Sunday, April 23, 2017

Should Outrageous College Tuition Costs be Considered a “Crime”?

Many of the so-called millennial's who attend college today, are racking up debt that is out of proportion to what they receive when they finally get their diplomas. The total student debt is estimated to be over a trillion dollars and rising.

The question that must be asked, is it fair that colleges charge so much in tuition fees, as they have increased the tuition fees at 3 times the inflation rate over the past few years?

What is ironic is that many of these expensive (both private and public) colleges and universities have endowments in the many millions, and in the case of some, in the billions (especially the ultra-expensive “Ivy League” universities - ex: Harvard $37 billion and Yale $23 billion etc.) In addition to these enormous endowments, which by the way are tax-free, many (if not all) receive federal funds and grants in the millions each year, and still they continue to raise the tuition to the students attending their colleges and universities. To give you some idea as to what the U.S. Government gives to these schools in the form of federal money, here is an example:

1. Johns-Hopkins University - $1.9 billion in federal funds ($2.6 billion endowment).

2. University of Washington - $950 million in federal funds ($2.2 billion endowment).

3. University of Michigan - $820 million in federal funds ($7.7 billion endowment).

These were just a few examples of schools with billion dollar endowments who receive government funding while their tuition rates increase yearly, way above the inflation rate. Maybe these school endowments should have their yearly profits taxed like the rest of us are taxed?

Why are tuition's going up so fast? Some have blamed the fact that the government has made available to students, government guaranteed loan assistance, and that has emboldened the schools to raise tuition costs as the loans are guaranteed by the government, thereby minimizing default by its student recipients to the colleges they are attending. It is a win-win situation for the greedy colleges.

In 1976, tuition in private colleges and universities (in 2016 dollars) was $10,000. Now, they're $33,000. For public colleges and universities there was a fourfold increase from $2,500 to $10,000.

Many colleges and universities have students emerge ill-educated by comparison to the tuition paid by the student. They have trained too many of the students to be unemployed. In addition, the students come out of school as “debt slaves” where much of what they earn goes to payoff their debts. Both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, during their campaigns for president, promised to make a college education “tuition-free”, which was just campaign rhetoric to generate the college vote (totally unrealistic, and just a ploy for getting votes).

Much of these increases in tuition rates goes into a bloated administrative staff and to pay exorbitant salaries to professors and assistants. To show the “bloat” at some schools is the case of high profile professor, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who was paid $500,000 for teaching one law class at Harvard University, so while students suffer from burgeoning tuition costs, their professors are living on the “gravy train” of inflated faculty salaries. Shouldn't some of these “gigantic” endowments be used to make the college experience less financially burdensome to the students attending their school? We have allowed the colleges to run up the tab (with government subsidies) and populate the campus with idiotic, worthless courses (mainly with a “social agenda”) and administrative bloat, and a good dose of “political correctness” mixed in.

So, it is incumbent upon us to try to stop this “cancer” on America's higher education by bringing down this outrage of excessively high tuition costs. Yes, it would be a “crime” if nothing is done to remedy this situation.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, April 20, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

Compassion, Humiliation
and other Political dalliances.
Many of us recall with regret, the theme of former President George W. Bush’s first Presidential campaign – the well-intended attempt at fostering ‘Compassionate Conservatism’. No one understood what it meant and yet, good money was thrown after bad at the concept, in the hope that more Government giveaways would somehow, engender goodwill among men.  Pardon me while I try to purge my memory of how well all that turned out.  If I remember correctly, it was laughed off Capitol Hill.
The ‘First-black-face-in-the-White House’ crowd; the ‘Goody 2-Shoes Brigade’ and the ‘Something-for-Nothing’ crowd of delusional Democrats gave us Barack Hussein Obama and ‘Humiliation’ - in one fell swoop.  Obama, was steeped in Islamist ideology from the time he was shuttled from his rabid Socialist-Communist parents through a series of indoctrinations at the hands of various societal deviates and Islam-oriented mentors.  He was an apt student.  He became expert at using ‘Humiliation’ and intimidation as effective political tactics all the while he was engaged in the dubious pursuit of Community Organizing on the crime-ridden streets of Chicago.
As President, he honed his techniques in the use of these twin tactics of Middle East thuggery to gain advantages over his political opponents. Conversely, he eschewed ‘Compassion’.  There is no forensic evidence of his employing compassion in any situation or with anyone on his list of political enemies.  Obama paid lavish lip service to the nobler aspects of humanity however, his deeds never jibed with his insincere rhetoric - not by a long shot; not for an instant. And yet, despite the obvious failure of every piece of legislation and every tyrannical edict he forced through the Capitol ‘using his pen and his phone’ – he devastated the economy, compromised national security, decimated our military and scuttled our reputation in all the capitals of the world – he was re-elected to serve a second term. Thus, we endured 4 more years of his ineptitude at governing, aside from his highly successful, divisive treachery.  
And so. the result of the recent Presidential election was that Obama, the arrogant Narcissistic, pompous ass and his utterly corrupt, failed, former Secty of State, the infamous Hillary, were humiliated and cast aside like yesterday’s trash.  Who could have done such a thing to these smarter-than-everyone else icons?  Why, none other than millions of those insignificant. middle-class Americans who live in fly-over country and cling to their Bibles and guns.  Oh yes, and Donald J. Trump.      Heh, Heh, Heh!
               MORT KUFF  © 12-2-2013

MUST WATCH: The Real Housewives Of ISIS

Hat tip to Zvi in Israel.

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, April 16, 2017

Who Determines What is “Fair”?

“Fair”, that's the key word among the Democrats (a/k/a Liberals and Progressives) as they try to justify their quest of taking something of value (money) from the successful and giving it to the less successful, all under the guise of the term “fairness”.

What or who gives the Democrats the right to pick winners and losers? The Democrats rail against the “evil” oil companies, for example, who produce most of our usable energy needs, while they want to give taxpayer funds to “green energy” companies (ex: Solyndra etc.), many of whom have gone out of business after they got the government “Stimulus” money guarantees (remember the boondoggle of the Obama “Stimulus” in 2009?)

Is that fair?

They also demonize the “rich” as not paying their “fair share”, but never mention the fact that the top 10% of wage earners pay almost 70% of all the income taxes collected.

Is that fair?

They rail against the billionaires and millionaires, and they want to raise taxes on people who earn $200,000 ($250,000 for a married couple), who are a far cry away from the exalted income earners they mention constantly, the billionaires (like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet) and millionaires ( like the Clinton's and the Obama's).

Is that fair?

During the recent deep “recession” our country was in, Obama and the Democrat Party wanted to raise the taxes of our corporations, who already paid the highest rate in the world. We now have the distinction of being #1 again, but for the wrong reason.

Is that fair?

Within the Democrat Party, you have certain people who preach tax fairness, but who have underpaid their own taxes (ex: Tim Geithner, former Sec'y. of the Treasury under Obama; former Democrat Majority Leader Tom Daschle; and former Ways and Means Chairman, Rep. Charlie Rangel (to name just a few). Hypocrites all.

Is that fair?

When people, who are unemployed and receive many weeks of unemployment benefits, which are paid for by those who work full-time jobs, and who are trying to make ends meet through their taxes.

Is that fair?

According to the I.R.S., nearly 4 out of 10 American households pay no federal income taxes. Shouldn't everybody have some “skin in the game” by paying something?

Is that fair?

According to the CBO, federal employees receive salaries and benefits that are nearly 50% higher than those who work in the private sector, and whose taxes pay their salaries and benefits.

Is that fair?

The State of So. Carolina, a few years ago, which had a high unemployment rate, was denied, by the NLRB (controlled by the Democrats), the opportunity of having a plant built by the Boeing Company because So. Carolina was a “right-to-work” state, thereby depriving the state of thousands of potential jobs ( after Boeing made a deal with the union in the State of Washington, the So. Carolina plant was finally O.K'd).

Is that fair?

So as you can see, the people who pontificate about “fairness” are probably some of the most “unfair” people in the whole country, I'm referring to the Democrats, of course. Do we really want them or their cronies to determine what is “fair” or not?

Let's make the results of 2016 the end of an error by continuing to vote out of office in 2018 and 2020, those Congressmen and Senators that support the Marxist/Socialist policies of the Democrats.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, April 13, 2017

Complacency Jeopardizes the Miracle called America

The degree of unrestrained hatred is approaching epidemic
proportion that is being fueled by the national media and
irresponsible government representatives who prey on their
contingency, mostly from down trodden urban communities.

Society classifies them as minorities by their ethnicity or race.
They are in the lower end of society because the upper end
has kept them there, to be used by these elitists politically.

Ignorance is the reason they are minority classified. They are
easily manipulated when they are told Conservatives are out
to get Santa Clause and all their free stuff is in jeopardy,
and they have a right to be mad with hate; but that madness has
reached a crescendo synonymous with insanity, reaching
dangerous levels where Madonna talks about blowing up the
White House and Snoopy Dogg takes a pop shot at an
effigy of President Trump. These examples create John Wilkes
Booths and Lee Harvey Oswalds.

K Street and responsible citizens cannot allow this to go on if
our country is to survive.

Complacency jeopardizes the miracle called America.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Win the Battle and Lose the War!

Once again Republicans showed how not to lead by failing to do what they said they would do.

They spent the last 7 years proclaiming that if the voters vote them into power, they would “repeal and replace” Obamacare. So, when given the chance by controlling the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, they failed big time.

Contrary to how the Democrats operated in passing Obamacare by voting for the bill even though they had reservations about it, the Republicans blew it. Yes, the Democrat leadership used bribery and arm-twisting, but in the end, the Democrats walked in lock step to pass the monstrosity called Obamacare. Not so with the Republicans, some being so much the ideologues, they couldn't accommodate each other to come to a consensus to pass a “repeal and replace” bill.

It is an honorable trait to have principles and to stick with them, but sometimes in order to get what you want you might have to swallow things you don't like now in order to get what you want later on.

I was a supporter of the Tea Party movement, but some of its adherents are “ideological purists” who say it's my way or the highway. No compromise, no giving up one inch of their principles for the greater good seems to be their modus operandi. It seems that the Republicans are their own worse enemies, again.

The recent failure of the bill getting rid of the disaster called Obamacare, is a perfect example. Whether or not the bill that failed was good or bad, it was a start considering that the Democrats would not go along with anything proposed by the Republicans. The rules of the Washington political establishment make proposing new legislation a difficult task to accomplish. When our leaders, in crafting legislation, have to contend with these archaic rules, it sometimes causes the instituting of reform very difficult to achieve.

President Trump tried his skill of negotiating to help pass the bill, but he couldn't overcome the rabid ideologues in his own party who wanted a bill that incorporated 100% of their ideas.

Maybe, on second thought, it might just be a blessing in disguise for the Republicans, as of now the impending implosion of Obamacare is now fully owned by the Democrats. They would have to answer to the voters (especially the the middle-class who are getting killed by enormous premiums and outrageous deductibles) that all the hoopla that they could keep their doctor, their health care plan, and that they would save $2,500 for a family of 4, were all lies and that their gloating over the Republican defeat of their proposed bill to repeal and replace, is like sticking their finger in the eye of the vast majority of the over-burdened middle-class people who are being hurt by this stupid health care bill called Obamacare.

Yes, the anti-American Health Care cadre who opposed the bill won the battle, but in the process they lost the war. You could say that the Republicans are their own worst enemy. Let's hope they can gather their thoughts and work together on getting the rest of the Trump agenda passed for the benefit of the country.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, April 6, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

You can tell a lot about a President from the
way he descends the stairs of Air Force One.

I am deadly serious about this.  We can all recall the way  Barack Hussein Obama held his clenched hands together in front of himself as he minced down the stairs like a Fairy Godmother. When he remembered to do it, he saluted as he passed the squared-away Marine in dress blues who stood at statue-like attention at the bottom of the stairs – Obama never, ever looked at the Marine Guard or otherwise acknowledged his presence when he saluted – and true to form, he saluted like a faggot-Fairy Godmother.  It was a pitiful and genuinely disgusting sight to witness and one that was best purged immediately from one’s memory.
Have you noticed how President Donald Trump descends the stairs of Air Force One?  He descends the stairs with confidence at a steady pace, jacket open and his long necktie flowing in the breeze.  As he takes the last two steps, he turns slightly toward his right to face the Marine Guard and executes a sharp military salute. And I’ve noticed that when he is ready to ascend the stairs, he looks directly at the Marine, snaps a salute of respect and climbs the stairs.   
Yep. You can tell a lot about a President from the way he descends the stairs of Air Force One. Thanks, Pres.Trump.

                                                                          MORT KUFF   © 2-4-2017

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, April 2, 2017

The “Marxist Brothers”!

Now that the Democrats have lost the presidential election, they have proven that the party has turned to the “far left” by choosing Thomas Perez and Rep. Keith Ellison to be Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Democrat National Committee. These two are being called the “Marxist Brothers” because of their radical leftist philosophy and actions while in public office.

The leftist tilt (whatever happened to the “Blue Dog” Democrats?) of the Democrat Party was mentioned by pundits as one of the major causes and reasons why they lost the presidential election to Donald Trump, and has left the Democrat Party in shambles, and by giving the G.O.P. the majorities in both the Senate and the House, besides 34 state governorship's and over 1,000 Republican state and local elected positions. It seems that the Democrat Party is doubling down on their leftist tilt by naming Perez and Ellison to head the DNC. The Republicans are ecstatic.

Who are these new leaders of the Democrat National Committee? Let's see:

Thomas Perez, a civil rights lawyer from the State of Maryland, and of Dominican Republic descent, has previously held positions as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in charge of civil rights, and as President Obama's Secretary of Labor. Perez, as an Assistant in the Obama Justice Department, was the one who recommended dropping the voter intimidation charges against the Black Panthers, who were charged with bringing weapons into a polling place. He, at one time, testified that he didn't think “white people” are protected

by the Voting Rights Act. In addition, ala Hillary Clinton, he used a private e-mail address to dodge accountability of communicating with organizations such as Planned Parenthood, the N.Y. Times etc. He was also an ardent supporter of raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour, which most economists claim is a job killer, especially among the youth and minorities.

It was a well known fact that he was endorsed by, the Democrat establishment, both Obama and Hillary whereas his opponent for chairman, Ellison, was endorsed by socialist Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Chuck Schumer. Perez was named chairman on the second ballot by a margin of 35 votes.

Upon being elected, Perez, in an attempt to gain party unity, moved to have the committee, by acclamation, name his rival Ellison as Vice-Chairman. This the delegates did do.

As for Vice-Chairman Ellison, he also has a history of left leaning tendencies. As an example, he has a 100% rating from the pro-abortion group called NARAL; he has come out against gun rights (amending the 2nd Amendment); he wants to normalize relations with that state sponsor of terrorism, Iran; he voted to bring charges of impeachment of former Vice-President Dick Cheney for his so-called “high crimes and misdemeanors”; and he also claimed that the militant leader of the Nation of Islam of which he was once a member), Louis Farrakhan, was not an anti-Semite, even after he called Judaism a “gutter religion”; he has called for “reparations” to blacks for slavery, which ended over 150 years ago; and to top off his troubling resume he has received and accepted campaign contributions from an “un-indicted” terrorist organization called CAIR (Council of American-Islamic Relations).

In case you are unaware, Ellison is black and he is a practicing Muslim, which might account for many of his past actions and statements.

To point out some more bizarre behavior, as Ellison and Wasserman-Schultz were sitting together at the State of the Union address by President Trump, both refused to clap, even as bi-partisan issues, like job creation, were mentioned, and both sat on their hands and didn't stand when the widow of a killed-in-action Navy Seal was introduced by President Trump. They looked as though it was the worst moment in their lives as almost everyone else stood up and applauded out of respect.

So, as you can see, it looks like the Democrats didn't learn their lesson after losing the last election, mainly by tilting so far left by voting in these two radical, left-leaning leaders - the title “The Marxist Brothers” seems to fit these two to a tee.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Wandering Thoughts

As we age, the horizon seems to be coming closer and not out of reach.
I wonder if other octogenarians are evaluating life and the years that have
gone by, or contemplating something more beyond the horizon after they
leave this life.

Not meaning to sound morbid, it is more of curiosity that begs the question,
"what the hell has this been all about?"

See: It Didn't Just Happen
Though I try to maintain a Christian code, I cannot abide on some things
attributed to Christ, like turning the other cheek, or compassion of forgiveness.
There are and have been tyrants and events that should never have been
tolerated or ever forgiven. I don't understand the disparity where some have
opportunity and others dealt the dirty end of the stick, in some cases, caused
by inept leaders.

Good and evil creep into society where, not accepting all diversity is labeled
racists by inept leaders and their followers, who are not able to differentiate
the good from evil in their zeal to appear caring.

On a personal note describing my life, the word is "almost."

Reaching my hopes and dreams has always been almost, therefor in grading
my life objectively, it is a C. The road is getting me closer to finding out if
there is such a thing as a soul and does it get recycled, or is the end a light
turned off into darkness, never to shine again.

Conservative column from George Giftos

The Three Stooges: Featuring Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Elizabeth Warren.
Yes the Democrats have a Deep bench.

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, March 26, 2017

The Law of Diminishing Returns

It seems that one of the great passions of the liberal Democrats is the idea that raising taxes on the rich will somehow even the “economic playing field”. One big problem, it hasn't worked in the past and will not work in the future.

There comes a point when if you “punish” someone for being successful by overtaxing and/or over regulating them to raise government revenue in order to fund social programs and “pet” projects, the opposite effect occurs in most all instances. In Economics 101, that is called the “Law of Diminishing Returns” (in taxation, the point where increasing the tax rates, over and above what is fair, do not produce the desired revenue, but it actually generates less revenue than expected). Let's look at history. Starting in the 1920's, when Pres. Calvin Coolidge lowered the tax rates, to when JFK, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush also lowered the tax rates, we have seen a subsequent boom in positive economic activity, contrary with what the naysayers (Socialists and Democrats) were predicting.

It might seem strange and incongruous that when tax rates are raised over a certain point, that the revenue that comes into the government coffers was less than what was expected, but when the rates were reduced to a “fair” amount, revenue soared. It was the the tax cuts proposed and enacted under Ronald Reagan that produced low inflation, low unemployment and the greatest economic boom in U.S. history, which continued on for the next 20 years. When Reagan came into office in 1980, federal receipts were approximately $600 billion. In 1989, which was Reagan's last full budget, government receipts had shot up to $909 billion. But even with those increased government revenues, we still ran the government at a deficit. The main reason for that anomaly was entirely the product of Congressional “pork barrel” spending. They, the Congress, spent more money than the government took in in revenue, mainly for social programs that did not work.

It has been downhill ever since, especially since Pres. Obama, took office, as we now have over $20 trillion in national debt and it's still rising at an alarming rate. It is expected to reach $25 trillion in just a few short years. This could possibly result in what might be called a “government bankruptcy” (ala Greece and some other European economy's) unless we change course. That's what Trump promised us in the last campaign.

The Democrats continue to float the idea that it is “unfair” for someone in our society to amass wealth while others wallow in poverty. The Marxist/Socialist tenet of “share the wealth” by taking from the rich (a/k/a the successful) and giving to the poor has “honorable intentions”, but in practicality, the unintended consequences have proved disastrous in practice. Pres. Johnson's signature legislation called the “War on Poverty”, is a good example of failure of government involvement in helping the less fortunate. Just the opposite has occurred as the poverty rate hasn't really improved in the over 52 years and more than $8 trillion spent on the poverty initiatives that were put into effect as a result of those programs. The most financially secure countries in the world are countries that are mostly free enterprise capitalistic countries, not Marxist/Socialist countries, who try to institute a “share the wealth” philosophy. In the words of one of our founders, Benjamin Franklin who said: “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will be the end of the republic”. Let's hope that doesn't happen to our country.

So, the point of this editorial is that once you can reach the “point of diminishing returns”, it is downhill from there and the unintended consequences of these policies take over to make matters worse, not better.

The policies promoted by Pres. Obama and his Administration have not worked, even though he and and the Democrats told us that “everything is beautiful” economically. So now, President Donald Trump, has undertaken a reversal of those policies by proposing the lowering of taxes for both individuals and corporations and by reducing the regulations that have hampered economic growth for far too long. Too much government involvement has a tendency to stifle achievement as the incentives to succeed are diminished and many people will rebel, it is human nature. So, we must turn back many of those anti-growth policies that have reached the “point of diminishing returns”, and bring back the American spirit of innovation and incentives to succeed as the greatest nation in the world. That's why Trump's slogan of “Make America Great Again” resonated with the voting public in winning the presidency.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 23, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

                Get it in writing.
I want to see this new Administration issue an official ruling to the effect that all pronouncements at official functions be delivered in the English language, only.  This includes the opening and closing prayers by members of the clergy and the entirety of the text by all other speakers.  
There is no place in public discourse for words in any other language.  
It is my strongly held opinion that every citizen of this nation be fluent in our one language (English); loyal to our one flag, the Stars and Stripes and sworn to acceptance of the entirety of the tenets of The Constitution of the United States of America, our sacred guiding document, with no exceptions or reservations whatsoever. If individuals, including all legal citizens, are not willing to commit and assimilate to this degree, they should not be permitted to enjoy any of the benefits of citizenship of this nation.
I am absolutely opposed to any so-called ‘accommodations’ that are a result of intimidation tactics by followers of Islam intent on imposing their version of the tenets of the Quran that call for violence against non-believers. No public  ceremony that is sponsored by our Government at local, State, regional or Federal level should permit any such participants.  It should be a legal requirement that organizers of all public events require a written & signed statement from every single speaker, to the effect that no part of the content of their message can be interpreted as, in opposition to any part of the original intent of the authors of The Constitution. Otherwise, what is the purpose of citizenship in the United States?  
        If we are not totally committed patriots then, what are we?

                                                                             MORT KUFF   © 1-22-2017

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, March 19, 2017

What is a “Snowflake”?

A new word has joined the lexicon of the English language, the word is “snowflake”. Here's the definition of the word:

“An overly sensitive person incapable of dealing with any opinion that differs from his/her own”. These people can often be seen congregating mainly on college campuses.

Look what is happening on many college campuses around the country today. Schools have set up “safe spaces”, where students can be free of any opinions that might make them upset - no adverse opinions that might upset someone will be tolerated in those “safe spaces”. In addition, some schools have also banned certain words (speech codes) like the term “freshman” which in normal parlance means a student's first year in high school or college, as being sexist, and therefore, unacceptable by “wussified” professors and administrators trying to appeal to the far-left fringe, which generally run most colleges and universities.

Another fallout from this bogus sensitivity of others hearing or spouting differing opinions, is the rise of organizing efforts, some of which are sponsored by outside agitating groups, some of which are financed by George Soros, to prevent, shout down, or harass speakers that have different points of view, mainly conservative speakers like Condolezza Rice, writer and pundit Ann Coulter, social scientist Dr. Charles Murray, columnist Ben Shapiro, author David Horowitz and a host of other learned speakers from the “right” point of view (i.e. Republicans, conservatives or libertarians). In some cases, riots and desecration of property has occurred, on and off campus, with little consequences meted out to the students and agitators causing the damage or mayhem. It is a well-known fact, that most all schools of higher learning are staffed with leftist professors and administrators, who tout the liberal progressive line, and who institute restrictive rules and regulations controlling the actions of students on and off the campus. Free speech, which the liberals and progressives champion as part of their makeup, is generally limited on campus if anyone tries to digress from the “party line”, which is liberal progressive orthodoxy.

The term “snowflake” is a natural progression of the hideous term “political correctness”, which has had an adverse effect upon our language and culture for many years. Many “unelected” busybodies (mostly from the left side of the political spectrum) have determined what is permissible to be said or done under penalty of public ostracism and scorn by these members of the so-called “P.C. Police”. You name it, our lives are being disrupted by others telling us what is permissible in the general interchange between people as to what we can say or do.

Just recently, Dr. Ben Carson, President Trump's H.U.D. Secretary, was accused of making a “racist” statement by inferring that the slaves that were brought here against their will, hundreds of years ago, were in a way, immigrants to our country. A totally benign statement that was twisted and spun to infer that he made a racist remark by equating slavery with immigration. The fact that Dr. Carson was a black person meant nothing to these “race hustlers”, he is a conservative Republican and a member of Trump's cabinet, therefore, he must be condemned and pilloried. Little mention was made that our first black President Barack Obama, had made over 10 similar references, over the years, equating slavery and immigration, by using the same analogy as Dr. Carson. No condemnation from the left about Obama's remarks, most likely because he was a liberal Democrat, and in their eyes, he was the right kind of black person, not a black Republican and Trump supporter, like Dr. Carson.

Wake up America, our traditions, culture, and morals are under attack, we must not sit idly by and accept this “wussification” of America without some form of a counter attack. Our present president, Donald Trump seems to be leading the charge against this insidious manipulation of our lives by the left. We should back him completely in his quest to neutralize the “snowflakes” and the P.C. Police.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

A tribute to Snowflakes everywhere!

Friends in Safe Spaces. Chad Prather and Steve Mudflap McGrew aka Larry the Liberal

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Rioters a/k/a Protesters are Emotionally Primitive

We are experiencing dire consequences from all sides of the spectrum because, many on the Washington scene are fearful the game is over and their cushy jobs are in peril of going down with the draining of the swamp.

It isn't mere speculation that the hold overs from the last administration may be behind the intelligence leaks and the chaotic events designed to upset President Trump's agenda for making America great again, as evidenced by the hateful rhetoric expressed from these people.

The Democratic party no longer exists as it was before the Obama era, because it has compromised traditional values, and the people, not living in heavily populated coastal urban areas have spoken.
They didn't vote for Donald Trump for his personality or oratory, but for action he promised, that has already been displayed in such a short time.

The people are also fed up with the anarchists, Bolsheviks and other organizations claiming their rioting is legal protest. They draw in the unsuspecting, uninformed naïve, who are emotionally primitive in their attempt to express themselves without violence, and are limited in their vocabulary by confining themselves to using a barrage of "F" bombs to state their opposition to traditions.
The Trumpians mean to change the climate and clean the attitude of the Washington elitists.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, March 12, 2017

What is Fake News?

My definition of “fake news” is a person or organization that is attempting to purvey or present a story to the public that's made up or grossly embellished in order to promote some agenda or to be against some person with whom they dislike or abhor. You could say that both political parties have been guilty of doing that, but it seems that the liberals (a/k/a Democrats and Progressives) have taken it to a whole new level, especially since Donald Trump became a candidate and eventually the President of the United States.

It is normal for the news media or political opponents (in some cases they are one in the same) to “spin” information to further their views. That might be looked upon as “white lies”, but when stories are made up of “whole cloth” to be used as a negative weapon against someone or something you don't support or agree with, that is a “whopper” of a lie, and can be considered “fake news”.

President Trump, who is probably considered to be one of the most unorthodox politicians in modern history, has been the victim of this phenomenon, of the presentation of made up stories and outright fabrications by his opponents in the media and by the Democrats. Trump being Trump, doesn't take those “bogus” stories lying down, he fights right back and goes after those who he feels are trying to undermine him and his presidency. Some made up stories to make my point are: that he removed a bust of Martin Luther King from the Oval Office (not true), that the 1st lady Melania Trump was an escort, a prostitute when she first came to the United States (not true), that his White House staff is in disarray according to “unnamed” sources in the White House (not true) etc., etc.

The news media is overwhelmingly liberal and it's sympathies generally are “in the pocket” of the Democrats. Therefore, the stories they speak on or write about are generally unfavorable to the Republicans, and especially unfavorable to President Trump.

Now don't get me wrong, the president, Donald Trump, is not always accurate in some of his utterances he makes, but they are generally exaggerations and/or bravado, not meaningful or earth shattering untruths. But, the news media and the Democrats jump on those utterances and generally make “mountains out of molehills”, as the old saying goes, accusing him of gross misconduct, and of all things, “impeachable offenses”.

All during his campaign and during the initial phases of his presidency, President Trump has used the term “fake news” to label some of the stories promulgated by the news media, especially CNN, MSNBC, the N.Y. Times, and Wash. Post etc. These news organizations take exception when Pres. Trump labels them purveyors of “fake news”, but the public seems to agree with Pres. Trump that many of the stories that are put out for publication are made up, with no reliable sourcing, and meant to make Pres. Trump and his administration look bad and to undermine his presidency. That tactic seems to have backfired on the media, and the public is very disenchanted by the low ratings they give to the news media.

We do have “freedom of speech” in our country, but we also have a set of morals (which seem to be under fierce attack lately) and a Constitution which has been given to us by our forefathers. Honesty and integrity are two principles that should be followed by all who disseminate the news (the 4th Estate), and it should be fair and balanced in reporting of that news. Opinions should be reserved for the editorial page and not in the actual news stories, and made up stories (fake news) should be scrapped altogether, otherwise our whole system, our democratic republic, will be compromised and made a farce. President Trump says he will fight against “fake news” with all his might, and from his past record of achieving success, he might just succeed in reducing its incidence or he might even be able to get rid of it altogether.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 9, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

    Let’s be fair to the Fairways.
Woodmont Country Club located just outside Washington, D.C. has a very fine golf course that is renowned among those who love that sport.  It was founded in 1921 by Washington, D.C. German-Jewish Golfers so that they might enjoy a facility at which they were welcome, which was not the case at the other private courses convenient to the Nation’s Capital.
In the aftermath of the recent missed opportunity to take action in support of Israel as it was being piled-on at the UN, the full-time golf course hacker & part-time president Barack Hussein Obama’ was being considered for a ‘complimentary’ membership to Woodmont.  Suddenly, it became a cause for concern.
Hence, the ultra-Leftist Liberal Jewish members who were and are still, enthusiastic supporters of Hussein Obama, find that they are being thwarted in their efforts to bestow this honor upon him, due to his action of openly stabbing Israel in the back.
It is this writer’s suggestion that there ought to be a path by which  Obama might be brought in from the shadows.  He should be  permitted to work as a Caddy for a trial period of ten years after which, if he has compiled a clean record, he might once again be considered for membership.  This time, as an Associate, non-voting member of the Club, fully-paid-up from his own funds. He would then be allowed access to the Course, to play 18 holes by himself, during the Jewish High Holidays while Club members  of the Jewish faith are at services in their Synagogues. It’s all about ‘Fairness’ folks, it’s all about ‘Fairness’.

                                                                               MORT KUFF  © 1-13-2017

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, March 5, 2017

Are Police Killings of Blacks a Form of Racism?

If you listen to to some of the militant so-called black leaders and radical civil rights leaders, you'd think that every time a policeman kills a black person, it was based on the policeman's innate racism toward blacks. Do these race hustlers have a legitimate gripe? Let's look at the facts: In 2015, 986 people were shot and killed by police. Of that number, 495 were white (50%) and 258 were black (26%). That's a 2 to1 ratio.

Many liberals portray shootings by police as racist attacks on blacks, regardless of the facts. It turns out that the U.S. Justice Dep't. has found that black police officers in San Francisco and Philadelphia are more likelier than white officers to shoot and use force against black suspects. Is that racism? According to Heather MacDonald, author of the book, “War on Cops”, in 2013, 42% of cop killers were black and there was no charge of racism by the “poverty pimps” (Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Black Lives Matter, New Black Panther Party, Louis Farrakhan etc.)

Another false claim by academic liberals and civil rights spokespeople who make the claim that the disproportionate number of blacks in prison is a result of racism and strict drug laws that target blacks more than any other group. They ignore the fact that black criminal activity is many multiples of that of other racial groups. MacDonald says that state prisons contain 88% of the nation's prison population and that just 4% of state prisoners are incarcerated for drug possession. The vast majority of blacks in prison are there because of violent crime - and mostly against other black people. In fact, the most tragic aspect of black crime are law abiding black people who must conduct their lives in fear. The white liberals, who constantly make excuses for this aspect of black crime, do not live this way and in most cases would not tolerate it.

When President Trump makes reference to this horrible situation, he is vilified and called a racist and insensitive to the plight of the black community that are confronted with this almost on a daily basis. But, why are pliant blacks being used as pawns of the white liberals who are mostly in charge of the cities where this black crime is taking place? They should be using their efforts to support and champion the people who are trying to protect them from the criminals among them, the police. (Most of this information I've mentioned in this editorial was gleaned from an article by Professor Walter Williams, a well respected black academic and economist).

The term racist, which is used primarily by liberals to attack conservatives, is now becoming hackneyed and irrelevant because it is being over used by the purveyors of racial tumult. The biggest victims of this slander and libel are conservative blacks like Ben Carson, Thomas Sowell, Lt.Col. Allen West, Larry Elder, Sen. Tim Scott and the aforementioned Walter Williams etc., all highly respected citizens by fair-minded people.

So, the next time you hear any of the racial arsonists claim that the police are the enemies of black people, refer to the crime statistics I've presented in this editorial to refute their baseless charges.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Emancipation Constipation

It can't be denied that a large portion of women voted
for Hillary Clinton simply because she is a woman and
for no other reason, no matter how dishonest and
corrupt she is. It was the same when almost all blacks
voted for Barack Obama, no matter how inexperienced
and inept he has proven to be, simply because of the
color of his skin. It's sad their plight never change under
his leadership. Only few have realized or accepted the
irony of their vote.

Donald Trump is issuing his "Emancipation Constipation,"
a fiat, or government laxative, to drain the swamp of all
the political crap accumulated during the Obama years,
now that he has been elected to lead our country.

Hopefully, the proposals he lays out will give instant relief
from the discomfort we have been forced to endure for the
past eight years, by being stuffed like a goose, with
executive orders and proposals, that produced a foie gras
of entitlements, thankfully falling short of garnering the
votes they hoped would continue the agony of defeat for
traditionalists and those of conservative persuasion.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share