Speak Loudly and Carry a Feather Duster

I know, the real phrase is “Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick”, but I’m not referring to former President Teddy Roosevelt with that headline, I’m referring to our present Commander in Chief, President Barack Hussein Obama.

Being clueless about foreign affairs (and domestic affairs as well), he tries to act “macho”, but he comes across as a wimp, a wuss and a weak-kneed propagandist.

His threats carry little credibility and he makes the United States look weak and vacillating.

Immediately upon being sworn in as president, he went on an “Appeasement” tour (sometimes referred to as an “Apology” tour), claiming that the United States was not an exceptional nation and, in addition, claiming that we did many things with not the noblest of intentions (I presume he forgot our involvements in WW1 and WW11, our aid to victims of floods, hurricanes, and famines etc. around the world). That was quite an indictment against the most powerful country in the world, the country he was leading, the United States of America.

From Iraq to Afghanistan, to Israel and the Palestinians, from his “red line” in Syria, and his support for the now deposed Morsi in Egypt (a member of the Muslim Brotherhood), he has made blunder after blunder. The result is that we are being laughed at around the world, especially since we elected this former Community Organizer twice. Are we stupid or what? I guess you could say we are stupid as it looked like we voted for Obama because of the color of his skin and not the content of his character.

At present, he and his flunky Secretary of State, John Kerry, is over in the Middle East trying to convince Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians without getting anything of value in return. He thinks he can broker a settlement with a group that really doesn’t recognize the State of Israel, and, if given the chance, would cut off the heads of Israeli’s as well as look at them. The same naiviete can be said for his so-called agreement with the Mullah’s in Iran. Remember when he vowed that he would not allow the Iranians to develop a nuclear bomb? Well, who doesn’t think that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon in a year or so?

Yes, Barack Hussein Obama is no Teddy Roosevelt, he “Speaks Loudly and Carries a Feather Duster”, and he has brought shame upon this great country of ours, the “exceptional” United States of America.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann


=========================================

MORT's meanderings.

'No Class' prattles on non-stop, about Middle Class.

Barack Hussein Obama aka Black Hustler Obama, the Commander-in-Chief of  'No Class', prattles on incessantly about the Middle Class.  He is oblivious to the fact that the United States of America, unlike the Marxist dream world in which he resides, is only divided by categories of income - not 'class'.  

His fascination with the dumb-assed concept of  'income inequality' is proof positive that this foreign fool happily paddles around 24/7, in the mire of the cesspool that is Saul Alinsky's all-wrong-all-the-time, 'Rules for Radicals'.

This delusional mentality only makes sense in the context of the many-times-failed ideologies of Socialism, Communism and Marxism. Now, we have the latest proof that such lunacy is a failed concept - the dawning of Obama's second term.  

Enabled by the clueless, careless, greedy something-for-nothing majority of painfully stupid legal & illegal voters, Obama is well on his way toward his goal of destroying the 237+ year old, 'Great Experiment' that is, the United States of America.

One arrogant Narcissist on an ego-trip, supported by an army of equally arrogant, intolerant, self-serving, no class evil enablers, who proudly identify themselves as members of the Democrat Party, is preparing our once-great nation for a shamefully uncontested take-over by the Muslim Brotherhood.  

Like the song says, "It was great fun, but it was just one of those things."

MORT KUFF  © 1-29-2014

MORT's meanderings

Legacy of an Illegitimate Alien.

Despite the lowest approval rating on record for a sitting president of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, a shining legend in his own mind, will continue to add to his legacy as. 'The likeable Muslim who destroyed our Liberty and our American way of life'.

How smart are we as a people, when we offer ourselves up as literal slaves to an intransigent, despotic tyrant who was elected by a majority of totally clueless, glassy-eyed voters?  Obama was propelled into office by a huge 'Something-for-Nothing' crowd of slugs who fell hook, line & sinker for his 'Hope & Change' load of horse manure.  What that brought us as a result, was a Tsunami of racism, regulation, taxation, out-of-control  lawlessness, divisiveness, deception and irresponsible spending such as we've never experienced in the history of our country.  And worse yet, there have been no accompanying positives that would serve to ameliorate the never-ending litany of disasters.  Nothing.  Nada.

Over a period of the last five years, we've been treated to a non-stop series of broken promises plus intentional, outright lies by a president with absolutely no qualifications for the job.  At the outset, he dropped an opaque shroud of secrecy over all his records - from his birth, to his education, to his family history and his intimate associations with a wide spectrum of society's most undesirables.

If the disaster that is ObamaCare is the crown jewel of his legacy, what can we possibly look forward to as a beacon to guide us into the future as a nation and as a people?  The answer eludes me but, I'm certain it won't be easy, or fun.

                                                                                     

                                                                                      MORT KUFF   © 12-31-2013

2016 Battle of the Tubbies

It would appear the greatest State Department diplomatic accomplishment the past
four years was the international caloric effect it had on Hillary Clinton, prancing
the world, attending state dinners on behalf of our country. What an unselfish
service and sacrifice to her waist line to make.

It is almost a given she will be her party's nominee in 2016, and if New Jersey's
Governor Chris Christie follows suit for his party, it will be a fight of the TUBBIES.
Whoever her opponent will be, he or she will have to deal with her P.R. firms NBC
and CNN, who were preparing the propaganda machine in a mini series and
documentary, to supplement their so called unbiased reporting, but circumstance
deterred fruition, although still remaining in competition with the other mainstream
media to crown her.

Of course knowledge of the Dragon Lady's questionable dealings in the past will be
omitted to preserve the distorted image they will attempt to present, hiding the
self-serving, extraordinarily ambitious, power hungry creature.

Her unfiltered past must be delved into deeper in order to preserve the nation from
another pending disaster as we are being confronted with by the present
administration.

To counter the romance novels mainstream media plans to publish as non fiction, a
way must be found to list the certain to be omission of events during her tenure with
the Rose law firm; White Water dealings, Vince Foster's highly problematic death
and removal of files from his office by Bernard Nusssbaum, chief White House
counsel, and given to her chief of staff, Margaret Williams to hide.

Derelict investigation of an unprecedented $1,000.00 cattle futures investment netting
her almost $100,000.00 in a short time, Filegate...unauthorized use of FBI files,
firing the travel office, etc. There are many more events that have to be regurgitated,
like the China connection and the sale of the Lincoln bedroom and Air Force One and
any part she may have played in them to see the true picture of Hillary Clinton,
as well as names from the past that include Jim and Susan McDougal, Webster Hubbell,
Jim Guy Tucker, Marc Rich. You may not have agreed with the agendas of past presidents,
but except for a few, most put country first. Hillary's record if she runs is clearly
self evident it will be all about her and not for the good of the people and country.
Compare the weight of the Clinton wallet before they entered the national scene with
today's weight. You may ask, "but at this point, what difference does it make?"

Ask them who have encountered the dirty end of the stick she handed them. Especially
the families of the four who died in Benghazi!

The recent disclosure of the Fort Lee, George Washington Bridge deliberate traffic
snarl, has all the mainstream media news rooms and their cable affiliations wearing bibs
to protect them from their salivating.

It is perfectly permissible to refer to Gov. Christie as being fat, but I anticipate
crucifixion For referring to the Dragon Lady's voluptuous physique as dumpy and at
times, looking like a bag lady. Double standard is a liberal standard, and a
conservative sin.

Conservative article from George Giftos

Are You Paid What You’re Worth?

Most people would probably say “NO”, but they would have trouble defining what their worth really is. A good definition of what is the right pay for a worker is: You don’t get paid for time you work, you get paid for the value you bring to the time you work. In other words, is your production worth it to the company or organization to pay you the amount they pay you?

Many people today feel that they should be paid for the job classification, regardless of what they contribute to it. Equal pay for equal work, is the rallying cry for years by the “feminists” when they petition for getting more pay for women. Equal pay determination is easy if two people are doing the same or similar work. But, the objectivity blurs when you try to compare two dissimilar jobs. How do you compare a teacher with a truck driver, or a sales clerk with a carpenter etc., as other factors also enter into the determination of what a person should be paid?

Due to physical differences in men and women, there will always be some disparagement in how men and women are compensated. Men, overall, are physically stronger than women, so therefore they are more prone to be attracted to jobs that many women shy away from such as, firemen, combat military, manual labor etc. That’s also true with women, who tend to be attracted to certain jobs that men won’t do, to any great extent, such as, nurses, elementary teachers, checkout clerks etc. That’s not to say men and women don’t crossover to work at the jobs mostly held by the opposite sex, but, in the main, stereotypical job selection by men and women hold up as stated.

The “political football” of raising the minimum wage, is an area where the government gets involved when it really shouldn’t. To have the government set an arbitrary base pay rate for hourly workers without any consideration as to how that wage can be compared to production, as needed by the employer, generally brings “unintended consequences”. It generally means, mostly in the teenage group, that there will be fewer jobs available, thereby causing higher unemployment for those on the lower rung of the pay ladder. By raising the minimum wage, you will also cause a demand for an upward adjustment by other workers immediately above the newly set minimum wage plateau. Think of all the entry level positions that might be lost here in the Delray/Boca area, if we price these workers out of the market by artificially raising their wages without any thought of the economic hardship placed on the employer. That might seem beneficial for the worker, but if his employer has difficulty meeting that increase, that worker may be laid off or have his work week cut back. That’s an example of the “unintended consequences” of trying to be “generous” to workers without regard to the value that the worker brings to the job.

Some use Europe as an example of putting into place higher minimum wages, but when you see that the unemployment rate, in most European countries, is twice that of ours, it should give pause for thought that artificially determining what someone should receive as pay, determined by the government, might not be in the best interests of the worker or for the country’s economy, as a whole.

The demagogues, of course, will vilify those who would oppose a spike up in the minimum wage, but pure, simple economic logic, will win out in a serious debate as to its merit, but emotion seems to always trump logic, most of the time, so the pressure to constantly raise the minimum wage will be forever present and most likely approved by the pandering politicians. Just recently, there have been demonstrations outside fast-food restaurants demanding a $15 per hour minimum wage (by the way, many of those protesters were supplied by the unions as paid protesters). It has been determined that approx. 3% of the work force works for the minimum wage, mostly teenagers getting their first taste of paid employment, and seniors looking to supplement their retirement.. Really, should a floor sweeper, a hamburger flipper, or a Wal-Mart greeter etc. command the rate of $15 per hour? The question could be asked, is being employed at $7.65 per hour better than being unemployed at $15 per hour? The answer should be quite obvious.

In conclusion, politicians should let the “free market” determine the pay of the workers (except in instances of coercion and fraud or exploitation), because the unintended consequences of arbitrarily setting pay scales, is more detrimental to the worker than letting the productivity of the worker determine his worth in the marketplace.

Remember, you don’t get paid for the hour. You get paid for the value you bring to the hour.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Some Questions to Ponder

We have all heard the falsehoods we were told about Obamacare. But here are some additional questions to ponder:

·       If the economy is as vibrant as Obama claims, why do we need still another extension of unemployment insurance benefits?

·       If Obama was going to get “to the bottom of the IRS scandal” how come he appointed an individual, Barbara Bosserman, who is a significant contributor to Obama and other Democrats, to serve as an “independent” investigator?

·       If Obama is as smart and savvy as liberals say, why has he fostered policies that has increased disability dependents by 22% since 2008 resulting in the Social Security Board of Trustees saying a portion of the program will run out of funds to pay promised benefits by 2016?

·      How can the GOP be the party of the rich when the richest populous is Fall Church, VA where the average income is $121,250 a year, seven of the 10 richest members of Congress are Democrats, and Democrat Senate Majority Leader Reid resides at the Ritz?

·       If Obama’s economic policies are sound as the media claims, how come the number of people who have left the labor force has jumped by 10 million since Obama took office and 91.5 million Americans are not working at all?

·       We were told by Obama and Unions that the taxpayers would not be hurt by the bailout of GM and Chrysler.  Then why have we lost $10 billion in the GM bailout and $1.3 billion in the Chrysler bailout?

·       Electricity prices have increased by more than 20% since Obama has been in office despite massive spending on “green energy.”  Could the reason by massive overregulation by the EPA and other government agencies?

·      Obama consistently talks about tax fairness.  Isn’t it curious that According to the Tax Foundation the bottom half of income tax filers paid 36% more in taxes in 2011 than they did in 2010 even though their income did not increase and yet the top 1 shouldered 35% of the tax burden although their share of income was less than 19%.

Conservative commentary by Jim Pirretti

  

MORT's meanderings

Earnest advice meant for Obama.

As a respectful American citizen, it pains me to see the President of the United States being berated openly as an inexperienced, incompetent, unethical, race-baiting, anti-Semitic, anti-Constitution, anti-American - which of course, he is.  But it reflects poorly on our Chief Executive, the elected leader of the nation and the nominal Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces.

Now, due to his intentional misleading and the litany of devious deceptions regarding his literally non-stop speechmaking over the course of the past five years - and due to the fact that just recently, his statements about - "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor - period." - have been spotlighted as bald-faced, intentional deceptions,  LIES -  yes, this President tells lies - Barack Baby, Mr. Articulate, is facing a truth gap

Hence, this poor but arrogant President has been tarred with the ugly brush of, 'CREDIBILITY'.   People don't believe what he says anymore, as they once did.  However, he can turn this thing around on a dime, if he'll change just one letter in that word - from 'CREDIBILITY' - to 'CRUDIBILITY'.  

            'CRUDIBILITY'  

        Now, there's an Obama we can all believe in.

           MORT KUFF  © 12-18-2013

The Tyranny of the Minority

That phrase was usually stated as a “tyranny of the majority”, whereby, let’s take our Constitution as an example, laws were put in place, by our founding fathers, that prevented the majority from running roughshod over the minority. Sections of our Constitution like freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, and separation of powers, were included to thwart the majority from imposing their will unreasonably on the minority.

Well, today the tables have turned. It is the “minority” that is trying (and succeeding in some cases) to impose their will on the majority. A well organized and financially secure cabal of far-left special interest groups like GLAAD (a militant gay rights group), the pro-marijuana and drug legalization advocates, and the anti-gun lobby, have marshaled their forces to affect change (a good example, in my opinion, of “defining deviancy down”).

The most militant and well-funded gay groups are GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bi-sexual, and Transgender), GLAAD, and Human Rights Watch, organizations, representing approximately 2% of the population. They have a formidable influence in government, Hollywood, and the main stream media. Over the past few years, they have been successful in changing the laws, in about 18 states, to accept gay marriage. Most were changed by judicial fiat (mostly far-left liberal judges) and legislative action, not by citizen referendum. Anybody who opposes these militant gay groups do so at their own peril. For a group that preaches tolerance for their lifestyle, they are very intolerant of others who oppose their agenda. A recent case in point is the flack over the “Duck Dynasty” show on the A&E network. The patriarch of the family, Phil Robertson, made some remarks denouncing homosexuality, and immediately the group GLAAD demanded his firing, which the A&E network did with all alacrity. The blow-back against the actions of the A&E network is already beginning, mainly by Conservative groups.

Also, the pro-legalization of marijuana group has been pushing for a Florida State Constitutional Amendment change to permit medical marijuana, knowing that that is the foot in the door for future legalization of marijuana for recreational use. Most everybody agrees that marijuana use by sick and terminally ill people, should be made available to them, but the pro-drug groups see this, not as a health issue, but as an opening to get drug use approved for everyone, including, in some cases, hard drugs.

The other minority group, the anti-gun lobby, is also well financed and uses emotional appeals to gin up support for their cause. Every time a mass shooting occurs they trot out the same emotion-laden appeals to ban guns. They blame the people, who abide by the gun laws and the N.R.A. (National Rifle Association), for the carnage done by some deranged individual(s). It doesn’t matter to these anti-gun fanatics, that it is the criminal that should be stopped and not the law abiding citizens who want and need guns for their own protection and for purposes of hunting. Most polls show that most citizens do not want guns banned, but the well-funded and vocal minority have gotten some states and municipalities to pass strict gun control laws. Many of those cities that have the highest rate of gun crimes are cities with the strictest gun laws. How does that grab you?

All the areas of concern mentioned above are areas of concern mainly espoused by a minority of citizens, not the majority of citizens, so you could say that we have a form of “tyranny of the minority” doing what our constitution originally provided for to curtail, the “tyranny of the majority”. How ironic is that?

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

The Great Manipulator

I'm fed up with the President's semantic manipulation of the English language!
The 1925 Geneva Protocol banned the use of chemical and biological weapons
but did not prohibit the development, production or transfer of such weapons.
It reserved the right of the signatories to retaliate in kind if another state
 used chemical weapons first.

Nowhere in the protocol does the words, "Red Line" appear. These words
 are of his invention in his mind, to make him appear tough and the protector
of his United States. Adolescent playground threats of don't cross the line
 or else. Only his 'or else' never comes, because they are just words with
no action left at the 19th hole with all the rest of his promises.

All of the so called world community he thought he charmed, left him high
and dry and out on a limb, so trying to distance himself from his red line he
 is  saying to his unfriendly friends that the red line was drawn back in 1925;
the line that doesn't appear in the protocol.

Because he is left alone to make the decision he boxed himself into, he now
 asks congress to support him in order to hedge that decision, to absolve
 himself if it goes bad so he can say it wasn't his fault, or take credit
saying he forced congress to back him up and go after Syria's Bashar Assad.

Because of his waffling and indecision, Barack Hussein Obama is the most
dangerous man involved in the Middle East. Like a green recruit pulling the
 trigger starting a catastrophic war....a misstep by this inexperienced,
 incompetent who doesn't have a clue, or the foggiest idea about what to
do,  is asking for our trust.

Another of his manipulation of language is changing the meaning of scandal
by interpreting it to mean phony. Dare to disagree with this interpretation
 or any of his other missteps and get labeled a racist by the libercronialist
 (leftist pals).  It isn't the color of his skin, it's the thickness; and his ply
 is very thin by not being able to take any criticism for being  a Bungling
 Buffoon. Harvard law professor indeed.

Some long term prison inmates are using their time studying law books and
 have become quite proficient, using their knowledge to tie up the court system
 with frivolous law suits. From what I have witnessed of the President on a
different level, he is using his knowledge of the law to circumvent
it and manipulate it for his advantage at the expenses of the people he was
voted to serve. He is using the law to serve him, choosing an Attorney General
to assist in making sure all the I's are dotted and all the T's are crossed.

It doesn't hurt to have a bunch of zombies called Congress to let him get
away with it.

Conservative article from George Giftos

Was the Advent of “Feminism” Good for Society?

Ever since the advent of modern-day “feminism“, which dates back to the 1960’s, we’ve seen quite a change in our society - some positive and some negative.

Prior to this time in the 1960’s, women were mostly stay-at-home moms or working women who were hired mainly as nurses, school teachers, and retail store sales clerks. The feminist movement wanted to change all that, and they, on the whole, have succeeded.

The feminist movement was started, at that time, by a female activist named Betty Friedan, who had authored a book entitled, “The Feminine Mystique” in 1963. This book was the catalyst of the women’s liberation movement which has continued on up until this day. Friedan, along with fellow activists, Gloria Steinem and Bella Absug were the major movers and shakers of what we now refer to as the Women’s Lib Movement. Betty Friedan was the driving force behind the founding of N.O.W. (the National Organization of Women) and NARAL (the pro-choice abortion group).

Since that time, American women have “dropped their aprons and mops” (so to speak) and have decided to compete with men in business, academia, the professions, politics, and a host of other careers that women generally were not participating in, to any great extent, up to the 1960’s. This change, in many cases, has been a positive happening as women became more educated and in many cases, more financially self-sustaining. The “nuclear family”, as we knew it back then, post WW11, is today almost non-existent.

Some of the problems that have occurred and that has evolved over the past 50 years, could be traced to the “feminist” movement of the 1960’s.

The major negative or disruption, caused by the “feminist” movement, has had a real effect on the family, as many families are now one-parent families, as the divorce rate has skyrocketed to where one out of two marriages end in divorce. Before the 1960’s, divorces were generally rare and were not looked upon favorably by society. This has caused some major problems with our youth as they try to cope with a broken family and all that it entails. In many cases, children come home from school to a parentless house with no built-in supervision. Two parents working seems to be the norm today, as the former scenario of the husband being the sole breadwinner of the family is basically a thing of the past.

In addition, the stress of the mother working and raising a family has created additional health problems in many women who are trying to cope with the situation. Diseases that once afflicted mostly men are now afflicting many more women today, such as heart disease, diabetes, and yes, even suicide and depression.

Women have made much progress, but it has brought with that success some negative effects on our society. Today, some of our politicians have used women as pawns or as symbols to try to discredit their political opponents. This tactic has been mainly used by Democrats by accusing the Republicans as waging a “war on women”, along with the radical “feminist” groups who are “tied at the hip” with the Democratic Party. It seems that this tactic has worked fairly well, as most women give their votes to the Democrats come election time.

No one party has all the virtue, when it comes to dealing with women’s issues. Because many Republicans have different views than most Democrats regarding raising children, family, religion and sexuality, doesn’t mean that they are wrong in trying make our society more to their liking. Modern day feminists make the lives of both women and men more difficult by being intolerant of other’s views. Women should not be manipulated nor should they manipulate others for partisan political gain, as life is difficult enough as it is.

So what do you think, has “feminism” been good for society?

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann