Liberal Democracy

Liberal Democracy
The Free State

Monday, November 30, 2015

New York Daily News: S.E. Cupp: 'Breaking Up With The Constitution'

Source:New York Daily News- Donald Trump & Ben Carson.
Source:The New Democrat

Damn! I agree with S.E. Cupp on something. Perhaps its time to reëxamine my political beliefs and news opinions. No, not really, but she makes a great point here about the Republican Party and two of their, to be nice eccentric presidential candidates in Donald Trump and Ben Carson. I say on a regular basis as a Democrat that I miss the days of Newt Gingrich. Forget about Ronald Reagan, I would just like to go back to the mid and late 1990s with Newt.

Because as partisan as Newt was he’s also a very intelligent man and someone who not just believes in government, but knows how to govern. He knew he had a Democratic president, he knew he had fairly small Republicans majorities in the House and that Senate Republicans had tight majorities as well. Meaning that there was only so much that Congressional Republicans could do by themselves with a Democratic president and tight majorities in Congress. Yes, Speaker Newt Gingrich did shutdown the Federal Government in 1995, because he couldn’t sit with President Clinton on Air Force One. But he learned from his mistakes and they passed Welfare to Work together in 1996.

But forget about Newt for a minute. It would be nice just to go back to 2011-12 and instead of hearing Republicans talking about threat of Islam inside of America and having the U.S. Government trample the First Amendment and our Freedom of Religion, something that Republicans say they support, but would have the Feds break into Mosques and round Muslims and Arabs in general like the Japanese, Italians and Germans were in World War II, we would hear Republicans claiming to be Constitutional Conservatives.

Even with all of their new big government constitutional amendments to the Constitution. (Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum come to mind) Like putting the Federal Government in charge of marriage and what people can watch on TV and do in their free times. At least they were talking about the Constitution. And again in Newt’s case he actually understands the Constitution. But at least the GOP was talking about the importance of the Constitution and claiming to support it. Even as they were proposing to rewrite it even in the same speech. Like with Representative Bachmann, when she announced for president in the summer of 2011. And calling same-sex marriage a threat to national security. At least she claimed to love the Constitution.

But no! We can’t even have the good ole days of big government Republicans proposing to outlaw same-sex marriage and pornography and even gambling from the Federal level. They’ve gotten even crazier with The Donald and Dr. Ben, proposing to close down Mosques, round-up Arabs and tell college students what they can think and hear while they’re at college. Speaking of political correctness and fascism, that is what it looks like from the Far-Right in America. The GOP, the party of religious freedom, just as long as they agree with your religion and your religious beliefs. At least with the Far-Right.

S.E. Cupp, is a true Conservative and so is Senator Rand Paul and several others in Congress, because they not just believe in the Constitution, but understand what they actually believe. With Donald Trump, 2016 is about his latest realty TV show or documentary called, Who Wants Donald Trump For President? In a theater or on a TV near you in 2017. With Ben Carson, welcome back to the 1950s and giving Joe McCarthy a good name by comparison. The Founding Fathers, our Founding Liberals, would be shitting asteroids if they saw what some of the Republican presidential candidates were proposing today.
Source:CNN

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

The National Interest: Peter Harris: 'Losing the International Order: Westphalia, Liberalism & Current World Crises'

Source:The National Interest- President Barack Obama, speaking at The United Nations in New York City.
Source:The New Democrat

"The war in Syria demonstrates the limits of the Westphalian system—but it's still the best rulebook we have."

From The National Interest

"Speaking from the State Floor in the White House on September 10, 2014, President Obama addressed the nation on the situation in Iraq and the United States’ strategy to degrade and defeat ISIL, a terrorist organization."

Source:The Obama White House- President Barack Obama, speaking at The White House.
From The Obama White House

To put it mildly the world is a lot more complicated now and the developed world which is mostly in the West is different now and less united than it once was. America and Europe, still believe in great liberal values like freedom of speech, free assembly, freedom of religion, personal freedom, self-ownership, the ability for one to live freely and make a good life for themselves and basic human rights and civil liberties. And even though we’re no longer fighting Marxism and Communism in general at least in the traditional sense, the West is dealing with a different type of authoritarianism that in many cases is not state-sponsored and organized from some authoritarian state.

Islamism, and private Islamist groups, have now replaced Marxism as the main competitor when it comes to liberalism and liberal values. The liberal order, to use a German term, is now facing Islamism as its main enemy when it comes to whether countries are going to live in free societies that are governed responsibly. Or are they going to live in the stone ages where women, gays and non-Muslims are treated like second or third-class citizens and even prisoners. The West and their Arab allies, haven’t figured out how to deal with Islamism and ISIS effectively yet. For one, a lot of those Arab states don’t believe in liberal values and human rights and are just looking to protect their own authoritarian regimes and monarchies, but don’t want to move to some fourth or fifth-world theocracy. The other being the West, America and Europe, aren’t sure about how much they are willing to invest to fight ISIS in Arabia.

This is a different battle or war taking on Islamism than the Cold War. During the Cold War, the main and really only major enemy to America and Europe was Russia and their Marxist Soviet Union. The People’s Republic of China, was still a very poor Marxist society similar to North Korea today for most of the Cold War. With Islamism, it’s not countries that we have to fight for the most part. But groups and groups powerful enough to knock out weak government’s and states and take at least part for their land. As they’ve done in both Iraq and Syria. But the only way you defeat a group like ISIS is through a strong broad committed coalition, which is what liberal internationalism is. That is going to go in and take on ISIS until they’ve defeated them. If you want to protect liberal democracy, liberal values and free societies, you have to fight for them and be united behind that.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Marmar: Rita Hayworth 1967 Interview

Source:Marmar- The Love Goddess!
Source:The Daily Review

The only thing that I would have liked to seen more with Rita Hayworth is Rita in color. She is truly special to look at and to listen to, but black and white simply doesn’t do her justice. I saw They Came to Condura with Rita, Gary Cooper and several others last night and she’s in her early forties at this point, but she still had everything including the great voice, face, hair and body. And was still a hell of an actress. And stick her with a group of U.S. Army soldiers in the Mexican desert where there isn’t another women for perhaps hundred of miles and they haven’t drank or smoked in days and they got this red-hot Spanish goddess with them whose technically their prisoner and guys could end up doing things they wouldn’t normally do when they’re living in much better living conditions.

I made this point before, Rita Hayworth was made for color TV and film and I just wish she became a star in the 1960s, or even 1950s. She was a constant entertainer and goddess that had put guys in sweet dreams for weeks even if they were at war. Even this 1967 TV interview when of course color TV and film were common if not standard by then, was shot in black and white. But again because of how gorgeous and cute she was with that great voice, very similar to Raquel Welch, you can still see how great she was even in black and white and even in her late forties when she was no longer the top Hollywood Goddess in popularity, or perhaps anything else. But she still had it and was still able to grab people’s attention and focus on her.

Monday, November 23, 2015

The National Interest: Christopher A. Preble: Expecting More from Our Allies



Source:The National Interest.
Source:The New Democrat

You can't be both a Neoconservative who wants America to police the world mostly if not completely by ourselves and be a fiscal Conservative who puts real limits on what government can do. Who doesn't want to consistently be borrowing money, running up deficits and expects government to pay for most if not all of its government operations as least when times are good. Speaking as a non-fiscal conservative, but fiscal Conservatives prioritize government spending. They lay out what is the money coming in and figure out exactly what government needs to do and then they pay for it.

A Progressive, is different and would try to figure out exactly what government should do without putting many if any limits on it and try to figure out how to pay for it. Even if that requires borrowing the money. Same thing with Neoconservatives who actually tend to be somewhat progressive when it comes to economic policy. George W. Bush in the 2000s, is an example of that. Newt Gingrich in the 1990s, who wanted to use government to move people out of poverty through work and job training. And encourage business's to hire people on Welfare. Speaker Paul Ryan, very similar today.

So if you just look at foreign policy and national security from a fiscal conservative point of view and not from a liberal internationalist or smart power point of view, or even a dovish perspective, having American taxpayers pay for the national security of other developed countries who can economically afford and have the population to defend themselves, doesn't make good fiscal sense, or even national security sense. Also it is not just American taxpayers who pay for other developed countries national defense in taxes. They also pay for it in higher interest rates because of the national debt and that we borrow from countries like Saudi Arabia and Japan, to defend them.

Out of all the Republican presidential candidates, maybe three of them are actually fiscal Conservatives. In party that is supposed to be a conservative party. And I'm thinking Senator Rand Paul, Governor John Kasich and perhaps Senator Ted Cruz. Senator Marco Rubio, wants to spend another trillion-dollars on national defense and invest even more money in having America try to defend Europe for Europe and Arabia for Arabia, Japan for Japan and South Korea for South Korea. All of the countries are developed countries that can afford to defend themselves. Saudi Arabia and South Korea, already have two of the largest militaries and defense budgets in the world. The European Union if they were a country, their economy would be roughly the size of the United States. How come they can't pay for their own national defense? They can, but have chosen not to. Why pay for your own defense, when someone else does that for you. The mind of a Socialist I guess.

America, can't afford to have a small military and defense budget, but we sure as hell can't afford to police the world ourselves. Especially when we're stuck with a twenty-trillion-dollar national debt and we're borrowing money from countries in order to defend the countries that we're borrowing money from. For America to be as secure as possible, financially, economically and security, other countries especially Europe, has to at least play their own part when it comes to their own national defense, as well as dealing with international challenges when they come as well like Syria and Iraq. Socialism, is cheap when you don't have to pay for your own security. Europe, would be a lot less socialist if they had to pay for their own defense and not expect America to do that for them.


Saturday, November 21, 2015

Washington Examiner: Fred Barnes: ‘Hollywood Myth-Making’

Source:Washington Examiner- The Hollywood Ten.
Source:The Daily Review

“Screenwriter Dalton Trumbo died in 1976, but Hollywood still hasn’t gotten over its high regard for him. He is the subject of a new movie, Trumbo, that lionizes him as a passionate supporter of the First Amendment and free speech, a true patriot. But that defines Trumbo only in terms congenial to the political culture of the Hollywood left.”


“The successful career of Hollywood screenwriter, Dalton Trumbo, comes to an end when he is blacklisted in the 1940s for being a Communist" 

Source:Movie Clips Classic Trailers- Bryan Cranston as Hollywood screenwriter and Communist Dalton Trumbo.

From Movie Clips Classic Trailers 

This blog covers political correctness and how that is a threat to free speech on a regular basis. Especially in the last couple of years where political correctness had made a big comeback on the college left in America. With probably thousands of students if not more who believe that any criticism of minorities in America and even individuals is not only bigoted, but should be illegal. Which of course would be clearly unconstitutional if Congress ever passed some law protecting minorities in America from criticism through governmental force.

But as most people know and believe fascism and political correctness just doesn’t come from the Far-Left and if anything has more support for it on the Far-Right. And used to put down Americans who simply see the world, country and live different lifestyles than the Christian-Right and others on the Far-Right in America.

Let’s say that everything that Fred Barnes said about Dalton Trumbo is true and I’m not ready to grant him that: what was Dalton Trumbo guilty of? Failing to answer whether he was a Communist or not to the House Un-American Activities Committee in 1947. He wasn’t even charged with being a Communist agent for Russia and working to destroy the American liberal democratic form of government, or anything like that. He was brought to HUAC simply for being under suspicion for at the very least having ties to Communists and having communist beliefs and even being a member of the Communist Party.

Trumbo wasn’t charged with anything that is illegal in America. At the end of the day that is what this is about: Cold Warriors still living the Cold War wanting to eliminate communism at all costs even at the expense of rounding people up simply for having communist leanings.

I’m not a Communist obviously and I hate communism as a political ideology and perhaps only see Islamism as a worst form of a big government statist philosophy. But to arrest someone for simply being a Communist and sharing that philosophy when they’ve done nothing illegal, is supporting something that Anti-Communists are supposed to be against: which is big government fascism that says either you are with us hundred-percent of the time, or you’re with the enemy.

Dalton Trumbo, was a Hollywood screenwriter and filmmaker who was also a member of the United States Communist Party. So what? We are a great liberal democracy with a constitutional guarantee of free speech. The most liberal free speech rights in the world, at least among large developed countries. We can are free to associate with any groups that we want as long as we aren’t involved in criminal activities.

Dalton Trumbo wasn’t brought to Congress to testify to the House about being a criminal and to talk about his criminal activities, because he wasn’t accused of being involved in any crimes. He was brought to Congress to talk about his possible membership with Communist USA. The Communist Party in America. And declined to answer whether he was a Communist or not, because he didn’t want to be charged with perjury, or have to worry about never working in Hollywood again and being blacklisted.

Back then studios were scared as hell of Communists and communism as well back in the 1940s and 1950s and didn’t want any suspicion of even being associated with Communists. Trumbo, was a Communist not a criminal and never should have been brought in front of the House to answer where he was a Communist or not in the first place. 

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Prager U: Jonah Goldberg- What is Social Justice?

Source:Prager U- Jonah Goldberg talking about social justice.
Source:The New Democrat

“Social Justice” is a term you hear almost every day. But did you ever hear anybody define what it actually means? Jonah Goldberg of the American Enterprise Institute tries to pin this catchall phrase to the wall. In doing so, he exposes the not-so-hidden agenda of those who use it. What sounds so caring and noble turns out to be something very different.”

From Prager U

From this video all you hear is Jonah Goldberg’s definition of social justice. So take it for what it is worth, but that is not it.

Social justice, or term I prefer as an actual Liberal and not Jonah Goldberg’s week-long drinking binge’s idea of a Liberal, is purely economic freedom. A society where everyone can do well and live in freedom. Where poverty is almost not recognizable, because everyone regardless of their income level has an opportunity to get a good education and get themselves the skills that they need to get a good job and live well in freedom. Perhaps even start their own successful business, or manage one. Not have to live off of public assistance whether they are working or not, because they have a good job that allows for them to comfortably take care of themselves.

Jonah Goldberg’s idea of social justice is what you hear in the video: Big government with both of its paws stuck down the rich man’s wallet and in their bank accounts to take from him to take care of people who struggle just to eat everyday and feed their kids at the same time and avoid being evicted from their public housing unit. But again that is not it.

What I’m talking about what President Clinton called an Opportunity Society. Not some Socialist Utopian Society, where government take cares of everyone, but an Opportunity Society where everyone can live well. Because every kid can go to a good school and for the low-skilled low-income workers and opportunity for them to complete and further their education. So they can get off of public assistance and live well in life with a good job.

Conservatives and Libertarians, love to talk about redistribution of wealth. Perhaps as much as Socialists like to talk about tax the rich. But the only way government can exist is by redistributing wealth. Unless you want to live in a Marxist State where government owns all forms of enterprise. You won’t see many hands go up in the air when you ask: “Who wants to live in a Marxist State?” Not even Bernie Sanders and at least some of his followers.

So of course government is going to redistribute wealth and the question is how. One way to do that is to tax people in Atlanta to pay for a highway in St. Louis, or tax St. Louis to pay for a military base in San Diego.

When it comes to social justice the way to do that is to tax people who are doing well to pay for good schools in low-income communities. Or to give low-income workers and people on Welfare the ability to go back to school and finish their education and get themselves a good job. Night school, community college, private and public job training programs. So they can live in economic freedom as well. Which saves money for your public assistance budget, because you have fewer people who actually need public assistance at all.

Social justice, is an Opportunity Society where everyone can do well. Not a Socialist Utopian Society, where government takes care of everyone. 

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Movie Documentary: Biography of The Love Goddess Rita Hayworth

Source:Movie Documentary- The Love Goddess Rita Hayworth.
Source:The Daily Review

Margarita Casino, to me sounds like a better sexier name than Rita Hayworth. Sort of like Raquel Tejada, but its hard to lose with Raquel Welch. I would have loved to see Rita as a Spanish brunette that she originally was, but she was red-hot redhead. Kind of hard to lose with Rita Hayworth. Whether she goes by Hayworth or Casino, or as a brunette, or as a red-head, because she was a goddess regardless of whatever her name was, or what color her hair was. She was someone you see her once and it is like you've seen her everyday and knew her like your brother or something, because you never forgot her. That is the true test of a goddess is do guys especially remember and talk about you or not. Do they say, "yeah she was pretty", as they're moving on with whatever they're doing, or do they remember you and fantasize about you and can't wait to see you again.

Rita, was the Love Goddess and one of the top Hollywood Goddess's of all-time. But she was more than a gorgeous sexy red-head with an adorable smile and sweet voice. She's also one of the top actress's and entertainer of all-time. The most popular at least female star of the 1940s and the best actress of that decade as well. In an era where movies were movies and where you actually had to be able to act and deliver lines and where there were great lines to deliver. And where movies weren't put together simply to take advantage of the latest hot celebrity's pop culture appeal. She was the best of the best in what was really the Golden Age of Hollywood which was the 1940s and 1950s. And I'm not sure that we've seen an entertainer this talented and this attractive at the same time since.

Rita Hayworth, was a princess, but she was a Hollywood Princess. The Princess of Hollywood, who was treated like loyalty and kept guys going during World War II and perhaps the Korean War. Giving millions of American soldiers and marines, all the motivation that they needed to survive those wars. To see a talent like that become the wife of a prince where she's all over the world especially in Europe, but not in Hollywood making movies and writing songs and doing dances, almost seems like a waste of talent. Especially when this was going on in the highest point of her career in the late 1940s. And then coming back to Hollywood after her marriage with Prince Aly Khan and getting movie roles that people and movies women just starting out would have gotten, seems like a damn shame to me. Because she really was the Princess of Hollywood.


Saturday, November 14, 2015

Rod Willerton: Hollywood & The Stars: 'The Odyssey of Rita Hayworth'

Source:Rod Willerton- The Odyssey of The Love Goddess Rita Hayworth.
Source:The Daily Review

"Hollywood & the Stars: The Odyssey of Rita Hayworth"


Was Rita Hayworth the Raquel Welch of her generation, or was Raquel Welch the Rita Hayworth of her generation? We could probably debate that until the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is over. I would give a slight edge to Rita, because she is literally one of the top Hollywood actress's and entertainers of all-time. Raquel, also a great entertainer, but not in that same class.

Both Rita and Raquel, red-hot, really cute and really sexy. Both have great voices, both move very well, both very bright and pick up things very quickly. It is rare that you'll find an entertainer who is this great and looks this great at the same time. Where you're watching her and you not only never forget her in a movie that she was in, but you don't forget the movie as well. Rita, had that and is still the standard for how other Hollywood goddess' are judged today.

The only thing with Rita Hayworth is that I wish she came out 20-25 years later. Imagine if she came out even in the late 1950s, or 1960s, with the same talents, intelligence, physical beauty, the body and how she moved and all of those movies and images in color. Can you imagine her playing a biker woman, or cowgirl, a rock star, or something? Again with that voice, body and goddess beauty, that adorable smile and voice.

Pal Joey, which Rita did with Frank Sinatra and baby goddess Kim Novak in the late 1950s, is great opportunity to see her in color. She's the female lead in that movie. Miss Sadie Thompson from 1954, or 55, that she did with Jose Ferer, is a great film for her. In that movie she's an incredible entertainer. Singer and dancer, who also has a very sharp lip and wit. With twenty different marines or more all wanting a piece of her.

I'm just starting to learn about The Love Goddess and getting familiar with her movies and career. But similar to again Raquel Welch, Liz Taylor, Marilyn Monroe, Lauren Bacall, Ava Gardner, there's so much about her that is interesting and worth learning about her.

Rita is truly a treasure who didn't burn out in her thirties or forties and to never be hard of again. A star by the time she was in her early twenties in 1940, all the way through the 1970s. We are not talking about one of the most talented entertainers of all-time that had she not drank so much, or wasn't so depressed, that she could've had a great career. Stories that you do see in the movies and on TV.

We're talking about literally one of the best entertainers of all-time. Perhaps top 3-5 actress's ever and perhaps the best looking actress ever. An entertainer, who was a great actress, singer and dancer and she's still truly special.

Friday, November 13, 2015

Prager U: Derryck Green: Who Are the Racists: Conservatives or Liberals?

Source: Prager U.
Source:The New Democrat

This video is so stupid that I really can only make fun of it. Because to take it seriously you would have to assume that everything this guy said in this video is accurate. And to do that you might need to take a four-hundred pound man who hasn’t seen their own two feet since they were a kid seriously, when they say diet and exercise is a good thing. Because how would he know, he’s never done either.

I think I’ll go to the so-called voter ID issue. The countries that he point out that have voter ID laws, don’t have the history of racial discrimination that we’ve had. Where one race of Americans, or Europeans have been denied the ability to vote and go to good schools and even be allowed to be educated simply because of their race. Those countries tend to be racially and ethnically pure, by in large. With very small populations of racial and ethnic minorities.

Unlike America where the whole world lives here. Where we don’t have an ethnic majority. The two largest ethnic groups in America, the Germans, such as myself and the English, are both about twenty-percent each. In within thirty years or so America will no longer have a racial majority population as well. The European-American population is falling. And since Derryck Green says that Europe has voter ID laws, so should we, they also have universal higher education. Where their federal government’s are the primary payer when it comes to college education. Where everyone in the country can afford to go to college. Does Mr. Green want that higher education system for America as well? I don’t and I’m a Liberal. No such thing as free education, or free anything else that government does.

The fact is if you’re a Liberal, or a Conservative, you’re not a racist. Racism, is built on stupidity and ignorance, hate and perhaps some form of craziness. Where you see things about people who simply aren’t there. Where you judge people by their hair, or complexion, instead of how they present themselves as an individual which is their character. You look at characteristics of other members of a race and assume that everyone in that race is exactly the same. I’ll probably never get a Tea Partier, or Neoconservative to believe this, but tolerance is a huge liberal value, along with Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Choice. Conservatives, are taught to treat people as individuals and not as members of groups. Individualism, is a big conservative value. So if you actually are a Liberal, or a Conservative, you’re not a racist. But you might play a Liberal, or Conservative on TV, or online.


Wednesday, November 11, 2015

JCN Soul: Johnny Cash: 'I Won't Back Down'

Source:JCN Soul- The Man in Black: Johnny Cash.
Source:The Daily Review

"From the album "American Recordings 3 - Solitary Man"

From JCN Soul

"I Won't Back down", I believe is the perfect song to use as a motivator for a football team that the head coach could use in his pregame speech. Especially if he has a team that is undermanned at least on a paper and is a clear underdog, but strongly believes that his team is good enough to win this game. But he's got to get his players to believe that. And tell them, "that we're playing  a great team today they're going to hit us hard and we're going to take some big shots and give up some plays and points. But if we stay together and stay united and do what we've been working on all year and been practicing, they won't beat us, because we're better than them." 

I believe this would be a great song for a high school team that perhaps is having a cinderella season and hasn't won in a long time and they're playing a great team that wins a lot every year. And the same thing with a college football program and even an NFL team. And because this is Veterans Day how about taking it up to the battlefield and in combat. That lets say an Army Captain could use to tell him men and tell them that, "we might be undermanned and they may have more ammo, but we're better than the enemy and are better trained and if we stay together, we'll not only survive, but we'll win." I believe that is the message of Johnny Cash's "I Won't Back Down." That you can push him around and knock him around, but you can't knock him out, because he'll just keep coming at you. 

Monday, November 9, 2015

Dennis Prager: 'Feminization of America Is Bad For The World'

Source:Dennis Prager- Well, if radical feminists had their way, the only action figures that American boys would be allowed to have would be Barbie dolls. 
Source:The Daily Review 

"Last week the New York Times published an article, “Sweeping Away Gender-Specific Toys and Labels,” that contained three sentences that explain one of the most important phenomena in American life.

In discussing the increasing move to do away with gender-specific toys – something the New York Times approves of – the article quoted Tania Missad, the “director of global consumer insights” at one of the world’s largest toy manufacturers, Mattel... 


"Mark talks about "girly men" and the feminization of America and the Church, including Dr. Steven Clark's list, The Signs of a Feminized Man.  Mark and Debbie talk about teaching men to live by their feelings not being a good idea." 

Source:Mark Gungor- Talking about love and marriage.

From Mark Gungor 

Warning! This piece might come as sexist and homophobic for all of you oversensitive readers.

Dennis Prager, has a habit of being partially right. He’ll make an intelligent statement about a big subject, but then will screw up his argument with a whole bunch of stuff that really doesn’t have anything to do with the original point that was making and is simply false.

Having a country of essentially three-hundred twenty-million straight women, or straight women and openly gay men, would be bad for America. It would screw up guys fall weekends, because there would be no more football. And that is just one example. Straight women, would have a hell of a time finding dates, because they would be surrounded by straight women and gay men. If America came under attack, no one would be left to defend the country. Because all the real men in the country would have been deported and freezing their asses off in Russia, standing in bread lines for Vladimir Putin. All of the new unemployment in America with all of those football players out-of-work, because no one is watching football anymore. Twenty-four hours a day of soap operas, cooking shows, celebrity TV and so-called reality TV.

The Far-Left in America, has this idea that all Caucasians, who don’t share their politics, are bigots and that Caucasian men are all sexist and that even masculinity is sexist, because it isn’t feminine. This is the last faction of the country you want running the country. Well one of the last. They’re running tied right now with the Christian-Right that would turn America into the West’s version of Saudi Arabia. Where it would essentially be illegal to be feminine in public and where women would become servants of their men. What the New-Left in America will probably never understand is that men and women are certainly different. We look different, we think different, men tend to be bigger, stronger and taller than women. We even think different and tend to be interested in different things. Well, at least straight men compared with straight women. None of these differences are bad, they’re just different.

I have some advice for the New-Left in America, free of charge, because I doubt they’ll take it: if you don’t like masculine straight men, don’t hang out with them and don’t vote for them. Move to San Francisco, or Manhattan, where you might have better luck of finding a peanut farmer than a straight man. 

Guys are guys and girls are girls and there’s nothing wrong with that. We're divided almost completely down the middle in the country where both sides are able to influence the country and make themselves known and felt. Even our gay population is divided evenly among men and women. 

If Scandinavia is your ideal part of the world where you think everything is perfect there, try living over there for a while and see what it is like to live there. But as long as you’re in America try dealing with life as an American and our culture that combines both masculinity and femininity, or work to change the culture.

Saturday, November 7, 2015

George Seaton: Airport (1970)

Source:Turner Classic Movies- Left to right: Dean Martin, Jacqueline Bisset, and Helen Hayes.

Source:The Daily Review 

"Mel Bakersfeld, general manager of Lincoln International Airport, is beset with problems during one of the worst snowstorms in the history of the Midwest. A disabled jet has blocked the major runway, and the auxiliary runway is too short for takeoffs in bad weather conditions, forcing Mel to call maintenance chief Joe Patroni to solve the crisis; Mel's wife, Cindy, informs him that she wants a divorce; and Tanya Livingston, the Trans Global Airlines passenger agent with whom Mel is having an affair, is distracted by the mischievous Ada Quonsett, an elderly woman who is trying to stow away on a jet to Rome. 

Meanwhile, the emotionally disturbed D. O. Guerrero comes on board with a bomb in a briefcase, intending to blow up the plane so that his wife, Inez, can collect on the life insurance policy he has just purchased. 

The jet is piloted by Mel's brother-in-law, Vernon Demerest, who has just learned that his lover, stewardess Gwen Meighen, is pregnant. Shortly after departure, he is warned that Mel and Tanya have determined that Guerrero is carrying a bomb. With Ada's help, Vernon attempts to get the briefcase, then nearly succeeds in persuading Guerrero not to open it, but Guerrero runs into the bathroom and explodes the bomb. 

Guerrero is blown out of the jet, Gwen suffers a serious eye injury, and the aircraft is severely crippled, but Vernon and co-captain Anson Harris manage to land on Lincoln's runway, which Patroni has just cleared. As the passengers and crew enter the terminal, Vernon's wife, Sarah, observes her husband's obvious concern for Gwen and realizes that he has been unfaithful." 


"Burt Lancaster and Dean Martin head an all-star cast in this classic disaster film from producer Ross Hunter, for which Helen Hayes received her second Oscar. On the ground, manager Mel bakersfeld (Lancaster) juggles lover Jean Seberg and wife Dana Wynter while coping with a blizzard, aided by mechanic George Kennedy (who returned in all three sequels). 

In the sky, Capt. Vern Demerest (Martin) must maintain control of a 707 with his pregnant stewardess girlfriend (Jacqueline Bisset), a sly stowaway (Hayes), and a bomb-toting maniac (Van Heflin) aboard. Often imitated but never equaled, this box office hit was adapted by Academy Award winner George Seaton (Miracle on 34th Street, The Country Girl) from the best seller by Arthur Hailey (Hotel).

MPAA Rated PG for some intense sequences of adventure violence and language.

Produced by Ross Hunter Productions. Released by Universal Pictures, an division of NBCUniversal, an Comcast company." 

Source:The Baltimore Movie Trailer Park- Jean Seaberg and Burt Lancaster in Airport (1970) No Wonder Mel never goes home to his wife. LOL

From The Baltimore Trailer Park 

"Trailer from the 1970 movie : Airport" 

Source:Trailer Tajm- a trailer of Airport (1970
From Trailer Tajm

The 1970s, was a crazy and very entertaining even with how gloomy and depressing a decade that it was with the bad economy, Vietnam War, high crime rate and everything else. But one of few great things about that decade was the entertainment, especially movies and TV. 

Terrorism was on the mind of millions of Americans in the 1970s, as well as what could happen if something went wrong with an airplane when it was in air and thousands of miles from a nearest airport. Soap operas were also very popular and common in the decade, as well as movies that combined several different genres and stories in one movie. 

Airport, isn’t a pure action movie, or action/thriller, or action/drama, or action/comedy, or soap opera. It was all of those things into one movie. With a great cast and a great director.

Airport, is essentially about what good decent intelligent people, who all have their own issues and problems outside of work, do when they’re all under extreme pressure: 

Like having a passenger on the plane who is so desperate, who is out-of-work and can’t hold onto a job, who needs money and believes there is nothing left he can do, but have himself killed so his wife can collect his life insurance. Van Heflin, plays a man named Guerro (apparently he wasn't born with a first name) who manages to get a bomb on the plane. 

The General Manager (played by Burt Lancaster) of the airport, is no longer in love with his wife and as a result is now a workaholic who doesn’t want to go home at night, because he’s happier working all the time. 

Jacqueline Bisset, plays a head stewardess who is having an affair with a married pilot and is now pregnant with his baby. Dean Martin, plays the father of the head stewardess’s baby and his married and having an affair with that stewardess.

You have all of these decent intelligent people who are all very good at their jobs, but are all under enormous pressure and are all now dealing with an airplane that has a bomb on board by a man who is suicidal and wants to set the bomb off and the bomb does go off. So you have all of these people who are already under enormous pressure now having to deal with a potential airplane disaster in horrible Upper Midwest weather in the winter, leaving from Chicago. And now also have to deal with the possibility of hundreds of people dying in a horrible plane crash. 

This is a very entertaining and very funny movie. Perhaps not so believable with all the side soap operas in it. But even great soap operas tend not to be very believable. And it is very entertaining and pretty funny movie with very funny people in it and a an all-star cast.

Thursday, November 5, 2015

The National Interest: Colin Dueck: 'Donald Trump, American Nationalist'

Source:The National Interest - The Donald J. Trump. Thank God there's only one. Well, only one sr. Donald J. Trump.
Source:The New Democrat 

"Donald Trump’s real niche, carved out in his own strange way, is simply American nationalism. And this is a powerful force among Republicans. 

In the Republican presidential race, while Donald Trump’s star has faded a little, he continues to lead nationally in most polls. To be sure, he is not going to be president. Trump is more of a circus barker than a plausible commander-in-chief. But his continued polling success should indicate something about his appeal that observers from both parties would best understand. And partly, believe it or not, this has to do with U.S. foreign policy." 


"The Republican presidential candidate discussed Carson's rising poll numbers live on "Good Morning America."

Source:ABC News- interviewing The Donald J. Trump.

From ABC News

When you look at Donald Trump, you have to know that he's a businessman and a salesman, as well as the biggest narcissist perhaps in the history of the world. Who does these little things like running for president simply to bring attention himself. Who has multiple positions on perhaps every single major political issue going back thirty years since he first got involved in American politics from the outside. 

You shouldn't take anything The Donald says with a grain of salt,  years supply of salt. He goes where he believes the popular support is. He really should be running for both Narcissist and Faddist of the United States and run both offices at the same time. (He could afford to do it) Because who would beat him, or even challenge him. He's lucky politicians and candidates aren't required to take truth serum before they say anything, because he wouldn't be able to run for anything, other than maybe his own positions.

The Donald's latest venture and real reality show, Who Wants Donald Trump For President, is just an attempt to speak to so-called Middle-America Americans, Richard Nixon's Silent Majority. People who feel left behind from the New America. Anglo-Saxon Protestants primarily and to show them that he's with them. Even though he's nothing like them as far as where he's from, where he lives, the type of lifestyle he lives, the fact that he's not very religious at all. 

Maybe The Donald will get a new book, a documentary, perhaps an actual reality show out of this so-called presidential campaign. But he won't get the presidency, because the current group of Americans that he's pandering to are not enough for him to win the presidency. A Republican can't kiss off Latinos and women and hope to have any shot at winning the White House. So this is not about him being president.

Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Prager U: Greg Gutfeld- 'Left But Really Right'

Source:Prager U- Right is wrong, at least in Greg Gutfeld's case.
Source:The Daily Review 

“Successful liberals live by conservative values. It’s true. The liberal musician, the liberal chef, the liberal writer–all swear by things conservatives love, like competition, earned reward, and, yes, profit and the bottom line. Greg Gutfeld, bestselling author of, “How To Be Right: The Art of Being Persuasively Correct”, explains.” 

From Prager U

I don’t have a nice way of putting this other to say that Greg Gutfeld has an interesting and even good sense of humor. And is entitled to his liberal First Amendment rights like all other Americans.

All of these collectivist socialist values that comes from Europe, that he was talking about, are exactly that. Collectivist socialist values. Illiberal in most cases, because Liberals believe in liberty, which is where the word comes from and Socialists believe in the collective and seeing to it that you have a big enough government to see to it that no one has to go without.

To suggest that people who are successful regardless of political ideology, live by conservative values, would be like saying anyone who is against racism, believes in free speech and expression even as it relates to pornography and offensive speech , things that the liberal ACLU defends in court everyday, must be Liberals.

And if you believe that gays should be treated equally under law, you must be a Liberal. Right? Am I at least in the ballpark on this one? If this is case then most Americans are Liberals, because we tend to believe in these things and oppose discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion and even sexuality. If same-sex marriage was on a national ballot, it would probably win 60-40 now. Does that mean 3-5 Americans are liberal? I could argue that we are. But same-sex marriage is just an example of that.

You don’t have to be a Conservative, or even live by conservative values to be successful in America. If you believe in personal freedom constitutional rights, individual rights, civil liberties, equal justice under law, values that tend to unite Americans, are you a Liberal? No, because these are simply Americans values that tend to bring Americans together. Instead of trying to divide a country of three-hundred-twenty-million people between Right and Left.

And doing it in a way that suggests Liberals are simply about collectivism and just another way of saying Marxist. And people who believe in productivity, hard work, education, responsibility, fiscal responsibility, etc, aren’t conservative necessarily who live by the conservative ideology. They’re just good productive Americans who in many cases also believe personal freedom, including privacy, equal justice and rights under law, a very liberal freedom of speech, etc.

If you’re going to accuse people of being liberal and followers of liberalism, which Liberals tend to take as complement, by the way and not as an insult, so I don’t know what Greg Gutfeld is getting out of here other than maybe some laughs (perhaps at himself and some new followers people who already agree with him, at least have the decency to know what the hell you’re talking about. Instead of going off bogus (to be kind) liberal stereotypes from the 1950s and 1960s. Join the rest of the country in the 21st Century where many Americans now embrace so-called liberal values, that I’ve already laid out, as well as Greg Gutfeld’s so-called conservative values.

If the Right had to talk about actual Liberals and not just people who call themselves Liberals , because they don’t have the balls to be called Socialists, or are called Liberals in by the mainstream media, or hyper-partisan rightists (such as Greg Gutfeld) the Right would lose all the time if they had to debate Liberals and liberalism for what we really are. Because Americans now tend to embrace these so-called liberal values.

Tuesday, November 3, 2015

Keppler Speakers: 'Senator Bob Dole Shares Great Political Wit'

Source:Keppler Speakers- former U.S. Senate Republican Leader Robert J. Dole (Republican, Kansas)
Source:The Daily Review

“Since leaving public elective office, former Presidential candidate and Senator Bob Dole continues to take an active leadership role in a wide range of public policy and charitable causes. Recent projects include serving as Chairman of the National World War II Memorial, which was completed and dedicated in 2004; serving as Chairman of the International Commission on Missing Persons, and co-chairing, with Former President Bill Clinton, a foundation to assist the spouses and children of the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attack; and serving as President of the Federal City Council. He also takes an active role in supporting the work of the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics at his alma mater, Kansas University. As a renowned political commentator, a frequent guest on late night talk shows, star of two Super Bowl commercials and best selling author, Bob Dole is part of the American landscape. Senator Dole’s best-selling World War II memoir, One Soldier’s Story, chronicles his harrowing experience on and off the battlefield and the lessons learned through his struggle to survive. One Soldier’s Story is a tribute to those who defended liberty in its darkest hour and his gift to future generations, a destined-to-be classic about overcoming adversity and making the most out of life. Book Bob Dole at Speakers.com.” 

From Speakers 

Bob Dole, follows the oldest rule in the book, that he perhaps wrote himself, or had his good friend Strom Thurmond right for him: “Never take yourself too seriously.” The best rule for a politician, or any special interest servant, I mean public servant.

There’s so much nonsense (to be charitable) that goes on in Washington. Most people judge their finances in the thousands. Companies, in the thousands and millions, state and local government’s in the millions and to a certain extent hundreds of millions.

The U.S. Government in Washington millions of dollars to someone in Congress, is like a slam dunk to Lebron James: no big deal, something that he does several times in each game.

The U.S. Government, deal in billions, hundreds of billions and even trillions everyday. There’s so much money for them to manage and the fact that Congress, anyway represents the people who send them there and are only as good as them, there’s no way they can manage all of it themselves.

I think politicians have to laugh at themselves, otherwise they would go crazy and end up back at the nut house they escaped from to run for Congress and get reelected in the first place.

You’re always in the public eye even when you’re making your back room deals and voting on things you don’t want anyone especially your constituents to know about, because leaks get out. And people who work for you no longer feel they can hide what their boss is doing.

A public servant, is truly that at least in the sense that they work in the public, even if they work for their lobbyists. And in today’s internet age there’s only so much that they can hide from the public. So when they do crooked and stupid things, it gets out and they get reelected anyway, because their constituents are blind and didn’t bother to pay attention to what their senator, or representative was doing, or perhaps were drunk when they went into the voting booth. And voted for the wrong person by accident.

I believe what Bob Dole is talking about here is not only all the politicians in America that have had a great wit, but also making fun of a lot of things that he saw while he was in Congress. All the late night sessions because senators didn’t want to vote on things that their constituents would find out about. So they would vote when they thought the whole country was asleep. And even if Alaska and Hawaii found out about it, the thinking there was that they were too far away to do anything about it.

There’s so much nonsense (to be charitable) that goes on in Washington, Congress and the U.S. Government as a whole. You almost have to laugh at it, or deal with a horrible case of depression. And perhaps take up alcoholism to get through it. 

June-Marie Liddy: Folding Denim Jeans in Jeans in Boots

Source:June-Marie Liddy- skinny jeans in boots.
Source:The New Democrat

"June-Marie Liddy Folding Denim Jeans in Boots." Originally from June-Marie Liddy, but her video has been deleted.

June-Marie Liddy and I follow each other on Google+. I’ve followed her on YouTube for a guess a year or so. We haven’t met in person yet but, I’m pretty familiar with her online. And she does these videos about household chores and what she does around the house. And does them in tight denim jeans in boots and looks great in them as she’s doing this work. And more than willing to express herself physically as she’s doing this work. And gives guys a lot of rides (if you are familiar with the phrase) and a pleasure to check  out.

You can be sexy and substantive at the same time. You don't have to look like a nerd who eats TV dinners at home while reading a book every Friday night by yourself, or with another nerd you're involved with. While working at the library, or some laboratory everyday during the week.

Or look like a hooker who asks children for help in spelling the simplest basic words. You can have real substance and style at the same time, JM Liddy proves that. 

Monday, November 2, 2015

Senator Rand Paul: Senator Paul Speaks Out Against Budget Agreement: 10/29/15

Source:U.S. Senator Rand Paul (Republican, Kentucky)
Source:The New Democrat

I actually agree with a lot of what Senator Paul said here. But he gets a couple of things wrong here. The new spending in the Bipartisan Budget Act that is for defense and domestic programs is paid for by adjusting payments in Disability Insurance. As far as the Guns and Butter, that is what happens when you have a divided government where you have one party that always wants to increase defense spending and cut domestic spending, even infrastructure, which is generally a good pathway to reelection and the other party always looking to cut defense and increase domestic spending. So maybe we should look at the voters who send these people to Congress instead of the Congresspeople who just represent the people who send them there.

We do have a national debt of around twenty-trillion-dollars and I would love to bring that down and you can only do that through stronger economic growth, higher employment, with raising wages and deficit reduction. As long as you have a deficit, the debt will always go up. Which is how you get a national debt through annual deficits that are always adding to the debt. And again, divided government with a military oriented national security party that believes the best interest of corporations are always the best interest of the country. And a party that is more interested in domestic and economic spending, that tends to believe that the best interest of labor unions is always the best interest of the country.

So unless you have people from both parties who say, “we need to cut the deficit and I’m willing to give some of my priorities in a smart intelligent way, but I’m not going to hurt them, if you do the same thing with your priorities”, we’re always going to have guns and butter. Republicans, will get more military spending. Democrats, get more domestic spending like in the areas of infrastructure, education, medical research. And at best you’ll get a bipartisan agreement to fund and not borrow the money to pay for each parties priorities, but you won’t have a real agreement to deal with the long-term debt and budget deficit. That is how Congress works especially when the margins are fairly close both in the House and Senate and the President is from the other party that is not leading Congress. And this is also how you avoid government shutdowns and defaulting on the national debt. Which would have been the worst possible outcome.