Jeans Leder Nass: Wetlook Women- Women Getting Wet While Fully Clothed

Source:Jeans Leder Nass- Nadja from Jeans Leder Nass, in her wetlook Wrangler's, after Mel splashed Champaign on her. 

Source:The Action Blog

"Nadja and Mel CC. Two girls love Proseco and wetlook."

Source:Jeans Leder Nass- Mel on the phone.

From Jeans Leder Nass

Source:Jeans Leder Nass- Mel, from Jeans Leder Nass, in her wetlook Wrangler's in the tub.

There's someone or people with a channel on YouTube from Germany ( or Deutschland ) called Jeans Leder Nass. And they shoot women ( with a camera and video ) getting wet while they're fully clothed and a lot of times doing these things in cold weather.

They did one scene with two women drinking wine and champagne and then they would spray each other with their drinks. They did another video with a woman taking a shower in a denim suit. Blue Wranglers both jacket and pants, as well as boots. Other videos of women talking baths and getting all soaped up while they're still fully dressed.

What I've seen from these videos is the producers of them and the performers in them, have clear denim and boots fetishes. And love moving around and doing everything in their skin-tight denim jeans, including taking baths, showers, swimming, water fights, etc. Not that I'm complaining because as a guy who is a fan of what I would call soft-core porn, these women are all very attractive and very well-built and love showing themselves off including their tight bodies in skin-tight outfits, moving around and doing things that get them noticed.

Firing Line With William F. Buckley: Barry Goldwater- The Future of Conservatism (1966)

Source: Firing Line With William F Buckley- Mr. Conservative, U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater, R. Arizona.

Source:The New Democrat

"Firing Line with William F. Buckley Jr.: The Future of Conservatism. Episode 016, Recorded on June 9, 1966. Guest: Barry M. (Barry Morris) Goldwater.

From Firing Line With William F. Buckley 

"Under Arizona law, Mr. Goldwater had had to give up his Senate seat to run for the Presidency, and so at the moment he was a private citizen-though still, even after his disastrous defeat, the acknowledged leader of the conservative wing of the Republican Party. This rich conversation ranges from the specific and immediate (Medicare, the prospects for the 1968 election) to the general (Has too much power accrued to the Presidency? How can it be curbed?). BG: "I think the country has become pretty much a two-term country. So I think it's pretty much up to the President. If he decides to run again, the chances of the Republicans beating him are not excellent. However, if he keeps on with his lack of success in Vietnam, the downfall of NATO, ... the growing cost of living in our country, the chances get better. But we don't like to win on those kinds of chances." 

From the Hoover Institution

Source:National Review- Firing Line With William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater (1966)

When you have a discussion with someone like Mr. Conservative Barry Goldwater, who admittedly was the most conservative member of Congress, when he was in the Senate from 1953-65 and then later from 1969-87, you are talking about what some would call conservative libertarianism today or constitutional conservatism. Which is someone who bases their politics around the U.S. Constitution and conserving that document and all of the individual rights that come with the Constitution, including the protections that we get from government. And William F. Buckley was from that same branch on the Right in America, the Center-Right in the Republican Party. 

What Buckley and Goldwater were talking about here was how Conservatives could succeed not just in the Republican Party, but in American politics. And were talking about a movement where Republicans would run as Republicans, as Center-Right Conservative Republicans. Not as light-Democrats and as Progressive Republicans, but as Center-Right, Constitutional Conservative Republicans. And this political movement led to people like Ronald Reagan and other Conservatives in America getting elected in the future past 1966, as Conservative Republicans. Not as light-Democrats or Progressive Republicans. 

Dick Morris Reports: 'How a Communist Almost Became President'

Source:Dick Morris Reports- The National Enquirer's Chief Political Analyst Dick Morris.

Source: The New Democrat

"How A Communist Almost Became President Of The US! Dick Morris TV: Lunch ALERT!"

From Dick Morris Reports or The National Enquirer. Because based on the accuracy of his reporting, it could be from either. LOL

You can see why Dick Morris is the chief political analyst for The National Enquirer. Hard to imagine how someone could be more qualified to be the chief political analyst for The Enquirer, as Dick Morris. Hard to imagine someone who is looser with the truth than Dick Morris and if anything views the truth as their enemy, than Dick Morris and The National Enquirer. To take Morris seriously about anything relating to politics and current affairs, you would have to be someone who uses The Onion as their main source for news and information.

Source: Encyclopedia Britannica- Democratic Socialist Henry A. Wallace

Henry Wallace was no Communist. He was softer on the Cold War and fighting communism and other authoritarian regimes around the world than Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, but that could be said about a lot of people even on the Right who were Nationalists and believed that it wasn't America's business to fight communism and authoritarianism around the world and we should just worry about what goes on in America. Which is the same foreign policy viewpoint that President Donald Trump and his followers have. Whatever you think of President Trump and his followers, they're sure as hell no Communists, but right-wing Nationalists instead.

Henry Wallace was the George McGovern or Bernie Sanders of his time. Very democratic ( small d ) with his politics, but social democratic/democratic socialist with his politics. Big believer in big centralized big government and that it was the job of the national government to see to it that everyone's needs were met in society, but not someone looking to nationalize American industries and to wipeout private media especially opposition media that opposes the socialist administration. ( If we were to ever have Socialists running the government in America )

The only things that Dick Morris gets correct in his little video is that Henry Wallace worked for President Franklin Roosevelt. First as Secretary of Agriculture, later Secretary of Commerce, and later Vice President of the United States. As well as being the Progressive Party's nominee for President in 1948. And Morris is right that the Progressive Party were Far-Left and socialist even and perhaps even had some Communists in it and I would add not very progressive at all.

But Wallace was no Communist and to label Wallace a Communist, would mean that right-wing Nationalists, who were also soft when it came to communism and authoritarianism, because they believe it wasn't America's business to be involved in other countries as far as what form of government they have, were then and now also Communists.

Night of The Trailers: Chapter Two (1979) Starring James Caan & Marsha Mason

Source: Night of The Trailers- George Schneider ( played by James Caan ) with a big call-

Source: The New Democrat

Chapter Two is becoming one of my favorite movies for several reasons. It stars one of my favorite actors in James Caan and one of my favorite actresses Marsha Mason. I'm also a big fan of Joe Bologna and Valerie Harper. But also because it's one of those comedies that is also serious. It's basically a dramatic comedy with some soap opera aspects in it. It's one of those movies with a lot smart wisecracks but done in a way to get people to think and not just make fun of the situation or people involved, but using critical humor in a very intelligent way. It's a Neal Simon movie, so you should expect humor like that in it.

Source: Alamy Stock Photo- Hollywood Goddess Marsha Mason & actor James Caan

The whole plot and when the movie comes out, where it takes place, it's just all great. 1978-79 New York ( depending on when the movie was shot and made ) when divorce and getting restarted romantically in America was becoming a major and mainstream issue for lots of Americans. Where either Americans are getting divorced like in Jennie MacLaine's case ( played by Marsha Mason ) or losing the love of your life to a premature death in George Schneider's case ( played by James Caan ) and then trying to figure out how to live single again and what life was like before you were married and then trying to figure out if you want to get involved romantically again.

Source: Alamy Stock Photo- Hollywood Goddess Marsha Mason & actor James Caan

Do you even want to date again and get seriously involved with one person, or even just date several people with several first dates. With your friends putting pressure on you to get back in the dating game ( so to speak ) because they don't want you to be lonely. Or perhaps as well don't want to be friends with someone who isn't seeing anyone, or is even dating. Chapter Two has all of that. Two people who were once married and are now single, but for different reasons, who are put together by their best friends.

Source: The Film Experience- Hollywood Goddess Marsha Mason & actor James Caan

Just the whole scene where Jennie and George start dating again and going out with several people ( not all at once ) is funny and very well-done. Jennie goes out with a guy who his 6'9. Which must of been like blue jay on a date with a golden retriever. The size and height difference is undeniable and unavoidable. Marsha Mason in real-life and in that movie is only 5'2. Which is one of the reasons why she's so adorable, along with her personality, baby face, and still is. She might have felt the need to stand on a stool when trying to talk to this 6'9 basketball player, just so she could see him and he could hear her. George goes out with a woman who literally wears an electric dress that flashes. Must of been like dating a scoreboard at a football game.

But then the movie gets real good and real when George is put up by his brother of all people, to call and talk to Jennie. They have like three funny phone calls before they even have a pre-date ( as they called it ) where George goes over to Jennie's apartment just so they can meet and look at each other and talk for a while, which is where George proposes. And if you're thinking he proposes to marry her, you would be wrong and understandably so, but he proposes to take her out on an actual date. The first hour of this movie is a very good romantic  comedy with a lot of great writing and wisecracks. The second hour after they're married and get back from their honeymoon is very dramatic and heavily emotional.

George has never gotten over losing his first wife and taking his second wife Jennie to the same place he took his first wife for their honeymoon brings back all sorts of memories that his first wife is gone and that he's never gotten over that and has never been able to express how he feels about losing her. And takes all of that anger and frustration out on Jennie. Basically acts like she's in his way and doesn't want her around. Very mean and cruel to her, but not in the sense that he's violent or throws a lot of horrible insults at her, but just cold and standoffish, aloof in his demeanor with her. But she doesn't want to lose him and tries to get him to open up. George is an author and he gets his current book done and realizes that he still loves his second wife Jennie and that is where he opens up comes back to life and they live happily ever after. ( As the cliche goes )

This is not a cookie-cutter romantic comedy that became common in the 1990s which still hasn't gone away where you have a movie that is built around the personalities of the two hot young actors in the movie. The lead actor and actress, where the movie is built around sitcom one-liners and pop culture catch phrases. Chapter Two is an original comedy because it's creative and clever. With one of the best actors who has ever lived in James Caan and one of the best actresses at least of her generation in Marsha Mason, from one of the best screenplay writers who has ever lived in Neil Simon. Which makes it a great romantic comedy.
Source:Night of The Trailers

John Birch Society: John F. McManus- ‘Martin Luther King Doesn’t Deserve Adulation’

Source:Inside JBS- Dr. Martin L. King at the 1963 March on Washington-

Source:The New Democrat

“Earlier this month, a flood of reminders about the death of Martin Luther King (shown on right) 50 years ago arrived, as all elements of the mass media told Americans about the anniversary of a gunman killing this paragon of virtue and bravery on April 4, 1968. The reports insisted that King was the nation’s most eminent apostle of nonviolence, a heroic advocate of peace in our nation’s racially turbulent era, and an exponent of all virtues. The truth is that King was a highly flawed individual whose actual strategy for change wasn’t peace. The strategy he relied on consisted mainly of a process he had learned from known communists, whose indisputable goal was the destruction of our nation.”

From The New American 

"I Have a Dream, Martin Luther King Jr. Full Speech Best Audio

This is an audio recording of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. giving the "I Have a Dream" speech during the Civil Rights rally on the steps at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. on August 28, 1963." 

Source:Classical Media- From Dr. Martin L. King's I Have a Dream speech.

From Classical Media

This is how the Far-Right in America who perhaps today would be called the Alt-Right, what I and others call the New-Right of Far-Right right-wing Nationalists and tribalist’s in America who view themselves as the real Americans and everyone else who doesn’t share their cultural, religious, and nationalist views, as the Un-Americans and people who are immoral and in some cases should be in jail, like a lot of Donald Trump’s supporters do, this is how they feel about the great and unfortunately late Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King.

J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI believed the same things about Dr. King, or that’s what they claimed that Dr. King’s movement was being infiltrated by Communists as part of Communist Party USA. That this wasn’t about an equal and civil rights movement for African-Americans, but about some Communist conspiracy to take over the U.S. Government and replace it with a Communist State. That they were supporters of Fidel Castro, instead of young Americans of all racial and ethnic backgrounds, who were simply trying to defeat racism under law. And create a society where all Americans constitutional rights are enforced equally regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender.

The Far-Right in America and that includes groups like The John Birch Society and the militant violent factions of that movement like the Ku Klux Klan, are smart enough today that if the debate becomes about whether non-European-Americans should have the same rights as European-Americans, of course they will lose that debate and were already starting to lose that debate by the mid 1960s.

But if they can make the debate about good guys meaning them the real Americans, against criminals and terrorists and Communists who are supposed to be the civil rights marchers and activists, they might win that debate and seem like the reasonable people in that debate. And argue, “that the civil rights activists don’t want civil rights and equal rights, they want communism instead. So of course the FBI and other law enforcement agencies should monitor and arrest these people and even use violence agains them, because they’re Communists.”

This line of Far-Right thinking ( if you want to be generous and call it thinking ) has already been debunked. There were Communists that were part of the civil rights movement, but they were just Communist ideologues, not activists looking to overthrow the U.S. Government, but instead people who had Communist beliefs but were marching for civil rights for African-Americans and other minorities in America who were discriminated against. To say that the civil rights movement was really a Communist movement in disguise, is an old Joe McCarthy tactic from the 1950s known as guilt by association. “That if you know Communists, or have even had one conversation with them, you must be a Communist yourself.” Which is simply a form of right-wing fascism.

AHC: Mafia's Greatest Hits- Sam Giancana

Source:AHC- U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) I believe in 1960.

Source:The New Democrat 

"Mafia´s Greatest Hits Sam Giancana" 

From AHC

Sam Giancana to me at least was a real life Hollywood gangster. He is the gangster that we see in a lot of the Hollywood Italian Mafia movies the gangster in charge who made all the decisions as it related to his crime family the one guy you couldn't afford to have on your case because it meant your life would literally be on the line. Whether you were a gangster yourself who even worked for his crime family, an associate who did business with his crime family. 

And of course any law enforcement agent of investigator who was trying to bring Giancana and his family down. Or a politician who was somewhat crooked at least in the sense that they relied on organize crime family power and influence to get reelected or elected to the next office.

The Kennedy Family especially Joe sr. is a perfect example of that. Joe's son Jack, doesn't get elected President in 1960 had he not just won Illinois but Chicago as well. Which is a big reason why Sam Giancana and his crime family hated the Kennedy Administration so much when they came into power in the early 1960s, especially Attorney General Bob Kennedy but his brother President Jack Kennedy, because Giancana felt betrayed by The Kennedy's when the U.S. Justice Department started their war on organized crime led by Bobby Kennedy as Attorney General in the early 1960s. Since Giancana had a major role in seeing that Jack Kennedy won Chicago and Illinois in 1960. He felt the The Kennedy's owed him and would say out of his way and let him run his crime business.

Sam Giancana was more than just a Hollywood gangster in the sense that he looked like the gangster that we tend to see in gangster movies. Similar to Benjamin Bugsy Siegel the famous Jewish gangster who had a big role in Las Vegas being what it is today, Giancana had friends in Hollywood. Frank Sinatra, Joe Kennedy who was a major investor in Hollywood films. 

Giancana liked being around entertainers especially Hollywood entertainers and wanted to party with them and hang out with them. As ruthless a killer that Giancana was Phyllis McGuire who was a Hollywood actress, was one of Giancana's girlfriends. She was a gorgeous Hollywood actress and Giancana was a gangster and a killer, a little man in stature and yet they fell for each other.

Sam Giancana and his crime family, also represent the best and perhaps only legitimate alternative theory to Lee H. Oswald being the lone killer and conspirator in the JFK assassination. Because they had the access, influence, and all the motives in the world to assassinate President Kennedy because of what President Kennedy's Justice Department led by Attorney General Robert Kennedy, were doing to bring down organized crime in America with Giancana being one of their major targets. 

Giancana was no John Gotti. So much smarter and more powerful than Gotti. Giancana was a survivor who never served much time at all in prison and had one of the longest and most powerful carriers in organized crime.

CNN: Race For The White House: Richard Nixon vs John Kennedy (1960)

Source: CNN- The 1960 Democratic National Convention. 

Source:The New Democrat 

"CNN Race for the White House 1of6 Nixon vs JFK" 

From CHARLEMAGNE DUMDUM CALOTES

1960 between Richard Nixon and John Kennedy, was one of the last presidential elections in America that was about ideas, vision, experience, and qualifications. Instead of having two unlikable candidates who know they're unlikable and unpopular and use that to defeat their opponents. Going back to really 1996 and perhaps 1992, American presidential elections have been about destroying the other side instead of winning the election. And telling American voters, "we know you don't like us, but you should hate our opponents more and this is why." Where winning presidential elections has become about and has been about for a generation now negative adverting and campaigning. The campaign that runs the best negative ads and makes the best negative arguments agains their opponent, tends to win.

Instead of winning elections because your opponent is more qualified, has better experience, better ideas, better vision, more forward looking, more likable as an individual. In 1960 America had two great choices. Two very bright well-educated presidential candidates, who both wanted to be President and both knew why. Both had something positive to offer Americans. And of course there was negative advertising and campaigning between Dick Nixon and Jack Kennedy. but that wasn't what their campaigns was about.

Vice President Nixon offered American four more years of what was already working from the Eisenhower Administration. Senator Kennedy was offering Americans a new generation of leadership and new way of thinking. That the U.S. Government needed to new leadership to deal with the challenges of the 1960s. Americans had a real choice of either sticking with what was working ( according to the Eisenhower Administration ) or move in a different direction and deal with issues like civil rights for all Americans, health care for senior citizens, and other issues.

1960 to me is what presidential elections should be about, at least within the two-party system. Putting the two best candidates that America has to offer, or at least the best Democrat and Republican against each other. With both candidates offering why they should be President, instead of arguing why their opponent shouldn't be President. And because America is so divided not just politically, but culturally, and now even ethnically and racially, having a positive presidential election doesn't seem possible anymore. At least not with the two-party system.