Thursday, December 29, 2011

Sequel: The 80% Solution

When buying a food product, it's always good to see the word 100% pure on the label as that conveys the message that the product is safe to eat.

But in politics, that same desire for a candidate to be a 100% “pure”ideological candidate, is almost impossible to achieve. If that's what a voter is looking for, he is not going to find it. So what is a “purist” voter to do? Well, Ronald Reagan had what he called the 80% solution, which meant that if a voter could agree with 80% of the policies of a candidate for office, he should be able to support that candidate with a clear conscience as long as his opponent has a lower or non-existent favorability rating on the issues. This is the case now with the present slate of Republican candidates (with the exception of Ron Paul). All of the candidates have flaws, made flip-flops, and held opposite or differing opinions on a variety of issues - but, they mainly agree on the major issues as opposed to the views and policies of President Obama. Some voters in the present and past, have based their support of a candidate on one issue to the exclusion of all others (ex. Abortion, same sex marriage, immigration etc.). To me, that is a wrongheaded position to take as life is more than just one issue.

The candidates for the Republican nomination have mostly run the gauntlet of diverse positions on certain topics or policies and have been accused of flip-flops on some issues. Does a candidate have to toe-the-line by never changing or altering his mind on specific issues he might have held in the past? Let's hope not.

The two current front runners for the Republican nomination, Romney and Gingrich, have been accused of flip-flopping on a few issues. I think most all politicians have changed (or evolved) their positions over the years, either out of convictions or for political considerations. Even somebody like President Obama has flip-flopped on the issues more than a short order cook at IHOP over the past few years, which he will have to confront and answer for during the regular presidential campaign of 2012.

Many of our previous presidents have changed their minds on a whole host of topics including the a fore mentioned items such as abortion, gay rights, immigration and now government run healthcare. It is politically expedient to accuse your opponent of changing his mind, but in reality, it is a weak excuse to withhold your support or vote for a candidate just because of the flip-flop. That ploy is going to be used by both Democrats and Republicans in the upcoming election, as it is a means of personally attacking their opponent for doing what most all politicians do anyway, that is, change their mind.

So, my advice to all voters who hold disdain for any candidate or politician who has changed his mind on a particular issue, is to remember that most all have done the same thing on one or more occasions in the past. It's what that candidate believes in now, in the present, that should be taken into consideration more so than what he believed in years ago. Politicians would be foolish to stick to a position that they no longer believe in just for the sake of not being called a flip-flopper or to be “politically correct”.

So, in my opinion, Reagan's 80% solution should be viewed as a sensible means of evaluating a candidate for public office.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Monday, December 26, 2011

MORT’s Meanderings

My Favorite ‘UNfavorites’.

Being the picky sort, I enjoy being upset by things that never seem to faze my good wife or others in my immediate circle of those who tolerate me and my pickiness.

Example: I take huge umbrage at a TV spokesman who appears in ‘gold’ commercials, who always begins by saying, “People are always asking me - - - -“. That’s B.S. He would have to prove to me that people are always asking him anything except, to get the hell off the air.

Example: I am harshly irritated when people close their e-mails with, ‘lol’. I never know whether that means, ‘lots of luck’; ‘lots of love’; ‘lots of laughs’; ‘loads of laundry’; or what? I do believe this is a by-product of ‘texting’ and that we’re stuck with unintelligible abbreviations until something comes along to replace this current practice of people avoiding spelling-out what it is they want to express.

Example: I become agitated instantly when an elderly neighbor-lady, with a quivering rat-like dog on a leash, picks up her puppy’s recently-deposited poop from my lawn - albeit in a plastic bag, smiles sweetly and says, “Good morning”. I respond with an contemptuously-cool, “Good morning”, as I thank her for picking up the poo and gently but firmly, request that if it is within her power to do so, she refrain in the future, from allowing her pooch to poop on my private property. I don’t wish to engage in further conversation with this woman and so, after delivering my carefully crafted request, I turn heel and retire to the confines of my domain.

I love dogs as much as the next guy who objects to them shitting on his property but, I have no patience whatsoever with the owners of pooches who think their dog’s poo doesn’t stink. I have spake upon this subject and don’t not wish to smell it, again.

Example: I become eggs-aspirated with Florida’s ‘middle-of-the-roaders’. Whether they are occupying the middle of a street in my development that is replete with perfectly good sidewalks on both sides or, they are sashaying at a snail’s pace, pushing shopping carts full of groceries while occupying the precise center of the aisle between parked cars in super market parking lots.

In each case, I find myself day-dreaming about those lovely twin Cal.50 machine guns that accompanied me as I occupied the top turret of a twin-engined, land-based U. S. Navy patrol bomber during WWII. While I am now a couple of generations removed from that young man who sat between those guns, I still have reveries about using them in certain kinds of situations all these years later. Situations as just described or quite often, events taking place on I-95.

With regard to Interstate 95, there is a brigand who regularly travels that thoroughfare and makes no attempt to hide the fact that he is out to kill me. But, true to his cowardly nature, he uses a different vehicle every day to avoid detection and identification. Sooner or later, he’ll appear within my sights – and when he does . . . . he’ll ‘get his’.

Example: I couldn’t end this short litany of my Favorite ‘UNfavorites’ without a not-so-friendly jab at my all-time UNfavorite, my ‘UNfavorite-in-Chief BarackHusseinObama. I experience an overabundance of harsh irritation at each mention of his name, vision of his arrogant, sourpuss countenance or audio of his all-too-frequent lies and lunatic utterings into every microphone within a 6,000 mile radius. When he speaks, I reach for the closest barf-bag.

I remember clearly, wanting to strangle His Ineptness-in-Chief, Jimmy Carter. I have many indelible recollections of being annoyed to the max with the degenerate carryings-on by the Scumbag-in-Chief, Bill Clinton. However, all that pales beside the non-stop, 24/7 reminders about the most anti-American reprobate ever to occupy the Oval Office of our White House, Mr. Destruction himself, Barry the bamboozler.

There’s more of course but right now, it is time to clean my guns and check my ammo.

Conservative commentary by MORT KUFF © 2011

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 22, 2011

I Just Don't Understand!

It amazes me, as a “goy” (a gentile), that some of the most vociferous detractors of Israel are Jews themselves. Most of these detractors, although claiming all out support for Israel, seem to be part of the far-left, liberal, secular progressive branch of Judaism, and most seem to be Democrats. They are hell-bent on apologizing for the Muslim terrorists and their actions against Israel and the western democracies, most notably the United States.

They constantly bring up the canard of “moral equivalency” to the response that Israel takes the wrong approach in defending itself from people who are trying to kill them. Just recently, Obama's Ambassador to Belgium, Howard Gutman, (a Jew) saw fit to proclaim that anti-Semitism in the Arab world is different from the old European hatreds - because it can be justified by Israel's actions. These same “apologists” are also in the forefront of giving aid and comfort to our enemies or detractors around the world. These “self-hating” Americans are dedicated to blaming America first for anything negative that happens in the world. President Obama went on a world tour apologizing for our actions over the past years. That was unprecedented in the annals of the presidency for a president to “bad mouth” his own country on foreign shores. The blame America first crowd champion the oppressive regimes in Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Nicaragua, and blame the U.S. for all the ills in those countries.

These same apologists, who all seem to be afflicted with that liberal malady called CRI (Cranial Rectal Inversion), are constantly claiming we are the one's responsible for the terrible violations of their “rights”. They are against all means that we initiated since 9/11 to protect us from future 9/11's or worse. Profiling, wire tapping of suspected terrorists, forceful interrogation of captured terrorists (which they call torture), all seem to be “excessive” and depriving the terrorists of “their rights”. When you ask them how they have been personally affected, they have no answer, but give vague generalities about non-existent violations.

These same “Woodstock Wusses” are the same people who say that Israel and the West should negotiate with these terrorists who want to kill and behead them. Obama even said that Israel should sit down with the Palestinians and negotiate a peace settlement using the 1967 borders as a starting point. Does he really think Israel is that stupid to agree with that self-defeating proposal? They erroneously think that you can sit down and reason with these butchers and appeal to their good hearts and good intentions. They don't seem to realize that we have been trying that for over 30 years with no positive results. All they got for those efforts were more killings, more rockets, more kidnappings, more suicide bombers and endless vitriol eagerly propagated by a pliant main stream media around the world and in our own country.

Because I strongly support the State of Israel, doesn't mean I'm prohibited from criticizing Israel and its policies, but when it comes to its national survival and standing up for their right to defend themselves, I take a back seat to no one or no group.

This hate America and hate Israel crowd not only makes apologies for the Muslim terrorists, but they also support the oppressive regimes and tin-horn dictators right here in Central and South America. These same misguided misguided people support and apologize for the likes of Castro in Cuba, Chavez in Venezuela, Correa of Ecuador, Morales of Bolivia, and Ortega of Nicaragua, all the time mostly blaming the U.S. For all the wrong in those countries. Now you can see why I don't understand why “educated” (with no common sense) people will act and do such misguided things and think they are compassionate.

Maybe someday they will understand.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Selective Outrage

The Sun-Sentinel and reporter Anthony Man did what they normally do on
Saturday, Dec. 17, they published a "hit piece" on Rep. Allen West.
Bill O'Reilly popularized the phrase, "The Spin Stops Here", but their
spin never lets up, especially on sliming Rep. Allen West on a regular

To selectively take the words of Rep. West when he said in an
interview; "If Josef Goebbels was around, he'd be very proud of the
Democrat Party because they have an incredible propaganda machine.
Let's be honest, you know, some of the people in the media are
complicit in this, in enabling them to get that type of message out",
and to try to turn those words into a slur against Jews or the
Holocaust survivors, is outrageous. In a way, the Sun-Sentinel and
Anthony Man proved West's contention that the propaganda machine of the
Democrats and their surrogates in the news media, was working as well
as the Nazi smear machine run by that evil propaganda minister, Josef
Goebbel's, during WWII. Nowhere is his remarks did he denigrate Jews
or the Holocaust, only in the warped minds of the partisan Democrats
and the liberal news media does this "selective outrage" exist.

This is just the beginning of the upcoming vile campaign to get Obama
and the Democrat legislators elected in 2012. They can't run on their
pitiful record, so they'll have to resort to engaging in the "politics
of personal destruction" to cover up their ineptitude and their
Marxist/Socialist policies. Being a black Conservative Republican,
makes Rep West a prime target, because he's not part of the
"plantation" mentality alive and well in Wash. D.C.

Shame on them, but then again, they have no shame.
God bless Rep. Allen West.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Artwork by MORT KUFF

Click on the Cartoon for another cartoon by MORT KUFF

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 15, 2011

MORT’s Meanderings

White House will not do Christmas!

Actually, the White House itself, has never ‘done’ Christmas. It has always been of course, the occupants who have gotten into the spirit of this Christian holiday and have led the nation in celebration by decorating the People’s House and hosting public ceremonies that are appropriate to the occasion.

Since the White House was first occupied by President John Adams and his wife, Abigail, there has been an unbroken stream of Presidents and their families who have celebrated Christmas in that mansion, during times of peace as well as during those periods when we were engaged in war. Since this nation was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles, it has been taken as a matter of course that the two most significant observances of the life of Jesus Christ representing his birth and his death - Christmas and Easter - would and properly should be celebrated in the People’s House.

That is, until the ‘weird one’ President Barack Hussein Obama, initiated his crude & rude deviation from this long-established practice. He has blatantly ignored the Christmas tradition and absented himself and his family from The White House at Christmas time, leaving the gaily-decorated mansion without the presence of a President or a First Family. This is outrageous behavior on the part of a sitting President however, in light of what we have learned about Obama since his immaculate conception (un vetted election) the emerging pattern is becoming more evident. His hypocritical stance, vis a vis his observance of the tenets of the Muslim faith and his embracing of the ideology of Islam as opposed to his professed belief as a Christian, poses an ugly conundrum. What is at the core of this man whom more than half this nation’s voters elected?

The only thing I can imagine that would be worse than the President of these United States avoiding the celebration of Christmas in the White House, would be Obama the Muslim-in-Chief doing a shuck & jive ‘Taqiyya’ number by hypocritically pretending to celebrate this Christian holiday. The man is a lying S.O.B. He is a treacherous deviate in every sense of the word. He hates the freedoms that are the hallmark of our way of life. And, he has become so arrogantly reckless as to express that un-American viewpoint unambiguously, in his ever more frequent Karl Marx-like speeches.

I have no doubt that if the unthinkable happens, meaning he is re-elected for another four years - Christmas at the White House will become a thing of the past while even the most obscure Muslim celebrations will be the only quasi-religious events permitted and ‘officially’ observed in the ‘People’s House’.

Christians should be afraid. Jews should be afraid. Mormons should be afraid.

Believers in Confucius should be afraid. Atheists should be afraid. All sane people should be afraid. And, every American should definitely be afraid.

Do elections have consequences? This Jew says, “Yes, they do”.

Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2011

Bookmark and Share

Monday, December 12, 2011

Who's Responsible?

It seems that if you listen to the T.V. News and read the local newspapers, that nobody in authority in government wants to take responsibility for anything, especially things that have gone wrong on their watch.

Just the other day, President Obama blamed the Republicans for the breakdown of the Super-Committee, but never mentioned the fact that he was A.W.O.L. the whole time this question arose about how to reduce the “non-existent” budget and subsequent debt that we had and are accumulating. He also forgot to mention that he has not had a budget passed in almost 3 years and the one time he did submit one, it was voted down by a 97-0 vote in the Senate. It seems it is always someone else's fault, mainly George W. Bush. That's how a narcissist reacts when things go wrong. It is beneath a narcissist to admit he did something wrong. Our “Campaigner in Chief” always seems to let others do the dirty work and make the tough decisions, so that if it doesn't turn out right, he has the means to deny that it is his fault. Another example was the health care debate. He let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid carry the water on that one - and look how that turned out - 60% of the people want that law to be repealed.

Another one of the incompetents in his administration, Attorney-General Eric Holder, is another “pass the buck” player. The scandal involving “Fast and Furious”, that operation that sold guns to the Mexican drug cartels, is a prime example of how misguided policies instituted by his (Obama's) incompetent administration can cause harm to our country and to individuals employed to protect us, like a Border Patrol agent that was killed by one of those guns that was sold to the drug cartel. Even though Eric Holder is the head man in the Justice Dep't., he claims ignorance as to what went on. That answer is not credible because an operation of this magnitude had to be approved by his office and e-mails seem to back that conclusion up. He says he was unaware of this operation until only a few weeks before he was called upon, this past summer, before the House Oversight Committee. Is he a Pinocchio or what?

In addition, the office of the Attorney-General refused to prosecute the voter intimidation case brought against the “New Black Panther Party”. Career people in the Justice Dep't. wanted to go forth with the prosecution, but Holder pulled the plug. Who's responsible? Not me, said Holder!

Another of Obama's cronies, Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize physicist, was the person in charge of signing off on the Sloyndra loan guarantee debacle. He claims that the proper procedures were in place to evaluate that the loan guarantee was vetted properly, even thought the previous Bush administration had turned down the request as being too risky of an investment. Sec'y. Chu reluctantly admitted his agency made a mistake, but he played ignorant as to why it was approved in the first place. It looks like he wimped out.

Both Holder and Chu should man-up and hand in their resignations because it would be the right and proper thing to do - but, maybe they're waiting for their boss - Barack Hussein Obama, to make the first move? Lots of luck that the “Narcissist in Chief” will do that. He doesn't have the “cajones” to take responsibility for his failures - the same with both Holder and Chu. They just don't want to take responsibility for their actions or lack thereof.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 8, 2011

MORT’s Meanderings.

EXTREME? Oh, golly gee.

This word ‘Extreme has been bandied about and used ‘willy-nilly’ by blabbering
Democraps since the 1980 presidential campaign. Probably, it was used prior to that
but, when it came into popular usage in the ugly world of politics really isn’t important.
What bugs me now, is the extreme mis-use and constant over-use of that term by the
extremist Democrap blabbers, on an almost daily basis. Shades of Al Gore and his
extremely monotonous droning on and on with his use of ‘lock-box’ and ‘extremist’
terminology. He was annoying and today’s Democrap purveyors of ‘extremist’
terminology are annoying.

To listen to a Nancy Pelosi, a Harry Reid or any of the other extremely uncouth,
extremely harsh irritants in the Congress using that term when describing Republicans
or Conservatives, is the ultimate in extreme annoyance. These blabbering Democraps
and each and every one of the toadies who blindly follow their inane ramblings, are
annoying to the extreme max.

I’ll be glad when they all disappear and the screen fades to black. Or, could that be
considered a racist remark? If I’ve offended anyone for any reason, I’ll be extremely

Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2011

Bookmark and Share

Monday, December 5, 2011

You've Got to be Kidding.....Part 2

• How can you make a scapegoat out of a famous coach, the all-time leader in college football victories, 84 year old Joe Paterno, by hanging him out to dry over disgusting sexual incidents by a former coach who no longer worked for him?

• How can many of the Obamamaniacs continue to praise the job Obama is doing when most of the country feels that our country is on the wrong track and about to get worse?

• How can the MSM (Main Street Media) continue to hold Republicans and Conservatives to a higher standard of conduct than they have held liberals and Democrats? (ex. Herman Cain as compared to Slick Willie Clinton and John Edwards)?

• How can our government justify giving loan guarantees to the so-called “green companies” that were on the verge of bankruptcy before they got the guarantee? Do you think politics had anything to do with it?

• How come even if you taxed millionaires and billionaires at 100%, it would still not cover the trillions of dollars the government is spending?

• How come millionaires are painted as “handed down rich” people, when roughly 80% of millionaires in America are the 1st generation of their family to be rich? They didn't inherit it, they earned it.

• How can we remain solvent as a country when we take in $2.3 trillion while spending $3.6 trillion, mostly with borrowed money?

• How come Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is being vilified by liberals and unions when his policy of limiting the power of public unions has caused school districts in Wisconsin to be in surplus rather than deficit as a result of his policies?

• How come people who rail against Capitalism believe that “equality of opportunity” is the same as “equality of outcome”, and that successful people don't deserve to be compensated more than unsuccessful people?

• How come, if everything is improving under Obama's policies, why do we have 49 million people (as calculated by the Congressional Budget Office) living below the poverty line?

• How can you negotiate with a group of people (the Muslims) who want to see you dead because you are considered to be an infidel and not worthy of life?

• How can liberals continue to further the canard that George W. Bush was “selected” by the Supreme Court, and not elected by the electoral process? The Supreme court voted 7 – 2 to declare the recount in Florida as unconstitutional (included were 2 members of the liberal minority).

• How much of that Obama $787 billion “Stimulus” money found its way back to Obama campaign contributors instead of using the money in a fair and equitable manner?

• How can Attorney General Eric Holder not know the particulars of that Mexican gun sale (Fast & Furious) to drug cartels, when memos went to his office, addressed to him, about a year before the scandal broke? Shouldn't that be called gross incompetence?


Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 1, 2011

MORT’s Meanderings

The SunSentinel’s Sick-Humorist Gone Wild

In the Friday, November 25, 2011 edition of the SunSentinel, that paper’s Resident Humorist Stephen L. (Looney) Goldstein’s screed against the revered ‘now & forever’ spiritual leader of the Republican Party Ronald Reagan, was curiously, found on the Opinion Page.

This newsrag’s management continues to shuffle news, features, opinion and other trivia that rudely intrudes upon the furniture and auto ads, so that the readership is obliged to do a daily shuffle in its effort to locate the Opinion Page. Having found that illusive page in this day’s edition, the realization dawned on me that I am no longer surprised when ‘management’ places Resident Humorist Goldstein’s rant on a page other than that reserved for the drawn comics. Hey, it’s their rag; they have the right to choose when and how to disorganize it. Understood.

So at long last, let me get to the point of this Not-to-the-Editor-letter – it is to recount the bitter bias and hateful nature of Goldstein, the hoary humorist emeritus. This poor chap must find himself in a constant state of dyspeptic distress. If it weren’t for his ill-humor, he’d have no humor at all. Being humorous on purpose is difficult, even for the talented. So, being ‘laughed at’ instead of being ‘laughed with’ is a supremely sad condition for a serious Opinion writer to find himself thus categorized. Goldstein has brought this derision down upon his own tousled head.

His shameful rant against Reagan is without rhyme or reason except to provide a vessel to contain his latest outpouring of vitriolic bile. Rarely does one encounter the fullness of ill-humored rage against Conservatism as in the rancid rants and corrosive writings of the SunSentinel’s Buffoon-in-Chief. Long may he rave.

In the case of this Buffoon-in-Chief specifically, ‘long’ would ideally mean a time frame of hours or days but certainly, no more lengthy a period than that.

Conservative Commentary by MORT KUFF © 2011

Bookmark and Share