Modern Lonely TV: Tories- The Course of Margaret Thatcher (2001)

Source:Modern Lonely TV.

Source:The New Democrat

I’m not an expert on British politics obviously, but I do follow their politics and government similar to how British political junkies follow American politics. And what the British Labour Party went through from 1997 after they just lost the U.K. Government and were back in the opposition for the first time since 1979 and really didn’t start recovering until 2008 or 2009 when David Cameron became their leader in opposition, looks very similar to me how the American Republican Party looked in 1961. After they just lost the White House and were now not only the opposition party in America, but the minority party in both chambers of Congress with small minorities at that.

It took the Republican Party in the 1960s really 6-8 years before they started recovering from the 1960 presidential loss with Richard Nixon. They didn’t have that one voice that could unite the whole party together. The Conservatives with the Northeastern Progressives and their growing religious conservative base in the South. The British Conservatives in the late 1990s and 2000s were much worst off actually than the 1960s Republicans. The American and British systems of government are obviously very different. Where in America you can still be in power even without the White House. By controlling either the Senate or House in Congress and having a say in the national agenda.

In Britain winner takes all. The majority party in the House of Commons in Parliament decides who the Prime Minister is and can form the U.K. Government. And because the Conservatives lost in 2001 and 2005 and the fact that Britain doesn’t have what America has in mid-term elections, they were out of power the whole time from 1997 until May of 2010. Thirteen-years and were stuck in the minority in Parliament and as the opposition party as well. And they pre-David Cameron never had that one leader that could bring the whole party together and convince their country that the Conservatives should be back in charge in London and back in government.

The Conservatives were in charge in Britain for eighteen-years from 1979-97. That is a long time to have all the power in one country, especially a country of sixty-million or so. And always having to be responsible for governing the country and having to deal with all the bad and good on your own. And I think they just burned out and the British people wanted a different voice and a different vision in how to lead their country. Which is what Tony Blair represented as New Labour as someone who would use government to try to empower people. And not try to run everything in the country through government. And Tony Blair was able to lead Britain for ten-years with that message.

Ben Shapiro: ‘Why Jews Vote Leftist’

Source:Truth Revolt- right-wing political columnist Ben Shapiro.

Source:The New Democrat 

“Ben Shapiro takes a clear-eyed look at why American Jews vote for the anti-Israel Left.” 

From Ben Shapiro

The two things that I agree with Ben Shapiro on is that American-Jews tend to more identify with their Jewish blood, meaning ethnicity than their Jewish religion. And that a lot of Americans-Jews aren’t Jewish in a religious sense. A lot of Jews are either secular or practice another religion. I have a friend who is half Jewish and half Irish and raised Catholic like a lot of Irish-Americans.

And the other thing being that Jews like a lot of other Americans ethnics (at least of European descent) tend to identify more with their ethnicity than their religion. Italian-Americans, Irish-Americans, German-Americans, Greek-Americans, Polish-Americans (to use as examples) all fall into this category and all have their own American holiday celebrating their ethnicity and culture.

Now why do American Jews tend to vote Democratic and part of that huge Democratic melting pot that Democrats have to have to win the White House every four years? Part of it I believe has to do with history. A Democratic President FDR saved the Europeans-Jews in World War II after a lot of them were murdered by the Nazis in the Holocaust.

Another one being that the Republican Party is still tied very tightly with the Far-Right that tends to be Southern and rural based that tends to be Anglo-Saxon and anti-Semitic. The Far-Left in the Democratic Party also tends to be anti-Semitic. The difference being that Democrats don’t need the Far-Left at all in order to win.

If the Republican Party were ever able to dump their Far-Right (which includes part of the Tea Party) they could appeal to American-Jews. Because Jews in America tend to like or are at least opened to things like economic freedom, lower taxes and regulations, strong national defense, at least outside of the Northeast. The Northeast is somewhat dominated by the Far-Left at least when it comes to Jewish voters. But the rest of the country could be decent territory for the GOP in appealing to American-Jews as long as they aren’t seen as anti-Semitic and inline with the Far-Right of the GOP on social issues.

Hoover Institution: Uncommon Knowledge: P.J. O'Rourke Reflects on Life in The Sixties to Today

Source:The New Democrat

The Baby Boom is sort of tough for me to blog about as someone who was born in the mid-1970s the tail end of Generation X. And also as someone whose parents were born in the 1930s and are part of he Silent Generation. So I don’t really have much to go on other than my two of my uncles who were both born in 1944 who I didn’t see very often growing up and who I’m not close with today. Other than Boomers that I’ve talked to, but mostly as an adult. So what I have to go on for the most part is history. Which is generally a great reference to go on even if that is all you have.

Boomer stereotypes are people who were Hippies and looking to escape the 1950s and when that finally happened in college in the 1960s they just sort of exploded and freaked out on marijuana trips. Wait, that’s not so much a stereotype, but is actually true. But there’s more to that because this is a generation that is one of the most productive that America has ever produced whether they are on the Far-Left or Far-Right or somewhere in between. If you looked at what they produced for this country in the 1960s, 70s, 80s, 90s and even today. They are a healthy generation and they are living working longer than any generation we’ve ever produced. Because they want to and are still very good at what they do.

There’s an old American saying that when you are young you are more open to alternative views and lifestyles that they establishment sees as immoral and weird. But as you get older and mature you get more educated and realize that you have responsibilities for yourself and your family and people you work with or for and people who work for you. And there’s a limit to how much of a rebel that you can be. The Boomers were Hippies in the 1960s and 70s, but they also grew up and have become perhaps the most educated, productive, tolerant and open-minded generation that we’ve ever produced. And I give them a lot of credit for that.

The American Mind: Compassionate Conservatism

Source:The New Democrat

Before I almost sound like I’m speaking in favor of George W. Bush a man I was proud to vote against twice for president, I just want to say that if I was a Conservative and if I was a Conservative it would have to be the real thing and more Rand Paul/Barry Goldwater and not a Neoconservative or someone on the Religious-Right, but if I was actually a Conservative I would be insulted by the term compassionate conservative. Why, well think about it. What does that imply? That Conservatives aren’t compassionate, they could care less about people who suffer. “But I’m a compassionate conservative and I’m different. I care about people who suffer, I just want to spend a lot less money helping people who suffer.”

Now to President Bush’s credit what he wanted to do was in sense move the Republican Party past Reagan/Gingrich. A party that was seen as mean and not caring at all for the suffering. Which is sort of ironic because when Newt Gingrich was in the U.S. House and even as Speaker, politically he would’ve been a labeled in the 1980s and 1990s had the term been around as a compassionate conservative. Back then he believed in federal funding for education and job training for the unemployed and low-skilled uneducated adults on Welfare. He was just a lot more fiscally conservative than G.W. Bush as President. And believe the Federal Government should pay for what it does. And that these services should be run by state and local governments.

What President Bush was trying to do but communicated it poorly was to say that government has a role in helping people in poverty and other forms of suffering. But that government especially the Federal Government can go it alone and do everything themselves. That the faith community and non-profits, charities and other private institutions also have a role in helping the less-fortunate in society. And that the Feds can help with financial grants to these private groups to help people meet their basic needs. But that they can also help with things like job training so people in these circumstances can finish their education and get out of poverty. Without 9/11 I think that is the President Bush we would’ve seen in the first term.

Burns 1876: 'Western Boot Fitting'- Cowgirl Boots and Riding Boots

Source:Burns 1876- Western boot fitting for women, from Burns 1876.

Source:The New Democrat

"Visit us Burns 1876 Burns Saddlery & Burns Cowboy Shop, offers quality western wear, boots, hats, saddles, tack, western home decor. Durable custom indian blanket auto seat covers and our custom leather & repair shop where you can get specialized products made to order."

From Burns 1876

The right cowgirl boots are essential for cowgirls. The most important part probably being coming from someone who doesn’t live out west or in rural America and never has, but that they have to be functional. Women need to be able to move and move well in them. They need to be comfortable enough to do that so their feet aren’t always sore and getting blisters.

But cowgirl boots need to look good and be stylish at the same time. They need to go with the cowgirls jeans and other western wear that she would wear. And the style part is also important because guys cowboys and otherwise love the look of cowgirls. That is sexy cowgirls who look good and are well-built and look sexy in their cowgirl outfits. And I think this something that these cowgirls in this video more than understand.

The Federalist: David Corbin & Matt Parks: Liberty & The Bill of Rights

Source:The New Democrat

In that entire piece by David Corbin and Matt Parks I found one thing that I agree with them on. Having to do with two of our constitutional rights that have been weaken since the so-called War on Terror was declared by President Bush in 2001. The First Amendment dealing with Freedom of Press, which is critical in any liberal democracy. And the Fourth Amendment which protects our Right to Privacy and perhaps our Fifth Amendment which protects our property rights. All of these rights are critical in any liberal democracy. But since the declaration of the War on Terror and the Bush Administration and Obama Administration has been so intelligence hungry and believe they can at the very least stretch our constitutional rights to protect our security.

With the Bush Administration it was Judy Miller in 2002-03 and believe another reporter from The New York Times. And the Bush Administration believing these reporters had information about suspected terrorists that they weren’t releasing and threatened them with prison time if they didn’t give up their sources and information. The Obama Administration had similar stories involving Fox News and the AP in the last few years. The Neoconservatives have won the War on Terror at least the debate inside of the U.S. Government about what is more important in America. Our security or our liberty and security has been winning ever since 2001. And we had a neoconservative Republican Administration that enforced their neoconservative War on Terror from 2001-09. And now a progressive Democratic Administration conducting the same war with the same policies as the last.

As the great libertarian philosopher Milton Friedman who preferred to be viewed as a Liberal once said, you can’t have security without liberty. And I would add and vice-versa that you have to have both. If you’re not secure you don’t have freedom. But without liberty you might be protected from terrorists, foreign invaders and domestic criminals, but now you have to worry about your own government and what they might do to you. Because you don’t have liberty and a basic set of constitutional rights to protect you. Because now you live in a police state. You live in Soviet Russia and perhaps even Putin Russia, or Syria or some other hell hole on Earth like that. Which is not what America is about and perhaps what our last two president’s don’t understand

AEI Ideas: James Pethokoukis: Reward Work,

Source:The New Democrat

I like James Pethokoukis ideas that he listed as far as not only the Earned Income Tax Credit which along with Welfare to Work are two of the best anti-poverty programs ever created, but also as far as expanding the EITC for low-income workers. I would do that and add things like health insurance, education, job training, savings, retirement and even housing to the EITC. So these workers could actually put some money away and finish their education so they can leave their low-income low-benefit job and get themselves a good job. And leave poverty for the middle class.

If you want fewer unemployed adults in America whether they are educated or not and at least since the Great Recession there’s a mixture of both types of unemployed worker, working simply has to pay more than not working. Which is the whole point of the EITC. Money that low-income workers get back so they don’t have to pay federal income taxes. So that means increasing the minimum wage to the point that a minimum wage worker makes more money and earns that money, than someone not working at all and collecting Welfare Insurance. Because they simply do not have enough skills to get a good job.

So minimum wage 10-12 buck and hour with a thirty-percent tax break for employers. And index the minimum wage for inflation so it keeps up with inflation. And apply today’s federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour to people on Welfare and index that for inflation as well. So the person on Welfare even if they have kids would get the message that they could get more money working than not working. As well as get assistance in order to finish their education and get themselves a good job. And be able to leave public assistance all together.