Monday, April 30, 2012

Are Democrats the 4 “S” Party?

Democrats, for years, have been claiming that they are the the party for the “Average Joe” and the party for the minorities as compared to the “evil” Republicans. Is that a fair comparison, or have the Democrats been very successful in duping the people into thinking that they are that kind of compassionate party? Some, on the other hand, have claimed that instead of the virtues extolled by the Democrats of being that compassionate party, they are actually the 4 “S” party - the party of “Slavery”, “Secession”, “Segregation”, and “Socialism”. Is that a fair statement?

Historically, it was the Democrat Party who promoted slavery (prior to Abraham Lincoln). After the Civil War, it was the party of Lincoln (the Republicans), who passed the 13th Amendment, granting slaves freedom, the 14th Amendment, granting them citizenship, and the 15th Amendment, giving them the right to vote. It was Republicans who sent federal troops to the Democratic South to enforce the hard-won rights of freed slaves. During the Civil Rights demonstrations of the 1960's, it was the Republicans who supported those laws by over 80% in both the House and Senate. But, the Democrats constantly claim a monopoly as the party of civil rights.

With all those positive actions on the part of the Republicans, why do blacks and other minorities generally support the Democrats come election time? Have they been sold a bill of goods by the Democrats and a compliant media? You could say that the Democrat Party really is the party that wants to keep blacks and other minorities on the “plantation” by offering them “goodies” from the public treasury, thereby making them dependent on the Democrats to continue getting this largesse from the government. Instead of helping the minorities, those policies have created and ever expanding underclass who are totally dependent on the government for their livelihood. Some for generations.

One of the principles fostered by the Democrats and by President Obama, is the principle of “sharing the wealth”. Taking from the “makers” and giving to the “takers” - that's right out of the father of Socialism, Karl Marx's playbook. In fact, over 70 Democrats in the House and Senate are members of the Democratic Socialists of America, including most all of the Congressional Black Caucus. From health care to “Cap and Trade”, the policies of Obama and the Democrats are mirrored after the countries of the European Union, who are mostly socialist oriented and as of today, many are economic basket cases including Greece, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Are those the policies that the voters bought in 2008 under the slogan of “Hope and Change”? Our extended recession, since Obama took office, is a direct result of those socialist policies promoted by the Democrats and Obama. They have constantly “demonized” our companies (the job creators), and have been hostile to them by threatening them with their “class warfare” themes and rhetoric, including the threat of increasing taxes on the producers of our economic engine. The explosion of the government, in employment and regulations, have been the result. One of the sad signs of our policies is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.

We need real “hope and change” not just the empty rhetoric of an incompetent narcissist who seems to not have the best interests of America at heart. So, I declare that the Democrats are the party that could and should be called the 4 “S” party.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, April 26, 2012

MORT’s Meanderings

Fools in high places.

My only qualification for inclusion in that fast-disappearing segment of our population known as, ‘The Greatest Generation’, is the number of rings in my tree trunk. I did nothing brave or outstanding while serving in uniform but, like all the others, I went where I was sent and did what I was ordered to do. If that had meant marching into harm’s way, I most certainly would have done it without hesitation.

I think I can speak for 99.99% of the men and women who served then and those who serve now in the U.S. Military, when I say that after enduring basic training, followed by specialized training in one’s MO – and becoming acutely aware of the mission of our armed forces in this troubled world - our military men and women have no illusions about the enemies we face.

Why is it then, I ask myself, that so many of our civilian policy-makers in positions of leadership in the Federal Government are so stupid, so stubborn, such wimps, such cowards and frankly, such fatuous fools in high places? Is this really the best we can do?

My gripe today, is specifically focused on those people who tremble in their boots because some of our soldiers have displayed the bad taste to pose for unseemly photos – or cavort in front of video cameras as they do what soldiers have done for centuries - - engage in inappropriate ribaldry and make obscene gestures to poke fun at and hurl insult to their enemies.

My purpose is not to condone or excuse such behavior. Rather, my purpose is to earnestly endeavor to educate those in policy-making positions – especially those who have never worn the uniform or had to face enemy fire, in the exquisite science of facing reality.

For Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to express the currently popular but entirely false canard that such inappropriate behavior by our troops, will cause the blood-thirsty heathens of radical Hamas or the Taliban or the lunatic followers of Sharia Islam to become even more maniacal toward any unfortunate Americans they might capture – is utterly stupid. The enemies we are facing in the Middle East have been at their despicable work since the seventh century and have honed their hatred to white hot.

No actions on the part of our military can cause these enemies to be any more or any less cruel and vicious than they already are. They are brought up from the womb, to hate and make violence against all whom they consider to be infidels or who are somehow deemed in their warped psyches, to be unfit or unworthy.

To add insult to the colossal stupidity and impracticality of this administration’s Rules of Engagement, this inexperienced, inept and horrendously arrogant President and his enablers are engaged in hobbling our military - by purposely abandoning sound military practices in favor of pandering to the enemy. They do this by imposing nonsensical restrictions on our armed forces through the use of Obama’s tool of choice - his ‘failed-every-time-it-has-been-tried’ socialistic ideology.

Barack Obama is a coward. All his life, he has hated our traditional allies, inheriting this hatred from his father who despised them as ‘colonists’. And now as President, he is in a position to sever relations with those same allies – and that is exactly what he has done. Further to the detriment of our nation’s security, he has asserted the Muslim upbringing that is at his core by cozying-up to the Middle-East Arabs and Muslims and more recently, by recognizing and welcoming to the White House, the freedom-hating Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt. Obama hates who we are as Americans. He believes as do Muslims everywhere, that the freedoms we enjoy have corrupted us as a people. However weird that belief is, it is his guiding star and if re-elected to the presidency, it will assuredly lead to our demise as the last bastion of freedom on this troubled globe.

Since assuming the presidency, he has steadily separated us from our Democratic allies and has subordinated us to despotic regimes whose sole objective it is to establish Shariah-compliant Islam as the dominant way of life throughout the world.

This President has foisted his brand of moral cowardice onto compliant civilian appointees at the State Department and at the Department of Defense. Sad to say, he has imposed this pathetic character trait onto some generals and admirals at the highest level of command. These men have sworn an oath of allegiance to follow orders from their Commander-in-Chief. In my view, this President has betrayed our trust by demanding treason from both our civilian and our military leaders.

Is there anyone among us who is still so naïve as to believe that such pandering to the enemies we face in the radical, blood-thirsty hordes of Islam – will deter them from pursuance of their violence against our soldiers if given the opportunity? Isn’t it obvious to all who will engage in reality, that it doesn’t matter to these lunatics what we do? They will continue their violence regardless of how we chastise and prosecute our own service men and women for perceived ‘offenses’ against the enemy. And, when we do this to ‘our best and finest’, we destroy the morale of ‘our best and finest’. Is that really how to support our all-voluntary armed forces? This plays directly into the hands of our enemies; this is the path being followed by President Barack Hussein Obama.

Now, do you know what I meant by the title on this piece, “Fools in high places”? Got it, folks? Four more years of this lunacy? I don’t think so.

Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2012
Bookmark and Share


Monday, April 23, 2012

President Obama's Radical Agenda

Those who wonder about President Obama’s agenda should he win a second term, have gotten tips from his recent behavior; he will do all he can to discredit The Supreme Court, and will use Federal agencies to enact his policies so as to circumvent his legislative failures in congress. The model for Obama 2.0 is FDR, who attacked the structure and composition of his Court, and created an alphabet soup of administrative agencies that diminished congress and created regulations and a burdensome bureaucracy which still engorge Washington D.C. today.

Last year, at his State of The Union address, The President, in a classless fit, lashed out at The Justices in attendance for their participation in the “Citizens United” case which extended free speech to corporate campaign contributions, a decision he opposed because it challenged the primacy of his union backers. This very public rebuke of The Court was both a reprimand and a warning. Last week Mr. Obama again warned the court to not overextend their “unelected” authority by overthrowing “Obamacare”, his legislative crown jewel.

The best example of Obama’s administrative usurpations was his use of The EPA to enact through fiat his “cap and trade” bill which was soundly defeated in congress. It is easy to project further Obama dictates not enacted by congress in a second term, the cure for which would entail law suits that would wend their way to The Supreme Court costing us years of gridlock, unwanted legislative implementations and great expense to unwind, a replay of the years when several of FDR’s new agencies were unwound.

As a candidate in 2008 then-Senator Obama promised, if elected, to fundamentally change America. He is doing that by circumventing congress and trying to radicalize The Supreme Court, a legacy that would deconstruct the balance between our 3 legs of government in negative ways most cannot conceive. The remarkable arrogance in Obama’s cause should sound warnings to alert citizens that the America he sees is not the America The Founders promoted. Too few foresaw in 2008 that for a President Obama creating Moscow on The Potomac was his unspoken dream.

Conservative commentary by Richard Klitzberg
Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

MORT’s Meanderings

Inheritance ‘101’.

Well, here we are in April, looking toward the Presidential election in November 2012.

At this juncture, there is a bit of certainty and a whole lot of uncertainty. First, it is a fairly safe bet that the two candidates are set. Romney on the Republican side; Obama on the Dem side.

Oh, and there is one other certainty - - are you ready for this…?

Whichever of these two men becomes the President of the United States of America, he will inherit the most horrendous national debt ever in the history of this nation, along with the absolute worst economy we’ve known since this nation’s founding.

That is the unprecedented, undeniable heritage of Obama’s first and hopefully, his only term as president.

With all his caterwauling about the mess he inherited from his predecessor, George W. Bush, Obama has exponentially increased our national debt to an unbelievably dangerous level with his outrageously reckless spending and lunatic economic and social-engineering. He has crippled our free-enterprise system with his egregious, tyrannical regulatory policies that reach far beyond anything ever imagined. That is, until the electrifying culture shock we’ve experienced since his illegal or at the very least in my assessment, questionably legal occupation of the Oval Office.

And so, while Obama can claim the dubious distinction of having proven beyond question that he is the most articulate liar ever to have held this nation spellbound, he is also, the worst disaster ever to hold this nation’s highest office. He eclipses Carter and Clinton by a quantum leap.

What the next president will inherit is a nation that has lost its position of leadership in the world, in every sense of the word – and its momentum in terms of the steady progress in science and industry since the Founding Fathers set us on the right path by birthing this nation with the Constitution.

Plus, the next president will inherit a nation that has been purposely divided into opposing forces by a constant barrage of racist and class-warfare claptrap from this current president. So much so, that there is a cloud of pessimism and gloom looming over our population – a pall of hopelessness at the changes that have been foisted upon us resulting from the ‘middle-of-the-night’ legislating by Obama and his Democrat enablers in the Congress. The next president will face a nation that is dispirited, depressed and is in an extremely precarious state. I can understand why Obama is doing a full-court press to keep his ill-gotten perks but, wonder why in hell Romney would want the job? Whatever his reasons, I’ll do my best to see that he gets the job.

Now, I am not known for withholding my strongly-held opinions about Obama. And, though I do not normally employ the tactic of ‘name-calling’ (not much), here is my concluding statement:

Barack Hussein Obama, will have the dubious distinction of being the former president who will have passed on a disastrous legacy that is directly attributable to his inept handling of this nation’s affairs and his failed Marxist policies. The synthesis of BHO has been his purposeful alienation of our traditional allies and his blatantly submissive embracing of our most dangerous enemies – the tyrannical despots and radical Islamist regimes around the globe.

This man who calls himself a Christian, while admitting to his mixed family heritage and his upbringing and education as a Muslim, is a hypocrite of the first order. He is a committed anti-Christian, anti-Semite, anti-American, anti-Constitution, anti-business, anti-free enterprise, anti-American exceptionalism, anti-Military, anti-American history and anti-Founding Fathers. He is anti-anything and everything that is in our tradition of personal freedoms and the American spirit that has made us what we are as a nation. That is what he meant by, ‘fundamentally changing our nation’.

No matter the outcome of the upcoming election, it is certain that Obama will continue to blame George Bush for “leaving us in such a mess” – and begin anew, a non-stop diatribe of blasphemy, lies, deceit, blame and finger-pointing toward Republicans. And, if Mitt Romney is elected, Obama will aim 99.5% of his vitriol at the new occupant of the Oval Office. That’s who Obama is; that’s what he does.

One thing that will never change is the hopelessness, racism and divisiveness that spews forth from the smooth-talking Muslim miscreant, Barack Hussein Obama.

Remember folks,


Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2012

Bookmark and Share

Monday, April 16, 2012

Can You Spend Your Way to Prosperity?

If you are a prudent conscientious citizen, you try to live within your means so that you don't get into financial trouble and all the extra problems that come with that happening. So if individuals try to be frugal and fiscally conservative, why can't the government do the same?

One answer might be is that the bureaucrats in the government, who allocate and spend our tax money, are not spending their own money, so who cares? People are most always more capable of being careful to get the “most bang for their buck” when it is their money and not someone else's money.

The Obama administration realizes that Obama cannot be re-elected by pointing out the successes of his administration, so he will have to generate votes some other way which might include getting as many people on the “dole” as possible so that they might, in turn, cast their vote for Obama and the Democrats to keep their government “freebies” coming in. Today, one in five Americans - 67 million of us, all told - rely on federal aid in obtaining housing, food, income, health care, and education. Dependency-related programs now cost $2.5 trillion annually which comes to roughly 70% of the federal budget. It has exploded over the past three years of the Obama administration, in which Obama has consciously decided to make government bigger and more people dependent on it. It is a subtle form of “bribery”.

Obama has done this by expanding pre-existing entitlement programs. We have expanded Medicare to cover prescription drugs (which was passed during the Bush administration), not just physician and hospital expenses. Medicaid, which was intended to provide health care for the poor, is now expanded to cover middle-class and even more affluent children. Disability insurance expands to cover more and more conditions, including even “classroom stress” for teachers. The expansion of these programs were not made because of the downturn of the business cycle, these decisions were made with a political consideration in mind, and it has accelerated during bad economic times which makes dependency grow even faster.

You can see that wherever Obama goes on the “stump”, he panders to his audience by tossing out “goodies” for the naïve flock of listeners. In fact, people think he is the “Messiah” passing out the largesse from his own stash of cash, without realizing that it is the taxpayers who are really footing the bill, not Obama.

Be prepared to hear Obama promise to open up his government “candy store” to attract voters in hopes that they will want to keep their “gifts” from the U.S. Treasury and to keep their “angel” in the White House, so the cash spigot remains open for at least four more years.

So the answer is NO. We can't spend our way to prosperity, but we can spend our way into poverty by becoming another Greece, Spain or Italy.

Vote NOBAMA IN 2012.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, April 12, 2012

MORT’s Meanderings

Those unelected people?

In his latest outrageous attack on one of the three ‘equal’ branches of the Federal Government, the Supreme Court, Obama referred to the nine Justices as ‘those unelected people’.

Now, I ask you - - ‘Where in the pluperfect hell does this Chicago street thug get off, characterizing these nine Supreme Court Justices, two of whom he nominated as, ‘those unelected people’? Has any president ever been so derogatory about the sitting Justices on the Supreme Court bench? Even FDR, who was frustrated by the Court and tried unsuccessfully to pack it with more of his enabling cronies, was never so disrespectful to the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government.

I wonder how Obama, the alleged Constitution ‘professor’, would characterize those 32 (latest count) Obama-appointed Czars who are unelected and therefore, unaccountable to either the Congress or the American people? Would he refer to them as ‘those unelected people’? Or, are they somehow – different?

Then, there’s the Chairman of the Federal Reserve – he is an appointed ‘official’. Would he be one of ‘those unelected people’ also? And, how about sweety-cakes Janet Napolitano - - is she another of ‘those unelected people’? And, the ever-lovin’ Attorney General Eric Holder – does he qualify as one of ‘those unelected people’?

Does all this hypocrisy make you as sick to your stomach as it makes me?

If the Street-Thug-in-Chief blatantly shows this lack of respect for the other two branches of the Federal Government – before he is re-elected (throw-up), one can just imagine how much farther he will go when all restraints are off. And, he feels free to do and say and implement whatever nefarious whims he has been holding behind his back.

It makes my skin crawl to think that there is a possibility that there are enough people in this country – legal and illegal – who could vote this raging narcissist in for another term. That would of course, sound the death knell for the freedoms and way of life that we’ve known in the United States of America, since its founding in 1776.

Four more years? I don’t think so. If Obama wins; we lose!

Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2012

Bookmark and Share

Monday, April 9, 2012

Dinesh D'Souza - Obama & 2016

Dinesh D'Souza is author of many New York Times best sellers. He has an extremely important movie coming this summer - "Obama & 2016".

The movie is from Gerald R. Molen, producer of Academy Award Winning Schindler's List. It explains in plain language who Barack Hussein Obama really is, what he stands for, and the dangers of him being reelected for another four years.

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, April 5, 2012

Don't Move the Rock, There are Snakes Under It

The liberal machine is at work trying to make Republicans
and Conservatives appear heartless and out of the loop.
The Fluke fiasco which her backers claim wrongfully, people
with moral fiber hate women. Also, because they are against the
mandate for another free entitlement.

The argument has nothing to do with women's health or rights
and everything to do with separation of church from state.
As long as it's a liberal cause, it's OK with the ACLU!

In the few cases where health might be involved, contraception
products are readily available, free or at minimal cost.
It was disgusting to witness our President phone his Obamacare
shill, immediately after her put up appearance before Congress,
to praise this over sexed law student, Sandra Fluke for her
testimony and adding, how proud he'd be if his own daughters
emulated her.

The latest one to join this chorus of misguided feminists is
Hillary Clinton, appearing very matronly these days, with
the austere lib look. Real women avoid being associated with
feminist causes that reek with hypocrisies.

The so called liberated woman professes, it's her body and she
knows best how to care for it! Have you been in a Walmart lately?

I rest my case!

Conservative Commentary by George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Monday, April 2, 2012

Are We Losing the Culture War?

Over the past few years we've seen a concerted effort to change our society by the chipping away at the time-honored traditions that we have been handed down since the beginning of our republic.

Is this change, that is occurring now, for the good or for the bad? To some, our society needs change to keep abreast of the changing views and times, while to others, it is a step back by worsening our manner of dealing with each other. To me, it seems that the “change” people are winning the battle, but, in the end, it is our society that will forever lose the war.

This change is not happening overnight, but it is a process of little by little, drip by drip, a change here and a change there, and before we know it, our country will have been “changed” without us even being aware of it and whether or not we like the change or not, but we will be stuck with it.

Under attack by the “change” people are staples like our Constitution, traditional marriage, drug use, sexual orientation in the military, the intrusion of the government into every aspect of our lives, the dialogue between competing differing political factions which has become very strident. These attacks seem to be emanating mostly from the liberal-left part of the political landscape. This also seems to correspond with the pronouncement by Obama, during the campaign of 2008, that he was going to bring about the “total transformation of America” whether we wanted it or not, because he and his erstwhile Marxist/Socialist friends knew that's what's best for the country.

As the late former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan once coined the phrase “defining deviancy down”, which signified that the public is being cajoled into tolerating the intolerable. Some of our public officials are openly antagonistic toward religions (ex. the recent flap over government mandates for contraception and abortion), some are against our enforcement of our immigration laws, some want to legalize drugs, and some encourage public disruptions like the “Occupy Wall Street” mobs. In addition, there is a big push by liberal activist groups to promote the homosexual lifestyle in general, and same sex marriage in particular.

When President Obama was inaugurated, he said he was going to be a “uniter” not a “divider”, but in the past 3 years we, as a nation, have become more polarized on many of the “hot button” issues of our time. Instead of calming the storm of disagreement, he and his underlings have made the atmosphere more hostile and divisive by stoking the flames of “class warfare” by demonizing the so-called “rich”. This will be the major theme of the Obama re-election campaign since he will not be able to champion his record of achievement because there isn't any, so the policy of the “politics of personal destruction” will be stirring the pot of personal turmoil.

So yes, if Obama gets re-elected in November, the war on our culture will be speeded up as he won't have to worry about being re-elected, and he will then be able to continue willy-nilly in his transforming our country in ways that most of us will not approve of.

That's why this election is so important to the survival of our culture and of our country. Now, go out and do the right thing. NOBAMA in 2012.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share