A friend of mine coined the word “Libercrites” (Liberals plus Hypocrites ='s Libercrites) which sort sums up the way the Democrats seem to approach their political thoughts and actions. “Do as I say, not as I do”, that's what the “Libercrites” use as their “modus operandi”. They preach that they are in favor of border security, but practice open borders. They preach fiscal responsibility, but propose higher taxes on everyone, including their favorite economic class, the poor. They preach free speech, but try to deny the speech of others who disagree with them (prevalent on many college campus' across the country). They preach abiding by the U.S. Constitution, but then try to undermine it (ex: abolishing the “Electoral College” and packing the Supreme Court etc.). If that doesn't make them “Libercrites” nothing else will suffice.

Look at Bernie Sanders, who rails against millionaires (and billionaires), but is one himself with three houses in addition to his family income. He wants to take money from the well-off and give it the less fortunate, but he doesn't share his wealth with the poor. He has reported that he only gives about 3% of his income to charity. He could be designated the poster child of the “Libercrites”, along with Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein, Elizabeth Warren, and a host of other wealthy Democrat socialists, who rail against rich people and corporations.

Take the Southern border crisis (which the “Libercrites” claim is a manufactured crisis). For years, many of the “Libercrites” were in favor of erecting a border wall, but now since President Trump is in office, they are dead set against it. Why? Are they against the wall  out of principle? No ! They are against it out of pure politics and an invisceral hatred of President Trump. The hell with what is good for our country's security. The “Libercrites” want “rich” people to pay their fair share, but never mention the fact that the top 10% of wage earners pay 70% of all income taxes. Isn't that fair enough for the “Libercrites”?

Another area where the “Libercrites” seem to have a convenient loss of memory, is in promoting socialist economic principles to replace our free enterprise capitalist economic system that has been handed down to us by our founding fathers. Don't they see the two famous nearby economic basket cases in Venezuela and Cuba as an example of why socialism doesn't work? Ole Bernie and the other socialist panderers seem to be afflicted with that “Libercrite” disease called CRI (Cranial Rectal Inversion). Unfortunately for them, that malady
is untreatable as long as they close their eyes to reality.

So in conclusion, the word “Libercrite” is an aptly coined word to describe the policies of the loony liberals and their fellow cronies in the “fake news” media.

In the words of that great American patriot, President Donald Trump, let's MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

To equate Alexandria (Ocasio-Cortez), Ilhan (Omar), and Rashida (Khalidi) with the outrageously funny jokers, the “Three Stooges, might not do justice to Larry, Moe, and Curly (and Shep and Joe). The original “Three Stooges” didn't alienate the public at large, but the newly elected anti-Semite Congresswomen have alienated most everyone - Democrats and Republicans alike.

Whoever is pulling the strings of these three outspoken radical socialists, better hope that most of the electorate are not paying attention to the words and actions of these off-the-wall politicians? Besides voicing anti-Semitic rants, they all want to forge ahead on the impeachment of President Trump, they all want a single payer government-run Medicare for all health care plan, they want to institute a federally mandated $15 per hour minimum wage, and all are against President Trump's border wall to help stem illegal immigration, the illegal shipment of drugs across the border, and the horrendous practice of human trafficking. It seems they are creating havoc within the Democrat Party, much to the dismay of the establishment Democrats. It's like the head stooge Moe is poking his pals in the eye or bopping them over the head after they did something stupid. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a more mild-mannered radical herself, is having a hellava time trying to rein in these three rabble-rouses.

Being young, female, and representatives of minority groups, the Stoogettes are making the Democrat-powers-to-be very nervous as they seem to dominate the news cycle by bringing about a lot of negative publicity to the Democrat Party. What's amazing, is that many of the Democrat candidates for president have latched their wagons to many of the proposals put forth by the “Three Stoogettes”.

Of course, the Republicans are “licking their chops” that these three keep on mouthing their ideas as they feel that it is a good omen for the 2020 election. All three have embraced the “Green New Deal” which, according to most economists, would be fiscally disastrous to the United States, as it would turn our country into a mediocre country from being the most prosperous country in the world today. Do we really want to emulate the countries of Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, So. Africa, and other failed countries who have instituted socialism (a/k/a totalitarianism) or a large dose of it? According to the venerable sage and former British Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, who said, “The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery”. It seems that the demise of Venezuela sort of proves Churchill's point to a tee.

In addition, all three have proclaimed that life on this planet is in danger and that we have 12 years to avoid “Armageddon” from happening by not doing something about man-made global warming (a/k/a climate change) before the world crumbles. Can any rational person jump on this “doom and gloom” bandwagon?

So, as the “Three Stoogettes” continue on their merry way of spouting nonsense, it looks like the Republicans will have another 2016 in 2020.
​
Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

If you listen to the rhetoric of Bernie Sanders, you'd think that the United States is on the precipice of an economic disaster and that his socialist policies are the antidote to “make America great again”. This from a man who has never held a private sector job and has been on the government payroll for most of his adult years. In other words, he has been sucking on the “teat of Uncle Sam” practically forever. And he's telling us what to do?

Why has he had such a great impact and following on the part of the Millennial's and other supposed “losers” in our country? Being an avowed socialist, ole Bernie is promising “free” this and “free” that, like he was handing out candy to the kids on Halloween. He implores the masses to vote for him and by doing that he will pay off their student loans, will give them free tuition at public colleges, he will raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour, and his biggest plum of a promise, “free heath care” in the form of universal Medicare for all. Sounds great? But, one might ask, how will he pay for all this largess that would doled out by the government?

Well, that not a problem to ole Bernie the socialist, he'd raise the taxes on the wealthy for all those “freebies” he plans on giving to the masses. Little does he realize that even if he levied a tax of 100% on the wealthy, he wouldn't even come close to the $94 trillion his plan would cost over a 10 year period. He is selling a Pig in a poke”.

Contrary to what Bernie, and his socialist acolyte Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says, freedom, liberty, and free enterprise better insures that people get what they want. Profits (a dirty word to liberals) create incentives for businesses and entrepreneurs to meet the needs of its customers, you and I the public. Without customers a business will fail. Central planning (the major feature of socialism) cannot compete with countries that embrace free enterprise capitalism. Albert Einstein, famed mathematician and physicist, once stated that “Sometimes one pays most for things one gets for nothing”.

Bernie, to his pals, is the “Pied Piper of Doom and Gloom”. He derides the excellent economy we are now experiencing by proclaiming that he is in favor of a “total transformation” of the American economic system (isn't that what Obama ran on in 2008?). He wants to change (unwittingly) the historically low unemployment rate (which is below 4%), he wants to add more restrictive regulations on the “greedy” businesses and corporations, and he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy businesses and entrepreneurs (the job creators) up to 70% of their income, all in the name of “fairness”. Doesn't he realize that the top 10% of wage earners pay a little over 70% of all income taxes? By punishing success and taking the incentive out of our economic blueprint, we will become a “mediocre” nation or worse, another Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, South Africa, and other socialist oriented countries.

So yes, if ole Bernie gets elected (by some fluke of nature), his socialist “common sense” will be nothing but “nonsense”. We must not let him and his pals ruin the greatest economic machine on the face of the earth, the United States of America.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann​

Some say conspiracies never die and you have a perfect example with the disappointed Democrats as the Special Prosecutor, Robert Mueller, burst their bubble of getting fodder to use in the future impeachment of President Trump. After two years of accusing the president of “being in bed with Vladimir Putin”, and being a traitor to his country, the Democrats and their “shills” in the media, have come up empty, but they will not admit defeat or apologize for dragging our country to the brink of a citizen insurrection.

The main thrust of this two year nightmare against President Trump, was the fact that Donald Trump, a political neophyte, unexpectedly won the presidency over the overwhelming favorite, Hillary Clinton. The Democrats and the main stream media couldn't accept that fact. Immediately after his election, the “conspiracy brigade” was sworn in to undermine his presidency.

Who started this “conspiracy”, beginning in the presidential campaignof 2016? It seems that it reached the highest levels of the government, with the unusually quiet former President Barack Obama, as the “maestro” behind this whole sordid affair. He had to know and had to have given his approval to his underlings to carry out this undermining of Trump's campaign and after his stunning election as president. All this Russia collusion scenario started during Obama's Administration with the weaponizing of our country's law enforcement agencies, including the Justice Department, the upper echelon of the FBI, and of course, with the backup of the biased news media who “carried the water” for the anti-Trump “deep state”. Never in the history of our great country, has such an insidious campaign to slander and libel a sitting president, with the intent of undoing a fair election and having him removed from office.

Who were some of the “bad actors” in this scenario? Let's start with John Brennan and James Clapper, who headed up our national security agencies. It filtered down to the FBI and the Justice Department which included James Comey at the FBI and Attorney General Loretta Lynch at Justice. The leadership at he FBI (as opposed to the honorable members of the rank and file agents) were all dedicated to unseating the president, Donald Trump. These “bad actors” used, for their nefarious deeds, the super secret FISA Court in getting the okay to spy on an innocent person, supposedly affiliated to Trump, by using a “fake” dossier in hopes of getting damaging information of the president.

Unfortunately for President Trump, his Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, recused himself, early on in the Trump Administration, for some vague reason, from which the phony conspiracy investigation, in turn, led to the naming of a Special Prosecutor, Robert Mueller, and his two year “witch hunt”.

Now that the Special Prosecutor has finished his investigation and made his report, the Democrats have not accepted his finding that President Trump was not guilty of collusion (conspiracy) with the Russians, and not guilty of obstructing justice for a crime he did not commit. It looks like the hatred of Trump is so great that the Democrats and the media (the 90% who daily wrote negative stories about him), simply cannot accept the Special Prosecutors decision to not find President Trump guilty of the crimes they have sworn he committed over the past two years. You could say that this whole exercise could be classified as a prosecutor in search of a crime, and which he didn't find one, much to the chagrin of anti-Trump haters who, it looks like, will continue on their phony attempt to unseat our president. Shame on them!

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

The Liberal (a/k/a Progressive) is always preaching “diversity”, but deep down they really don't want everyone to just look different, they really want everyone to think like they do. They are the chief proponents of “political correctness”, who will determine what you can say or do, and will have the unelected P.C. Police “sworn in” to carry out their destructive attempt at conformity.

When a liberal is offended by what is said or done, he/she doesn't just complain or offer an opposing view, they want their “pound of flesh” by calling for for that person or group to be fired, and if that offending person is in the media, they want his advertising sponsors to boycott the “offender” to further their desire for compliance to the liberal orthodoxy. How divisive and exclusive are those tactics?

This “modus operandi” is almost the sole provenance of the liberal left against conservatives or conservative thought. Just recently, the liberal left “attack dogs” have put Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh etc., in their “boycott” cross hairs.

In previous years, the “tolerant” left has also used similar tactics against Bill O'Reilly and Dr. Laura, with some success. It seems that since they couldn't confront their adversaries by using debate and alternate facts, they wanted to shut them up permanently, regardless of the human toll on their opponents and their families.

The liberals have been notoriously unsuccessful in challenging conservatives in the arena of ideas, as in talk radio and T.V. and in newsprint. The ratings overwhelmingly favor the conservatives which I'm sure drives the liberals crazy. Instead of having their message geared to gain support of the voting public, all they try to do is to try to marginalize the opposition by a constant barrage of biased, made up stories (fake news) trying to tear down those who have the audacity to have a different opinion(s) than their own.

Most all successful talk shows on T.V. or the radio are conservative. Very few, if any, liberal shows are rated as successful as the conservative shows. The ratings overwhelmingly favor the
conservative shows by a wide margin. Conservative pundits like Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, and Fox shows, “Fox and Friends” and “The Five”, have all outdistanced their liberal counterparts in the ratings. CNN and MSNBC are way down in the ratings as opposed to Fox News. Even the late night T.V. shows have seen a decline in their audiences due to their constant haranguing of President Trump and the Republicans. By constantly trashing the president, the 50% of the electorate who support the president, tune out these shows as a result. Previous late night hosts like Johnny Carson and Jay Leno were equal opportunity comedians who lampooned liberals and conservatives alike, and it was done in jest, not in venom which the preset hosts now indulge in on an almost nightly basis. I guess you could say, “If you live by the sword, you'll die by the sword”.

So, diversity in looks and thoughts should be the rule, not the exception, if we want to live in a civilized society.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann