Fox News: Art Laffer- '100 Million Now On Federal Welfare'

Source:Fox News- right-wing economist Art Laffer, talking to Fox News about Federal Welfare.

"Not counting social security, medicaid and many more. This is Obama's Utopian dream for America coming to fruition. The Cloward-Piven strategy in full bloom. Create a dependent class of slaves who will perpetuate their own enslavement by continually electing those who promise more handouts until we are all equally poor and miserable.

The Marxist redistribution of wealth sounds good until you run out of other people's money to redistribute. Then it all collapses as we saw with the Soviet Union. C.S.Lewis said  "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive."

From USA Action News

I agree with Art Laffer I guess on one point and that's work requirements for Welfare. No where in America should Americans be getting more in income from our taxpayer funded government, then from working on their own. Even for people working minimum wage jobs and even working those jobs full-time, should be getting more in income, them people who don't work at all and are completely dependent on public assistance. Even if they had kids. I guess my approach to addressing this issue would be different from Mr. Laffer. 

I like the idea of subsidized employment where people on Welfare would go to work, even at minimum wage jobs, while they're in school or training to get themselves the skills that they need to get a good job and get off of public assistance all together and still be able to collect their public assistance payments, including their Welfare checks, while they're working. 

So under my system, if you are now on Welfare but then go to work even at let's say as fast food joint or a grocery store, you would get the income from working at your new job, but still keep your Welfare checks, as well as receive financial assistance to go back to school and get the training that you need to get yourself a good job and get off of public assistance all together. This is actually something that the Obama Administration was looking at in 2009-10 with the American Recovery Act to deal with the Great Recession. 

Under my system, people who are working regardless of the job and income, would get more money working, than not working. And anyone on Welfare would be required to not just go to work and look for work, but then take one of the first available jobs that they're qualified for, even if they have kids. While people who don't work and perhaps even don't want to work, would get less in income and eventually be kicked off of Welfare for failure to go to work, even if they have kids and could even lose their kids for failure to adequately support their kids.

Chuck Phillips: 'Gerald R. Ford Speech On Assuming The Presidency'

Source:Chuck Phillips- Gerald R. Ford (Republican, Michigan) becoming the 38th President of the United States, in 1974.

"Gerald Ford begins to heal the nation of Watergate." 

From Chuck Phillips 

"Nixon's resignation was tendered to United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at 11:35 a.m. At that moment, Ford became the 38th president of the United States, although he took the official oath of office at 12:05 p.m. Once the former president (and now private citizen) Nixon left the building, the White House staff began preparations for Ford's swearing-in. More chairs were added for the much larger crowd of invited guests than was at the farewell. The oath was administered to Ford by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger in the White House East Room. Chief Justice Burger was traveling in the Netherlands at the time, and was flown back to Washington, D.C., on an Air Force plane.[6] The first phone call that President Ford, a former center on the University of Michigan football team, made after his inauguration was on Saturday, August 10, 1974, to Ohio State University football coach Woody Hayes, who had just recently suffered a heart attack." 

Source:Wikipedia- Gerard R. Ford (Republican, Michigan) becoming the 38th President of the United States, in August, 1974.

From Wikipedia

On August, 9th 1974 Gerald R. Ford who was Vice President of the United States up until assuming the Presidency, assumed the Presidency of the United States. A job he never wanted or campaigned for prior to becoming president. 

Gerry Ford's big goal in politics was to be Speaker of the House of Representatives. A job as Minority Leader of the House of Representatives from 1965-73, came within twenty seats or so, after running for Speaker five times. He didn't want to be Vice President either, he got that job after Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned in 1973 due to a corruption scandal of his own.

Then Minority Leader Ford, was appointed Vice President in 1973 to replace Spiro Agnew, because House Speaker Carl Albert and Senate Leader Mike Mansfield, both Democrats both told President Nixon that Ford had the most votes and trust of any Republican in Congress. And would be someone that both Democrats and Republicans would vote to confirm in both the House and Senate. 

As Ford was confirmed by both the House and Senate overwhelmingly for Vice President in December 1973. And as it turns out Gerry Ford was the right choice if not best choice to be Vice President, because of his credibility with Congress and the country.

When Gerry Ford became Vice President in 1973, both Democrats knew that he was going to be the next President of the United States. As well as the media, because they all knew that Richard Nixon's days as President were numbered, that he wouldn't finish out his term as President. And what was about to come down and came down in 1974 in the Watergate scandal points that out perfectly. So appointing Ford as Vice President, President Nixon also probably knew or believed that he was appointing the next President of the United States as well.

John Birch Society: Arthur Thompson- 'Gov't Healthcare Always Leads to More Gov't Control and Rationing'

Source:John Birch Society- CEO Arthur Thompson.

"In this weekly news update for August 6-12, 2012, JBS CEO Art Thompson discusses how Healthcare always leads to more government control and rationing. Preliminary steps for a Communist crackdown beginning in Brazil and South Africa. In spite of the War on Terror, al Qaeda now in Spain." 

From the John Birch Society

This spokesman for the John Birch Society has one thing correct, is that what's called ObamaCare (otherwise known as the Affordable Care Act) is basically the same thing. As what's called RomneyCare, same ideas in both health care reform laws. More access to health insurance for people who can't afford it. Patient protections so people don't lose their health insurance without just cause, like they actually get sick or hurt and need their health insurance, and no more annual or lifetime caps. As well as an individual mandate that requires that everyone get health insurance so we are all part of the system. And no longer have the ability to pass our health care Costs onto people who've decided to pay for their health care still in place, but they are now regulated. But Romney/ObamaCare leaves in place the private health care and health insurance system in place, including the private for-profit systems.

Media Burn Archive: 'President Richard M. Nixon before Resignation & Full Speech, August 8, 1974'

Source:Media Burn Archive- President Richard M. Nixon (Republican, California) announcing that he's resigning the presidency, in 1974.

"Moments before he goes on-air to resign as President of the United States, Richard Nixon is calm and collected, joking with staff as they set up the pool feed. "Good evening. This is the 37th time I have spoken to you from this office, where so many decisions have been made that shaped the history of this nation."

Help us caption & translate this video!" 

From Media Burn Archive

Why did President Richard Nixon resign the presidency in the summer of 1974, when he still had two and a half years left in his 2nd term? There are several reasons and to put it simply. He lost most if whatever support he had left in Congress. He would've been impeached on a bipartisan basis in the House and would've been convicted on a bipartisan basis in the Senate. The House Judiciary Committee had already voted to impeach him with a bipartisan vote and was on course for a similar vote on the House floor. The Republican Leader in the Senate, Minority Leader Hugh Scott told President Nixon, that the votes were there to convict the President which takes a 2/3 vote.

Senate Democrats had fifty five seats. Senate Republicans had forty-five seats and that there were at least twelve Republicans that would vote for the conviction of President Nixon and that Southern Democrats would vote for conviction as well. President Nixon would've been impeached in the House and convicted in the Senate, embarrassed even further in the country then he already embarrassed himself. And this scandal would've continued with the FBI or someone actually coming to the White House or someone to escort Richard Nixon out of the Oval Office so President Ford could takeover. Or however that process would've worked.

I would like to think that at least one of the reasons why Richard Nixon resigned the presidency when he didn't technically have to, you can't force a President to resign or a Member of Congress and perhaps even the Vice President, whose technically an elected official only they can make this what must be a very difficult decision, but I would like to think that why President Nixon resigned was to put an end to one if not the worst constitutional crisis's to sleep. And so the country could move on and deal with difficult challenges that were ahead.

The United States was facing energy shortages, a rising debt and deficit, rising unemployment. Similar challenges that President Carter faced in the late 1970s, that President Ford attempted to deal with them all. But it's a little difficult to deal with those challenges, when you are not sure who the President is going to be in the next few weeks. Whether it was for purely selfish reasons or looking out for the national interest in why President Nixon resigned when he did and I would like to think it was a combination of both, President Nixon made the right decision in resigning when he did. Not to make up for what he did that led up to his resignation, but to put and end to a scandal that he didn't start, but covered up.

Jim Heath: CBS Evening News With Dan Rather- Vice President George H.W. Bush (1988

Source:Jim Heath- U.S. Vice President George H.W. Bush (Republican, Texas) on the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, in 1988.

"From 1988, a live interview showdown between CBS anchor Dan Rather and Vice President George Bush." 

From Jim Heath

When Vice President George H.W. Bush went on the CBS Evening News in the winter of 1987/88 when it wasn't a certainty that Vice President Bush was going to win the 1988 Republican presidential nomination. , he used this opportunity to try to convince Conservative Republicans that he wasn't a wimp 9as Newsweek called him just 3-4 years later) and that he was willing and would take on what right-wingers call the "liberal media" and Dan Rather was one of their biggest targets. 

The right-wing of the Republican Party has always seen Dan Rather as a closet Liberal Democrat who was out to bring down or at least make Republicans look bad. The right-wing has pretty much hated Dan Rather and perhaps CBS News in general, since the Nixon presidency and their coverage of the Watergate scandal. And saw it as unfair or whatever and what Vice President Bush was doing with this interview with Dan Rather, who at the time was the anchor of the CBS Evening News, was an attempt to convince Republicans that he was tough enough to take on what they call the "liberal media", as well as Democrats.

Iran-Contra was still a big deal in late 1987 and early 1988 and as Vice President, George Bush was clearly involved in this situation and had knowledge of it. He was President Reagan's top deputy, his Chief Counselor on Policy and perhaps even his Chief Operating Officer. 

Even if Vice President Bush didn't have much knowledge of this situation (which I doubt) then that would mean as number two ranking officer in the Federal Government, that he was out of the loop in perhaps the most important political scandal of the Reagan Administration. 

Whether Iran-Contra was or wasn't what this interview was supposed to be about with Dan Rather, thats why Rather wanted to talk about it. And Bush knew this and used it as an opportunity to fight back against again what right-wingers view as the "liberal media".

Reason: John Blundell- 'Margaret Thatcher, Meryl Streep and The Iron Lady: Fact vs. Fiction'

Source:Reason Magazine- actress Meryl Streep playing United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (Conservative, England)

Source:The Daily Post

“When I first heard of this movie,” says John Blundell, “I immediately was a little worried because of Meryl Streep’s own ideas and polices and so on that are very distinctly not Thatcherite.”

As a longtime Margaret Thatcher ally, few people are in a better position than John Blundell to assess the veracity of the Oscar-nominated bio-pic, The Iron Lady. The former head of influential free-market organizations such as The Institute of Economic Affairs, The Institute for Humane Studies, and the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, Blundell is also the author of Margaret Thatcher: A Portrait of the Iron Lady (2007) and the new Ladies for Liberty: Women Who Made a Difference in American History.

On the eve of the 2012 Academy Awards ceremony, Blundell sat down with Reason.tv to discuss the controversy surrounding the film (which depicts its titular character in the throes of demenita), Streep’s widely praised performance, and the continuing power of Thatcher’s social and political legacy.

“I must admit,” he says, “to being pleasantly surprised. I think overall Margaret comes out of this process with her reputation enhanced and, of course, Meryl Streep’s reputation hugely enhanced.”

From Reason Magazine 

I saw the Iron Lady, the Meryl Streep bio movie about former United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher back in May. And I was expecting a great movie about one of the most important world leaders, in at least the last thirty years. And I was disappointed, I don’t believe this movie was intended for political junkies. Or even people who love history such as myself, whether its American history or world history. This movie was intended for people who love movies and feel the need to be entertained.

I think this movie is for people who are not interested in learning about important historical events and people and don’t find that interesting enough to watch that type of thing or read about it. So they see a movie and hopefully its more dressed up for them and comes off as more and I hate this term to describe things like this, but as sexy.

One credit I would give the Iron Lady and something that I was pleasantly surprised by, was that this movie didn’t try to make Maggie Thatcher look like some type of Conservative fool who was interested in selling out the interests of the country to private business interests and didn’t care about the needy and was always looking to go to war. I think Meryl Streep did a very good job of playing Maggie Thatcher as the person she was. And not some Hollywood Leftist vision of her.

To me, what stands out about Maggie Thatcher, who had about a twenty year career in the British Government in the UK Parliament, as Leader of the Opposition and then of course as Prime Minister, is all the important things in her career that they didn’t cover. They didn’t cover much of her as Leader of the Opposition and how she rose from that to be Prime Minister or. Her interactions with the UK Prime Minister. I believe they showed one Question Time performance, or her relationship with President Reagan, or, how she dealt with the Soviet Union.

The Iron Lady covered a little bit of the Falkan Islands conflict with Argentina in 1982 and her attempts to cut the British debt and deficit. But about an hour of this movie was about her life post-Prime Ministership. Even though it’s as Prime Minister where she really made her impact, not only in Britain, but the world as well.

I thought that Meryl Streep did a very good job of playing Maggie Thatcher with the material that was given her. As far as what aspects of her life they covered. But no offense to Prime Minister Thatcher, this movie as far as appearances has a similar issue as the movie Game Change had with Sarah Palin. Except that I believe that Meryl Streep is too attractive, too cute, and beautiful to play Maggie Thatcher. Whereas in Game Change, Julianne Moore is not attractive enough to play Sarah Palin, at least as far as I’m concern. 

Forbes Magazine: 'Ex-Citi Chief: Split Up Big Banks'

Source:Forbes Magazine- ex-Citi Bank head Sandy Weill.

"Why Sandy Weill's recent statement is poppycock.  Plus, Facebook earnings on deck, and Sheila Bair's harsh words for big time bankers." 

From Forbes Magazine

I like what the two guys in this Forbes video were saying. Saying now that the big banks should be broken up, after you contributed to the huge financial meltdown of 2007-08, that the country is still paying for, is like a bank robber giving a speech about why you shouldn't rob banks, right before he's sentenced. Where was this before the actual crisis happened? And why should anyone with intelligence, who also happens to be sane and sober, all at the same time, listen to Sandy Weill about anything?