There Oughta be a Law!

• That Congressmen and Senators should be under some form of “term limits” so that some elected officials can't make a career out of holding public office. According to our founding fathers, our Congressmen and Senators were supposed to be temporary officeholders, not career politicians that held office for 30 or 40 years. Term limits might be 10 years or 5 terms for a Congressman, and 12 years or two terms for a Senator. I firmly believe that corruption will be decreased big-time if this law is enacted.
  
  
• That people, in the interest of good taste and propriety, should not wear clothes that have a tendency to offend the “normal” eye of another person. That means that people should not wear outfits that look like they are trying to squeeze 10 lbs. of potatoes into a 5 lb. bag. There is a limit as to how far a fabric could stretch so that if one of those people attempts to bend over, an explosion might occur thus causing injuries to innocent people. Just go to your nearest shopping mall, sit on a bench and observe the people walking by to see what I mean.
  
  
• That any plastic surgeon who performs “lip enhancement” surgery on overly vain women, and that woman then looks like she can sip a drink through venetian blinds, those doctors should have their license taken away to prevent him/her from creating more freaks than we already have now.
  
  
• That any person, wearing a brand-new warm-up suit and wearing a new pair of Nike sneakers, and who looks like he/she could run in a 26 mile marathon, and they then park his/her car in a “handicap parking space”, should be arrested and then sentenced to work in a hospital as a volunteer for one week as punishment.
  
  
• That a woman riding in the front passenger seat or in the back seat of a car, cannot, under any circumstances, tell the driver what to do, how to do it, and where to go unless they are specifically asked to do so by the driver. This would help reduce the stress of driving tremendously, maintain good spousal relationships, and prevent needless accidents. A win-win-win proposition.
  
  
• That a student attending a public school must dress in a manner that is appropriate and not look like a student is about to attend a Halloween party. Modest school uniforms might be the answer in creating an atmosphere and environment for learning which is not present in today's “anything goes” climate of dress.
  
  
• That any law proposed and passed by a politician must meet the “smell test” of whether or not that politician would, under normal circumstances, be affected by the law being proposed and they must not exempt themselves from the overly ambitious laws that they want to impose on everyone else. “Rotsa Ruck” on getting that passed by today's self-serving politicians.
  
  
• That any interview with an athlete must have an interpreter on hand to explain what gibberish is being said by that “student athlete” or by a “non-degree” recipient pro athlete, or they should just play a recording of the trite phrases and words most athletes utter such as, “We gave it 110%”. “We must work together as team”, “The officiating was terrible”, “We've got to play better defense”, “We need to execute better”, and on and on just to fill up valuable broadcast time between commercials.

Do you think any of these laws will pass? If you do, then I have a “Bridge in Brooklyn” I'd like to sell you.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Empty Inaugural Words

Speaking of crafty speeches, on Monday I read the transcript of President Obama’s inaugural address. I have found it better to read the words and not sit there staring at the TV just to be enraptured.

As we prepare to launch our “Next Generation Today” show on Feb. 4, the critical theme will be “the next 100 days for the Next Generation,” and I read Obama’s words through that filter. I was struck by the fact that he did not talk about our growing debt and government spending.

If there is one glaring item that threatens our children’s future, it is our national debt. The president only mentioned our deficit once, and that was when Obama paid lip service to making “the hard choices to reduce the cost of health care and the size of our deficit.”

Now, I am not a rocket scientist, but back in 2010 when he signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the law was estimated to cost the American people $940 billion. That cost later skyrocketed to $1.7 trillion, and several new taxes from the law just hit all Americans this January. (Notice I said “all Americans.”)

Our deficits in the era of Obama have been $1.42 trillion, $1.3 trillion, $1.29 trillion and $1.1 trillion. We are on track for a fifth straight year of $1 trillion-plus deficits – the difference between revenue flowing into the government and government spending. We are now borrowing 46 cents on every dollar spent.

In his inaugural address, Obama did not mention how we will curtail spending.

On the other hand, average gasoline prices have gone from $1.84 in January 2009 to $3.30 in January 2013, and Obama said in his address, “We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and grandchildren.”

When Moms cannot afford to take their kids to soccer or lacrosse practice because of rising energy costs, that is a betrayal.

As a young fella tanking up my Dad’s car on our assigned day during the Saudi oil embargo, I remember being told that government would create a Department of Energy to make us energy independent. Yeah, exactly what I’m thinking.

We sent $2 billion to Brazil for offshore oil exploration; we wasted taxpayer dollars on green energy boondoggles (Solyndra); we are sending jobs overseas for wind blades and solar panels, and anyone remember the Keystone XL oil pipeline?

We are betraying our children.

On the defense front, Obama said “a decade of war is now ending” and “we will defend our people and uphold our values through strength of arms.” But recent and current events suggest otherwise.

Last September we lost a U.S. ambassador, a State Department official and two former Navy SEALS in Benghazi, Libya. We just learned that radical Islamic terrorists murdered three Americans of the 10 they took hostage at a gas plant in Algeria. No one asked radical Islamists about an end to fighting, and sadly, they do get a vote.

“Strength of arms” – those Obama inaugural words are in contrast to the threat of sequestered defense spending, which would so promote a decline in American military strength that Obama-appointed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta spoke against it.

We need a loyal opposition that will make a stand in the political arena, and the GOP must not continue to acquiesce under perceived media pressure.

Steadfast and Loyal,

Allen B. West

Allen West joined PJ Media as the Director of Next Generation Programming where he is leading the effort to develop new Internet TV shows and other media that can be viewed on NextGeneration.TV starting in February and March 2013.

The Hell with Political Correctness!

When are we all going to go to the window (like in the movie, “Network”) and yell out, “I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore”, when it comes to dealing with the insane, mostly liberal, induced madness called, “political correctness”?

You can't say this, you can't say that, you can't do this and you can't do that - who in hell are these self-appointed arbiters and guardians of proper speech and behavior (a/k/a the P.C Police) to make our lives hell because they deem certain things or actions “verboten”, “not Kosher”, or insensitive, to some real or imaginary groups or individuals? It infects all aspects of our lives especially when it applies to certain “protected” minorities. I thought we had a 1st Amendment right to say what's on our mind, whether it is deemed proper or not. Shouldn't people be allowed to look stupid, say stupid things, and do stupid things as long as it doesn't hurt someone else, besides their feelings? It has gotten so bad that some people, in the normal interchange of conversation, can give someone a compliment and be sued for sexual harassment, that telling an ethnic joke, making a racial remark, or using a harmless non-threatening sexual innuendo, can be a cause for someone losing their job, being fined by a court, being refused a promotion, or being vilified by the media, because they (who's they?) deemed it insensitive or insulting? It is outright lunacy, to say the least.

Look what has happened in our judicial system - today when someone commits a crime, it must be determined whether or not it is a “hate” crime, which carries a more severe penalty, than the same crime committed by someone against someone else who is not in that “protected” class. How absurd! A crime is a crime, is a crime, regardless of who is the victim.

Certain people get a pass, just because they are in the “protected” class. If a white person called a black person a “nigger” it can be considered racial harassment, but if a black person called another black person a “nigger”, that is O.K. or at least it would not considered a “major” offense by the P.C. Police.

Zero tolerance is another area where “political correctness” holds sway. The intentions are sometimes laudatory, but the punishment doesn't always “fit the crime”. A casual remark by one person to another with a sexual connotation might be grounds for a lawsuit, a student taking an aspirin in school might be a cause for suspension, telling an ethnic, racial or religious joke might be cause for a firing or banishment from the industry, but there's one area where the P.C. Police don't seem to get involved in, that's when the topic is slandering or mocking Christians. Anything goes and in many cases it is looked upon favorably by those who are non-believers (generally liberal secularists and atheists). Slander a Muslim, a Jew or other protected minority, and all hell will break loose, but not when it comes to Christians - they are fair game. Shouldn't all religions be fair game, even for obnoxious, and slanderous speech or actions?

It was different years ago, when people could joke with one another, say stupid things to one another, and be free to either be nice or nasty, without a “blow back” or being vilified or harassed by the P.C. Police. We should all be fed up with these “unwritten” restrictions called “political correctness”, and we should all run to the the window and proclaim that “We are mad as hell and we won't take it anymore”. Political correctness be damned.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

MORT’s meanderings

How will we respond to the violence that is coming?

It is my assessment that the number-one threat facing our national security and hence, the number-one threat to the very survival of our liberty and traditional American way of life, is the encroachment of Islam-Shariah-Jihad.

And, the number-one tactic in the war Islam is waging against freedom-loving people worldwide, including the United States, is violence. The threat of violence and actual violent attacks are what the Muslim Brotherhood is all about. Examples abound in every country where Muslim populations have swamped urban areas and been allowed to intimidate local authorities into submitting to demands for ‘accommodation’. What the MB, CAIR and all the other Muslim groups mean by ‘accommodation’ is, a never-ending stream of demands for special recognition and special treatment for miscreant Muslims plus, assured building & occupancy permits for more and more mosques.

It is quite clear that neither this committed Muslim President, his sicko-psycho enablers or his Zombie followers are inclined in the slightest, to put up any kind of resistance to those who would violate, torture and murder U. S. citizens abroad. This means that top- down, this Administration is in denial, it is cowardly or, unapologetically sympathetic to the blood- thirsty methods of the ultra-radical movement know as, Islam-Shariah-Jihad.

We note with disgust, that given the behavior of Attorney General of the United States Eric Holder during Obama’s first term, the American people learned that violence against our citizens within our borders, would be tolerated without so much as the blinking of an eye. Further- violence, atrocities and even murder against our citizens and their property overseas, including attacks on our official Embassies, has been tolerated without blink, by the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Her responses have been typical in that they are weasel-worded, obtuse and lacking in specifics. Worse yet, they are usually delivered so long after the fact, as to seem almost unrelated to the offensive event. .

Can we look forward to anything other than more strident stagecraft, more bluster and

more bloviating from John Kerry, presuming he whizzes through the Senate confirmation process as expected? It would have been difficult for this President to have chosen a more inappropriate, more incompetent, more delusional radical than Kerry (who by the way, served in Viet Nam). He and his three lavender Purple Hearts will hold sway over an ever more Swiss-cheese-like Diplomacy on the Potomac – all to the detriment of the already soiled reputation and national security of the United States. In response to the inevitable cries of, “Give him a chance” I say – “Instead of giving him the opportunity to dis-serve this nation as Secretary of State, make him the Ambassador to North Viet Nam. He is a perfect fit to buddy up with the VietNamNorth-dwarf President – treacherous and traitorous birds of a feather, so to speak.

And so, with the official attitude both at the Department of Justice and the Department of State being so totally wobbly and weak-spined, it is also inevitable that we’ll see more threats and more actual violence from the various, benignly-named Muslim organizations within our borders. And overseas, we’ll see continued violence and bloody attacks on our citizens and property by Al Qaeda and other Islamo-thug groups. Further, I predict it will all begin shortly following Obama’s Inauguration. When he swears to preserve and protect the Constitution, it will be yet another example of how he blasphemes the very principles upon which this nation was founded. The Muslim term for such deception is, ‘Taquiyya’. If you are not familiar with that term yet, get to know it.

My question is: “How will we respond to the violence that is coming?” We know for certain that it is headed our way. We know for certain who the perpetrators will be. We just don’t know exactly where or when they will strike. But, we are certain that it will be aimed at ‘soft targets’, with the objective of killing as many innocent Americans as they can. There isn’t any doubt that the bad guys are planning multiple attacks that will be timed to coordinate simultaneously with other events at wide-spread locations, guaranteeing the greatest human carnage and causing the most universal chaos possible.

Being the devilishly clever, evil miscreants they are, they will be testing how we respond by staging several ‘dry-runs’ before initiating their first multi-location terrorist event, here in the United States.

So, I repeat my question: “How will we respond to the violence that is coming?” There was once a time, in fairly recent memory, when it would have been reasonable to presume that somewhere within the complexity of our Federal Government, there were organized groups of people addressing themselves specifically to this kind of threat. Sadly today, we can’t be so certain. That is most unfortunate.

It is my long-held suspicion that chaos and civil disorder are exactly what Barack Hussein Obama and his group-think enablers want to see occur. And, occur with the accompanying human carnage mentioned previously. Why? Why? Because that is precisely the excuse Obama needs to put his ‘personal Police Force’ onto the nation’s streets. That is the condition ‘trigger’ he is watching for. It is all the reason he needs to invoke his presumed authority permitting him to send his army out to take control of all activity in the nation – in order to ‘maintain peace and tranquility’. Yeah, right.

Does this sound far-fetched to you? How many examples in recent history would you like me to cite? Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Gadhafi, Kim Jong il, Idi Amin, Assad, Chavez, Mao, Saddam Hussein, Amadinejad – to name a few. They all used violence to achieve their objectives. And, how did the people in their respective countries respond? It is a matter of record that whatever resistance they were able to mount, wasn’t sufficient to effectively deter the rise to omnipotent power by each of these despots.

Pray tell me, what is different about the approach to gain power by all the aforementioned despots – and Barack Hussein Obama’s mad dash toward total dictatorship?

Call him King, call him Monarch, call him Potentate or call him President - the result is the same – total control over each and every aspect of the lives of every man, woman and child in the United States of America. Is that what we want?

I ask you again: “How will we respond to the violence that is coming?”

Conservative commentary by MORT KUFF

To Frack or Not to Frack: That is the Question?

A new industry has evolved over the past decade or so, called “Fracking” (definition: it is a process of extracting natural gas from shale rock layers deep within the earth). This method of capturing natural gas from shale, is gaining a vast source of valuable energy which could make the U.S.A. a natural gas exporter to the rest of the world. The resulting boom is transforming the American energy landscape. In certain areas of our depressed economy, the states that have encouraged “fracking” have been booming (No. Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas etc.) economically. Of course, with any successful discovery of a natural resource, the “environmental wacko’s” have come out of the woodwork to try to throw roadblocks in the way of exploring for this very valuable and affordable product, that is situated in abundance right here in our own country.

These perpetual naysayer’s of progress have come up with a litany of mistaken concerns trying to scare public officials into not giving the okay to drill for shale gas. The major charge these so-called “tree huggers” put forth is that “fracking” creates cracks in the rock formation that allows chemicals to leach into sources of fresh water. The fallacy of that argument is that the average shale formation is thousands of feet underground, while the average drinking well or acquifer, is a few hundred feet deep.

Another fear put forth by the environmentalists is that “fracking” releases toxic or radioactive chemicals. The reality is that 99.5% of the fluid injected into fracturing the rock, is water and sand. The chemicals range from the benign such as citric acid (which is found in soda pop), to benzene. Most states have laws on the books to make the drilling companies comply with the strict rules relating to the use and disposal of the chemicals.

Other scenarios put forth by the environmental lobby to create a “doom and gloom” atmosphere in the minds of the public, is that “fracking” causes cancer, earthquakes, pollution from trucks transporting the gas, or that shale exploration is unregulated. Most all of these wild claims have no merit or scientific facts to back them up, as all new industries will have growing pains due to the progress it has brought to the state or area.

With all the scrutiny that this new energy source commands, the companies must make its production safe for the public, and they must make the case that “fracking” is a safe, inexpensive and valuable source of energy, which it is.

Since the environmentalists were an important source of political aid for Obama, the new industry might have to overcome some hurdles that the Obama Administration might try to impose on them, in order to appease the fanatics who are against all types of fossil fuel exploration, no matter how beneficial it is to the financial condition of the country. This process, along with the vast amounts of untapped oil and coal deposits still locked up by the Obama energy policies, could, if left to be explored and captured, could help us out of the financial bind that we find ourselves in at the present time. Common sense seems to be the exception rather than the rule that drives this Admistration’s energy policies.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

MORT’s Meanderings

Obama’s Nominutz.

One thing is for ‘dang sure’ now that our ‘Lord & Masters, Barack & Hussein & Obama’ have been re-elected by the clueless, the careless, the corrupt, the cowardly and the cabbage-heads - - his future nomination of incompetents to the highest posts in our Federal Government, will continue.

I call them ‘Nominutz’. Anyone out there need clarification?

In a piece I wrote titled, “Obama’s endless supply of fruits & nuts” (12-3-2012) and in another piece titled, “Continuity of Incompetence is assured” (12-15-2012), I expressed my gut thoughts about this issue. I covered what I consider to be the inevitable imposition of Socialist lunacy at the top, guaranteed by Obama’s continued appointments from his endless supply of Nominutz, and their confirmation by a cowardly, complicit Congress. Did I hear someone mention a THIRD TERM?

**********

If interested in reading these articles, they can be accessed on one or more of the following sites:

‘ChuckOnTheRightSide.blogspot.com’

‘RealVerse.com’

‘NoTyrants.blogspot.com

(Look in the right-hand column for ‘MORT’s meanderings’) (Thanks for taking the time & trouble to read my KuffStuff.)

Conservative commentary by MORT KUFF

The Americans With No Abilities Act

President Barack Obama and the Democratic Senate are considering sweeping legislation that will provide new benefits for many Americans. The Americans With No Abilities Act is being hailed as a major legislative goal by advocates of the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition.

"Roughly 50 percent of Americans do not possess the competence and drive necessary to carve out a meaningful role for themselves in society," said California Sen. Barbara Boxer. "We can no longer stand by and allow People of Inability (POI) to be ridiculed and passed over. With this legislation, employers will no longer be able to grant special favors to a small group of workers, simply because they have some idea of what they are doing."

In a Capitol Hill press conference, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pointed to the success of the U.S. Postal Service, which has a long-standing policy of providing opportunity without regard to performance. At the state government level, the Department of Motor Vehicles also has an excellent record of hiring Persons with No Ability (63 percent).

Under the Americans With No Abilities Act, more than 25 million mid-level positions will be created, with important-sounding titles but little real responsibility, thus providing an illusory sense of purpose and performance.

Mandatory non-performance-based raises and promotions will be given to guarantee upward mobility for even the most unremarkable employees. The legislation provides substantial tax breaks to corporations that promote a significant number of Persons of Inability (POI) into middle-management positions, and give a tax credit to small and medium-sized businesses that agree to hire one clueless worker for every two talented hires.

Finally, the Americans With No Abilities Act contains tough new measures to make it more difficult to discriminate against the non-abled, banning, for example, discriminatory interview questions such as, "Do you have any skills or experience that relate to this job?"

"As a non-abled person, I can't be expected to keep up with people who have something going for them," said Mary Lou Gertz, who lost her position as a lug-nut twister at the GM plant in Flint, Mich., due to her inability to remember righty tighty, lefty loosey. "This new law should be real good for people like me. I’ll finally have job security." With the passage of this bill, Gertz and millions of other untalented citizens will finally see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Said Sen. Dick Durbin: "As a senator with no abilities, I believe the same privileges that elected officials enjoy ought to be extended to every American with no abilities. It is our duty as lawmakers to provide each and every American citizen, regardless of his or her inadequacy, with some sort of space to take up in this great nation and a good salary for doing so."

Hat tip to George Giftos

Did We Cut Off Our Noses to Spite Our Faces?

How could a president be re-elected after posting such a pitiful record of accomplishment? Historians will have to figure that one out in the future.

Well, it happened, much to the chagrin of myself and others who supported Mitt Romney for president against Barack Hussein Obama.

From all reports of the voting patterns of the election, it was reported that Romney received 3 million less votes than did McCain in 2008. How could that be? Most likely, for whatever reason, some voters stayed home and as a result, Obama was re-elected.

From what I can see, many conservatives seem to want to have a candidate that agrees with them on 100% of the issues, and if that candidate doesn’t meet their criteria, they won’t support or vote for that candidate, or they’ll just stay home. The Democrats don’t seem to have that “purity” problem, they’ll vote for the Democrat come hell or high water. That seems to be winning tactic for the Democrats, something that the Republicans should try to embrace in future elections.

I presume many of the stay-at-home voters never heard of the Reagan 80% rule for supporting a candidate for office? He said we should be able to support a candidate whom they could agree with on 80% of the issues, especially if the choice is someone like Obama.

Where were the likes of Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, and Jon Huntsman in support of Mitt Romney during the campaign? Were they so disappointed in not getting the Republican nomination that they decided to take their ball out of the game and go home? It sure looked that way.

Due to their pique, they consciously or unconsciously, aided in the re-election of Barack Hussein Obama. In addition, the enthusiastic Tea Party supporters were conspicuously muted in their support of Romney. Why? What positions, that Romney espoused, were so unpalatable that they couldn’t give him their meaningful and enthusiastic support when compared with Obama? They might’ve not liked him personally or some of his views, but “why did they cut off their noses to spite their faces” and help in the re-election of Obama when the candidate they should have eagerly supported was head and shoulders above his opponent? Now we are saddled with 4 more years of someone who is trying to turn our country into the United States of Europe.

Who can we thank for this outrage?

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Free Stuff Party

The great depression and dust bowl created an era of massive poverty. Most, who were caught in this destitution, did not lose their pride and were grateful and humbled when receiving any kind of aid. Many felt it shameful not to be able to provide for ones self, let alone a family. It was a time of bare essentials, patched up clothes, worn leather soles and heels, toy-less birthdays and Christmas's, stale baked goods and many meatless meals.

Even today's genuine poor are no where near to what I just described. Many can be seen as yesterday's lower middle class. There are areas in the world where people would gladly change places with them and feel blessed. This doesn't mean their needs should be ignored nor compassion withheld.

What blemishes this scenario is a huge number of people working the system and making a mockery out of its intent; abetted by our President and assisted by his capo, David Axelrod, who abused it politically, for the votes that gave him another four years, to complete the destruction of America as we have known it; a populous of creative individualistic entrepreneurship and a Norman Rockwell image of our country they view as pornographic by his entitlement abuser constituencies, who are the real pornographers of our country.

They are a group professing pseudo poverty, to claim the spoils of Obama's dismantling of private enterprise and toils of the productive tax payer. Non tax payers who have paid their dues are not under this banner. This is not the Democratic Party of our parents and grandparents. It isn't the party of FDR, Harry Truman, JFK and even the one Ronald Reagan once belonged to and grew out of. It has become an unrecognizable organization of questionable character, leaning dangerously toward what this nation has always fought against.

I have coined a new, more appropriate name for it... "The Free Stuff Party!" And now, while most of us are tightening our belts because expenses of our essentials and taxes going up, with no plan to cut down on government ex penditures, the President continues to spout the phrase, "Fair Share." No matter how much we shell out, the fair share revenue will not go to reduce the astronomical debt, but instead, a new executive order just executed by this arrogant, pompous ass, lifts the ban on pay freezes for federal employ ees that gives raises to the Vice-President, members of Congress and circuit and district court judges. How different is it fromthe board room of a corporation, lavishly compensating upper management?

Is this a great country, or what?

Conservative commentary by George Giftos