MORT’s MEANDERINGS:
If Eric Holder were a student horn player, I could probably tolerate his unintelligible sounds - making the excuse that music charts are hard to read, without training. Quite obviously, he is not a trained musician – trained seal is more like it. Even so, he must be able to read English and sound out some English words – he is purported to be a college grad.
Watching his disgusting performance before a Congressional Judicial Committee was a national embarrassment. When he admitted that while he hadn’t actually read the 10-page Arizona law but, that he had read ‘reports’ of its contents – presumably, in the left-leaning, Obama-biased media, he lost any vestige of justification for retaining the position of U. S. Attorney General. He appeared before a Congressional Committee with apparently no preparation; that is most egregious and absolutely unforgivable. To add insult to injury, he stubbornly refused to acknowledge that ‘Radical Islam’ could possibly be a factor in crimes against the security of our nation. He didn’t want to be put in a position of sounding unfair to or accusatory of any religion. He didn’t want to ‘offend’. That did it for me.
So, I’m suggesting that in order to make his life a bit more comfy for him, he should be axxed to take a slightly modified oath of office, along the following lines:
“As Attorney General of these United States of America, I swear to protect and preserve the unlawful rights of both foreign and domestic violently radical Islamic terrorists, from being infringed upon by duly sworn officers of the Department of Justice or law enforcement agencies from any of our 57 states and further, that any legitimate citizen of the United States who even appears to cast a sideways glance at a Muslim thug (moderate or radical) will be chased down like a dog and prosecuted to the full extent of existing U.S. laws on the books, until Sharia law is established by ‘Super Mullah - Barack Hussein Obama.”
There, that oughta do it.
Conservative viewpoint from MORT KUFF © 2010
Boynton Beach, FL
Friday, May 21, 2010
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Socialism in America!
This is B. Hussein Obama's HOPE and CHANGE! The anointed one took True Law Abiding Patriotic Americans for the biggest ride of their life, right into SOCIALISM.
Monday, May 17, 2010
PAY TO PLAY
Those three little words just might be the words that have caused our elected representatives and senators to be held in such low esteem by the American public and it is not what our founding fathers had in mind when they gave us our Constitution. The founders envisioned that our democratic republic would be administered by selfless individuals for the betterment of all its citizens and not just for their own power and personal enrichment.
It seems that certain individuals will spend millions of dollars to get elected to a job that pays about $170,000 (as a Congressman or Senator) per year. Are they really seeking elective office to help their fellow citizens run their country or are they trying to feather their own nest for future earnings and to gain power? That’s where the words “Pay to Play” comes into play.
I’m sure there are some dedicated politicians who are trying their best to follow the mandates of the U.S. Constitution, but what about the sizable cadre of other politicians who have self-serving motives?
We’ve heard over the past few years that many of our elected representatives use “earmarks” as a means to pad their campaign chest and for future monetary considerations. When a Congressman or Senator puts an “earmark” into a budget resolution (an “earmark” is a specific grant to an individual, business or public project, in the form of allocating taxpayer money for a purpose thought to be beneficial to a constituent without having to be voted on by the other legislators) he creates the perception that he expects something in return from the entity receiving that “earmark”. Look at the legislators on the Finance Committees and see who contributes to their campaign funds for re-election? You guessed it, the financial institutions. The politician will deny the obvious, but that scenario can be documented just by checking the politician’s campaign fund statement. Could that largesse, by these “earmark” recipients, be one reason why incumbents get re-elected about 90% of the time? Even if an “earmark” is not in play, the politicians vote on a particular bill is in play. That leads to the next example.
Another gross example of the words “Pay to Play” is the fact that many retired or former legislators become “players” by becoming lobbyists for one of the many firms that are in the lobbying business. These former legislators, especially the one’s who once held high leadership positions in either chamber, are commanding big salaries sometimes in the many millions of dollars. I’m not against anybody, per se, making a lot of money (contrary to the to the socialist feelings of President Obama), but if they are hired because of their former position in the legislative body or as payback for voting a certain way while a legislator, then the fish starts to stink from the head down.
Look at the lineup of former legislators (both DEMOCRAT and Republican) who have been brought aboard the lobbying “gravy train”. Former Senators Tom Daschle (D) and Bob Dole (R), both former majority leaders of their respective parties, are pulling down million dollar salaries from the lobbying firms they represent. In addition, you have other notable legislators cashing in like Richard Gephardt (D), Bob Livingston (R), Trent Lott (R), John Breaux (D), Dick Armey (R), Ted Kennedy, Jr. (D) etc., etc. What specific knowledge or “smarts” did these people possess other than knowing the workings of the congress and who they could convince, among their former colleagues, to vote a certain way. That is “Pay to Play” and it’s not in the best interest of our country.
The “foxes in the hen house” (the legislators) have made the rules and they have left many loopholes to benefit themselves when and if they become lobbyists. Today, a former Congressman or Senator cannot become a lobbyist until two years after he leaves that office, but they very conveniently become “consultants” not lobbyists, but still command six and seven figure salaries. Tom Daschle (D) calls himself a consultant, what a sham.
The system of “one hand washes the other” is one reason why the public has such a low opinion of the Congressmen and Senators. These hypocrites lambaste some corporation CEO’s for greed, but practice the same greedy ways in their own lives. SHAME ON THEM, BUT THEN AGAIN, THEY HAVE NO SHAME!
Conservative Commentary by Chuck Lehmann
It seems that certain individuals will spend millions of dollars to get elected to a job that pays about $170,000 (as a Congressman or Senator) per year. Are they really seeking elective office to help their fellow citizens run their country or are they trying to feather their own nest for future earnings and to gain power? That’s where the words “Pay to Play” comes into play.
I’m sure there are some dedicated politicians who are trying their best to follow the mandates of the U.S. Constitution, but what about the sizable cadre of other politicians who have self-serving motives?
We’ve heard over the past few years that many of our elected representatives use “earmarks” as a means to pad their campaign chest and for future monetary considerations. When a Congressman or Senator puts an “earmark” into a budget resolution (an “earmark” is a specific grant to an individual, business or public project, in the form of allocating taxpayer money for a purpose thought to be beneficial to a constituent without having to be voted on by the other legislators) he creates the perception that he expects something in return from the entity receiving that “earmark”. Look at the legislators on the Finance Committees and see who contributes to their campaign funds for re-election? You guessed it, the financial institutions. The politician will deny the obvious, but that scenario can be documented just by checking the politician’s campaign fund statement. Could that largesse, by these “earmark” recipients, be one reason why incumbents get re-elected about 90% of the time? Even if an “earmark” is not in play, the politicians vote on a particular bill is in play. That leads to the next example.
Another gross example of the words “Pay to Play” is the fact that many retired or former legislators become “players” by becoming lobbyists for one of the many firms that are in the lobbying business. These former legislators, especially the one’s who once held high leadership positions in either chamber, are commanding big salaries sometimes in the many millions of dollars. I’m not against anybody, per se, making a lot of money (contrary to the to the socialist feelings of President Obama), but if they are hired because of their former position in the legislative body or as payback for voting a certain way while a legislator, then the fish starts to stink from the head down.
Look at the lineup of former legislators (both DEMOCRAT and Republican) who have been brought aboard the lobbying “gravy train”. Former Senators Tom Daschle (D) and Bob Dole (R), both former majority leaders of their respective parties, are pulling down million dollar salaries from the lobbying firms they represent. In addition, you have other notable legislators cashing in like Richard Gephardt (D), Bob Livingston (R), Trent Lott (R), John Breaux (D), Dick Armey (R), Ted Kennedy, Jr. (D) etc., etc. What specific knowledge or “smarts” did these people possess other than knowing the workings of the congress and who they could convince, among their former colleagues, to vote a certain way. That is “Pay to Play” and it’s not in the best interest of our country.
The “foxes in the hen house” (the legislators) have made the rules and they have left many loopholes to benefit themselves when and if they become lobbyists. Today, a former Congressman or Senator cannot become a lobbyist until two years after he leaves that office, but they very conveniently become “consultants” not lobbyists, but still command six and seven figure salaries. Tom Daschle (D) calls himself a consultant, what a sham.
The system of “one hand washes the other” is one reason why the public has such a low opinion of the Congressmen and Senators. These hypocrites lambaste some corporation CEO’s for greed, but practice the same greedy ways in their own lives. SHAME ON THEM, BUT THEN AGAIN, THEY HAVE NO SHAME!
Conservative Commentary by Chuck Lehmann
Saturday, May 15, 2010
The Audacity of NOPE
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
OBAMA’S CRITERIA FOR SUPREME COURT NOMINEES
MORT’s MEANDERINGS
It should be obvious to all by now, that our erstwhile “Fellow-Traveler Speaker-in-Chief” does indeed have criteria for the selection of his nominees to The Supreme Court. First among them seems to be, that the nominee be a female of one species or another - and ‘off-the-charts ugly. Secondly, that the nominee be totally bereft of any directly-related experience or demonstrated familiarity with, much less possessing any competence in the area of jurisprudence. Thirdly, that she (now and forever, it’ll be a ‘she’) is a FOB (Friend of Barack) and dedicated to all things subversive, with a record of proven opposition to The Constitution of the United States. After that and in no special order but, seriously taken into consideration - - thick ankles; unkempt hair-do; overall manly appearance; a healthy distrust of legal precedent and fellow Justices; a marked propensity for foreign despots who habitually espouse vitriolic hatred of all things American.
© MORT KUFF 2010
It should be obvious to all by now, that our erstwhile “Fellow-Traveler Speaker-in-Chief” does indeed have criteria for the selection of his nominees to The Supreme Court. First among them seems to be, that the nominee be a female of one species or another - and ‘off-the-charts ugly. Secondly, that the nominee be totally bereft of any directly-related experience or demonstrated familiarity with, much less possessing any competence in the area of jurisprudence. Thirdly, that she (now and forever, it’ll be a ‘she’) is a FOB (Friend of Barack) and dedicated to all things subversive, with a record of proven opposition to The Constitution of the United States. After that and in no special order but, seriously taken into consideration - - thick ankles; unkempt hair-do; overall manly appearance; a healthy distrust of legal precedent and fellow Justices; a marked propensity for foreign despots who habitually espouse vitriolic hatred of all things American.
© MORT KUFF 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



