From what we see and read in the news media, and what is produced in Hollywood, you’d think that global warming is a “fait accompli” and that no further debate is needed on this very debatable subject. Wait! Not so fast! Who gave them the right to close debate on this subject? It is not settled science. No science is ever settled, it is always evolving.

Before we all follow the “doom and gloomers” into the dark ages, let’s hear what others have to say about our “impending demise”. Thousands of years ago, we were in an Ice Age - the ice melted and there were no SUV’s ( Sports Utility Vehicles) or extensive use of fossil fuels. According to climatologists and scientists, in medieval times the Earth was warmer than it is today – still no SUV’s in sight and the industrial revolution didn’t even begin as yet..

Remember also, Greenland was named by the Vikings for its lush landscape, not its ice and snow coverings, as it looks today. In the mid- 1970’s, the same “ chicken little's” were championing the theory of “ global cooling” - that theory went bust, but over the years since, these same people have regrouped and are now championing “ global warming”. What a difference a few decades make. Two totally different theories in just over 50 years.

Remember the phrase, “follow the money”, well, by scaring the daylights out of the public, millions of dollars of our tax money will have been given to the global warming “scam artists” to find ways of averting a “non-threatening” disaster, mainly by giving them research grants to prove the non-provable.

What is the real agenda of these so-called environmentalists and tree hugging enthusiasts? They even have recruited a 16 year old Swedish girl, Greta Thunberg, to be their  emotional ”spokesperson at the U.N. and around the world. They have no shame about exploiting a naive youth for their dubious cause.

Are their motives to really to save the planet or is it to install an economic system more to their liking? They are anti-capitalist, anti-free enterprise socialists. If we acceded to the demands of these “environmental wackos”, we would decimate our standard of living and cause a world-wide depression, making today’s hard times seem insignificant in comparison. The past proposals of Congress and past President Obama to institute a “cap and trade system” to punish businesses that use fossil fuels and energy, in conducting their business by taxing them unmercifully, was right out of the “Communist Manifesto” of Karl Marx. The Democrats and their present proposal to create a “Green New Deal” boggles the mind as being a totally unworkable theory that would change our way of life, and not for the better.

I’m sure most people, who now sympathize with the alarmists and their scare tactics, would rebel at the consequences that will come about once they are educated and informed as to the real magnitude of the “Greens” misguided solutions. Once these charlatans can prove that they can change “Mother Nature”, then we can sit down and work out a plan to confront the climate, but as of now, no one can show how we can control “Mother Nature”. Therefore, we should not give credence to these climate change “snake oil” salesmen.

Maybe the Oscar winning movie producer and Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore, should have titled his pseudo–documentary, “A Convenient Lie”, for in essence, that is what it was, a means of gaming the system to extract money from a gullible public under the guise of a noble “nonexistent” cause.

Yes, our global climate, in some areas, is warmer by about one degree over the past hundred or so years, but in some areas, like the Antarctic, the ice cap has been increasing and it has been getting colder. Does this climate change give us any reason to panic and call for a complete change in the way we live our lives? Is it man-made or the normal evolution of nature? For every scientist or climatologist who champions global warming (euphemistically called “climate change” now, so they can call whatever happens, climate-wise, in the world, they can now have a catch phrase to describe it), there are many more who challenge that theory and the “dire consequences” that the alarmists are trying to sell. You make the call, but remember, “FOLLOW THE MONEY”, the “green” they champion is not in the climate, but it is the “green” in their wallets.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

As a person who eagerly voted for Mitt Romney in 2012, I am totally disappointed in his desire to stab his president in the back over a personal pique.

This “holier than thou” phony politician, tried to justify his misguided personal animosity toward President Trump by claiming that his religious faith caused him to act the way he did in voting “Yes” to find President Trump guilty of Article One of the impeachment of President Trump that was put forth by House of Representatives.

Ever since he came out with his virulent denunciation of Trump as Trump was running for president, he has shown his jealously about “being a loser” in his quest for president, by throwing all common sense to the wind in pursuit of undercutting a fellow Republican. In his statement about his decision to vote “yes” on impeachment, he used the same terminology as both Schiff and Nadler used in their bogus impeachment hearings. Since he claimed to have studied the evidence of that phone call between Trump and Zelensky, and to come up with the conclusion that Trump was guilty of a “high crime and misdemeanor”, shows that his final decision was personal rather than factual.

To believe the lies put forth by the “Trump haters”, Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, and Nancy Pelosi, shows that his decision was not based on anything Trump did wrong, but that his personal animosity toward Trump was the deciding factor to justify his decision.

This vote by Romney to “convict” Trump will endear him to the feckless Democrats for the time being, but I'm sure he will be the subject of vilification in the future by the Democrats as was the case when he ran for president in 2012. Remember, he was accused of being a tax cheat, a misogynist, a racist and a myriad of other sins by the Democrats as he challenged Barack Obama for the presidency. He ran a lousy campaign as he seemed to be always on the defensive instead of challenging the weak administration of Obama.

Romney was the same person who “kissed the ring” of Donald Trump during his run up to the Republican nomination in 2012, and finally during the actual campaign, in asking for his support, both financially and personally. Didn't he know the “evil personality” that was Trump,
the individual, as be begged for his money and support? Even after his shameless put down of Trump as Trump ran for the office of president, and once Trump was elected, he magnanimously had Romney over to discuss a possible job in his administration. Romney did not get that appointment which I'm sure added to this final display of disloyalty.

Listening to Romney trying to justify his decision was really painful to listen to as a former supporter of his. If I agreed with what he said, as I said in my headline, we'd both be wrong. The next step for Mitt Romney would be to join the Democrats. Good riddance.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

There are times when people with extensive schooling and college degrees do things that could be considered stupid. I'm referring mainly to Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who both seem to have an advanced case of “cognitive dissonance” (definition: when men's ideas, beliefs or behaviors contradict each other) and an ample supply of personal stupidity.

In trying to undo the presidential election of 2016, the two pariah's of the truth, have concocted a scenario that boggles the mind. Their hatred for President Trump trumped (no pun intended) all reality in their quest to unseat a sitting president.

If you were a masochist and listened to the Democrat presentations on the floor of the Senate as to why President Trump should be impeached, you could come to the conclusion that so-called intelligent people could show signs of abject stupidity.

It has taken 3 years for the Democrats to finally do what they have been trying to do since President Trump was inaugurated - that to impeach him and try to have him leave office. It was only minutes after he was sworn in as president that President Trump was targeted by the Democrats as an illegitimate president, who should not hold the title as president. Is that a reasonable response by sane individuals who are blinded to reality by their loony liberal ideology? Most all the Democrats were counting on Hillary Clinton winning the presidency in a landslide, as most all the polls and pundits said would happen. The shock of a Trump winning the election sent many of the Democrats over the edge – including both Schiff and Nadler. They
both, from the beginning of Trump's presidency, were determined to do everything possible to try to undo the results of the 2016 election.

First it was the Russians who they claimed was working with the Trump campaign to undermine the election in his favor. Working with some “bad cops” in the FBI and the Obama Justice Department, a Special Counsel was appointed, by using some unseemly tactics like getting a phony “dossier” to use in getting warrants in the FISA Court to spy on people associated with Trump. After 2 1⁄2 years of intensive investigating, the Robert Mueller Report (he was the Special Counsel) came back with the conclusion that Trump didn't collude or conspire with the Russians nor did he obstruct justice. That was a devastating blow to both Schiff and Nadler, who claimed that they had “overwhelming evidence” of Trump's involvement.

Not taking defeat easily, the Democrats, under the direction of Schiff and Nadler, latched onto an innocuous phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky. A so-called anonymous “whistle blower”, with ties to Schiff's office, was presented as someone who claimed that Trump bribed or extorted the Ukraine president thereby committing a “high crime or misdemeanor”, which was an impeachable offense under our constitution.

This is where the “cognitive dissonance” and stupidity of these two dishonest politicians came into play. They convinced a naive and shaky Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, to bring impeachment charges against President Trump, which the Democrat controlled House of Representatives then voted to impeach the president on a strictly partisan vote. No Republican voted for the Articles of Impeachment in the House.

Now, the Senate must decide whether the Articles of Impeachment are valid and that President Trump should be relieved of his post as President of the United States. Since 67 votes are needed in the Senate to find the president guilty, there is no way that that will occur.

All the bluster and shenanigans by the Democrats in the House will have been for naught. All the liars on the Democrat side, especially Schiff and Nadler, were stupid to pursue this phony matter against all rational thinking. It is too bad that stupidity isn't painful because that is what they deserved in wasting all this time when they could be doing the country's business, for that is what they were elected to do.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Why are the feckless Democrats demanding new evidence to be presented in the phony impeachment process, when they claim that the “overwhelming evidence” that they have produced in the House is enough to convict the president?

Can you imagine impeaching a president over an innocuous phone call with another president of another country? Does carrying the moniker of Democrat mean that you have lost all your common sense? If their evidence is so “overwhelming”, why, then, do they need more? The Republicans should not be sucked into trying to answer all the lies that the Democrats throw at them in trying to justify impeaching the president. The Articles of Impeachment, sent to the Senate for trial, contain two counts that do not reach the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” set forth in the Constitution. For months leading up to the actual vote in the House of Representatives for impeachment, the “loser” Democrats were using words like bribery, extortion, “quid pro quo” and attack on the Constitution, to charge what the president supposedly engaged in for doing those activities. Those were actual crimes, but, in the end, they couldn't prove those outrageous false charges so they settled for “Abuse of Power” and “Obstruction of Congress”, both non-crimes.

The trial in the Senate should, after hearing the charges put forth by the House of Representatives, the Senate should declare that the Articles do not meet the criteria of what the Constitution states as reasons for impeaching a public official (in this case the President of the United States).

When the president will be found “not guilty” in the Senate (no way will 2/3's of the Senate vote for conviction), some think that that the Democrat-controlled House will not accept the Senate's decision by offering up more new senseless crimes to hang around the president's
neck, and start another impeachment process. Their hatred is so intense that they can't think straight and will attempt another “bite of the apple”. That's how out of control they are when it comes to dealing with President Trump. They realize that the re-election of the president is almost a sure thing.

Think of all the wasted time, effort, and money that has been expended on this “hoax” impeachment. Instead of doing the people's work by addressing the problems of the country, the Democrats will continue on their vendetta against the president in trying to undo the results of the 2016 election.

It seems the “overwhelming evidence” that the Democrats presented to the Senate was not so “overwhelming” after all. The Democrat “shills” in the persons of Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Jerrold Nadler, are going to be shown to be the phonies that they are in pushing this senseless impeachment charge against all rational thinking. The quicker they shoot down this sham persecution, the better off we all will be.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

If you listen to today's liberal politicians and their flunky's in the main stream media, you wonder where their common sense has gone – it seems their once common sense has morphed into nonsense.

A good example are the thoughts and policies put forth by the Democrat candidates for president and some of the movers and shakers in the rank and file of the Democrat Party itself. You wonder, do they really believe what they say or are they just mouthing what they think the Democrat base wants to hear? To any intelligent person, it is just pure nonsense to spout such platitudes promising voters something for nothing, which seems to be the major promise they are making in hopes of enticing the voters to vote for them.

Let's go down the list of what the Democrats are professing to believe in. Free college for all and the paying off of the students debt; Medicare for all, including for illegal aliens; no border walls to stem the flow of illegals into our country and the same with the amount of deadly drugs smuggled in; doing away with the Trump tax cuts and the imposition of a 70% income tax on successful wealthy citizens; mandating the introduction of “green energy” in place of fossil fuels; trying to impeach a sitting president who has committed no high crimes and misdemeanors only for purely political purposes; and on and on. You wonder, do they really believe that the general public will fall for their “snake oil”? That isn't common sense, it is nonsense.

In addition, their policies mirror many of the ideas out of the Karl Marx playbook. Many in the Democrat Party really think that socialism is the preferred economic system we should follow in place of our tried and true capitalist system. To justify their warped thoughts, they throw out the nice sounding word “fairness” that drips off their lips as if they think everyone should be equal regardless of what they contribute to society. That mentality sort of makes everyone fall into the mediocre category as the incentive to succeed is frowned upon. Is that really fair, or is that the nonsense I was referring to in my headline of this editorial.

The left-wing liberal who preach that socialism is the preferred economic system, never seem to mention or point out where, when or what country socialism has succeeded. On the other hand, people with common sense can point out the economic “basket cases” like Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina, the former Soviet Union, and most Muslim countries in the Middle East and most countries in Africa. Some of those countries that have embraced Marxism/Socialism, were once very successful economically until they embraced the socialist economic model. In South America, both Venezuela and Argentina fall into the category of being endowed with great wealth, but after falling into the hands of rulers who embraced socialism, their economies, consequently, went into the tank.

So when you hear the liberal politicians promise outrageous ideas of you getting something for nothing, you should remember that old saying of “there is no such thing as a free lunch” as the liberals try to turn common sense into nonsense.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann