Che Guevara?

Why do they hold Hugo Chavez in high esteem, but want to put Dick Cheney in the clink and Sarah Palin in the corner wearing a dunce cap?

Why did they carry on so when Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd died, when normal people knew that one of them was a drunk who should have wound up in jail, not the Senate, and the other one joined the Ku Klux Klan so he could win elections and then quit for that very same reason?

Why are liberals more hostile to tea-party members than they are to Islamic terrorists, and more frightened of secondhand smoke than they are of Iran nuking Tel Aviv?

Why were they so proud of themselves for giving fugitive from justice Roman Polanski an Oscar for a piece of cinematic claptrap like “The Pianist” and so triumphant when Switzerland, no doubt terrified that he’d transfer his fortune to the Bahamas, refused to extradite him for having drugged and raped a child?

But it’s not only liberals who treat logic as if it were a contagious disease. For instance, how is it that Newt Gingrich could go on TV and claim with a straight face that he was surprised to find that, as president, Obama has shown himself to be a radical leftist?

I realize that Gingrich didn’t run in 2008, but was he living in a cave during the entire campaign? It seemed pretty clear to me, along with about 58 million other American voters, that when Obama swore he’d have us out of Iraq and shut down Gitmo inside a year; when he declared war on the coal industry and announced that, under his watch, energy prices would soar; when he lamented that the problem with the U.S. Constitution and the civil-rights movement was that they didn’t deal with the redistribution of wealth; when he gave speeches demeaning America and religion; didn’t voice an objection when Michelle confessed that she’d never been proud of this country until her husband ran for president; and when he wrote in his book that the college students and professors he was attracted to were socialists, communists and other assorted airheads, Obama certainly made every effort to make things crystal clear. Had Newt Gingrich simply been lulled to sleep by the mantra of Hope and Change?

All I know for certain is that if I were going to pass myself off as a political pundit, I wouldn’t go around admitting that I was taken aback to discover that when Mr. Obama, friend of racists, radicals and terrorists, went off to Washington, it wasn’t in order to establish a boy’s camp on the banks of Willet Creek.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.