Chuck Lehmann

Chuck Lehmann photo
Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann (Chuck on the Right Side

Most Recent Articles by Chuck Lehmann:

Trickle Up Poverty

Sep 4, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

When Ronald Reagan ran for president in 1980, his opponents scoffed at his proposal to lower taxes, calling the possible results as “Trickle Down Economics” (a/k/a Reaganomics).  They said it was a worthless economic policy.  Was it?

In theory, TDE is an economic system where there is no significant barrier to accumulation of wealth by individuals.  If the rich do well, as the theory goes, benefits will “trickle down” to the rest of the people.  Lower taxes on high income earners or capital gains will benefit not only the rich but everybody on the lower income rungs, is how that theory is supposed to work.  Reagan’s critics had to “eat crow” as the economy boomed after the Reagan tax cuts kicked in.  The resulting prosperity lasted more than 25 years.  Yes, the rich got richer, but so did the poor and middle-class, “a rising tide lifted all boats”, as Jack Kennedy once opined.  The economy was booming during the late 80s and 90s as a result of Reagan’s “Trickle Down Economics”.

There’s No Such Thing as a “Free Lunch”

Aug 14, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

That expression has been regularly used over the years to convey the idea that anything that is offered as “free” really isn’t free, but is a hidden cost and a possible burden to others.

Ever since the “New Deal”, during FDR’s administrations, politicians have been promising people something for nothing in hopes that those people will respond favorably in the future and vote for those politicians doling out the “free” largesse from the public treasury.  Well, today the “chickens are coming home to roost” (a phrase re-popularized by Obama’s former pastor/mentor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright).

We Need More Millionaires!

Aug 9, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

The far left “liberal loons” are constantly attacking successful people (a/k/a millionaires and billionaires) by saying we should tax those people more than they are already taxed because the liberals claim that it is “fair and just” - their favorite words when they want to raise taxes. 

Little do these ideological political hacks realize that the top 10% of wage earners (those earning more than $133,000 per year) pay approximately 70% of all income taxes and that approximately 48% of wage earners pay no income taxes.  Talk about fairness?  Shouldn’t every citizen have to pay something to support our country?  And many of those people who pay nothing complain that the “rich” don’t pay their fair share.  Are they kidding?

Is Social Security a Viable Program or just another Ponzi Scheme?

Jul 31, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

Ida May Fuller, the first recipient of a Social Security benefit check in 1940, paid a total of $24.75 into the Social Security fund.  Her first monthly S/S check issued in 1940 was for $22.54, almost as much as she paid in.  Over the ensuing 35 years of her life, she collected a total of $22,888.  Her case is reminiscent of the early investors of a Ponzi scheme.  They get paid off from the investments of future dupes (or victims).

Social Security, a well-meaning program instituted to help seniors during their non-working retirement years, has turned into a financial nightmare for the workers of today (not for the present retirees), who are paying F.I.C.A. taxes and not expecting to collect anything when they retire.  The cost of the program has mushroomed over the years from its inception in 1935.  Let’s take a look.


Jul 26, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

That’s a legitimate question and one that surely requires an answer.

When I was born, many moons ago, I believe the average life expectancy of an American citizen was in the upper 60’s.  Today the average life span is about 78 for men and approximately 80 for women. That’s quite a jump, don’t you think?

Well, let’s take the year 1960 (57 years ago).  Doctors at that time still made house calls for approx. $15.00 per house visit ($10 a visit at the doctor’s office).  Many of the cures that my mother used for some of the illnesses was homeopathic (without really knowing what that word meant) and natural treatments that were handed down from generation to generation.

The Liberals and Diversity

Jul 18, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

First off, let’s define what we mean by diversity.  According to Merriam-Webster, “diversity” is the inclusion of different types of people (such as people of different races and cultures) in a group or organization – it also includes a “diversity” of opinion.

Now, with that definition in mind, let’s see how the liberals use it in trying to further their political agenda.

Are We a Nation of Addicts?

Jul 11, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

Yes, we all know the addictive properties of tobacco, alcohol, heroin, cocaine, opioids, and the so-called “harmless drug” marijuana, but we are now encountering quite a few newer and other addictions, many of which have been recently confirmed and that are causing great concern in the medical, and mental health communities.

The addictions listed above are concerns because they are mind-altering drugs and/or health hazards, but the newer addictions, which are not mind-altering per se, but are in some ways equally harmful to the body and to society in general.

“You Cannot Multiply Wealth by Dividing it”

Apr 19, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

That’s a phrase that Dr. Adrian Rogers coined (in 1984) which today takes on special meaning by the policies put forth by the former Obama Administration, the Democrat Party, and its effect on our society.

The complete passage that Dr. Rogers wrote is as follows:

  • You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
  • You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
  • The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
  • Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving.
  • When half the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, this is the beginning of the end for any nation.



Feb 6, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

That phrase cannot be attributed to any one particular person, but the gist of that saying gives poignancy to today’s liberal (a/k/a Progressive) thinking of the many government policies and programs that have not turned out the way they were originally intended.  Do any government policies ever turn out the way they were intended?

Perception Manipulators

Jan 12, 2017 — Chuck Lehmann

Popular novelist and author, David Balducci, has coined a phrase that seems to be on the money when describing what is going on in the dissemination of news and information in our country today. It is the term, “Perception Manipulators”.

That phrase, along with the phrase “fake news”, has reached epidemic proportions in our country today.  This past presidential election was inundated with “fake news” and “perception manipulators”, which was mostly championed by the Democrats (a/k/a Liberals and Progressives).  Day after day, week after week, the drumbeat, by the liberal media and the Democrats, of negative stories about Donald Trump, filled the airways and newspapers with stories about the “evil” intentions of Donald Trump.  It didn’t matter if the stories were true or not, whatever it took to make Trump look bad was the goal of these less than honest “perception manipulators”.

Are Enormous Speaking Fees and Huge Donations Really Camouflaged Bribes?

Oct 17, 2016 — Chuck Lehmann

We all know that taking money from someone by a politician or a government official in order to get a favorable government action, is a felony and is called a bribe. Well, suppose the payment of money is in the form of an enormous speaking fee to a spouse or a generous donation to a certain charitable foundation that a particular politician or government official runs or has an interest in, should that be considered a bribe or a “quid pro quo”?  Does that sound like a situation that the Clinton’s are involved in?

Suppose Hillary Clinton is elected president, how would she be able to to deal with foreign countries, foreign leaders or oligarchs that have contributed millions of dollars to her spouse, Bill Clinton, and to the Clinton Foundation?  Do you think that those countries that have donated millions of dollars to Bill Clinton (and Hillary Clinton after her stint as Secretary of State), and the Clinton Foundation, did so out of the goodness of their hearts, or do you think they expected something positive in return for their largess?  Is the Pope Catholic? Of course.

You Can’t Polish Horse Manure!

Sep 4, 2016 — Chuck Lehmann

Every time another damaging item of scandal comes to light about Hillary Clinton, a gaggle of Hillary idolaters and sycophantic media pundits fall all over themselves in making excuses for her indiscretions and lies. As an example, a loyal Clinton flack, lawyer Lanny Davis, is always trotted out to spin the facts that it is just another right-wing conspiracy against the Clintons by trying to impugn the actions and motives of the “Simon Pure” Clintons for purely political purposes.  But, the overwhelming litany of misdeeds and obfuscations of Hillary (and Bill) makes it difficult for these Clinton apologists to make their hero a moral, trustworthy and sincere figure.  In other words, they can’t polish horse manure.

United We Stand, Divided We Fall!

Aug 31, 2016 — Chuck Lehmann

That phrase has been attributed to that fabled Greek story teller, Aesop, and by a passage in the bible (Mark 3:25) which stated, “And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand”.  As a Republican, I think that phrase has enormous meaning, especially in the upcoming presidential election.  Quite few disgruntled Republicans, have stated that because of differences between themselves and the Republican candidate, Donald Trump, they will not vote for him or endorse him for president.  The Democrats, on the other hand, join together no matter what their differences are and prepare to win the next election.  The Republicans, some not all, seem to carry their differences to the extreme and do just the opposite out of principle.

I believe that our country is basically a center-right country, but we Republicans consistently lose elections to center-left candidates representing the Democrats.  It seems to be that we are always grabbing defeat out of the jaws of victory.  Are we that stupid?  The answer is probably YES!

Like it Never Really Happened!

Aug 28, 2016 — Chuck Lehmann

That’s the advertising phrase , “Like it Never Really Happened”, that the cleanup disaster company “Serv-Pro” uses to remind customers of their services.  To hear and watch the media talk about the presidential campaign, you’d think that Hillary Clinton has led an exemplary life with little or no conflicts of interest or breeches of law.  The media acts like a paid “Super Pac” of the Democrat Party, Democrats good, Republicans bad.  They seem to completely overlook all of Hillary’s indiscretions over the past 30 years, it’s “Like it Never Really Happened”.

It seems that every 4 years the Democrats trot out the same old scenario, the Republicans are sexists, racists, bigots, homophobes, nativists, and a host of other epithets to demonize the Republicans (and now Trump).  It seems that those damning words are okay, according to the media, if directed at the Republicans, but when Trump calls Hillary Clinton a bigot, the media goes crazy in pseudo-indignation and alarm.  A perfect example of hypocrisy in action.

Blinded to the Facts!

Aug 7, 2016 — Chuck Lehmann

Whenever I write about liberal Democrats (of which I was one many years ago), I am constantly reminded of a phrase that sort of describes them to a tee, it goes like this;  “They are blinded to the facts by their loony liberal ideology”.

The term “cognitive dissonance” aptly describes their public pronouncements, and what they really know to be true, which is not what they said in public. Saying one thing, but believing something else.  Many of the liberal Democrats are educated people who adhere to the “party line”, even though they know that what they are saying doesn’t meet the “smell test” of verifiable facts.