Thursday, February 27, 2014

Equality of Outcome

To listen to Obama and the Democrats, you’d think that people in our country are being deprived of their chance of success in life by the people who have attained success….the wealthy.

In our Declaration of Independence it is stated, “…..that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, it did not say that there is a “guarantee” of happiness, only the opportunity to pursue happiness. Obama and the Democrats seem to think that that is not enough, they feel that all people should have the same status in life regardless of whether they have earned that status or not.

That’s what “income redistribution” is all about. The Marxist/Socialist mindset of Obama and the Democrats, seem to think that people who achieve success and have accumulated monetary rewards for their efforts, should have to redistribute those “excessive” monetary rewards to the less fortunate by forcing them (a/k/a a form of stealing) to pay more in taxes and fees so it can be distributed to the poorer folks. Notwithstanding, that many wealthy people donate huge sums of money, on their own, to charities without government coercion.

No matter what kind of society you or I live in, there will always be people who are well-off and some who will not be so well-off. In our Capitalistic, free enterprise society, the opportunity is there for everyone, some succeed and some don’t, but is that any reason to punish success by demonizing the successful and overly taxing them to try to “level the playing field”? In the words of our great former President, Abraham Lincoln, who said, “You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich”, are words that sort of contradict the philosophy of Obama and the Democrats.

The Democrats have demonized, for instance, the “Koch Brothers”, because they are wealthy (billionaires) and contribute many dollars to Republicans and Conservative groups and causes, like that is somehow un-American. The Koch Brothers are the owners of the 2nd largest privately held company (Koch Industries) in the United States. They have over 67,000 employees who rely on the Koch’s for their livelihood. These “evil” rich billionaires, besides their political donations, have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to schools, hospitals and charities such as (to name a few) George Mason Univ., Univ. of Chicago, Free Enterprise Institute, Salvation Army, the Smithsonian Institution, Univ. of Kansas, Young Americans for Freedom etc, etc. Should they be looked upon as un-American because they are wealthy and politically connected to Republicans and Conservatives?

Look at what Obama and Democrats do. They rail against the wealthy and Wall Street, and then go out to fund raise with liberal fat cats (millionaires and billionaires) who pay $30,000 to $40,000 a dinner plate. I guess in their minds, those rich millionaires and billionaires are O.K., but the other rich people who support their opponents are “evil” and should be audited by the I.R.S. (that has actually happened). You could honestly say that Obama and the Democrats are unrepentant hypocrites.

Yes, equality of outcome (and income) will never be attained in any society, but equality of access and opportunity will always be there for those who can take advantage of the opportunities made available to them by our system of free enterprise. The Marxist/Socialist systems cannot compete with Capitalism and free enterprise because they take away the incentive to be all that you can be. When there is no incentive to achieve success and monetary rewards, there is no progress. And, “income redistribution”, as orchestrated by the government and Obama and the Democrats, is not the answer.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, February 23, 2014

MORT's meanderings

Damned Fools R us.
At the precise moment a majority of myopic voters elected Blarrack Hussein Obama as the President of the United States, it signaled the beginning-of-the-end for the Liberty and individual freedoms of every citizen living in this nation.
The Democrat Progressives who had been salivating to resuscitate the many-times failed ideologies of Socialism since Woodrow Wilson was a pup, enabled by the clueless & careless Something-for-Nothing crowd - had finally elected their first black president. Well, not exactly black but, close enough for Government work.  
Blarrack Hussein Obama, a one-term U.S. Senator from the streets of Corruption City (Chicago) was woefully inexperienced , without any practical experience other than street thuggery, bereft of any meaningful accomplishment as either a State or U.S. Senator, he was embarrassingly unqualified to serve in public office.  But, he was a nice-looking, coffee-colored chap, born outside the USA of a white American mother and a black Kenyan father.  So, while he had an undistinguished record, he looked good, had an engaging smile and he spoke well.
Obama was raised in the Muslim  world and thoroughly indoctrinated as a student of Islam.  But so what?  In the minds of the clueless & careless, he had all the necessary  qualifications to be the first 'Black President' and that's what mattered.  And, he had promised, 'Hope & Change'. While he never bothered to explain what that would mean, his enablers rightly presumed that it meant he would bring about some kind of long-awaited retribution for all the insults and wrongs done to black people in this country.
Finally, payback for African Americans - going back to the days when African Muslims sold blacks to slave traders who crammed them into sailing ships, delivered them to the shores of America and into the hands of slave traders in our Southern states.  Payback at last!  Payback at last!  Payback at last!
Well, it didn't exactly work out that way for the rest of America. What we damned fools had elected, was a despotic, ego-centric, classic Narcissist with delusions of grandeur, committed to bringing this nation to its knees and reconstituting it to a system of anarchy that ignores the intent of the nation's Founders.  And also, totally ignores the Constitution those Founders provided us as a guide for a civilized people, to live in a free society.    Thanks, myopic voters.  Can you see him now?
MORT KUFF © 2-22-2014

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Cart Before the Horse

Putting the cart before the horse may avoid rolling over the manure, but the crap is still in the
street waiting to be picked up.

President Obama chose to make the Affordable Care act his signature legacy and tackle it first,
ignoring the economy that effects us all.

Working to improve the financial structure of the individual by passing legislation, to make
job creation for small business and incentives for big business, to keep jobs here would have
presented a much different picture on the outlook to access health security acquisition.

We wouldn't be talking about 30 million uninsured. Instead of working to solve that problem,
he and his advisers has blown it to be problematic for every American. Twenty five hundred
pages of Obamacare gobble-d-goop could have been reduced to a couple of dozen.

Barack Obama's approach is a perfect example of mismanagement. To improve some elements
in health care insurance and put some providers to task has created vast, unnecessary
collateral damage to millions of Americans, in order to placate the liberal voter base.

Obamacare is turning out to be the president's Edsel!

Conservative article from George Giftos


The "Jane Fonda Obama" Video

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, February 16, 2014

You Can’t Polish Horse Manure - Part 2

To listen to some of our “esteemed” politicians when they discuss the problems facing us as a nation, you’d think we are all stupid and uninformed (although, in my opinion, many who voted to re-elect Obama might fall into that category of being stupid and uninformed). Many voted for him because of the color of his skin, not the content of his character.

What is amazing is that many politicians will take a set of facts that are not favorable to their views or to their candidate, and try to “spin” the negative (unflattering) facts into trying to have us believe that what we know, is patently B.S. The single biggest practitioner of this attempt at obfuscation and untruthfulness is our own leader, Barack Hussein Obama.

Being the consummate politician that he is, he never stops attempting to “polish horse manure”, and he can do it with a straight face over and over again. He is shameless besides being arrogant and condescending.

Take his “signature act”, Obamacare (a/k/a The Affordable Care Act). He knew what was in this health care monstrosity back in the summer of 2010. He knew that the “grandfather clause” of people being able to keep their health care insurance, would be null and void when sign ups were to begin in Oct. 2013, if their insurance wording changed in any respect from July, 2010 forward to the sign-up date. But for the past 3 years, Obama kept exclaiming that, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan, PERIOD“. The same with your doctor, you can keep your doctor, PERIOD. Even up to a week before the disastrous rollout of Obamacare, he was saying that “lie” over and over again.

As of this date, approx. 6 million individual policyholders have been notified that their policies do not meet the Obamacare criteria so their policies are no longer going to be in effect in 2014. So no matter what Obama says or does, he cannot “polish horse manure”, no matter how hard he tries. Think of all the employees who are insured by companies, companies who got a year’s waiver till the end of 2014, who will find that their companies health care policies don’t meet the Obamacare criteria and therefore will be dropped and will have to go to the Obamacare insurance exchanges to purchase their health care policies. They’ll find that their premiums will be higher and their deductibles will rise precipitously, making it a double whammy for the average employee. In many cases, employers will drop health care coverage altogether. This is why Obamacare is turning out to be a monumental disaster.

In addition, Obama has been proclaiming that he is responsible for all this tremendous “economic growth” we have experienced during his 5 years in office. The EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES! It doesn’t  matter that we have a stagnant, pathetically little growth economy, that is averaging around 2% per year (during Reagan’s 2nd term, our GDP was averaging between 5% and 6% growth). It’s like he can’t (or won’t) see the forest for the trees. He projects the idea that if he says it, it must be true. That’s the persona of a narcissist, not a leader who is our President. He thinks he is a legend in his own mind.

So, no matter what he says or does, Obama cannot “polish horse manure” no matter how hard he tries, and you can take that to the bank.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Two Americas

In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM 1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income inequality speech":

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.

The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.

The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.

It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts.

Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don’t. That’s the divide in America.

It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility.

It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.

It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s truth, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.

That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat.

That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America.

It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

Because, by and large, income variation in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.

You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college - and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.

He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.

There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.

Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.

Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, February 9, 2014

MORT's meanderings

Rabbi Bruce Warshal Publisher emeritus of the Florida Jewish Journal,    
will leave an indelible stain of arrogance.

When Rabbi Warshal bites the dust as sooner or later, we all must, he will leave a tiny but welcome void in the pages of South Florida Jewish journalism.  Warshal, an inveterate,  dabbling dilettante  with delusions of editorial grandeur, who hilariously anointed himself with the sobriquet, 'Emeritus', has long since, passed  way beyond his 'use-by' date.  

In a spin worthy of (the 'articulate but clean, according to VP Joe Biden) President Barack Hussein Obama,  Warshal  stated that the Jewish Journal - the nation's largest Jewish weekly - does not take sides and said his opinions on Sharon were his own.  That statement, coming from this ultra-leftist, long-time Lib-Progressive, bomb-throwing Rabbi, is as classic a piece of blatant hypocrisy as it would be possible to find anywhere on Earth.

In the Sunday (1-12-2014) edition of the SunSentinel, Shani McManus (The Jewish Journal's 'Senior Writer for more than a decade') wrote of the passing of Israeli icon, Ariel Sharon, using copious quotes from Rabbi Emeritus.  Miz McManus reported Warshal as likening Sharon to controversial U.S. General George Patton: "brilliant but reckless."  One wonders at what precise point in time did the self-esteemed Publisher Emeritus Rabbi Warshal become in his own mind, Mr. Military Expert Emeritus?  

Warshal's views on the life and times of Ariel Sharon are lugubriously ludicrous.  His notions about Sharon's policies regarding the so-called Palestinians, are 180 degrees apart from those of the late, former Prime Minister of Israel.  As opposed to a brief flyover of Israel by Warshal (maybe he stayed a day or two), Sharon had the job of dealing with a sworn enemy of his country on a daily basis - that would be 24/7.  And yet, General Genius Warshal has the chutzpah to make this statement about Sharon -   "He never understood their (the Palestine} narrative.  When you don't respect the narrative, you don't have peace."

Warshal is a pretentious, faux (foe) supporter of the Jewish State of Israel, who is totally committed to all things Palestinian - swallowing their  'narrative', hook, line & sinker.  
Rave on, o mighty sage-emertius of the largest Jewish weekly in the nation,  Rave on.
Your time has come and gone.  You will be remembered by some as a 'has been' and by others, as a 'never was'.  So, when you finally put down your pen that dripped 'tripe & hype', it is for certain that you will leave an indelible stain on Jewish Journalism  - a stain of arrogance.  You can take some comfort however, in knowing how much you loved you.                                   
MORT KUFF  © 1-12-2014

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, February 6, 2014

Pocketbooks, Shoes, and Shopping

There must be something in the DNA of most women who become addicted to buying an excessive amount of pocketbooks (purses), shoes, and of shopping, in general.

Isn’t 20, 30, or 40 pairs of shoes enough for the average woman? Is having a pocketbook that matches their every outfit, really that important? The answer by most men is “YES” to the first question and “NO” to the second question. But, to the average woman (or above average woman), the answer to the first question is “NO” and “YES” to the second question. Most men are astonished as to why women must acquire such an array of fashion accessories, whereas one pair of black shoes, and one pair of brown shoes, plus a pair of athletic shoes are more than enough to satisfy a man’s fashion desires. Besides, one wallet is enough to carry their credit cards and important papers. Most men find it really hard to comprehend the fanaticism of women who need to acquire so many pocketbooks, shoes, and a sundry of other fashion items.

Go to any mall, shopping center, or flea market and watch the men tag along following their wives and girlfriends around from store to store. You could say that the men obliging their women are like oxen with rings in their noses being led around from store to store. The malls and stores realize that they must accommodate these put-upon men by providing chairs and benches for these men to rest their tired legs while their women use their credit cards with great abandon buying their “needed” items for survival.

You’ve read in the papers that manufacturers of high-end women’s fashion products like Gucci, Louis Viutton, Coach, Michael Kors, and Chanel are suing some stores, flea markets, and other retail outlets, for selling “knockoff” products (imitations of the real things). Many women compulsive shoppers can’t afford the very expensive fashion goods, so the “knockoff’s” are a very attractive substitute to fuel their addiction, much to the dismay of the above named manufacturers.

I heard a comic once refer to this shopping addiction on the part of women as a precondition that upon death a women’s ashes should be spread around their favorite mall as a fitting climax to a woman’s life. A lot of truth is sometimes said in a jest.

But alas, we men will continue to “schlepp” along with our wives and girlfriends in their quest for the next great shopping bargain, as the men will want to keep peace and harmony in their relationship, and to some extent, try to keep the charges on their credit cards as low as possible.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, February 2, 2014


Most of main stream media is acknowledged to be sympathetic toward liberals,
as detected in their deceptive syntax when interpreting fact and reporting news.

In 1942, Jimmy Doolittle formed a squadron of B-25s, assigned to bring the war
to Japan, by leading them on a bombing raid over Tokyo. When most of the crews
returned, it was "Mission Accomplished." It was not the whole megillah ending
the war in the Pacific!

When President George W. Bush landed on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln,
on its returned from deployment in the Gulf, it was to honor the sailors and
marines for accomplishing the mission assigned to them. The "Mission Accomplished"
banner depicted our thanks and gratitude for their sacrifices. It didn't reflect
the end of our fight against terrorism. Seeing the Commander-in- Chief arriving
on the flight deck was a morale booster for the Navy and Marine Corps personnel
as well as the nation, as did the Jimmy Doolittle raid over Tokyo!

It should have ended there, but all of a sudden the patriot buzz stopped when the
Liberal buzz took over, realizing Bush and conservatives were gaining points. It
no longer mattered that most of congress and the world thought Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction. The campaign to discredit the president and call him
a liar started in earnest, led by the main streams and even the lefties in congress
who voted for the intervention in Iraq.

This main stream media helped elect a black white knight to save the country from
destruction, not realizing his promise to put out the fire was with kerosene. They
have been very slow recognizing that their man they helped put in office is the real
unmitigated liar they chose to save us from the one they wrongfully accused of lying.

From the beginning, the new kid on the block gained momentum in reporting news
with fact, creating a problem for business as usual by the current administration and
its media allies. Their tactic to remove the thorn from what use to be their territory,
is creating mythical circumstances and aiming their venom tipped discredibility arrows
at their nemesis FOX NEWS, in hope to sway the uninformed back into their fold.

The alphabet broadcast media are pissed (irritated) by Fox for reporting everything,
whereas they are selective in choosing what is to be aired, in order to coincide with
the liberal slant and friendly bias toward the Obama administration. There are some
honest liberal journalists employed by them who have and are bailing out and alighting
on Fox, making Fox the only three dimensional source for news.

Conservative commentary from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share