Thursday, June 30, 2016

“Figures Don't Lie, But Liars Do Figure”

This proverb, that has been attributed to Mark Twain, has some real relevance during this presidential campaign season. Both major political candidates have accused each other of lying. Is one or both right? Or, is one more prone to be called a liar than the other?

Well, let's take a look. Donald Trump has a tendency to brag, bluster, and exaggerate when making statements, but people seem to think that he is not a “congenital liar” (aside from their other perceptions of him), but the same could not be said of his opponent, Hillary Clinton, who was dubbed a “congenital liar” by the late N.Y. Times columnist William Safire, way back in 1995.

Since Hillary Clinton has been associated in politics for approximately 30 years, she has a written and verbal record of things she has said or done, over the years, to conjure up the charge of being a “congenital liar”, as labeled by William Safire. In fact, recently a Quinnipiac poll asked people to say the first word that came into their mind when the name Hillary Clinton was mentioned. The first three answers, as reported by the poll, were #1 – liar, #2 – dishonest, and #3 – untrustworthy. That's a major burden that Hillary Clinton will have to carry into the presidential campaign. Will she be able to overcome this perception of being untruthful? Only time will tell.

Up until the present time, Hillary has insisted that her private e-mail server was legal and approved for her in conducting her duties as Secretary of State. But, according to the State Department inspector general, she did not get permission or would not have gotten permission to use a “private” e-mail server in the conduct of her duties of Secretary of State. In addition, she signed a State Department directive, the day she started as Secretary, regarding her using exclusively a State Department sanctioned e-mail server. She now states that she does not remember signing that statement (this seems to be a recurring “problem” for Hillary - not remembering certain inconvenient facts). Does anyone really believe that she was that unaware of this protocol of the State Department? In fact, during her tenure as Secretary of State, she even sent a memo to underlings in the State Department stating that they should not use private e-mails in the conduct of their duties. I guess this is a case “of do as I say, not as I do”. To her it seems that the law applies to everyone else and not to her (and her husband, Bill Clinton too).

This was just the latest of her contradictions (a/k/a lies) that has dogged her over the years. Look at another one of her flip-flops over the years. It seems that she will say or do whatever her audience wants to hear in order to gain favor and win votes. Remember in 2008, when she appeared in a nationally televised session with the Rev. Rick Warren, when she stated unequivocally that she was in favor of traditional marriage, between one man and one woman, because of her strongly held religious beliefs. I guess her “strongly held” religious beliefs changed in 2015, when she came out in favor of same-sex marriage. Was she lying about her religious beliefs in 2008 or did political considerations take precedence over her “strongly held” religious beliefs that she told Rick Warren and the national T.V. audience?

Her opponent, Donald Trump, has made some comments over the past year that she has referred to as him being a liar, but what she considers lying could be construed as Trump being an exaggerator, being a self-glorifier, and a boaster, but not a person who blatantly lies to gain an upper hand in the face of known facts.

It is safe to say that we all lie to some extent. Some could be called “white lies” and some could be called “whoppers”. The comments made by Hillary generally fall into the category of being “whoppers”. It seems that when Hillary tells a lie, she really believes it to be the truth. In other words, it is pathological in her case which can be called a case of “cognitive dissonance” ( which is defined as the mental conflict that people experience when they are presented with evidence that their beliefs or assumptions are wrong).

So, the proverb of “Figures Don't Lie, but Liars do Figure” fits Hillary Clinton to a tee, and to think that she might be our next president, boggles the mind. She has zero credibility, both domestically and internationally. Let's hope that saner heads will prevail in the upcoming election and Hillary will not become president.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 26, 2016

MORT’s meanderings

 Here are things that gall me, no end.
The image of Obama mincing down the stairs of Air Force One and returning the sharp salute from the squared-away Marine standing at attention, with a sloppy, girly-salute  that is obviously a meaningless, throw-away gesture meant only for the White House photographers. Knowing how vehemently this Commander-in-Chief openly despises the Military, it is tantamount to a slap in the face of every man and woman on  active duty and every veteran, by this hypocrite who bows so deeply from the waist and so reverently to the vicious, anti-Semitic, anti-American Royals in Saudi Arabia.
The farce of Secty of State John F. Kerry, being lauded by the Liberal press as, ‘The highest-placed official in this Administration to visit Hiroshima’, the site of the first atomic bomb dropped on Japan, that led to the end of WWII in the Pacific.  Kowardly Kerry spent 4 months in Viet Nam, carrying a rifle and a video camera to film himself,  braving the flora & fauna of the jungle.  Then, his disgusting performances upon his return home to heap kudos upon himself and his three unsubstantiated Purple Heart Medals with endless appearances on TV, spouting a string of fabricated narratives about atrocities he witnessed first-hand so he says, perpetrated by American soldiers.
The image of Meddler-in-Chief & Faux Diplomat, Barack Hussein Obama and an  enormous entourage of family & Government flunkies, popping around the world in Air Force One, like a story-book Potentate with his Palace Guard & Court Jesters - on a non-stop series of Fool’s Errand trips all across the Globe, to apologize for anything he can think of, all at the cost of many, many millions of taxpayer’s dollars - with nada, absolutely no valid reason for any of it.
And, the most egregious, disgusting image of all  -  This pitiful excuse for the Head of State of these United States, presenting himself to the people of Hiroshima and ripping open the scab that it has taken 71 years to be formed over the horrors that attended the dropping of ‘The Bomb’ in 1945.  Despite reports that he won’t, I am willing to bet that he issues some kind of apology or makes a mockery of the facts that led President Truman to okay the use of this ultimate weapon of destruction – in the sure knowledge that if it did indeed, work – it would most likely end the war with Japan. We know that it did work.  The Japanese people know that it worked.  The rest of the World knows that it worked.  None of this matters a damn to Obama.  He is working on his legacy and anything he thinks can add even the tiniest bit of luster, regardless of what he has to do, regardless of what he has to say – and regardless of the cost to the American people and the legacy of the United States, you can bet your bippee, he will do it or say it.  And, if it chafes relations between the U.S. and Japan, that’s O.K., too.
         MORT KUFF  © 5-23-2016

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 23, 2016

“Black Lives Matter” Equals a “Roving Lynch Mob”

Can you imagine if the loosely knit patriotic Tea Party conducted themselves in the manner that the “Black Lives Matter” group conducts themselves today, all hell would've broken loose in the “lame stream media” and vicious condemnation would prevail and the Tea Party would be vilified from pillar to post. Not so with the BLM thugs. Excuses for their violent confrontations with police and ordinary citizens seems to be the rule, by the Democrats and the media, rather than the exception. Even Pres. Obama has shown little outrage over the tactics of this militant, anarchist group called “Black Lives Matter” (BLM) (and other similar radical groups).

When the BLM groups (and affiliates) rant, “Pigs in a Blanket, Fry 'em Like Bacon (referring to police officers), or chanting, “What do We Want, Dead Cops , and When Do We Want it, Now”, and “Hands Up Don't Shoot” (referring to the justified killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson by a police officer), they are stirring up racial unrest that is becoming a cancer on our society, mainly in our inner cities with large minority populations. Look at what is happening at the Donald Trump rallies, the anarchists including BLM, La Raza (a Mexican group who's name means “The Race”), the S.E.I.U. union thugs, and some Bernie Sanders supporters, are trying shut down Donald Trump and his political message. These are not peaceful protests, they are mostly “Rent-A-Mobs” financed, in part, by that billionaire anarchist, George Soros, the patron saint and big financial contributor to the Democrat Party.

It seems that most all these disruptions and violence is emanating from the left side of the political spectrum. You don't see comparable right-wing groups disrupting Hillary or Bernie rallies as it is not in their DNA or nature to be unlawful in their actions (just like the Tea Party conducted themselves). The Republicans and Conservatives don't have any Al Sharpton's, Jesse Jackson's, or BLM, or Eric Holder's causing mayhem across the country. The principal cheerleader (by not condemning these anarchist groups) is none other than our Pres. Barack Hussein Obama. He, on several occasions, has railed against the police, without knowing all the facts, thus exacerbating an already volatile situation. Almost all his interference seems to be on behalf of the black community regardless of the facts involved, and against law enforcement officials, and the cop on the street. He, according to many, has become the most racist president in modern times. When he first ran for president, he claimed that he would be the greatest race unifier in history, but he has become the most divisive. During his tenure as president, race relations, in our country, has reached a new low and seems to be going lower.

In addition and conjunction with his support for black anarchist groups, he has also engaged in class warfare, pitting rich against poor; man against woman; coal companies and miners against the EPA and loony environmentalists, and, you could deduce from his actions, wrong over right (no pun intended).

As mentioned earlier, look what is happening today as we gear up for the upcoming election for president. At rallies, mostly Trump rallies, mobs of people representing certain radical groups, have fought with police, harassed Trump supporters, and caused much property damage. Where 'o where, has been our president (on a golf course?), while our political system is being turned upside down? Why isn't he using the bully pulpit of the presidency to quell these attempts of limiting or stifling free speech?

Unlike his predecessor George W. Bush, Obama has jumped in feet first and has started partisan campaigning on behalf of the Democrats and against the Republican nominee, Donald Trump and the Republican Party. It has been almost 8 years and Pres. Bush has yet to “bad mouth” Pres. Obama. Whether you agree or disagree with all that Bush did as president, you must recognize him as person with “class” as compared with his successor, Pres. Obama, who seems to put his foot in his mouth month after month while complaining about his treatment in the press and by his adversaries.

In conclusion, as the BLM anarchists are given free reign, because of their minority status, to conduct themselves in such a lawless and disruptive manner, we will see more and more disruptions right up till the election in November. The big loser in all these shenanigans will be the American people. May God help us survive.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Islamic Twigs in the President's Family Tree

Liberals have a knack to come up with mendacious slogans, to
put forth their agendas. A prime example is, "hands up, I give up!"
is a description of something that never happened. "Black lives
matter" is the deception to depict eighteen year old 6'5", 289 lb
Michael Brown, a felonious bully as an innocent child.

The latest open border farce is, "build bridges, not walls!"
The families of the many slain Israelis and those of the victims in
Paris and Brussels who were murdered because of globalization
wouldn't agree. Kate Steinle would still be alive if that bridge to
sanctuary city, San Francisco was torn down.

These are divisive vehicles borne from a weak leader's ideology,
who doesn't heed the advice of knowledgeable experts, but
continues to pursue failed tactics, pandering to his liberal base
and entities profiting in his sympathetic stance on their behalf,
who counter our country's interests with dire results.

The President's mindset and whom he has endorsed to replace
him, bear the responsibility for the Boston marathon bombing
and San Bernardino and Orlando massacres that happened on
their watch.

It's the failure of his administration to identify and separate the
renegade factions from mainstream Islam and treating it as a whole,
that brings fearing it would offend all Muslims, by criticizing the
radicals. The President's family tree with Islamic twigs appears to
show proclivity to Islam and lame action.

It is also the failure of mainstream Islamists to denounce Sharia
tenets and political intrusion contaminating good intentions that
shown at Mohamed Ali's funeral.

Cancer cannot be destroyed with an aspirin and a Band-Aid. It can
only be eliminated by aggressive attack. Unwilling to act by the
liberal establishment, offering containment as treatment will
leave the terror continually open to flare-ups down the road.
Political correctness stymies solutions by negating profiling as a
tool to pinpoint the culprits, used effectively by Israel's security
forces at airports and check points.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 16, 2016

For Every Promise There's a Price to Pay!

The Democrats (represented by Hillary and Bernie) have been making promises that, in practicality, cannot be fulfilled by either of them if either one gets elected president. They are the epitome, or poster people, of the “Free Stuff” Party (a/k/a the Democrat Party).

Both Hillary and Bernie have never held a private sector job or position, on a regular basis, where they had to hire and fire, meet a payroll, and to make decisions about making a profit (profit to them seems to be a dirty word). They have been sucking on the government “teat” most all their lives, but they claim that they have the knowledge and experience to turn our economy around (I thought our economy was booming according to Obama?), without any business experience whatsoever (I guess they are following the Obama model).

Hillary has been riding the coattails of her husband (a/k/a Slick Willie) for over 30 years, and Bernie was without a permanent job up till the age of 40 when he was elected Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, and he has been on a government payroll ever since.

Look at what these two politicians are offering the electorate. Free college tuition, relieving college graduates of their student loans, free health care, and free this and free that, all being paid for by the government treasury even though we are approaching $20 trillion of national debt. Their proposals would add another $19 trillion to the national debt making us likely to have a massive default which would put us on the road to becoming a third world nation. In addition, both of these spendthrift politicians want to raise the minimum wage by federal decree. They don't realize that that policy would cause more unemployment, which in real terms is over 10% now. The people they are claiming to help, the first time worker or the unskilled worker, would be the worst hit because many businesses would be unable to meet that increased payroll mandate. Besides, it would have a “ripple up effect” for workers already employed. Wouldn't these people who are starting out in the workforce and seniors supplementing their incomes, be better of being employed at $8.00 per hour rather than unemployed at $15.00 per hour? The social consequences of having more of our youth unemployed, would be a social disaster, as many will turn to crime or have to go on the government dole to make money.

These two Marxist/Socialist presidential wannabes, don't realize that every promise that they make there will be a price to pay, and it won't be pretty. Suppose they were using their own money instead of the government's money (our tax dollars), do you think they would be so generous in offering the “freebies” they are touting to the voting public just to get their votes? Is the Pope Catholic?

This whole manner of making promises you can't honestly fulfill, reminds me of a third grade election for class president, as the winning student candidate runs on the platform of “free candy” for all if he/she is elected class president. The same with Hillary and Bernie. If either gets elected, the country will be the loser as they will be creating a bubble that will have to burst sometime in the future. So, my friends, don't fall for these offers of something for nothing, the price we'll pay will be catastrophic.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 12, 2016

MORT’s meanderngs

HATE. Always more than enough to go around.
It seems to me that unmitigated hate has spread like a cancer that has metastasized to every fiber in the fabric of humanity, worldwide.
While there have always been pockets of hate and there have always been individuals and groups that were particularly virulent in their hateful activities – the widespread dissemination of this sickness today, has been increasing exponentially, at an accelerated rate.
When comparisons to Hitler and Nazism become mundane, we know there is a problem – and it isn’t a small one. Whenever and wherever abject hatred is recognized as having become the order of the day in a society – as is the current condition in the Middle East, Europe and in many other parts of the World -  it must be confronted and dealt with decisively and at once.    Whatever it takes, it must be done!
This condition is rife today and is in large part, directly attributable to the  most radical elements of the Muslim-Islamist total way of life that is both political and religious.  It preaches hatred and extreme violence against anyone who is not already a follower of their belief system or, who does not convert to it.  They are particularly hostile toward Jews and Christians, as their favorite targets for extreme acts of violence.  
They unabashedly declare that it is their ultimate objective to subject the entire population of the World to live under the tenets of radical Islam’s punitive Shariah law – clearly, it is their intention to dominate and enslave the entire world.    They live to HATE.    Any questions?
          MORT KUFF   © 3-11-2016 

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 9, 2016

People Who Live in Glass Houses..........!

The famous expression is: “People who live in glass houses should not throw stones”, which means don't criticize other people when you yourself have faults and weaknesses of your own.

So it is with Hillary Clinton. She's been blasting Donald Trump for his involvement in Trump University (not a real university, but a real estate seminar organization) as being a “scam” operation, but, upon closer inspection, she, and mainly her husband, have been involved in a much larger “university” operation called the “Laureate Education University”, with main headquarters in Baltimore, Md., with most of its operations in Central and South America and in Europe. What is the involvement of the Clinton's in this university, which some have called a real “scam operation”? Let's see.

Well, in 2010, Bill Clinton was named Honorary Chancellor of Laureate Education University, a failing “For Profit” university that needed some “street cred”, and they found it in the person of Bill Clinton, former U.S. president, and husband of the then U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. And they made it financially rewarding for him and the Clinton Foundation through speaking fees and donations.

From 2010 to 2015, when Bill Clinton severed ties to Laureate, as his wife announced for president, he made $16.46 million during his tenure as honorary chancellor of Laureate University. During this time, as Hillary headed up the State Department, the State Department pumped at least $55 million to a group run by Laureate founder and chairman, Douglas Becker, who had strong ties to the Clinton Global Initiative (a/k/a the Clinton Foundation). Becker, in addition to running Laureate, is also the chairman of the International Youth Foundation (IYF). This is a non-profit sister organization (whose offices are less than a mile from Laureate in Baltimore). Another prominent investor in this group is the nefarious Progressive billionaire, George Soros, a multimillion dollar contributor to the Democrats. Can you see a tie-in emerging in this narrative? All these facts have been reported and verified by the Bloomberg News Bureau.

The Laureate Education University's business practices have faced serious legal scrutiny and criminal investigations in Mexico, Chile, and Turkey, where Laureate operates, as “for-profit” universities are actually illegal in those countries. Bill's main job, as honorary chancellor, included speaking at a half dozen or so Laureate schools every year, mainly trying to drum up business for the school using his name and persona as proof of legitimacy for the school. Many informed sources claim that Laureate University is a real scam operation that makes Trump University look small in comparison.

The questions arising from the Clinton's involvement are profound and if a “quid pro quo” can be attached to their actions, this will be another scandal in the Clinton “crime” portfolio . Questions arise as to how come Bill Clinton was paid so much to be a “figurehead” for Laureate and to give speeches for the school, and why was U.S. funds O.K.'d by the State Department that went to the principals of Laureate University, and its sister group the IYF, with the approval of Hillary Clinton? Something smells rotten in Denmark, don't you think?

This is just another, among many, example of the “sleazy” dealings of the Clinton's and why they have become so extremely wealthy in such a short period of time after leaving the White House, when they claimed to be broke. Does the word “grifters” come to mind when trying to explain their motives and actions? Imagine a person who personifies greed and sleaze, like Hillary Clinton, becoming our next president, heaven forbid?

So. when Hillary rants on about Trump University, she should remember the saying, “People who live in glass houses should not throw stones” as it will surely come back to bite them in the butt big time.

I wonder whether the investigation into the dealings of Hillary, while Secretary of State, and the monies paid to Laureate University and its sister organization through the State Department, and the speaking fees paid to Bill Clinton, will pass muster or has the fix already have been made. I guess we'll have to wait for the F.B.I. investigation to be concluded, and then see what the Obama Administration will do.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, June 5, 2016

Flexibility is Necessary to Maintain Existence

Tall buildings and skyscrapers are engineered to sway slightly
in a high wind. The reason...resistance to a strong wind can be
damaging to the structure and in some cases, cause it to crumble.
Flexibility is necessary for maintaining existence.

Extremism in either party follows the mantra of "my way, or
the highway." This creates gridlock and nothing gets done. There
is Republican voter anger when their representatives give in to
the Democrats without reciprocity as would be when the other
shoe fits the hard nose Republicans doing the same thing.

In a fervor to alter the wrongs of the Obama administration, many
are reaching for an outsider to lead us, hoping to change business
 as usual. Let me remind you, Fidel Castro was an outsider and see
 what Cuban zeal got them.

Let me also remind you, Reaganistic flexibility works. That's when
to know to give some and when to close shop before everything
collapses around you. Compromise is not a dirty word when each
walks away with something. Not like the asinine agreement with Iran,
Obama Care and other bone-headed deals backed by Democrats.

These examples are what happens when the opposition is shut out
with no compromise, leaving the majority of the people disgruntled.
Outsiders are untested. Barack Obama may have been considered
an insider, used by his liberal ideologues because of his color, but in
truth he was an untested outsider, community organizer, whose
incompetency has been revealed and proven by the dire shape our
country is in.

Trump-ets blaring, confetti falling like snowflakes and
outlandish speeches by the chameleon can be entertaining placating
the anger, but the solution sounds boring and the remaining sixteen
fell victim to this odd campaign phenomena.

On the Democrat side, the self-serving, infatuated one with her self,
 who is riding her husband's coat tails has been tested, serving in the
senate and as Secretary of State. Her performance was never stellar,
but noteless, undistinguished with possibly facing impropriety charges
for endangering the security of the nation.

The young who have no idea what socialism is, along with minorities
 playing the system, are responsible for the fruitless high ratings reflected
by the Santa Clause from Vermont. Illegal intrusion over our border is
beginning to change the demographics of our country and Socialism is
not something to think can't happen in this country. Witness the
globalization of Europe and unfettered border control.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, June 2, 2016

Are the Words Clinton and “Sleazy” Synonyms?

It's not very nice to call someone “sleazy”, which is a word defined as a person being dishonest, corrupt, and disreputable, especially a former President and a Secretary of State, but as the the old expression goes, “if the shoe fits wear it”. When I make a statement like that, I know I will be accused or referred to as being a member of the “vast right-wing conspiracy”, but what the hell, I say that the Clinton's are a “sleazy” duo.

The Clinton's have been on the public stage for over 30 years, starting their sleazy careers in Arkansas and continuing up until today. This “Teflon Duo” has had to answer for one scandal after another, but as “luck” would have it, they have slithered through most all of them with only a glitch here and there (I guess you could deduce that it's not what you know, but who you know that has guided them in their charmed life).

Actually, the first glitch occurred during the Watergate brouhaha in 1973. Hillary landed a job right out of college, on that Watergate committee as a legal assistant, which was headed up by Chief Counsel, Jerome Zeifman, a Democrat. As she worked for the committee, she was abruptly fired by Zeifman for lying and being unethical. It seems that that firing was the forerunner for her career in politics and government service up until today, as she is now being investigated by the FBI, which might presage the end of her political career if the FBI recommends that the Justice Department indict her. Stay tuned.

The Clinton scandals have, as stated before, been going on ever since their Arkansas days, when she supposedly turned a $1,000 investment into a windfall profit of $100,000 as her husband, Bill, was then the Arkansas Attorney General. It was later reported that a crony of Bill's did the transaction for Hillary as a favor. This was the first of many “quid pro quo”s” the Clinton's have been accused of over the years.

All during their time in Arkansas and into Bill Clinton's two terms as president, Bill's philandering and abuse of women continued on a regular basis. It has been quite obvious that all during this time, Hillary was her husbands enabler as she headed up an “attack” group called to counteract “bimbo eruptions”, which was setup to attempt to intimidate and to keep quiet the gaggle of Bill Clinton's abused women accusers.

Since they left the White House in 2001, the sleaze continued on uninterrupted. As they left the White House, they were accused of taking approximately $200,000 worth of furnishings and gifts from the White House. They shamefully had to return $120,000 of the loot.

The Clinton's claimed that, when they left the White House, they were broke, but they were able to buy a million plus dollar house in Chappaqua, N.Y. and a townhouse in Wash. D.C. (also worth millions, so I guess they weren't really as broke as they claimed?) After they left Wash. D.C. , they started a tax-free “philanthropic” foundation called the “Clinton Foundation” (a/k/a the Clinton Global Initiative), which over the years has become a billion dollar enterprise with donations mainly coming from foreign countries and foreign individuals. Some people have referred to this foundation as a Clinton “slush fund” which, according to reputable sources, contributes or doles out only about 15% of its funds to legitimate charitable causes, while the rest of the tax-free money has gone to Clinton cronies for large salaries, lavish travel, and a stockpile of future workers for Hillary's campaign for president, and a personal piggy bank for the Clinton's, but by some “act of miracles”, the foundation has gotten away from a government audit and they also have been late in filing their tax returns. Do you think they might be hiding something?

While Hillary was Secretary of State, her husband Bill was traveling around the world collecting huge speaking fees and getting big donations to the Clinton Foundation, while some of those foreign countries and foreign “oligarchs” had dealings with Hillary's State Department. Did these countries and foreign individuals give the Clinton's these monies out of the goodness of their hearts, or was there an expectation of something of value in return, such as a quid pro quo? The answer is obviously a resounding “yes”.

The list could go on and on, but I think you get the gist of what I laid out, and I think you could say that the actions of the Clinton's were “sleazy” at best and criminal at worst.

It would be a disaster for our country if we put these two “grifters” back in the White House.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share