Recently, Laura Ingraham was a guest on Howard Kurtz’s Sunday Fox show, “Media Buzz.” She offered what I thought was an intelligent solution to a problem that has been annoying me for some time.
As we all know, Fox remains an oasis on TV, the only news network that isn’t in the tank for Obama and the liberals. However, in attempting to comply with Roger Ailes’ desire that Fox be “fair and balanced,” too many shows have fallen into the habit of teaming up a liberal and a conservative, and having them spend five or 10 raucous minutes shouting over each other and trading insults. We wind up with a lot of heat and absolutely no light.
Ingraham’s suggestion was to unload the liberals and, instead, invite conservatives on board and let them hash out their differences. She’s right. We already know the liberal positions because we read them in every newspaper and we hear them trumpeted every day over at the three major networks, along with CNN and MSNBC.
It would be far more enlightening to hear Republicans share their differences over immigration reform, same-sex marriages, gun laws, health care and foreign policy. What’s more, we would be spared ever again having to listen to the likes of Juan Williams, Geraldo Rivera, Bob Beckel and Alan Colmes flapping their gums.
In a related matter, if members of the media, people like Juan Williams and Rachel Maddow, are going to tell us how wonderful the Affordable Care Act is, I want them to announce whether they’ve signed up for the platinum, gold or silver plan. And if they haven’t, it only goes to show how much brass they have to constantly act as shills for Obamacare.
In 2012, pollster Nate Silver was the darling of the left because he not only predicted that Obama would be re-elected, but got every swing state right. Then, for an encore, he predicted which turkey would receive a presidential pardon. This year, simply because he said that the GOP had a 60 percent chance of taking back the Senate, they suddenly began questioning not only his honesty and qualifications, but his legitimacy. Talk about killing the messenger. If they take a mere prediction this hard, imagine how they’ll carry on when they actually lose the Senate and watch Harry Reid revert, Cinderella-like, from the second-most powerful politician in Washington to just another cranky mouse.
The pro-abortion females, composed for the most part of women who keep telling us how empowered they are, give the game away every time they pretend they can’t afford a few bucks a month for birth control pills, and need the rest of us to finance their sex lives.
Another annoying habit of theirs is to equate abortions with health care. How is it they inevitably fail to factor in the cost to the emotional and mental well-being of those who undergo the procedure? I don’t buy for a second that most women don’t pay a huge price for ending the life that is taking place inside their wombs.
Obviously, I am not referring to the likes of Sandra Fluke, Wendy Davis and the cold-blooded harridans who hang out at Planned Parenthood, and who seem to believe that murdering the defenseless is their birthright.
Some of those man-on-the-street interviews that have begun to permeate late-night television are just plain funny. But recently, a man took his camera and microphone to the campus of American University, which just happens to be located in Washington, D.C. He asked a cross section of students if they could identify just one current member of the U.S. Senate. Most could not.
He also asked how many senators there are. They didn’t know that, either, so it’s no surprise they also had no idea how many senators are allotted to each state. Their embarrassing guesses ranged from five to a dozen.
But all is not lost. Almost without exception, they knew that the hit song from the animated film “Frozen” was “Let It Go.”
Understand that unlike most of those segments that are shot on Hollywood Boulevard or in Times Square, where you wouldn’t stand out from the crowd if you were dressed up as a gorilla or were wearing two coke spoons as earrings, this is a place where the yearly tuition is $41,316.
I suppose some would say that parents who balked at forking over $165,264 for an education that apparently places a higher premium on music trivia than on civics are cheap and small-minded.
I, on the other hand, would say that parents who subsidize their children’s education only to discover they don’t know the first thing about their government are not cheap and not necessarily small-minded, but they are definitely suckers.
Media wishing to interview Burt Prelutsky, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.