Sunday, July 23, 2017

Are We a Nation of Addicts?

Yes, we all know the addictive properties of tobacco, alcohol, heroin, cocaine, opioids, and the so-called “harmless drug” marijuana, but we are now encountering quite a few newer and other addictions, many of which have been recently confirmed and that are causing great concern in the medical, and mental health communities.

The addictions listed above are concerns because they are mind-altering drugs and/or health hazards, but the newer addictions, which are not mind-altering per se, but are in some ways equally harmful to the body and to society in general.

Let's take look at some of these other addictions. Just during the past decade, the addiction of using cyber machines have taken the country by storm, namely the use of I-Phones, Twitter accounts, and tablets. Most everyone, both young and old, seem to have one of these cyber contraptions and it seems to becoming an addiction to many of the people using them. Just go the mall and watch the people walk by, most people have their I Phones out in their hands or sticking out of their back pockets (its slimness makes it easy to carry them in your back pocket). It is not only the young people, but many of the adults who are “thumbing” their way through the buttons of their machines. I've even seen youngsters, as young as 4 years old, with determined interest in their I-Phones, thumbing along with the rest of the people, totally oblivious to others around them. This activity can be very dangerous, especially when walking on the sidewalk or when crossing the street, and especially when driving a car. Some states have passed laws banning texting while driving, and a person could be fined for that act.

You wonder if this obsession (or addiction) is a good activity that is just keeping up with the technological changes of life, or is it just a passing fancy that will fade away in the future? I err on the side of addiction now and in the future. (I just returned from 4 weeks in the country of Costa Rica, and it is just like here in the U.S. when it comes to the use of these machines).

Another activity that borders on an addiction is the mindset by many “health nuts” that they will only eat “pure food” and drink. Vegans (or semi-vegans) are seriously into what they claim is the “healthy regimen” of eating only foods that are organic, “cage free” (as in eggs), no sugar, no salt, gluten free, wild caught fish (no farmed fish), and a host of other no-no's that they consider “sinful” if ingested into their bodies. They have a tendency to look down upon others who don't accept their food and drink choices, sometimes bordering on disdain. Is that really a healthy regimen to follow or are they just addicted to their “pure lifestyle”. I believe that they have the right idea about eating healthy foods, but they carry their lifestyle to ridiculous extremes which creates much tension among others who associate with them. Is it an addiction, you make the call?

Another activity that can be addictive, I feel, are the the people who gear their lives to overly trying to be physically fit by exercising to the extreme, sometimes 3 to 4 hours a day (I'm not referring to prize fighters and/or some other athletes who must meet certain physical parameters to excel in their sport). Yes, physical fitness is a good activity to engage in, but when you take that good activity to the extreme, it can be detrimental to your health and well-being. An example of an extreme physical fitness addiction is a woman that comes to the gym I patronize, who must weigh between 80 to 90 pounds and works out on a “Stairmaster” (a very difficult exercise machine), for about an excess of 2 hours a day, plus using other machines. She is all skin and bones, and I presume that she feels that she is overweight (maybe she's even anorexic). To me, this is an addictive behavior just as overeating is addictive to some who become morbidly obese.

I'm sure I could list other addictive behaviors, but I think you get the point I'm trying to make. Most of these behaviors are self-imposed, but in the case of of people with physical problems who become addicted in trying to relieve their pain and discomfort, through no fault of their own, help should be made available to them to rid themselves of their addiction.

Other than the government trying to restrict the mind-altering addictions, the government should not get involved in banning certain other addictive activities, but they should get involved in educating the public as to the dangers of getting addicted to any activity, as they have done in their successful campaign in the past against cigarette smoking.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, July 20, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

The Wall Street Journal headlines that,
“Putin is not America’s Friend”.

Now, if that isn’t Pulitzer Prize journalism, I don’t know what is.
Ya coulda fooled us.  All the smart money was on Putin when the two leaders met in person for the first time, at G20.  Prediction:  poor, naïve, unsophisticated President Trump would be eaten alive by the wily, ex-KGB tough guy. It would be a slam-dunk.
Pres. Trump said that he was ‘honored’ to be meeting with the leader of the former Soviet Union.  Trump says a lot of things, the vast majority of which are astutely calculated to have a particular effect on whomever he is conversing with.  It’s his thing; it’s what he does.
Is anyone so naïve as to think for one split second, that Trump, the world’s most accomplished negotiator, doesn’t know how to read anyone with whom he is negotiating?  With just a fleeting reprise at how this life-long business tycoon decided to run for the Presidency and then plow through all comers, including the Royal Dame of Democrat Corruption, Hillary the Horrible, one is obliged to conclude that this is a narrative about a dominant male who never fails to achieve supremacy.
If there are two people in the room and one of them is Donald Trump – my money is on the Trumpster to take home the prize.
                                                  MORT KUFF        © 7-10-2017

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 16, 2017

What is Cranial Rectal Inversion?

Cranial Rectal Inversion (CRI) is a malady (disease) that is mostly contracted by liberals who have their heads so firmly planted up their butts, that it is unlikely that they'll ever have another rational point-of-view. It is in most cases, incurable, and they can transfer it to other liberals whom they intermingle with.

The symptoms are very numerous, but I'll try to enumerate the ideas and policies associated with this malady, which causes them and their fellow liberals to be afflicted with this disease.

First off,. The liberals that are infected are in favor of, open borders and giving amnesty to illegal aliens, the more the better; they favor taking money from the rich and giving handouts to the poor ( free stuff); they favor unfettered abortion up till the time of breech (in other words, late-term abortion); they call Wall Street “evil” while taking in millions of dollars in campaign contributions from those very same financial institutions; they believe in same sex marriage and gender neutral bathrooms and shower rooms; they believe in appeasing our avowed enemies while “dissing” our friends ( like Israel); they want to take away the firearms of law abiding citizens while they, in the past, released thousands of criminals from our jails and prisons; and they turn a blind eye on the corrupt activities of the Clinton's ( ex:the Clinton “Crime” Foundation) and their loyal cronies (a/k/a liberals, Progressives, Democrats, and Socialists), and finally, they can't get over the fact that Queen Hillary (a/k/a Nurse Rachit) Clinton lost the election to political neophyte Donald Trump in a stunning upset.

There are many more symptoms as to why the liberals are infected with CRI, but we don't have time or space to enumerate them all. You could say that they have their heads so far up their butts, they can chew their food on the way down, to add to the earlier definition at the beginning of this Pulitzer prize winning editorial (there's no conceit in my family, I have it all, ha,ha!).

The cases of CRI sort of escalate generally around the time of an election period. To try to counteract this malady, they (the Democrats) trot out the usual verbal garbage their sleazy focus groups tell them to use to try to slime their opponents ( the Republicans) as it has worked very well for them in the past. They say Republicans are anti-woman; anti-black; anti-Hispanic; anti-poor; anti-abortion; anti-gays and lesbians, and the new favored class, transgenders (which make up ½ of one-percent of the population) etc. , but it doesn't seem to help them get cured, in fact, it makes their condition much worse.

Just listen back to the campaign of Hillary Clinton in 2016, which had an advanced case of CRI, and it got worse each and every week she campaigned. By getting the Democrat nomination and losing the general election, her case of CRI is still non-reversible and she will have to bear the agony of being considered terminally irrelevant even after her shocking loss to Pres. Donald Trump, much to the chagrin of Barack Hussein Obama and his flawed legacy and her record of economic and foreign policy failures.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, July 13, 2017

Anonymous Sources Has a Name

Blood sucking elements in the democratic party and fake news
media keep pecking on the scab that divides the country, wanting
to draw blood, keeping the wound open, because they do not want
America to heal for fear they will become extraneous.

They are illusionary, suffering from Yehoodi syndrome. The term I
have coined to describe their anonymous sources, whom they often
cite as the persons they come to for their erroneous accusations.
Yehoodi was exemplified as the little man who wasn't there, in the
old Jack Benny radio shows in the 40's.

While the Trump administration is trying to move the country ahead,
the blood suckers' manic obsession with Russia, sinking their teeth
deep into the fallacy of collusion and not letting it go, no matter how
hard or how many facts are thrown at them, has not offered even
one idea or piece of constructive legislation, preferring to obstruct
and continue their campaign of hate, to topple the present seat of
government. It is incendiary and subversive!

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 9, 2017

President Trump's Speech in Poland

President Donald Trump delivers this terrific speech to a crowd in Warsaw, Poland. This speech came ahead of the G20 summit. You will not hear President Trump bad mouth America or apologize for our Country.

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, July 6, 2017

Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share?

To listen to the Democrats, the next worse thing to ISIS (and to some, climate change), the terrorist Muslims in Syria and Iraq, are the wealthy individuals in the United States of America. They keep harping on the erroneous fact that that the rich don't pay their “fair share” in paying income taxes and that they are greedy besides, and have become rich on the backs of the poor. Is it true that the rich don't pay their “fair share” of income taxes?

As former Democratic candidate for president, Al Smith (1928) once said, “Let's look at the record”. According to the 2010 (which is still valid today) non-partisan Tax Foundation report, the top 1% earns 19% of the gross national income and pays 38% of all federal taxes. The top 5% earns 34% and pays 59%. The top 10% earns 45% and pays 71%. The bottom 50% pays just 3% of federal tax. If that isn't soaking the rich”, I don't know what it is? Shouldn't everyone have a dog in the fight by paying something to the government?

It is true that during the 8 years of the Obama Administration, the rich have gotten richer and the poor and middle-class have remained stagnant or have lost income, mainly due to the run-up of the stock market, which the rich are heavily invested in. The spending policies and the regulatory policies of the Obama Administration, and the low interest rates of the Federal Reserve, have also contributed to this income gap. The only economically sound way to stop this difference in income differential is to get the economy stimulated with policies that will encourage entrepreneurship so that we can produce more jobs, and in return generate more tax revenue to the federal treasury, so that we can reduce the burden of taxation on the upper and middle-class taxpayers. The policies of the Obama Administration did not work for most people, and change was needed (not the hope and change “snake oil” promoted by Obama) to get us back on the right economic track. President Trump, before and after his election, has proposed a reform of our tax system to make it easier for people to pay their taxes and to reduce the rates that all taxpayers now pay. If and when those reforms are passed, our economy will take off upward as it is now doing without the needed reforms in place.

But, the inexperience of former President Obama in economics , and his lack of sound fiscal and administrative knowledge, he seemed to have a “tin ear” as to what was needed to get our economy booming again. The voters had the chance in 2016 to elect a real “money man” of integrity in Donald Trump, and they voted him president.

The semi-Marxist/Socialist plan, espoused by President Obama (and the Democrats), did not get us out of our stagnating economy during his 8 years in office. He preached “income redistribution” by blaming the wealthy of not doing their “fair share” to contribute to the government's revenue. Without the wealthy class paying the vast majority of the income taxes, we'd be in a much greater financial bind than we are in right now, approaching $20 trillion in debt. Even the “evil” Koch Bros., as the Democrats like to call them, have a company that employs over 67,000 workers at better than average wages, yet they are vilified as being un-American by the Democrats, and some have even claimed that they should be jailed for being so “rich”. What, for being successful and wealthy? Are the Democrats that out of touch with reality or what?

We need many more Koch Bros., and other millionaires and billionaires, in order to get our economy moving upward like it should be going. The Democrats and the Liberals should stop demonizing the wealth creators for purely partisan political purposes.

So, the answer to this editorial's headline is - YES - the rich do pay their “fair share” and we do need more people to get a well paying jobs so that we can get out of the economic malaise that the Obama Administration nas kept us in for 8 years. We should all strive to become millionaires and billionaires, as it would be good for our country and to the entire world. Instead of “sharing the wealth” by taking from the rich and giving to the poor (the Robin Hood syndrome) in the form of handouts and financial government “goodies”, in order to gain votes by the recipients of those “goodies” at election time, we should be promoting the “sharing the opportunity” for all to succeed and achieve financial success. That's the American way. A hand up instead of a handout is what will make America great again.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 2, 2017

MORT’s meanderings

On July 4, 2017, and on every other
one of the 364 days in a year, here
in the United States of America,
‘we’ celebrate the miracle
of our Independence.

‘We’, refers to those of us who have read, understood and  wholeheartedly agree with the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution in its original intent and the Bill of Rights.

Any individuals who do not accept these sacred documents in their totality, as handed down to us by the Founding Fathers, and who do not believe in what America is all about, will never assimilate therefore - they should voluntarily move out or be forcibly moved out, to take up residence elsewhere.

                                                                       MORT KUFF    © 7-2-2017

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 29, 2017

An Olio of Potpurri

I'm a lot smarter than the majority of the people, but this isn't
a point of contention, considering it is depressing and not some
thing to be proud of, realizing how much I don't know. Which
doesn't say much about the majority of the people.

If we are to praise modern technology for its achievements, we
must also count the harm it is causing through social media in
its irresponsible miss use of this aspect of it, that has contributed
to the decline of moral values.

It is also a medium used by the manipulators to reach clueless
and disgruntled masses, like those whom I profess to know more
than they do, uniting them into mobs for destruction, and by their
use, stand to gain from the chaos under pretense of protest.

This is allowed due to another miss use; the abuse of the First
Amendment and misinterpretation in its meaning. The wording
must be honed to prevent or correct its flaws by adding an
amendment to the First Amendment.

Feel good liberals are a hinder toward better governance due
to their adherence to political correction, standing in a circle,
holding hands, singing kumbaya and hoping redistributing the
wealth earned by the productive will solve all our problems.

By patronage for open borders, they are compounding additional
problems. We cannot control the influx of illegal immigration and
undesirables who will never assimilate into American culture, but
form enclaves and barrios with no intent to follow our laws, as
shockingly witnessed by other countries who have opened their
borders without weighing the consequence of losing their identity
as a nation.

They will never become the "Little Italy" or the "China Towns"
that are now a part of our culture.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

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

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