Saturday, June 27, 2009

Prophetic Sentences

This is probably the 5 best sentences you'll ever read. This is
one paragraph that should be in every book in every school room
in every city in every state in our great Union. Our educators
could make a lesson plan on this one statement and beat these
words into every head in every class in every state in these
United States of America.

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating
the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person
must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give anybody anything that the
government does not first take from somebody else.
4. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to
work because the other half is going to take care of them, and
when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work
because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my
dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation.
5. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

By Adrian Rogers, 1931
Submitted by Steve Sass

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Conservative Thought of the Week

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same".
Ronald Reagan

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Department of Energy - Lost Its Way!

Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the Department of Energy during the Carter Administration? Anybody? Anything? No? Didn’t think so.
Bottom line . . we’ve spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember. Ready?
It was very simple, and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate. The Department of Energy (located appropriately at 1000 Independence Ave) was instituted 8-04-1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. Pretty efficient, huh?
And now it is 2008, 31 years later and the budget for this necessary department is at $25 BILLION PER YEAR, they have 16,000 federal employees, and approximately 100,000 contract employees and look at the wonderful job they have done! This is where you slap you head and say THIS IS JUST STUPID!
Ah, yes, good ole bureaucracy..
And NOW we are going to turn the Banking System, health care & the Auto Industry over to them?
God Help Us!!!

Submitted by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Conservative Thought of the Week

"Approximately 80% of our air pollution stems from hydrocarbons released by vegetation, so let's not go overboard in setting and enforcing tough emission standards from man-made sources".
Ronald Reagan

Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 22, 2009

Can You Remember?

Most of us, who have “been around the block a few times”, can remember the good ole days, but very conveniently forget the days that weren’t so good.

Let’s take a look back at yesteryear and see if you can remember some of the things I can remember.

I can remember when the thought of America being a loser never occurred to you.

I can remember when giving mercy to the guilty (i.e. Islamic-fascist terrorists) was cruelty to the innocent people and soldiers they attacked.

I can remember when college students burned the “midnight oil” instead of burning cars and buildings to protest or celebrate a school athletic victory or to “right” a perceived wrong.

I can remember when a discussion in a high school or college had two sides to it.

I can remember when “permissiveness” was only practiced by the rich.

I can remember when a song had a melody and contained understandable words, and a man and a woman could dance to it - together.

I can remember when liberals, like JFK, believed that to generate extra income for the government; you lowered the marginal tax rates instead of raising them.

I can remember when a person who didn’t stand for the pledge of allegiance didn’t stand only because he/she was crippled.

I can remember when someone told an ethnic or racial joke, the biggest laughs usually came from the people who were the butt of the joke, and they didn’t worry if it was politically correct or not.

I can remember when a Democrat, who was chosen to work in a Democratic administration, paid their owed income taxes before they were nominated.

I can remember when college professors were called absent-minded or biased only in jokes.

I can remember when “pot” was something carried around by the next door neighbor just above his belt.

I can remember when other people’s achievements were considered to be an inspiration rather than a grievance.

I can remember when government was concerned with what we did, in relation to committing a crime, and not concerned with how we feel or felt as determined by a government official, to mete out punishment.

I can remember when the phrase, “Rob Peter to pay Paul”, was only found in the bible, instead of being part of the economic philosophy stated in today’s political platform of the Democrats.

I can remember when “Drunken sailors” were considered to be fiscally irresponsible, not our President or Congressmen, who now make “Drunken sailors” look to be fiscally responsible. What a country!

I can remember when out-of-wedlock births were 5% as compared to today’s 40% (70% in the black community), and that was before the “War on Poverty” was begun and before sex education was taught in the schools.

I can remember when star baseball players like Hank Aaron, Mike Schmitt, and Willie Mays became stars by using their god given talents and abilities rather than by using performance enhancing drugs like some of the recent players have done.

After reading all of the above, what can you remember?

Written by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 21, 2009


The object of the game is to destroy American capitalism by having the government take over everything!

Tokens include a bus, a teleprompter, a sprig of arugula and a waffle iron.

Wanna play? No? Too bad, you're already playing... and quite frankly, it's a game that nobody wins!

Submitted by Steve Sass

Bookmark and Share

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Conservative Thought of the Week

"The "Progressives" (a/k/a liberals) who dominate politics in the states of New York, California, Michigan, and Ohio, target the rich (by over taxing them) on grounds that they have the ability to pay more. They also have the ability to leave the state.
In N.Y., for instance, from 1997 to 2006 the state lost 409,000 people. For every 2 people who moved into the state, 3 fled. Lately, two former N.Y. tax paying multi-millionaires left the state, Tom Golisano, Pres. of Paychex, and Rush Limbaugh, the #1 talk show host in America, both moved down to Florida to avoid the oppressive taxes of the Empire State. A Supreme Court justice once commented, "The power to tax is the power to destroy". Can't N.Y., and the other states, realize that they are "cutting off their noses to spite their faces" by punishing the producers of wealth by over taxing them and losing their tax revenue in the process? They all must be stuck on stupid!

Submitted by: Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Who Takes Responsibility Anymore?

If you are an aware person who follows the news of the day in the newspapers, on T.V., listening to the radio, or downloading it on the internet, you are confronted with a plethora of stories in which people do not want to take responsibility for their actions when they do something wrong. It’s always the “other guy” who is at fault, the “ other guy” being someone or something real or imaginary. The “devil made me do it” is another excuse for claiming to be not responsible for your actions.

Take for instance the housing and banking crisis, which was one of the major causes of our financial meltdown which we are in the throes of today. This crisis was spawned in the 1990’s during the Clinton Administration. The CRA (Community Reinvestment Act), which was promoted by the Clinton Administration to help minorities and the poor to buy and own homes, got completely out of control when powerful members in the government pressured banking institutions to relax their lending rules to institute the practice of issuing sub prime mortgage loans to people with questionable abilities to pay back those mortgage loans.

It was the liberal Democrats, led by Sen. Chris Dodd ( D-CT) and Rep. Barney Frank ( D-MA), who, for years, pushed for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to go further in promoting sub prime mortgage loans, which are the toxic assets at the heart of today’s financial crisis. Warnings by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan of an impending train wreck in the financial markets, hit a deaf ear in Congress. In addition, the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors to the President, Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury, and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), all warned against the approaching meltdown. Both Dodd and Frank defended the practice and berated the Bush Administration for questioning the lending practices of both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac right up to the time the lid blew off both Fannie and Freddie.

If you see Dodd or Frank on T.V. today, you’d think from what they say, that they are the saviors of the country who will lead us back to normalcy, instead of the perpetrators of the largest financial boondoggle since the Great Depression. They take no responsibility or blame for any of the actions that they took prior to the meltdown. You could say that putting Barney Frank in charge of the banking committee and setting its policies, is like putting the fox into the “rooster” house. Chances are these two perpetrators, who show no remorse for their actions, will be re-elected when they come up for re-election next year. What a country!

Add to the mix of not taking responsibility for their wrongful actions, are the people who have been smoking for 40 years and develop lung cancer as a result, then turn around and sue the cigarette companies for their own stupidity. Ever since 1964, when the U.S. Surgeon General came out with the finding that cigarette smoking increases the risk, tremendously, of developing lung cancer (and other physical ailments), people were made aware of the dangers to themselves if they continued to smoke. To compound the stupidity, many juries, feeling sympathy for the sick or dead person, or side with the smoker or his family, or in cases after the smoker died, and issue an award for damages to the smoker or his family. You wonder, sometimes, what these juries must be smoking, and it’s not tobacco.

So, to conclude, taking responsibility for you own actions should be the rule rather than the exception in today’s society, but we must make it something we instinctively do, and we can start by educating our young people that taking responsibility for their actions is the right thing to do and not to blame others for their stupidity, even though admitting that you screwed up is not the easiest thing in the world to admit to.

Written by: Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sad but True

Submitted by Fred Page

Bookmark and Share

Bush Speaks

Since he left office, President Bush has not engaged in partisan politics. Despite the current President attempting to blame Bush for everything bad that happens, Bush has held his tongue. However, in a recent speech he said just a few things that ring true.

First, he said about the massive spending by the Obama administration:

“I know it's going to be the private sector that leads this country out of the current economic times we're in... You can spend your money better than the government can spend your money."

On the subject of protecting our country from terrorist attacks he was very direct. He said:

“The way I decided to address the problem was twofold: One, use every technique and tool within the law to bring terrorists to justice before they strike again… that the country needs to stay on offense, not defense.”

"I told you I'm not going to criticize my successor…I'll just tell you that there are people at Gitmo that will kill American people at a drop of a hat and I don't believe that -- persuasion isn't going to work. Therapy isn't going to cause terrorists to change their mind.”

I just wish some current Republicans would say the same things.

Submitted by Jim Pirretti

Bookmark and Share

ABC Becomes a Media Puppet for Obama

What’s the difference between the government controlled news media in Cuba, Iran, China, and that in the U.S.? Apparently, not much anymore. Since Obama has been elected the mainstream media has been fawning over him giving him coverage that is so biased it has become propaganda rather than news. Now ABC has taken it one step further: On June 24 ABC news will be turning over its programming over to President Obama and White House Officials to push for government controlled health care!

ABC NEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room of the White House. ABC promises the news event will be balanced – it just won’t include any dissenting voices or other opinions. Is this an example of the Fairness Doctrine some Democrats are pushing for?

Submitted by Jim Pirretti

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Conservative Thought of the Week

"Economic freedom better insures that people get what they want. Profits create incentives for businesses to meet the needs of its customers. Without customers a business will fail. Central planning under socialist governments cannot compete with countries that embrace free enterprise". Somebody please clue in the anointed one, Barack Hussein Obama, he just doesn't get it.

Submitted by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Friday, June 12, 2009


One of the campaign slogans or pledges in the 2006 Congressional elections was that the Democrats were going to end the “culture of corruption” as practiced by the Republicans.

Well, since the Democrats did take over the majority in Congress, what has happened to this pledge since?

First off, let me state that “corruption” is not a Democrat or Republican phenomenon, as both parties are guilty of falling prey to its tentacles, and both have members who are or have been in prison serving time for acts of corruption while in office. Virtue or honesty is not the sole provenance of either party. I plan on writing about and exposing this endemic corruption in future postings, naming both Democrats and Republicans in the process.

Let’s start with one case that nobody seems to be aware of - the case of Representative Alan B. Mollohan (D-WV). He’s an obscure Congressman from West Virginia (but well known in his home state) who came into the Congress in 1983 with a modest net worth and today his net worth is in the millions of dollars. In fact, to be specific, since 2000, Mollohan’s real estate holdings and other assets had increased from $562,000 to at least $6.3 million by 2004. How could an “ordinary” Congressman earning a modest salary, get into that rarefied atmosphere of living like a millionaire many times over? It wasn’t by inheritance. The “red flags” should’ve been raised a long time ago.

One way is by using the practice of putting “earmarks” in continuing resolutions originating in Congress. Over the past 14 years, Rep. Mollohan (D-WV) has earmarked $369 million in federal grants to his district for 254 separate projects and programs from 1997 to 2006, $250 million of that total was directed to five non-profit organizations that were erected by Rep. Mollohan, staffed by his friends and close associates, those organizations received the largest “earmarks” from Rep. Mollohan. During that same period, top-paid employees, board members and contractors of these Mollohan created organizations, gave at least $397,122 to Rep. Mollohan’s campaign and PAC’s (the facts and figures were supplied by CREW – Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and Wikipedia).

Was there a quid pro quo for him receiving these monies? The “dormant” House Ethics Committee was supposed to be investigating these charges to see if there was a “pay to play” arrangement between the Congressman and his “contributing constituents”? The complaint was originally made in 2006. In addition, some questionable real estate deals he has made in West Virginia and South Carolina are also being investigated. He is charged with investing money, as a 50% partner, in a farm with a constituent who has been getting “earmarks” ($2.1 million) sponsored by Rep. Mollohan.

Is the fact that he is a Democrat in a Democrat controlled Congress have anything to do with the “snails pace” this investigation is taking, or are the charges bogus and don’t need to see the light of day? The heads of the House Ethics Committee are Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, (D-CA), and Ranking member Jo Bonner (R-AL). Write them and ask them what’s the status of the investigation is so far?

The term “transparency” has been thrown about quite easily, since the Obama Administration came into power, so it will be interesting how transparent the powers-to-be will be in the case of Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-WV). Members of Congress tend to circle the wagons when one of their colleagues comes under scrutiny for acts that are against the protocols of that body. Maybe it’s because many of them could be accused of some the same misdeeds as Rep. Mollohan? The old expression, “where’s there smoke there’s fire” certainly can be applied in the case against Rep. Mollohan.

If these charges are true, this is one more example in the “quiver” of those shooting arrows into the target of corrupt career politicians, in their quest to have term limits for members of Congress. It seems the “Culture of Corruption” is alive and well in Wash. D.C., only this time the name of the party in power is different than before.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. Just recently, Republican Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-CA.), was found guilty of corruption and is now serving prison time. Present members of the Congress and Senate who are being investigated now are Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), and Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) et al. One thread seems to weave its way through these corruption charges, which is the granting of “earmarks” to benefit special interest constituents and the resulting “Kickbacks” to the politician by the beneficiaries of those earmarks. President Obama has said that he will do away with “earmarks”, I say don’t hold your breath as all these career politicians want to get reelected and granting “earmarks” guarantees a steady flow of campaign contributions to the politician..

Written by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Conservative Thought of the Week

"In war (as well as peace) we, as a country, have secrets to keep. When we fail to keep those secrets, soldiers die and innocent civilians are killed, our enemies are encouraged, our allies grow reluctant to share intelligence with us, and our own intelligence agencies worry about the danger of sharing information from their top sources. We, the American people, are the one's betrayed, thanks, in part, to the Obama Administration and their shameless release of the interrogation papers which were classified as "Top-Secret". It seems that political expediency trumps national security, again, in the affairs of this administration. The old WWII slogan of, "Loose lips sink ships" certainly does apply in this matter."
Submitted by Chuck Lehmann
Chuck on the Right Side

Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 8, 2009

Conservative Thought of the Week

There is nothing affirmative about "affirmative action" if you were passed over or denied a job, or denied a spot in a college freshman class, because of your race or gender. It really should be called "negative action" because you can't give somebody something unless you take it away from somebody else. "Affirmative action" by definition is a bad thing. It helps some people based on their race or gender and hurts or discriminates against others for the same reason. How Un-American is that?

Written by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Do You Have Buyers Remorse Yet?

All of us, at one time or another, have experienced the condition called “buyers remorse”. The dictionary definition is: an emotional condition whereby a person feels remorse or regret after he/she makes a purchase.

I have experienced it as both a buyer and a seller. Years ago, I worked as a time-share salesman at a resort in the Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania. My job was to present the time-share plan in the best possible light to the prospective buyer. Since I taught salesmanship, as a business education teacher in high school, I pretty much knew the basic fundamentals of selling, but selling time-shares was selling at a high intensity level as it involved many thousands of dollars changing hands between the buyer and the seller. I needed some on the job training in order to be successful which I got that from the professionals in the field. As a result, I made “Salesman-of-the-Month” on one occasion. I believed in the time-share concept and it was my job to convince a buyer to buy my product using my selling ability.

I experienced the condition of “buyers remorse” after I sold a plan and the buyer left for home. On a few occasions, the couple or family thought about what they had purchased and got fidgety and developed a case of “buyer’s remorse” and called to cancel the contract (they had three days to cancel with no penalty). It was not a pleasant experience for me, the salesman, as I lost my commission. C’est la vie!

Today, I see the same emotional condition setting in with people who enthusiastically voted for President Barack Hussein Obama. Some friends of mine, who voted for him, have told me that they think they may have made a mistake in voting for him. It seems like a perfect case of “buyer’s remorse”, only this time it is their regret for a politician they voted for and not for a product. But, the catch here is that they don’t have “three days to cancel” their vote, and they and their country are stuck with their vote for at least the next three and a half years.

President Obama, like a good time-share salesman, did a great job in selling himself by telling the people what they wanted to hear. He was youthful, glib, and very articulate in selling “hope and change” on the campaign trail. Many people believed in him, and it didn’t matter that he was rated the most liberal member of the Senate, he sounded very moderate. It also helped that he was running against a very bland, boring candidate in John McCain. Many people were convinced that he would be the “change” they were looking for as compared to the policies of the previous administration. But, just like the buyer of the time-share plan, who had second thoughts and reservations about what they had just bought into, many people, after seeing what his plans are for the country since he was sworn-in, and how those plans will affect them in the future, are ruing the day they voted for him. They are having “buyer’s remorse”.

The extent of the “buyer’s remorse” won’t be felt until the congressional elections of 2010 and finally the next presidential election of 2012.

We’ll see if this “buyer’s remorse” has affected the voters who voted for him in 2008 (he received 52% of the popular vote), or is this just a temporary passing fancy of doubt? The success or failure of what he does between now and then will be the eventual determinant. Stay tuned for the ensuing results. Let’s hope our country can survive.

Written by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Obama in the British Media

Barack Obama and the CIA: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?
Posted By: Gerald Warner, from the

If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter.
Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail.
That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.
"Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed.
So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers.
Obama promised his CIA audience that nobody would be prosecuted for past actions. That has already been contradicted by leftist groups with a revanchist ambition to put Republicans, headed if possible by Condoleezza Rice, in the dock. Talk about playing party politics with national security. Martin Scheinin, the United Nations special investigator for human rights, claims that senior figures, including former vice president Dick Cheney, could face prosecution overseas. Ponder that - once you have got over the difficulty of locating the United Nations and human rights within the same dimension.
President Pantywaist Obama should have thought twice before sitting down to play poker with Dick Cheney. The former vice president believes documents have been selectively published and that releasing more will prove how effective the interrogation techniques were. Under Dubya's administration, there was no further atrocity on American soil after 9/11.
President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?
Submitted by Tony DiPerna
"Chuck on the Right Side"

Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 1, 2009

Too Good To Be True? It Probably Is!

“Greed is good”, as Gordon Gekko exclaimed in the 1987 movie “Wall Street”. It looks like quite a few people agreed with that statement as the revelations about the Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff has been unfolding recently, and has caught quite a few South Floridians in it’s web of deceit.

A Ponzi scheme is a swindle in which a quick return on an initial investment is paid out of funds from new investors, which lures the victim or victims into bigger risks, and eventually results in a financial bust and the loss of most all the money invested.

As despicable as Bernard Madoff was in his operation of his financial Ponzi scheme, the people who got caught up in his web of deceit, couldn’t control the greed “ gene”, that is residing in all of us, and it came out to bite these people, in the butt, big time.

The “victims” of this scam were not illiterate school dropouts, who were taken advantage of by a smooth talking charlatan, but were some of the wealthiest “machers” here and around the country, and in foreign countries as well. Fred Wilpon, owner of the N.Y.Mets, Steven Spielberg, famed Hollywood producer, Mort Zuckerman, owner of the N.Y. Daily News and U.S. News and World report, and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), were some of the famous people taken for a ride on the Madoff scam machine. It is estimated that up to $50 billion has been lost by these and other investors. The final total will probably never be known.

Some people were looking for that proverbial, “pot of gold” at the end of the rainbow, and believed that Bernie Madoff was some sort of a “financial genius” who could produce financial profits more than double the prevailing rate of what banks and other financial institutions were giving their depositors and clients. Greed blinded these people when they should have known that this guy was just another “snake oil” salesman selling a bogus product.

Mahatma Ghandi once said, “There is enough for everyone’s need, but not enough for even one person’s greed”. Getting annual returns of between 12% and 15% was not normal in the realm of today’s business and financial investing – it should have raised a “red flag” if anyone wanted to know how this “guru” knew something nobody else knew? In other words, “If it’s too good to be true, it probably is”, should have been the catchword, heeded by all the dupes, who entrusted this guy with their life savings and their philanthropic trusts.

I don’t wish hardships on anyone, as “there, but for the grace of God, go I”, but when the greed “ gene” takes over, it’s very difficult to act rationally when the dollar signs cover your eyes and warp your judgment. This won’t be the last time somebody will attempt to “screw” his friends and friends of friends in order to live the “good life” on the backs of his na├»ve victims, but it should be a wake up call, to all investors, to be vigilant in the future for the enticing deals that seems “too good to be true”, because as we’ve seen in this case, “they probably are”.

Written by: Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share