Is Climate Change the New Marxism?

The radicals behind the movement that are championing “climate change” are mostly liberal progressives who want to undermine the only system that has brought about less poverty in the world - it is called “free enterprise capitalism”. In the United States it is the Democrats (a/k/a Democrat Socialists (Bernie Sanders), Progressives, and liberal Democrats) who are clamoring for these anti-free enterprise rules and regulations with the main intention of instituting “income re-distribution” and punishing the so-called “rich” and successful, the people who have created millions of jobs, and as a result they have become wealthy through their dedication and hard work. The liberal radicals have been demonizing the “anti-poverty” entrepreneurs for years, and are now using the emotional term “climate change” as their catchword for achieving their insidious goals of trying to rid the world of capitalism and free enterprise.

Look around you today, what do you see? Most public and private schools are staffed by by teachers and professors that preach the Utopian” (really should be called “Dystopian) economic philosophy of Socialism (a/k/a Progressiveism, Marxism and Communism). These radical educators have invaded the campuses of the U.S. in droves, with some estimates that 80% to 90% of the faculty members are radicals trying to inculcate their philosophy into the mushy minds of impressionable students who have not met life's challenges yet, and are susceptible to the liberal, radical propaganda put forth by these teachers and professors.

Look at the phenomenon of the voters of the U.S. who elected a president twice who proclaimed that he wanted to “fundamentally change” the U.S. even though he was voted the most liberal senator, as a U.S senator representing Illinois. The fact that he was black and articulate helped him, along with his political cronies, to take over the reins of government. In the almost 7 years of his presidency, he has not let his fellow radicals down, he has in many areas transformed our government into a European- styled country with his out-of-control (many deemed to be unconstitutional) dictates and presidential directives.

Well, has his transformative changes worked for the betterment of our country or have they hindered the economic and political growth of the U.S.? Let's take a look at what has happened over these past 7 years. Today, according to Obama and his fellow Democrats, they proclaim that the biggest threat facing the U.S. and the world is not “IsIamic terrorism”, but “climate change”. Can you imagine a sane person equating the march of Islamic terrorism across the world with “climate change” being the major threat to western civilization? Well, the Democrats, including their candidates for president, have actually stated that as a fact. How naive and out of touch with reality can they be? It looks like the “Rules for Radicals”, expounded by Saul Alinsky, philosophy has taken hold of the Democrat Party (both Obama and Hillary Clinton are acolytes of Saul Alinsky). Alinsky's rules have been used by Obama to push his radical socialist agenda forward. The results have been unspectacular, to say the least, and harmful to the United States.

Here are the sorry results, 93 million potential workers out of the workforce and not counted in the BLS unemployment rate of 5.1%, the true rate (the U-6 rate) is over 10%, 48 million people on food stamps, 50 million people at or below the poverty line, the GDP has hovered around the 1% to 2% growth rate when 4% should be the minimum growth rate for real progress, and one of the biggest budget busters facing us today is the Affordable Care Act, (Obamacare) that has covered only 10 million (mostly by government subsidy) out of the 40 million touted that would be covered when this monstrosity was debated and passed only by a Democrat Congress. The big costs of Obamacare will start to kick in starting in 2016.

So, when our “esteemed” leaders proclaim that “climate change” is our major national threat, they should be looking in the mirror to see who are the real threats to our country are – they might just see the real threats of our country in the reflection in the mirror – it is themselves.

This presidential election in 2016 will be pivotable for our country's survival. Do we continue “down the yellow-brick road” to disaster by electing more radicals or will we face the real threats facing us in a realistic manner? We must elect people to office who will not drag us down , both economically and politically, with the result of making us a copy of third world disaster cases like Venezuela and Cuba. You must vote Republican to save our republic.

Let's not continue following the Karl Marx playbook - free enterprise capitalism is the prescription for success not the tired failures of the tenets of Marxism as espoused by the Democrats. Climate change is just a smokescreen to undermine our capitalistic free enterprise system. Don't fall for it.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

How Hillary Clinton's Lawlessness Gets Ignored

Got Law? How Hillary Clinton's Lawlessness Gets Ignored.

This Bill Whittle should open your eyes! Hillary Clinton breaks the law, gets people who work for her killed, lies to the American people...and she's still a media darling? How is that possible? Is the the example of corruption that the Democrats set for the younger generation?

Judge Jeanine Pirro on - Benghazi Gate Hillary Clinton VS Congress

MORT’s meanderings

Attention: Republican Presidential Candidates

We need to hear what your plans are for solving some of the most urgent threats to our nation – i.e., Illegal aliens crossing our borders; the economy that is not recovering but, is faltering; the smothering of the Free Market System by way too much Government regulation; the unfair, oppressive tax system; the crushing national debt run up beyond our ability to make a dent in it; the emasculation of our Armed Forces; the divisive mentality that is Obama’s specialty and that has us pitting one segment of our population against another -  all are vital issues to be addressed by the new President in 2016.

But, it is my assessment that the No.1 issue posing the most dire immediate threat to our security and to our very survival as a people and as a nation is – the rise of the lunacy that is militant Islam!

Under the lunacy that is the Obama Administration, we have not nor will we ever, take any meaningful steps to confront, much less seek, kill & obliterate ISIS or any other form of Islamist lunacy that is bent on destroying Israel and the United States and is dedicated to imposing Sharia law on every square inch of territory around the world.  

Sitting by and waiting to be attacked is lunacy on our part.  The next President of the United States must commit to pre-emptive strikes upon ISIS and the others who would do us harm.  We must seek out and destroy these mortal enemies of freedom and our Western way of civilized life.  If we are to survive; they must be obliterated from the surface of the Earth.  We must hear this from serious candidates for the Presidency.        No backbone, no commitment -  NO VOTE!   Got it?

MORT KUFF  © 9-15-2015

Should the U.S. Ban All Firearms?

If you listen to President Obama and most of the Democrats, we need to pass more gun-control legislation in an attempt to avoid another mass shooting at another college or on a soft, vulnerable target like an elementary school, a movie theater, or a shopping mall. In fact, many of these anti-gun, liberal“progressive” individuals would like to see all guns banned and confiscated, the sooner the better.

President Obama, as usual, used the shooting at the Community College in Oregon to further his fanatical stance on national gun control. Here he was, piously proclaiming, that if we passed “meaningful” gun control legislation that that massacre wouldn't have happened. He made that statement without knowing what all the facts were concerning that shooting. We all know, or should know, that repeal of the 2nd Amendment will not ever happen, even if the Messiah (our president) and the Democrats would like to see that happen.

In his speech immediately following the Oregon college shooting, he mentioned that other countries have banned guns and, as a result, their crime rates fell. He mentioned Australia in particular. Well, let's see what has happened in Australia since they banned all firearms in that country.

It has been over 18 years since gun owners in Australia were forced (yes, forced) to surrender their firearms (640,381 to be exact) which cost Australian taxpayers over $500 million in reimbursement costs. Here are the results of that ban on firearms. Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2%; Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6%; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44% (yes, that's 44%). In the State of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are up 300% (remember, while law-abiding citizens turned in their guns, the criminals did not and they still possess their guns). There also has been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults on the elderly, even while the residents were at home. The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest, law abiding citizens save lives and property, and, yes, anti- gun-control laws affect only the law abiding citizen and not the criminal.

Did you also notice that most all of these massacres have occurred in “Gun Free Zones” like church's, movie theaters, public schools, restaurants, college campuses, and shopping malls? Since criminals now are guaranteed that their “prey” is unarmed, these incidents in these vulnerable places, are made to order for a deranged individual to do his dirty work.

Mention should also be made that the cities and towns with the toughest gun-control laws are more prone to have crimes committed with guns (ex: Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, and New Orleans) - by the way, those cities and towns are all run by progressive liberal Democrats. I wonder why? So much for tougher gun-control laws.

Mention could also be made that the country of Switzerland requires that all it citizens own a firearm, and Switzerland has the lowest crime rate in the world, and that includes deaths by firearms. How come anti-gun fanatics like President Obama and former N.Y. Mayor Michael Bloomberg, don't mention that anomaly? Would it be because it doesn't fit their anti-gun agenda? Of course! They also forget to mention that most all these gun incidents were not committed by the “evil” NRA members or honest, law abiding, legal gun owning citizens.

So, to the question, “Should the U.S. Ban All Firearms”, the answer

is a resounding NO. As the old saying goes, “Guns don't kill people, people kill people” just like SUV's don't kill people, people driving SUV's kill people.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

The EU is breaking the law to import Rape and jihad. Is America next?

Culinary Administration

When Barack Obama vied for the presidency, he never realized
he bit off more than he could chew, and now finds he has no
appetite for it.

He thought he could make up the menu, not caring about the cost
of ingredients, or how to acquire them, and then have his chefs do
his bidding, putting it all together while he tees off. The problem
is, he doesn't know how to put a recipe (strategy) together.

It was a shock when he learned government operates with a fixed
menu called the Constitution. When he doesn't like the 'soup du jour,
he tries to order off the menu (executive order).

Any time he put on an apron and goes into the kitchen to concocted
something on his own, what ever he cooks up always turns out to
leave a lasting bad taste in ones mouth.

It takes more than ambiance for a successful operation.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Gates and Fences

The break-in at the DNC headquarters at the Watergate Office Complex
on June 17, 1970, in Washington, D.C. sparked what now indicates scandal
 about clandestine or illegal activity by adding "Gate" on the end of the activity.
For example: Monica-gate, Iran/Contra-gate, Travel-gate, etc.

By the nature of the Obama opaque administration's alleged misconduct and
 the, in contempt of congress Attorney General Eric Holder's stonewalling, a
 new and different designation is needed to replace 'gate' because a gate can
be opened.

Fences are designed to deter penetration, therefore Obama- fence is appropriate
 to use for various sections of the contentious challenges that face select committees
 investigating the VA-fence, the NSA-fence, the IRS-fence, the AP phone
records-fence, the Fast and Furious-fence, the Bergdahl-fence, the Gruber-fence,
 the Benghazi-fence and the DOJ reporter and Conservative targeting-fence.

Conservative column from George Giftos