Heritage Foundation: Jennifer Marshall: War on Poverty at 50

Source:The New Democrat

There have been several posts about the War on Poverty already this week on this blog. And that is because and not to sound repetitive, but 2014 is the 50th Anniversary of President Lyndon Johnson declaring War on Poverty this week. And with poverty still be such a big issue in this country still having roughly twice as much people as compared with the rest of the developed world, now is the perfect time look at what works and what doesn’t when addressing poverty in this country today.

The information, evidence and facts are already in how to address poverty in this country. If the goal is simply to move people out of poverty and into the middle class. Having achieved economic freedom with the tools and income to be able to take care of themselves. Instead of saying that "we have a population in the country with practically nothing and what we are going to do is give these people very little in helping them pay their bills". And then make the claim they no longer live in poverty because if you add up all of their public cash assistance, they no longer are officially in poverty.

Again we know what works in addressing poverty in America. Yes cash assistance, but short-term so people on poverty know they need to get their acts together so to speak. And improve their employment outlook by finishing their education. And prepare themselves to enter and stay in the workforce with a good full-time job. If you are actually talking about moving people out of poverty and into the middle class.

What doesn’t work as far as moving people out of poverty which is indefinite cash assistance. Coming with no opportunities for these workers to finish their education. Nothing be expected of them as far as improving themselves so they can take care of themselves. Giving them more money if they have additional kids while still on Welfare. Or giving them more money not working than what they could make working. Even if it is a low-skilled low-income job.

The New Deal and Great Society were designed for the most part with some exceptions, to give the less-fortunate some cash assistance to help them pay some of their bills. But without a lot of resources and encouragement or requirements for these people to improve themselves. And look for work or go back to work. And yes we have had some bad economic times over the last fifty years. But in good economic times you still need good skills to get a good job that you are qualified for. Which is why education and job training are two of the big keys in defeating poverty in this country.

Patrick J. Buchanan: 'Is America Going to Pot?'

Source:The New Democrat

All the evidence you need to know that Liberals are winning the culture war and paternalists on the Left and Right are losing the culture, just look at these personal freedom issues and civil liberties. And the so-called War on Drugs is a perfect example of that with all these states either having legalized marijuana or decriminalized marijuana and legalizing medical marijuana. But if that is not enough for you go to one of the generals of the Culture War coming from the Far-Right in Patrick Buchanan essentially admitting that marijuana is just more evidence of the moral decline of America.

As Pat Buchanan said on his blog today and I have his link up, it started with alcohol prohibition, then it went to the War on Drugs and outlawing other so-called narcotics that were popular especially with the Baby Boom Generation of the 1960s, to making it more difficult to smoke tobacco in America. And I actually agree with some of the tobacco restrictions. I’m not in favor of tobacco prohibition either, but the idea that someone should be able to force others to breathe in their tobacco in tight spaces, you are violating the person who doesn’t smoke the right to breathe clean air.

But as a country we are moving from an era where Americans believed government knows best about a lot of key areas of Americans lives both personally and economically, to an era where Americans saying, “no thanks Uncle Sam, we can manage our own lives. Thanks anyway.” I rarely agree with Pat Buchanan on anything. If he told me it was hot and sunny in Miami, Florida in July, I would get a second weather report from South Florida to make sure. But he’s right on the Culture War that it is almost to the point that the Right no longer wants to fight it. I already knew this, but to hear it from the other side is just more evidence that this is actually happening.

GI Bomber: MLB 1993- ESPN Wednesday Night Baseball- Texas Rangers @ Anaheim Angels: 9/17/1993

Source:GI Bomber- Texas Rangers pitcher Nolan Ryan, pitching against the Anaheim Angels in 1993 and being rewarded by the Angels fans for his great career.

Source:The New Democrat 

"The ESPN telecast started in the 3rd inning. I was there. It took me 20 years to find out this game broadcast. History at his best. 62.000 fans on a friday nigtht : we didn't know that was going to be the LAST strikeout of  Nolan Ryan's career (at min 30.40 of this video).  And how bout the nice move of Rangers manager Kevin Kennedy, who sends Ryan to the mound in the bottom of the 8th, only to take him out after the warm up tosses, for one of the greatest standing ovation I've ever seen (Around 1h.23min of this video)  Greatest memory I have in sports." 

From Gi Bomber 

Nolan Ryan, what forty-six years old and still a very effective starting pitcher at this point and pitching his last game ver. Capping off a great twenty-five year career. 

Not saying Nolan Ryan was the best pitcher, or the most dominant pitcher of all-time, but when he was on, he was those things, at least as far as what I’ve seen. He was generally very good, but not always great and have some games where he would become somewhat hittable and give up big hits and home runs. 

When Nolan Ryan was on, I believe he was the most dominant pitcher I’ve ever seen and the most dominant for the longest time. A twenty-five year, you know and how many bad seasons did he have.

I just wish his last game was against a better team and it had something to do with who was going to win the AL West in 1993. But the Rangers who did have a good season in 93, finished eight games out of first place behind the Chicago White Sox. 

And the Anaheim Angels, finished tied for fifth place in the AL West and only winning seventy-one games. And in the Rangers case 1993 is pre-wildcard, so you had to win your division to make the playoffs in the American League or National League. And the Rangers being this far out of first place at this point of the season, meant this was their last game.

Commentary Magazine: Peter Wehner: 'A Conservative Vision of Government'

Source:The New Democrat 

I’m going to write what a conservative government should look like at least in mind and go to the Barry Goldwater school of conservatism to do this. Because this is the most accurate way to explain what conservatism is and what conservative government looks like. And no, this won’t be a libertarian government or a theocratic government. Christian or otherwise. But how Classical Conservatives would govern if they had all the power. Keep in mind, I’m a Liberal so this is not what my form of government would look like. Even though I agree and respect a lot of the conservative principles of limited government. But this is how a Barry Goldwater conservative government would look like.

I’ve always said that Conservatives shouldn’t be so much anti-government, but anti-big government. And what is big government, well that is the story for another piece, but the idea of big government is government especially the Federal Government trying to do too much. And interfering into the personal and economic affairs of the individual. The whole Barry Goldwater line of I don’t want big government in my boardroom, bedroom or classroom. So what should government be doing, be limited to only the things that we need government to do.

And of course you may say can I be less specific, well I can. But it means you want government doing the things for the people who people can’t do for themselves, or do as well. To give you examples. You want government doing things like law enforcement, national security, foreign policy, handling interstate crimes, regulating interstate commerce and these things would apply to the Federal Government. What you want the states to do is law enforcement within their state, regulating business’s in their state, education and applying private market principles to all of these governmental affairs. And goes to things like accountability.

Part of the problem with right-wing rhetoric whether it is conservative or libertarian today, is even though they make it very clear what they do not want government to do anything. Especially the Federal Government, they don’t seem to be able to communicate what they want government to do. Especially the Federal Government so when they talk about cutting taxes and government spending, they don’t seem to know what they want to cut and how much revenue they need government to raised to perform the public services that they want government to do. But with a conservative vision of government and now you know exactly what Conservatives want from government, then you’ll know what taxes you need to have and what levels to raise the revenue for the government you need and nothing more.

Source:Harvard University

The Washington Post: E.J. Dionne: 'The Resurgent Progressives, Return of The New Left'

Source:The New Democrat

I agree with most of what EJ Dionne said in his column today. I thought his best line was “that to have a vibrant middle you need a vibrant Left and Right countering each other. To give the middle and again I’m talking about the American political spectrum if you are having trouble following along, you need both a strong Left and Right for the middle to be able to pick and choose what they like about both sides and put them into their own politics and how they look at the issues.

In the 112th Congress we were in a right-wing state of mind politically especially as it related to the economy. With the Right always on the offensive with the Left always on the defensive defending things they care about. And then settling for the best among bad alternatives to compromise with House Republicans. The 2011 debt ceiling known as the Budget Control Act that was all about budget cuts and no new revenue. Not even from tax reform is a perfect example of that.

So that is why I as a center-left Liberal Democrat, a real Liberal, I am not worried about the Progressives, or Social Democrats on the Far-Left lets say coming out strong in 2014. And pushing for things like. a minimum wage increase that I support if it comes with a tax break for small employers. Or talking about what I call the income gap that others call income inequality, because these issues give Liberal Democrats such as myself a big opportunity to talk about things like more job training.

Real educational opportunities for our low-skilled workforce so they can get themselves the skills that they need to live in economic freedom and be able to get themselves off of public assistance all together. Which is exactly what will happened if our low-skilled workers and low-skilled unemployed were able to do that. And they wouldn’t need public assistance at all which is the right way to make savings in public assistance. By having fewer Americans who actually need it.

I’m not worried about the Progressive-Left or the more socialist minded Far-Left emerging strong in 2014. Because unless they come from very strong Democratic or Progressive leaning House districts, or states, they won’t be on the ballot for the most part in 2014. And the center-left Liberal Democrats will be in those districts in the states. And these campaigns will give Democrats an opportunity and choices and decisions to make. About where we want to go as a party in the next few years. Remain as a center-left liberal party, or move further to the Left and become more of a social democratic party.

TV Days: 'President John F. Kennedy Explains The Need For Medicare'

Source:TV Days- President John F. Kennedy.

Source:The New Democrat

One of the advantages of Medicare is that when someone's spouse gets hurt Medicare is there to make sure that all senior citizens at least will get the affordable health care that they need. So they do not have to go bankrupt in order to cover their health care bills. I just wish they went further in the mid 1960s and allowed for everyone if they choose to pay into Medicare. And use it as their health insurance as well if they chose to. And even let the states set up their own Medicare system so the program doesn’t become too centralized. Had they done that we wouldn’t have the expensive healthcare system that we do today. Medicare was never called Seniorcare or SenioCitizenCare, it was called Medicare. Which means medical care for people and that doesn’t have to be senior citizens necessarily. Medicare could have been the so-called public option that was debated in 2009-10, but started in 1965. And we would still have a private health insurance as well as health care today. But where more Americans would have more choice in how they paid for their health care.   

Source:TV Days

TV Days: 'John F. Kennedy vs. Ronald Reagan- On Medicare'

Source:TV Days- President John F. Kennedy, 35th POTUS.

Source: The New Democrat 

"Does Medicare = Socialized Medicine? - John F. Kennedy vs Ronald Reagan

This video contains segments of Ronald Reagan's 1961 audio LP recording made for the American Medical Association's "Operation Coffee Cup," which was a campaign against proposed senior citizen healthcare legislation called Medicare. This video also contains segments of President John F. Kennedy speaking of the real need for Medicare senior citizen health insurance."

From TV Days

I have a lot of respect for Ronald Reagan, but he was simply dead wrong about Medicare. And by the time he was President of the United States at least, he was even a supporter of Medicare and spoke in favor of it. Were there members of Congress looking to nationalize the health insurance system, if not the entire health care system in the 1960s, I’m sure there were. But that is not what President Kennedy and then later President Lyndon Johnson were proposing. And what President Johnson then later got passed out of Congress in 1964, what they got out of Congress was guaranteed health insurance for senior citizens and the poor. Which is Medicare and Medicaid and I wish they went further and allowed for all Americans above poverty to pay into Medicare if they chose to. In other words the public option, but they didn’t even go that far.