Sunday, June 25, 2017

Whatever Happened to the Music?



I grew up during an age when music was melodic and when people were able to relate to the songs and were able to dance with one another. The musical artists during this time included such luminaries as Fats Domino, Elvis Presley, Johnny Mathis, Tony Bennett, Dion, Neil Diamond, the Bee Gees and Neil Sedaka to name just a few. That kind of music lasted up until the early 90's and then it all seemed to disappear from the airwaves and in nightclubs and stage productions.

From the 90's to the present, we have replaced melodic music (I'm not counting heavy metal “music” of the 70's and 80's) with gibberish, gyrations, street rants, and vulgar lyrics cloaked in the name of “rap” and “hip-hop” music.

During the past 30 years of this change of musical tastes, there hasn't been anything of note that could be classified as a musical standard. None of this “garbage” (music) is sung or hummed by people like the older standards of yesteryear, songs that are still sung and hummed today, generally by older people.

An exception to this trend away from melodic music has been the genre of music called “country”. This type of music has now come to be looked upon in a totally different light than it was 40 or 50 years ago. Back then, country music, which was popular in the South and Southwestern states, was considered hokey, twangy, and was stereotypical of red-neck music. Over the past 30 years, country music has morphed into a type of music that combines the old country, homey, nasal style with the popular music of yesteryear to create a blend of music that is melodic and also tells a poetic story in understandable English. Some of the biggest musical stars today, such as Garth Brooks, Toby Keith, Rascal Flatt's etc. are based in the genre that is referred to as Country/Popular music.

Some people have said that this decline in “music” today is another example of the “Dumbing down of America”. Crude, course, vulgar, unintelligible lyrics is not what I consider being considered music – but it has, and it's not a pretty sight to the eyes or ears of a discerning person. What is needed is another revival of music that can be sung, hummed, and danced to by everyone, not just a group of tattooed, unkempt, skin pierced freaks contributing to the decline of civilization.

I know I will be considered an “old fogy” and out-of-touch for making such pronouncements, but someone has got to say it instead of just thinking about it. Good taste and common sense should be universal and not just the purview of older people who are stuck on nostalgia and yesteryear.

Again I ask, “Whatever Happened to the Music”?

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann





Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 22, 2017

The Irony of Being in a Political Cycle



I am a follower of congressional hearings and White House briefings and
I will say, I'm baffled how anyone can possibly come to conclusion about
anything, when the tone of inquiry has become so hostile.

No one appears to be interested in arriving at the truth, but to cater to their
constituents grand standing, or trying to gain political points in a gotcha
game, or follow their media bosses agenda.

It is a miracle how the country can remain a gem of democracy with so much
incompetency from those in power and spheres of people in position of
influence whom we rely on for information.

Truth is diminished in the mire of politics turned corruptive for personal gain
and competitive edge. And the attempt to drain the swamp has been thwarted
at every turn by false innuendo and made up unnamed sources with
unsubstantiated accusations.

Hopefully we are merely in a political cycle, like climate change, without lasting
dire consequences, that will soon pass and bring sanity back to the country.
After watching the Senate hearing before former FBI director James Comey a
little while ago, I am adding a rider to my article expressing the irony of what
I've stated above.

The director said the President's "hope" that he would put an end to investigating
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn because he is a nice guy, intimidated him, so he
documented his conversations with the president; which he later leaked to the
New York Times via a friend, to cover his back.

When DOJ Loretta Lynch urged him to refer to the Hillary Clinton probe as a
matter, not an investigation about the misuse of her unsecured personal
computers, he didn't think it prudent to document this, among other improprieties.
In heading a department such as the FBI, a person who can be so easily
intimidated has no business being in that position.


Conservative column from George Giftos


The George Giftos bio:

Service: U.S. Air Force
Retired travel agency executive.
In management for agencies by
Fugazy World Travel
U.S. Industries
Carlson Companies


















Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 18, 2017

Liberals and the Demise of Cities


Look around the United States at the various “loser” cities and notice they mostly all have one thing in common - they are run by Democrats (liberals). Yes, that is a damning blanket statement, but let's look at the facts.

Go down the list, Detroit, Baltimore, Cleveland, Chicago, New York City, New Orleans, St. Louis, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Oakland, San Francisco etc., etc. They are all run by Democrat (liberals) politicians who pander to the mostly minority poor, ethnic constituencies that make up the majority of its citizens.

Take the City of Chicago (as comic Henny Youngman used to say, “Please”), it has one of the strictest gun control laws in the country, but it has one of the highest murder rates in the country. Most of the schools are under performing and the financial condition of the city is in dire straits. Who runs the city - the Democrats (liberals) under the direction of former Obama aide, Rahm Emanuel (a liberal).

Another city basket case is the City of Detroit. Once one of the wealthiest cities in America, it is now in bankruptcy and it has lost over half its population over the past few years. Many of its former mayors have been convicted of corruption and some are presently in jail. What political affiliation did these former mayor's have - they were all Democrats (liberals).

Just recently, we've seen the the chaos and lawlessness raise its ugly head in the City of Baltimore. The city is mostly minority in population and the political machine is made up of mostly black (liberal) politicians, and they have a police chief who is also black. They have screwed up the handling of the latest riots and unrest that caused a good part of the city to have gone up in flames and had encouraged criminal looting of businesses which took place on a widespread basis. The Democrat-run (liberal) city has double the poverty rate and unemployment rate as the rest of Maryland and the schools are performing at very low achievement rate. Could there be a correlation with these facts and the Democrat (liberal) control of the City of Baltimore?

Another disaster area of the country, New York City, has an ultra-liberal Mayor, Bill DeBlasio, who has dropped many of the reforms instituted by former Mayors Guiliani and Bloomberg, which made the city a vibrant place to visit or to do business with. The crime rate has gone up 20% since he took office and his economic policies have scared many residents and businesses away to other more tax friendly places of the country. With a friend like DeBlasio, New York City doesn't need anymore enemies. By the way, he is a Democrat.

The one thing all these cities seem to have in common, besides being run by Democrats (liberals), is that the governing officials of these cities always seem to blame others for their failures instead of blaming their liberal policies which they have instituted. It's always somebody else's fault, not their liberal policies (I guess they have taken a page out of the Obama and Hillary playbook).

Besides the fiscal malfeasance, many of these Democrat-run cities have amnesty policies that welcome “illegal immigrants” into their cities (Sanctuary Cities) by promising not to to turn them over to the I.N.S. for violating our immigration laws. These cities, trying to be benevolent and inclusive, have caused major problems within their

cities by increasing the unemployment rate of long-time residents and by lowering the standard of living for many of its residents. But, the people still continue to elect the Democrat (liberal) politicians over and over again. They seem to validate Einstein's definition of insanity which was - “Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. One ploy the Democrats (liberals) find effective in getting enough votes to get elected and re-elected is by offering the people “freebies” from the public treasury, which in turn has put many of these cities in or near bankruptcy.

So, these distressing facts about these floundering cities is only scratching the surface of the failed Democrat (liberal) policies which seem to mirror the failed economic and social policies of Marxism/Socialism.

I, therefore declare, that things will not change unless the people, in those cities revolt and throw out of office the miscreants that have engineered the demise of their cities - those miscreants are the Democrats (liberals). Case closed!

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann




Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 15, 2017

NPR Humor Gone Flat


This Saturday morning, I was surfing the channels to see who had
the best coverage of the President and First Lady arriving in Saudi
Arabia. It seems Fox News Channel was the only one providing full
coverage.

It was a proud moment seeing them received so respectfully.
Later, I had NPR tuned in on my car radio and was disgusted to
listen to the hosts on that program in a deluge of derogatory, bad
taste humor about the leader of our country.

NPR is now among my list of sub humans who are the mainstream
media and clueless celebrities, who are below idiot and moron
classification, sounding like Stephen Colbert, who is as funny as a
flat tire.

The whole lot of them can be described as the part of the anatomy
that discharges human waste.

Conservative column from George Giftos








Dinesh D'Souza schools liberal student how climate change policies harm the poor.

In a recent speech at Brandeis University, author and speaker Dinesh D'Souza was asked questions about climate change. D'Souza explained that global warming is not something that people experience and many interpret the findings differently. He explained how progressives see global warming as a moral issue because they would be able to change and direct the way people live. But he explained that people in India, for example, are just now climbing out of poverty and they need resources to move from starvation to eating once or twice a day. Instead, he said progressives see resources as luxuries that need regulated, making resources limited and more expensive, thereby harming the poorest of the world the most.



Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Is 70% Not Enough?


The liberals (a/k/a Democrats and Progressives) are constantly claiming that the “rich” don't pay their “fair share” of income taxes, but they never tell you that the top 10% of taxpayers (the “rich”) pay almost 70% of all income taxes collected. Well, it's true, but still the drum beat goes on – the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting screwed.

One might ask, how much is enough? Where would we be if the “rich” didn't pay 70% of the income taxes, we'd be racking up a much larger debt than the already $20 trillion we now owe? We must not cut off our nose to spite our face.

To try to even out the income bubble would be an almost impossible task. Some people will always succeed in accumulating money and wealth ( a fact: 90% of all millionaires did not inherit their wealth, they earned it themselves), even though we are all created “equal” under the eyes of the law, we cannot force equal outcomes in life through income redistribution (the Robin Hood syndrome). As the old saying goes, “you cannot make the poor rich by making the rich poor”.

President Trump has proposed a tax plan that will give all taxpayers a reduction in their taxes, with the “evil rich” paying the highest percentage rate. Yes, the “rich” will get a tax reduction also, but so will the middle and low income taxpayers, isn't that “fair”? The emotional fear scenario by the Democrats that the Trump tax reforms are “gifts” to the “rich”, does not meet the smell test. Most companies and businesses (both large and small) are the major employers in our economic system (a free enterprise capitalist system). If you want to create jobs and increase revenue to the government, you must not overtax the entrepreneurs and risk takers. These are the people who create the jobs and expand the economic base.

It might seem incongruous, but when you reduce taxes to a “fair” level, instead of reducing government revenue, it actually increases government revenue. History is replete with the truth of that statement. When Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton, and G.W Bush lowered the tax rates, government revenue increased exponentially. The caveat with that increase in revenue is that the Congress spent the extra revenue, and more, by increasing many of our social programs and “pork barrel” projects over and above the increased revenue. As a result, we now have a $20 trillion national debt, which President Trump is proposing to reduce by cutting and streamlining government programs and the bloated government bureaucracy.

To listen to Trump's detractors, he is going to kill children, starve seniors, ruin education and a host of other dire consequences, if his tax reform and budget proposals are carried out. The Democrat's are the one's who love to pass out “freebies” to the electorate in order to garner their votes at election time. The only trouble, with being so generous with handing out money from the public treasury, is that “there's no such thing as free lunch”, but as the Democrats surmise and factor in, people will be more receptive to the “something for nothing” plea as there are more people who will fall for that ploy because of greed and economic ignorance.

We should not penalize success by punishing the “rich” with unrealistic and overbearing taxes put upon them, but we should try to raise all people to become “rich” so that they can pay the taxes that the “rich” now pay, thereby increasing government revenue and reducing our enormous debt. A hand up instead of a hand out is the way to go. Too much government means more waste and inefficiency and an economic malaise, which we are finally recovering from our past policies.

So, as the headline of this editorial asks, “Is 70% Not Enough”, the answer is, “Yes”, it is enough, since the “rich” pay 70% of all income taxes, we should not overly penalize them by overly taxing them as the amount of jobs and economic expansion will decline, and we will push our national debt even higher and higher. If we have to balance our own personal finances, why shouldn't the government have to do the same? We have to start sometime, so now is the time to try to get our house in order and pass the tax proposals President Trump is proposing, the sooner the better.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann








Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 8, 2017

Ignorance is the Enemy


There is no humor listening to clueless millennials and snowflakes
in street interviews, who are unable to point out our country on a
map, or identify who the portrait of a notable past president is.
It is alarming that many are going through life with their head buried
in the sand, or lost in a perpetual weedy happy hour, inducing
destructive disobedience, acting out the civic lessons taught by
hard line, leftist professors.

The reign of terror during the French revolution; Italian Blackshirts of
the 1920's and German Brownshirts of the 30's began as embers
that complacency caused to burst into uncontrollable, full fledged fires
that could not be put out.

Don't rule out it not happening here.

The greatest danger we face is not the obvious. The greatest danger is
ignorance, and it comes from the least expected places. The campuses
of our universities where free speech and contrary ideas are suppose
to be debated, but squelched by activists who think the First Amendment
doesn't apply to their opposition.

Conservative column from George Giftos
















Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 4, 2017

“Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics”


That phrase, in the above headline, was popularized by author and humorist Mark Twain, which is defined as: “a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes used colloquially to cast doubt on statistics used to prove an opponent's point”.

The reason I bring this phrase up is the constant reference, by rabid environmentalists, to use the erroneous figure of “97% of global scientists believe in the theory of man-made “global warming”. It's use was glorified by both ex- President Obama and ex- Secretary of State Kerry, in trying to get the United States to buy into the theory of “global warming” and to push us into changing our ways of living, especially in the area of using carbon fuels to power our economy.

The people who promote this theory of man-made “global warming”, including both Obama and Kerry, actually believe that “global warming” (a/k/a climate change), is a greater threat to the national security of the United States than either ISIS and Al-Queda, two vicious terrorist groups. They actually made that statement with a straight face.

What about this figure of 97%, is it a true statistical figure or is it bogus ( a lie)? It seems that a climate blogger from Australia, John Cook, did a survey of scientists who wrote abstracts about the theory of “global warming”. Only 34% of the 1,000's of papers Cook examined expressed any opinion about anthropogenic climate change, and since 33% “appeared” to endorse anthropogenic climate change, he divided 33 by 34 and – voila- the figure 97% was born. As you can tell, it was and is a totally bogus statistic. In fact, the Wall Street Journal went as far as to say, “The assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem, is a fiction”.

Al Gore, in his discredited movie documentary ( in which he received a Nobel Prize) called “An Inconvenient Truth”, stated that the theory of man-made “global warming” was “settled science”, but that claim cannot be backed up by any reliable scientific organization or group. Most studies show that the scientific community is split 50-50 as to whether man-made “global warming” is real or is a real threat to our civilization. In other words, it is not “settled science” and anyone says otherwise is part of the “fake news” that has become quite popular lately. To quiet dissent, the environmental wacko's have labeled anyone who disagrees with them as climate change “deniers”, a group that includes prominent climatologists such as; Dr. Richard Lindzen of M.I.T; Dr. Timothy Ball of the University of Winnipeg; and John Coleman, founder of “The Weather Channel”, who all claim that man-made “global warming” is not a major problem to our way of life. In fact, John Coleman even called it a “scam” operation.

The liberal media machine (who mostly support the theory), has spent decades bulldozing anyone who tells you “global warming” is a sham theory. Remember, in the middle 1970's, the environmentalists were championing the theory of “global cooling”, predicting that in a few short years we'd be confronting a mini-ice age? Now, many of these same misguided alarmists have latched on to an opposite theory, man-made “global warming”. How ironic is that? I guess it is not so “settled science” after all.

Most scientists and NASA's RSS (Remote Sensing Systems) data, have determined that the world has warmed up a mere .36 degrees Fahrenheit over the last 38 years (they started measuring data since 1979). But, the bulk of that .36 degrees increase was between 1979 and 1998, since then, we've actually had temperatures dropping, and we haven't had any “global warming” for the past 19 years. The prediction by Al Gore (in 2007) that the North Polar Ice Cap would be gone in as little as 7 years, was grossly exaggerated, as was his Nobel Prize winning documentary.

So, when you hear that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made urgent problem, you now know that it is a fiction and it falls into the category of lies, damned lies, statistics.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann
















Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 1, 2017

MORT’s meanderings



Please, Mr. President . . .
give us a Director of the FBI who is a real cop.  One with a lifetime of experience at being a cop.  One with a record as a guy (not a gal, please) who has a reputation as being a tough-on-crime and really-tough-on-criminals, policeman - a cop.
(This is not a politically-correct’ request nor, did I mean it to be.  I want a tough-minded man at the top of the FBI. Not gay, not soft, no specific skin color  – none of that.  But, a guy who dedicates himself to returning the FBI to its former glory days when it kept secrets but, did its job silently and efficiently, without fear or without giving a second thought as to political repercussions.)
Give us a cop who has a lengthy history of experience at leading focused investigations and one who deals only with provable, factual information. Give us someone who is impervious to political influence.   A former NYC Police Commissioner like Ray Kelly comes to mind.  So does former NYC Mayor, Rudy Giuliani. Or preferably, a slightly younger version of either of these proven, rock-solid, highly-experienced cops and/or prosecutors, who is willing and able to take on the task of heading up this backbone agency that is so vital to our national security.
And puleeeez, don’t give us  Joe Lieberman or any other shopworn, former elected representative of the people, who spent decades of his life warming a seat in the U. S. Congress or at politically-appointed posts in former administrations.  I beg of you, Mr. President - spare us that giant, backward step.  Thank you, Sir.

                                                 MORT KUFF   © 5-24-2017

















Bookmark and Share

Sunday, May 28, 2017

Are American Males Becoming “Wussified”?


First off, let's define the word “wuss”: a weakling, a wimp.

Since the 1960's and the advent of “feminism” and “political correctness”, the “feminization” of the American male has taken hold in all facets of American life.

Look around you, what do you see, males are depicted in the media, in films, and on T.V. as bumbling fools, person's with an over active sex drive that abuses women, lazy losers, crude and uncaring, and to compensate for those stereotypes, sometimes become overly aggressive and violent, etc., etc.

This “feminization” of males has taken hold mostly in the white male community. Look at our professional sports teams in basketball, football, and in boxing. Most of the participants are black or of foreign descent. The white male is practically invisible (in most cases, the black and foreign athlete are the better athletes). Does that fact portend that these sports have an element of violence attached to them? Could be, as many white males are discouraged from participating in sports because of the possibility of injury.

Look at how many males dress and how they are groomed. Long hair and droopy clothes, earrings and piercings are common among many teenagers. As stated before, look at what seems to be the overprotective nature of the American male. Kick ball, dodge ball, sledding, and the ludicrous desire to give every participant a trophy or an award, are some of the “politically correct” changes that have affected the everyday life of the mostly male youth.

Look at many of our colleges who have set up “safe spaces” for the easily offended who can't handle points-of-view different from their own. Can you imagine a virile male admitting that he needs a quiet place just to cope with life? Most social rules in the colleges are directed at the males, who can be expelled just by having a female make a “harassment” charge against him, and contrary to our rule of law, he will be considered guilty until he can prove himself innocent (ex: the Duke lacrosse case, and the fake charges brought against a male student at the University of Virginia etc.).

Look at many of the organized childhood activities that many young males participate in; Little League baseball, youth football and basketball, and the idea that too much emphasis now is placed on just participating in the activity and not on winning or coming in first place, because the kid that might be a loser or on the losing team therefore he might be traumatized for life. As stated before, that's the reason behind why the idea that everyone gets a “participation trophy” instead of a “first place trophy”. Little do these over-protective enablers realize that by not recognizing talent or winners does more harm than good in preparing a young male to face his future life. He should be capable of handling adversity, as life is “not a bowl of cherries”.

This whole syndrome of the “wussification”of males has carried over to the adult male population. Just recently, the “lynching” of Bill O'Reilly is a perfect example of making mountains out of molehills. He was accused, by a few women, of “sexual harassment” by using certain suggestive comments which the women found obnoxious and in poor taste. These women were represented by the feminist mother/daughter team of Gloria Allred and Lisa Bloom (known as “celebrity ambulance chasers”). He probably was guilty of those suggestive comments. But, no mention was made of any physical contact or touching by him, just oral words directed toward the women. Should that be reason enough for him to be fired from his job as cable's Number One talk show host? Most men have been guilty of making suggestive remarks to women at some time during their lives, but in most cases a stern reprimand by the woman stopped the uncalled for verbal comments. Today, a man can be accused of “sexual harassment” just by complimenting a woman on her looks or other innocuous comments that the woman takes offense to, even though no offense was intended by the man.

This whole situation, whereby “political correctness” takes precedence over common sense, will have a tendency to emasculate our male population by making our male population “wussified”. Is that what we want for our boys and our men?

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann


Poland's Prime Minister DESTROYS the elites after the Manchester TERROR attack!







Poland Stands Up to EU on Forced Quotas: We’re Not Taking Your Migrants – Your Blackmail Won’t Work On Us!
Strong words from Poland’s conservative prime minister, Beata Szydło, in reaction to EU threats to force her country to accept migrants or face massive fines.




Bookmark and Share

Thursday, May 25, 2017

Beware of the Conquistadors in Sheeps Clothing


Mayan and Aztec empires. They are at it again, with their ancestors
intruding into our country illegally and over populating it with their ethnicity,
to gain eventual control of the government. Latino governance historically,
has not been something to write home about.

This statement will ruffle many feathers and open to criticism by the usual
elitists, because it's not politically correct and against their alternative fact
data base.

Open border advocates ridiculously postulate that the Pilgrims were all
undocumented immigrants when they settled here.

The fact is, there were no organized governments or empires we know of in
the stretch of land we now know as the United States and Canada. The land
was populated by scattered tribes with no functional governmental system,
that in some cases mirror today's middle east, by fighting among themselves.
Who is legally in this country and who is not is not debatable.

For a nation to remain sovereign, it's borders must be respected and its
people protected from uncontrolled immigration.

We are a diversified country and mustn't allow any one entity to dominate
the whole.

Conservative column from George Giftos





James O'Keefe Smacks Media Lapdogs!

A 'Michelle Malkin Investigates' Interview from CRTV.

Investigative journalist James O'Keefe has NO sympathy for the vile mainstream media lapdogs crying about Trump after burying Obama's bones for eight years. This is what REAL journalism looks like.

James O’Keefe Founded Project Veritas as their mission is to:

Investigate and expose corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions in order to achieve a more ethical and transparent society.




Bookmark and Share

Sunday, May 21, 2017

“When You Reward Something……”


“When you reward something, you get more of it”. That pithy statement contains a lot of empirical truth and explains a simple fact of life; people will always be attracted to the idea of getting “something for nothing”. It is an old marketing ploy that has been used for ages, but has been fine-tuned by today’s politicians, mainly because they are using other people's money (taxpayers money), not their own.

That gambit seems to be the liberal politician’s mantra when it comes to campaigning for the votes of the citizens. They figure that if they promise you something for nothing, they’ll get the vote of the voter who wants something for nothing. But, of course, the old adage of, “there’s no such thing as free lunch”, comes into play as an unintended consequence of that duplicity. Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders used that appeal as they went after the Democrat nomination in 2016. Luckily for us, neither became president.

Listen to the politicians today who are campaigning for your vote. They’ll promise you “free college tuition” or a subsidy to go to college if you “ volunteer” for their proposed community program (I thought when somebody volunteers you don’t get paid?), “ free” government healthcare, “ free” heating oil (supplied by a petty So.American dictator who hates the U.S.A.), “free” phones, “free housing”, “free” food stamps, and “freedom” from paying income taxes, and on and on. Think of how much all those “freebies” will cost us, the “tax-paying” taxpayers, who always seem to getting the proverbial shaft. What makes this practice so attractive to the charlatan politicians proposing these “give-a-ways”, is that there are many more people getting these “freebies” than there are of the people who must pay for them through their taxes (it is estimated that nearly 50% of the people get some form of government “handouts”). But, then you hear these hypocrites complain about our mounting national debt ($20 trillion), and inevitably blame it all on and the Republicans, never mentioning the trillions of dollars authorized and proposed by former Pres. Obama and the Democrats (during Obama's 8 years in office the debt rose from $10 trillion to $20 trillion). What else is new?

Look at what the Democrat candidates, who were running for elective office in 2016, and what they were proposing to the electorate, and you’ll see what I’m railing about. Maybe they think we are all stupid, maybe we are, as we keep re-electing many of these same politicians over and over again, (except this past election), but we don’t have to fall for that double-talk anymore. It seems like Pres. Trump is taking the “bull by the horns” in trying rein in this wasteful government largesse, with all the political ramifications that will be used against him by the “freeloaders” and the “something for nothing” crowd.

So, don’t fall for that “something for nothing” ploy in the future. Remember, if you reward something, you’ll get more of it. Do we need representatives who vote for more reckless spending with money we don’t have? We can’t be that stupid, can we?


Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann
















Bookmark and Share

Thursday, May 18, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

Attention:  Delusional Democrats who keep up the whine that we’ve got to get to the bottom of this Trump scandal that doesn’t exist.
Let me tell you what we’ve got to get to the bottom of . . .
We’ve got to get to the bottom of Democrats electing an America-hating, profane-pro-union, civil rights lawyer, street thug and holder of a string of public offices, on the way to being the newly-elected Chairman of the Democrat National Committee – and whose very first action, was to name a proponent of Islam’s Shariah law, the America-hating, totally-committed Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison, as his No. 2.  
What does this tell you about the Democrat Party that stubbornly calls itself ‘The Democratic Party’, which it is anything but?  These delusional  Dems have become so viciously anti-Conservative, so adamantly anti-U.S. Constitution, so vocally & viciously anti-Trump, that they have placed themselves outside the bounds of sanity. They’ve become radicalized.
They refuse to accept the fact that Hillary Clinton lost the Presidential election to a total outsider to the traditional world of national politics. They hate and fear Donald Trump because he opposes everything they have totally controlled in the Nation’s Capital for the past 50+ years.   Further, they are deranged-out-of-their-minds that this ‘outsider’ is overturning all the Socialist lunacy and repressive regulations that Muslim President Barack Hussein Obama put in place during his eight years of blatant disservice to our nation. Deranged Democrats my friend, are what we must get to the bottom of, to save our beloved nation.
                                                                       MORT KUFF   © 5-17-2017

















Bookmark and Share

Sunday, May 14, 2017

Who are the Misogynists?


The word misogyny is defined in the dictionary as “ hatred or hostility toward women”. You’d think that in this day and age, we wouldn’t have to have a discussion about whether “misogyny” is alive and well to any great extent in our society, but, it is. The discussion has heated up just recently with the appointment of Ivanka Trump as an Assistant to the President, her father. No sooner was she announced than the blogs, political pundits, late night talk show hosts and comedians, and the main stream media started in their campaign to discredit her and her family, mainly because they figure she is a threat to the fortunes of the Democratic party.

I presume we’ll always have some people who will feel threatened by a woman in a prominent position in government and/or business, but the viciousness of the references to Ivanka Trump and her family is totally over the top and completely unfair and outrageous. In addition, Donald Trump's wife, Melania, has also been dumped upon because of her relationship to President Trump. These were mostly all personal attacks and totally discredited, but they were examples of what we now call “fake news”. To these liberal loons, the end justifies the means, the truth be damned.

What caused this onslaught against this youthful looking, attractive, successful woman, Ivanka? My opinion is the fear, by others, that she will be the catalyst to prevent them from regaining political power which they so cravingly covet and desire. These attacks, instead of diminishing her standing among the voters, especially women, seems to have backfired as people don’t like to see a nice, successful All-American, mother and wife, unjustly vilified for no reason other than her political views and indirectly, her gender and her relationship to the president.

What is ironic is the “ deafening” silence on the part of the so-called women’s groups, such as the N.O.W. organization, in not coming to her defense against this assault on her and her family. They always say that they represent the women in America, but it seems that they only represent women who are “ liberal” women who are “pro-choice” ( a/k/a pro-abortion) and not a conservative woman. The Republicans have been accused by the Democrats as being the party of “intolerance”, but now the Democrats could be called the “ Misogynist” party after some of the shenanigans they have perpetuated against women (ex: Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter etal.).

During the past campaign cycle, including the primaries, the Democrats and Hillary Clinton used the gender card against Trump and the Republicans. It seems like the voting public didn't buy this blatant appeal to sexism and sent Hillary packing. The Democrats appeal by using the gender card (vote for Hillary because she's a woman) came back to bite them in the rump big time.

Ivanka Trump is not resented for what she has done, but for who she is: a Republican, a conservative woman, who is the daughter of the “hated” President. She doesn’t fit the mold of the feminists, but it looks like she fits the mold of most of the American people.

President Trump has taken the slings and arrows of the liberal left as being a “misogynist”, as President (and in his former life as a successful businessman), he has hired and promoted many women to positions of authority and influence. For examples, his campaign chief was Kellyanne Conway, the first woman to ever had run a presidential campaign (and be successful at that), he appointed Nicky Haley, as the U.N. Ambassador (of Indian descent); Elaine Chao, as Transportation Secretary (of Asian descent); K.T. McFarlane, as an Ass't. Foreign Policy adviser; Betsy DeVos, as Education Secretary; Seema Verma, Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (of Indian descent); Linda McMahon, to lead the Small Business Administration, Omorosa Manigault, Director of the Office of Public Liaison (of African decent) etc. , etc.

It seems like that if the Democrats can't win at the ballot box, they are trying to win in the court of public opinion, but it doesn't seem to be working as they are the real “misogynists” by their actions against women, not Donald Trump and the Republicans.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann














Bookmark and Share

Thursday, May 11, 2017

Pussycat Diplomacy Obituary


Pussycat diplomacy is over. November 8th restored faith in America,
respect by the rest of the civilized world and fear to our adversaries.
Our President, Donald J.Trump, has been working tirelessly from
his first day in office, bringing this about and undoing the damage to
the economy, trade agreements and relationship with other nations
by the previous administration.

Alas, we now have a Commander in Chief that is more than name
only, showing a Truman like resolve, to face dangers to our country
without hesitation and tail between his legs.

The "Red Line" isn't rhetoric, but a challenge to anyone foolish
enough to cross it, as witnessed this weekend, against Assad's
inhuman behavior against his own people.

The President's action was a measured pea shooter warning; but
rest assure, if this warning is not taken seriously, the next one will
be more than a BB sling shot and up the ladder with more intense
methods until Assad and the Russians get the message.

This should finally put to rest Liberal persistence trying to tie the
President being in collusion with Vladimir Putin.

Conservative column from George Giftos










That is the Code which gave President Trump the authority to suspend travel from several terror-prone countries. Sen. Ted Cruz exposed former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’s ignorance of the law, and the partisan nature of her decision to refuse to enforce President Donald Trump’s executive order.



Bookmark and Share