Thursday, June 30, 2011

Are We Stupid, or What?

Every time I go to the gas station to fill up, I say to myself, “Are We Stupid, or What”?

Why should we be paying $4.00 or more for gas that is mostly bought from foreign countries, some of whom don't like us very much, but definitely like our money. And we like dopes, give them our money by purchasing their oil. “Are We Stupid, or What?

It is estimated that we have enough energy (oil, gas, coal etc.) within the borders of our country and off-shore to last us many hundreds of years, but because of pressure from the “environmental whackos” and their sympathizers in the government, we can't tap those energy resources, but instead have to purchase them from other countries, thereby adding to our national debt and screwing up our balance of trade.

Just recently, our “Pied Piper of Cluelessness”, Barack Hussein Obama, has given the country of Brazil $2 billion to assist them in their exploration of oil and gas off their shores, but Obama has put a moratorium on our oil and gas exploration and drilling off our shores, and also in our territory in the Rocky Mountains, and Alaska. Upon giving that $2 billion to Brazil, he said he hoped that they would be successful so that we could be one of their best customers. Is this guy for real or what? One other thing to make matters worse, he gave Brazil the right to drill in the Gulf of Mexico – while he restricts our own companies from drilling. “Are We Stupid, or What”?

Obama has stated on numerous occasions that he is O.K. if oil and gas prices go through the roof, as that will help us clean up our environment by forcing people to use “clean” energy instead of the “evil” fossil fuels. Only a “nitwit” could think that scenario up, as even if we could get energy from the “green” sources he says we should be using, it could never make up for the fossil fuels that we need to keep our economic engine humming. There is nothing wrong with trying to wean us off of using fossil fuels by using wind, hydro, solar and bio-fuels etc., but we should realize that all those “green” sources cannot possibly make up for the energy needed and supplied by fossil fuels.

The “doom and gloom”, aforementioned, “environmental whackos”, headed up by the “global warming” guru Al Gore and his minions, are claiming that we can become “energy sufficient” by using only the “green” technology, but the only thing that it will do is to fatten up the wallets of those proponents of fear. Just follow the “green”, money that is, and the people who are pushing the green energy to be our sole source of energy, and you'll see a bunch of charlatans going to the bank to deposit their ill-gotten gains while you pay between $4.00 to $5.00 a gallon to fill up your cars, Suv's, and trucks. “Are We Stupid or What”?

They, and the Obama administration, are in cahoots and are, as a result, expected to gain a lot of money, much of it taxpayer money, provided by you and I. That's the situation that exists today between G.E. and its President Jeffrey Immelt, and the Obama Administration. Immelt and G.E. are expected to get billions of dollars by producing “green equipment” that the Obama Administration wants. I wonder who G.E. Is going to support in the election of 2012? That's not a hard question to answer, is it?

So I ask the question again, “Are we stupid, or What”? You make the call.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 27, 2011

Rev. Wright is what is Wrong


Recently,the Baptists held their National convention in Ft. Lauderdale. Their choice of Rev. Wright as keynote speaker tells us something about what is happening to traditional Faiths in our nation, today.

For the leadership of the Baptists to have selected such a controversial and volatile figure as Rev. Wright to set the tone for their meeting synthesizes in a nutshell, the lunacy of the left that has wrested control of nearly all denominations of the major religions currently practiced in America. Almost the lone exception being, the evangelical movement that welcomes both Christians and Jews into their fold.

Rev. Dozier, Pastor of The Worldwide Christian Center in Pompano Beach, FL is so right when he charges the religious leaders of all faiths and denominations to lead the way in the battle against the rapid encroachment of Islam and the insanity of Socialistic-Progressive Liberalism. His courageous admonition to all pastors, priests, rabbis and clerics to step up and speak out to their congregations against this insidious invasion, is bullseye-on-target. Providing just this sort of counsel and moral guidance to their flocks is a vital part of their calling but it appears, there's a whole lot of shirking goin' on 'round here.

One would reasonably expect these leaders to be 'rallying to the flag' (Old Glory, that is) and instructing the members of their congregations to become acutely aware of what's going on in their own neighborhoods. And then, to become active as individuals, in protecting our homeland against this unwelcome encroachment. Religious leaders should be instilling the 'empowerment of faith in what is morally right' into the psyche of each member of their congregations.

Sadly, there are some religious leaders in our area who appear to be either stupidly or stubbornly insensitive to what is going on around them. It could be that they are intimidated by radical Islamist elements. Or, they might simply be moral cowards. Or, it could be that they are consumed with an unseemly, craven concern for their own jobs. Whatever the case, they've become negative rather than positive influences on those who depend upon them for their spiritual ministry. In the military, this is called, 'dereliction of duty'.

Closer to home for me as a Jew who is unaffiliated with a local synagogue but, one who has attended services and listened to sermons of reform, conservative and orthodox rabbis, I have concerns. It is my assessment that those rabbis who regurgitate the nonsensical rhetoric of the 'J Street' crowd, have become so corrupted by that anti-Israel message that they've rendered themselves totally useless as thoughtful mentors to their congregations. And, that is indeed, a pathetic state of affairs. Worse yet, they have proven to be purveyors of a potent ideological poison and have in fact for all practical purposes, become effective agents of the enemies of conservative Judaism and protagonists against the lone Democracy in the Middle East, the isolated State of Israel.

It is truly tragic that so few of these so-called religious leaders appear to possess either the self-confidence or a trust in their congregations, that they can comfortably preach their message without the nagging fear of alienating their members. It seems to me that there is a reticence to ruffle the feathers of the 'regulars' and as a result, what should be their principal role as enlightened leaders becomes diluted and compromised. Instead of providing hearty meals of spiritually flavorful chunky stew, they are offering easily-palatable but tasteless and unfulfilling blanc-mange.

For those who regularly populate their houses of worship in search of principled spiritual guidance, they would be well advised to become more discerning and far more critically judgemental of the messages they hear from the pulpit. Then, they ought to give serious thought to how they might become pro-active in their own individual effort to improve the situation. It is surprising how individual decision-making and individual effort tend to build character.

If I were forty years younger and decidedly more cavalier, I'd probably start my own 'Temple of High Morals and Low Humor' from which I'd dispense more such opinions that are worth two-cents, or less. However, given the advanced state of my antiquity, my penchant for cautious optimism and renowned desire to ingest red wine and enjoy the hell out of every moment - I guess I'll just pass on that idle reverie and continue to pursue my not-for-profit hobby of taking out-of-focus photos of my conservative pals.

Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2011

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 23, 2011

Who Wages War Against the Middle Class?

The liberals are crying out and demanding that the state governors and state legislatures stop the “war on the middle class”. “Me thinks they protest too much” (a paraphrase of a Shakespeare phrase). The chant about stopping the “war” is mainly put forth by government unions who are “sucking on the teat” of the taxpayers on both the federal and state levels. I would presume that 75% to 80% of the people would consider themselves to be middle class and most of them are homeowners across the country. As a homeowner, what is the biggest cost or expense forced upon these people who own their home (outright or with a mortgage)? If you answered property taxes, you would be correct. Take education, for example, what is the major funding source to finance the schools? That's right, property taxes, mainly paid by the middle class, So if government workers bargain with “paid for” legislators (legislators who were elected with the overwhelming physical and financial support of the government unions) by getting “sweetheart deals” in pay and fringe benefits, it's the middle class taxpayers who foot the bill. Who then is waging war on the middle class, the tax cutters or the tax raisers, the unions?

Every election cycle the liberal Democrats trot out the fear scenario that the big bad, evil Republicans are hurting the children, our seniors and the poor etc., all because they want to rein in government spending which has brought many cities and states to the brink of bankruptcy.

The policies of the tax and spend liberal Democrats trickle down to the middle class by them having to pay more for gasoline to power their cars, gas to heat their homes, electric to use their appliances, food that they eat, clothes that they wear, and the health care that they need to enjoy life, and everything else that has to be transported by truck, plane, or rail. That's the “hidden tax” on the middle class, and then the liberal Democrats falsely blame the Republicans. It's like”the kettle calling the pot black”. Are we citizens so stupid that we can be taken in with this kind of demagoguery over and over again? As more and more of the populace rely on government handouts and largesse, the more they will support the political party and politicians who promise them the “free lunch” they are accustomed to. When that situation comes about, when more than half the people pay taxes and the other half takes the taxes, our society will be on the verge of disaster. We will then become a country of givers and takers and the givers will revolt, as we will become a “nanny state” with a limited private sector to produce the goods and services which is the engine to power our free enterprise economy. A strong private, capitalistic, free enterprise economy, is what has made our country the preeminent country in the world.

The middle class is under assault, yes, but not by the conservatives, it's the people who make the charges – the liberal Democrats who are the culprits. They are the enemy of the middle class, the sooner you realize that, the better off we will all be.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 20, 2011

Shovel Ready, My Ass!

Pardon my French, but I can't help telling it like it is. When the Messiah (Obama) sold us on a $800 billion “Stimulus” bill stating that he would put the country back to work with “shovel ready” jobs, he conned us big time. In fact, he put his trusted Vice-President in charge, Joe Biden. That should've been the tip off that all would not go well, and it hasn't.

He stated that he was going to use much of that money to repair our infrastructure with “shovel ready” public works projects and our unemployment rate would not exceed 8%. Since the time of the passage of that bill, by the Democrat controlled congress and signed by Obama, we have lost over 2 million jobs from that day to the present. Most of the money went to friends (unions), government workers, both federal and state (teachers, civil service workers etc.), but still it did not stimulate the economy as Obama told us it would, in fact, things have gotten worse. It's like we just threw money down a rat hole.

There is no doubt that Obama inherited a troubled economy, following the financial meltdown in the summer of 2008, but after all the “stimulus spending”, we are now worse off than we were before we spent this money, which we didn't have. Besides, we have raised our deficit by $1.5 trillion each of the past two years, with more big deficits projected for the coming years.

Recently, Obama joked about not having “shovel ready” jobs, saying that he didn't realize how tough the economic times were and that Bush's policies had contributed to this lousy economy. How much longer can Obama keep blaming his predecessor instead of “manning up” and taking the responsibility for his failed policies that could rightly be called the “Obama Depression”? I wouldn't bet on that happening as when you are a “narcissist”, as he has been dubbed by that well respected pundit/psychiatrist, Charles Krauthammer, you can't admit you'd fail in anything that you've tried up till now, and yes, he has been a failure, except to his cult worshipers, the Obamamaniacs.

His Kool-Aid friends in the media will try to “carry the water” for him and cover up or play down his failures, as they have a vested interest in having him succeed, even though, I surmise, that they know he is in over his head and has failed, but they won't admit it.

Ask any Obamamaniac what Obama has accomplished in his 2 ½ years and why he should be re-elected, the chances are that their silence will be deafening. They'll finally mumble that he had Osama bin Laden killed and he got his health care bill passed (without one single Republican vote, and that the bill is opposed by more than 60% of the people and they want it repealed).

It seems that all he knows how to do is campaign and read his talking points off a teleprompter. That is why we are in the mess we're in today, and it looks like there is no relief in sight.

I guess we could assume that Obama's “shovel ready” jobs were jobs used to clean up the horse manure that he created in the first place. Tell that to the 16 million workers who haven't gotten a job because of the incompetence of Obama and his Administration in telling them one thing, but not following through with results.

Shovel ready, my ass!

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann
Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 16, 2011

I Don't Like his White Half Side Either!

The biggest canard put forth by liberals against the critics of President Barack Hussein Obama, is that the critics are against him because he is black, therefore they are racist. Well, I for one, couldn't care less whether he is half-black, I don't like his half-white side either.

When the defenders of the president can't justify the ruinous policies of their leader, they revert back to the Jackson-Sharpton tactic that it must be a racist attack, end of discussion because you are a an “evil” racist. For the past couple of decades it has worked for the “Rhyming Reverends” as the “politically correct” charge intimidated many “white” critics as they didn't want to be labeled a racist, whether it was true or not.

To show the ridiculousness of this specious charge, most non-black critics of the president are the same critics of the late Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. The last time I looked, they were all white and they championed the same policies as Obama. What can we then be called, “anti-crackers”, “whitey haters” etc. It's just that stupid for us to be “painted by the same brush” for pointing out why Obama and his buddies in the Democrat Party are “leading us down the primrose path” in regards to his domestic and foreign policies. The definition of that idiom “led down the primrose path” is that one is being deceived or led astray, often by a hypocrite. This aptly defines what we are criticizing the president about and it has nothing to do with his racial makeup.

This phony charge of racism is being used whenever a person of color or a different ethnic background is brought to task or criticized. To me, it is a cowards way out of confronting a legitimate complaint against that person or group. It doesn't have any basis in fact, but just the charge usually has worked for the “racial arsonists” (Jackson-Sharpton) to initiate shakedowns and extortion of a person or businesses all across the United States. It is their modus operandi.

According to these Obama sycophants, it is off-limits to criticize or question the president as that would be an act of racism. What is a citizen supposed to do if he can't complain or challenge the policies of his elected leader(s)? Do we have to first determine the color or ethnic background before we question him/her? If the politician is a “minority” is it then a no-no to challenge that politician?

Let's stop this nonsense, as the people making these charges of racism are the real racists and should be ignored. So if Obama is half-black and half-white, who cares, he is all wrong and can and should be criticized where appropriate.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 13, 2011

Is There Really a Double Standard?

The media frenzy over getting a look at Sarah Palin's e-mails while she was governor of Alaska, shows the bias and proves that there is a double-standard in the main street media against conservatives in general, and especially against women conservatives in particular.

Where was this thirst for information during the 2008 campaign, and today, about Barack Hussein Obama? It seems that the media has a see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil attitude in its coverage of Obama. He can do no wrong, according to them, and they prove it by giving him a pass on just about every controversial thing he might say or do and with whom he associates with. He is truly a “teflon” president.

Even today, Sarah Palin, is a private citizen who does not hold public office, but still they go after her with a vengeance. What makes her so special in the minds of the “lame stream media” that they need to know “everything” about her, her family, her term as governor of Alaska, and her views on politics etc. Doesn't it seem like overkill? The hate is quite evident and overt.

On the other hand, here we have a president who had a host of questionable friends from the corrupt City of Chicago. No media outlet except Fox delved into these associations, no investigation as to how and why he sat through 20 years of listening to hate-filled sermons by his pastor/mentor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, no finding out why, as a state senator in Illinois, he voted “present” over 130 times and nobody thought that was odd, and finally, we had a candidate (and now president) who has refused to divulge all his personal public records pertaining to his birth certificate (just recently he presented a copy that has been deemed a “photo-shopped copy), his college transcripts, and his health records. Where is the same curiosity of the media that they seem to be using against Sarah Palin? The media was all over George W. Bush in trying to dig up dirt on his National Guard service and his arrest 20 years prior for a D.U.I arrest. They even dug up the accident first lady Laura Bush had as teenager where a friend of hers was killed. They were fair game, but not the “Anointed One”, Barack Hussein Obama. Sarah Palin is one tough cookie, she can handle the barbs and arrows directed at her, but where is the fairness in reporting that the media is constantly referring to when they criticize Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and other conservative talk-show hosts?

Sarah Palin becomes a target of the loony-left because, 1) she's very physically attractive (as compared to most liberal women), 2) she's a conservative (how terrible!), 3) she's religious and she's against abortion ( a mortal sin), 4) she's family oriented, and 5) she's a real feminist. All traits that offer a threat to the loony liberal left, or so they think.

Who are the real misogynists? Is it the conservatives who are constantly being accused of being anti-woman, or the one's making those fallacious charges - the liberal left? Look at how conservative women are depicted, women like Palin, Michele Bachmann, Condoleeza Rice, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin etc. They are all judged to be stupid, shrill, inarticulate, and pseudo sex symbols, and a joke ( a Chris Matthews depiction). To me, it all comes down to jealousy, as the women of the left are more suited to be witches rather than players on the national scene.

So yes, there is a double-standard when it comes to the media. That's why people have such a low opinion of the so-called purveyors of the truth. Shame on those hypocrites, but then again, they have no shame.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 9, 2011

A Conversation between Friends

Hi there. Just checking in on the lower and middle class, to see how you’re holding up. President Obama is for the people, the common folks, the downtrodden, the disadvantaged. So, how’s the hope and change going?

Still out of work, huh. That’s a shame. Your neighbors say they don’t have a job either and have few prospects for getting one? President Obama hasn’t really come up with an idea to help that yet. He spent three-quarters of a trillion dollars on stimulus though. You didn’t see results from that? Really? I know you’re still out of work. He’s been a little too busy to address that. I’m sure he’ll come up with some business-friendly ideas to stimulate the economy.

You still have the house? That’s good. It’s worth less than three years ago? Yeah, that's pretty common. What? You owe more than it’s worth? That’s not good. What do you mean Obama didn’t pay your mortgage like you expected him to? You didn’t really believe he was going to do that, did you? At least you’re not as bad off as those families he pledged to help stay in their homes. It’s been months since they’ve been on the street. Unfortunate.

Certainly you see his influence in Washington, don’t you? It’s all changed, with bi-partisanship and all. He brought us all together. Runs like a clock. After all, Nancy Pelosi said she’d drain the swamp, and Obama said we’d all get along… that we wouldn’t have red and blue states anymore, that we’d have 57 purple states.

Politicians are acting worse than ever? I guess you’re right. Rangle and Weiner? Yeah, I guess those are good examples. Well Obama did get rid of the special interests, and their lobbyists, and let us all see our lawmakers in action on C-Span.

Pardon? He didn’t? Well I’ll be. How many? He has how many former lobbyists in his administration? Whoa.

Yes, now that you mention it, I’m paying more for groceries too. That’s a good point. That’s called inflation and it is going to get a lot worse I’m told, what with the fed printing piles of money. And some of it has to do with the price of oil too, I’m sure. Gotta get those tomatoes to market. Boy, gas has gotten expensive, hasn’t it?

Hey, don’t fly off the handle on me, I’m sure it’s not Obama's fault. He’s doing everything he can to make us independent of foreign oil. What? Oh. He’s not? I KNOW you can’t drive a car with a wind power, but he’s thinking about the future.

What’s that? Well don’t get upset because you think prices for electricity and heating oil are going to skyrocket too. That hasn’t happened yet. I don’t think they’d ask us to pay twice what we’re paying now if there wasn’t a good reason. What? What’s the reason? Hmmm. I’m not sure, but I think it has to do with the U.S. contributing 1 percent of the world’s carbon emissions and he thinks by cutting those we can save some polar bears or something. He gets his information from Al Gore, so he’s on top of that.

Yeah, I know, you’re not happy about being in debt. I understand. Don’t feel bad. Our country is in debt too, and they want to spend some more. They’ll just make future generations pay for it.

Yes, I know that’s not fair, but what are we going to do? What’s that? Yeah, I guess Harry Reid insists it’s important to continue funding cowboy poetry. I haven’t heard it, but it must be very good. What I’m concerned about is the fact that just the interest on what we’ve already borrowed takes a huge chunk of the tax money going to Washington. Then they send a lot of that money to the Chinese who lent us their money. Nice people, those Chinese.

Immigration is another problem? Yes I agree, but what he wants to do is find a way to make them all citizens…

Well, yeah, I guess securing our borders first would be a good idea, and I’m sure there’s a good reason why the federal government is suing a state that’s trying to do it themselves. There must be.

C’mon, it’s not so bad. You’re excited about getting health insurance aren’t you? The President got THAT done!

Well if you can’t afford it, they’ll help you pay for it, but you are going to have to buy it. Rationing? You’ve got to be kidding. They're telling us that this is going to make health care affordable and accessible and…

OK, granted, maybe it wasn’t a good idea to add 30 million people to the health care system without adding a single doctor, or a nurse or two. That math’s a little shaky. But the states are going to help pay for it too. Oh. They're broke also?

OK, you can point out that it hasn’t worked at all in Massachusetts and is a miserable failure all over Europe, but this is the U.S. of A! We’ll do it right! After all, they wouldn’t pass something bad for us. The legislators are going to depend on the same health care coverage we buy and…

Oh. They’re not? They’re exempt? Hmmm.

Is it even constitutional? Gosh, I don’t know. They’re still figuring that one out.

Give Obama some credit. He’s learned a lot since he’s been in office, hasn’t he? After all, right off the bat he won a Nobel Prize. I know he didn’t have much experience but he’s a smart guy. For instance, he didn’t close Guantanamo Bay and bring those violent terrorists here. It’s smart to keep nuts who want to kill us away from our shores, isn't it? And, he has kept us involved in Afghanistan and Iraq to fight terrorism. What? You say that sounds a lot like policies from George W. Bush? I guess it does. But Obama did personally authorize the shooting of Osama bin Laden, didn’t he? He all but shot him himself. Plus, he wants to send love to the Muslim community, bring the soldiers home and cut the military budget big time.

And here’s more good news! He says that he’s cut your taxes!

Oh. I guess that would be important if you DID pay taxes. I guess about half of us don’t. But, he’s going to tax the dickens out of the wealthy. They can afford to pay more! That’s a good thing, isn’t it?

Well, your former boss is wrong. He won’t have to lay off another 40 people to pay higher taxes and for Obamacare for his employees. That’s just a scare tactic. He must watch Fox News. Plus, I’ll bet he can get a waiver. That can’t be hard. They’re giving them to a lot of unions, even fancy restaurants, particularly around San Fransisco.

No, that’s silly. Why would he want to move his company overseas?!

So you’re saying we’re not being told the truth? Why do you call them the lame-stream media? Oh. Really? I thought the job of the press in this country was to serve as a watchdog of government, not a lapdog. They really got after President Bush though, didn’t they?

I have to go. I know. I know. It isn’t a pretty picture. It sounds like what we can look forward to is an expensive, cold, dangerous, debt-ridden future with a poor health care system and a bleak retirement.

But you voted for him, didn’t you?

Conservative commentary by Jim Beach
Bookmark and Share

Monday, June 6, 2011

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 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 20 years of this change of musical tastes, there hasn't been anything that could be classified as a musical standard. None of this garbage (music) is sung or hummed by people like the older standards that were and still are today.

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 20 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 (including the recent two finalists in the show “American Idol”) are based in what 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

Saturday, June 4, 2011

Unemployme​nt Rate and Obama

Conservative Thought Of The Week

During a campaign stop in Ohio in 2008, then candidate Obama blamed President Bush for the “high” unemployment rate the country faced. In 2008, according to BLS figures, the unemployment rate was 5.8%.

Obama said:

Only someone as out of touch as my opponent could say that ‘the fundamentals of the economy are strong’ at a time when so many families are struggling. Amid the greatest economic crisis of our time, we desperately need to change the way Washington and Wall Street work…
We can’t afford four more years of the Bush-McCain economic policies that led our economy into this mess – we need to change direction and start putting America’s jobs and America’s workers first.

Well, it’s now 2011 and the latest BLS figures put the unemployment rate at 9.1%. Employers added only 54,000 jobs in May. To put these figures in perspective we should see how the jobs were added. As you may recall, McDonald's ran a huge hiring fair in April and said they were hiring 62,000 jobs. One source estimated that the McDonald’s hiring raised the annual number by up to 30,000 jobs. If McDonald’s had not hired so many employees in April the figures would have been far worse.

Back in 2008 Obama and his supporters claimed that under President Bush the unemployment rate was under 6% and that the only American jobs created was to flip burgers for McDonald’s. Well, it’s now 2011 and thanks to McDonald’s hiring, the unemployment rate under Obama was “held” to 9.1%. If it weren’t for those hamburger flipping jobs the unemployment rate would have been far worse.

Well, it’s readily apparent that the Obama-Biden economic policies are a disaster and that we need to change direction – and leadership.

Conservative commentary by Jim Pirretti

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Sarah Palin for Energy Secretary?

I don't believe that Sarah Palin will run for the presidential nomination of the Republican Party in 2012, but if she does she will not win the nomination. That's not a knock on her or her ability, as a politician, or her ability to attract supporters – that is an educated guess, on my part, as I don't think she'll want to face the the George Soros, liberal-left smear machine that is just waiting to put her and her family through the “wringer” again, as they have been doing since she ran as Vice-President in 2008. The “politics of personal destruction” would be in full force against her much to the shame of the smear merchants of the Democrat Party and their surrogates , Media Matters, The Daily Kos, and People Coming Together (all George Soros funded organizations). Along with their willing cohorts in the media, they will try to portray her as a political lightweight and denigrate her as being stupid and other vile adjectives.

So, if she doesn't run, what can she do with her very meaningful government experience as an elected official from Alaska, including two years as the state's Governor? I would urge the person who gets the Republican nomination to announce a deal to nominate Sarah Palin as Energy Secretary if that person gets elected. Not only would that candidate get a person with charisma in his/her cabinet,, but a person with intimate knowledge of working with the oil companies and by being an advocate for all forms of energy that sits within the borders of the United States. Why should we be buying our energy from other countries thereby making our deficit worse than it is now? We wouldn't, under an Energy Secretary like Sarah Palin, be giving $2 billion to Brazil to aid in their off-shore exploration of oil and then saying that we can't wait to buy the oil from them. That's the kind of stupid policy that would not happen under a Palin leadership role.

Not only is she knowledgeable about oil, but she has stated that she would champion all forms of energy including natural gas, clean coal, hydro, wind and solar. We are the richest country in the world, when it comes to energy resources, and to not exploit those resources is an outright crime. Think of how much money (revenue) would be generated for the federal coffers, if we tapped those vast supplies of energy? We could become an exporter of energy rather than an importer of energy with the resulting outflow of dollars to countries like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico etc.

So, rather than being a political liability, Sarah Palin would bring new hope to an otherwise stagnant (in Obama's case, non existent) energy policy that has contributed mightily to our national debt. Let common sense reign supreme again in America by using the talents of that great American, Sarah Palin.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share