Aaron Schwartz: Danny Schwartz & Alison Martino- Rita Hayworth: Mysteries & Scandals

Posted on September 11, 2015 by Rik Schneider

Donald Zamora_ Danny Schwartz & Alison Martino- Rita Hayworth_ Mysteries & Scandals

Source:Donald Zamora– Not sure who’s wedding this is, but it’s not The Love Goddess Rita Hayworth.
Source:The Daily Review 

“Rita Hayworth Mysteries & Scandals Produced by Danny Schwartz & Alison Martino.” Originally from Alison Martino, but this video has since been deleted or blocked on YouTube.

Donald Zamora_ Danny Schwartz & Alison Martino- Rita Hayworth_ Mysteries & Scandals

Source:The Daily Review– The Love Goddess Rita Hayworth.

“We start off learning about her strange relationship with her father before moving on to her break in Hollywood. From here we learn about the various negative things including her affairs and four marriages. From here we learn about various abuses, which led the actress to the bottle and eventually a major health issue. If you’re a fan of the series then you’ll certainly find enough drama here for two episodes. Those interviewed do a very good job explaining people about Hayworth’s rise to fame and the various things that caused her to be a controversial figure.”

From IMDB

Aaron Schwartz_ Rita Hayworth- Mysteries & Scandals

Source:Daniel Aaron Schwartz– The Love Goddess Rita Hayworth.

From Daniel Aaron Schwartz

If you are familiar with the classic movie channels like Get-TV and Movies, which is an actual name of a movie channel, you’re probably pretty familiar with Rita Hayworth. Because they play her movies practically everyday between both channels. Turner Classic Movies and FOX Movie Channel, plays her movies from time to time as well.

Rita, is still one of the most popular actress’s and Hollywood goddess’ of all-time. I imagine her photos kept soldiers going during World War II. Thinking if they make it back from that war they might get to meet her. She was World War II’s favorite pin-up girl at least on the American side.

A couple actress’s as far as how they worked and lived that you could compare with Rita would be Marilyn Monroe and Jayne Mansfield. Who when they were hot were two of the biggest starlets in Hollywood. But also had very complicated and chaotic personal lives. The problem with that is Rita had a long great career. Marilyn and Jayne died at the ages of 36 and 34 respectfully.

Perhaps the best and closest comparison as far as the type of personal life that they lived and the impact that they both made on Hollywood would be Lana Turner. Who drank too much, dated mobsters and could be very unpredictable. But when they were on their game they were both great actress’s.

Rita Hayworth physically reminds me of Raquel Welch. And not just because they’re both red-head, both of Spanish descent, gorgeous, well-built and really cute, but they could entertain. They were also both great entertainers who could act, sing and dance and humor people and in Raquel’s case still doing all of those things.

Rita, wasn’t a flash in the pan, or what could have been if only she did more of this, or that, or took care of herself, or what have you. Here was an actress who came out in the early 1940s and was still a star in the 1970s. Despite all the personal issues she had when she was not working and perhaps even when she was working. And that is really how she should be remembered. As one of the top Hollywood Goddess’s and actress’s of all-time.

Posted in Hollywood Goddess, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NFL Network: America’s Game- The 1985 Chicago Bears

Posted on September 10, 2015 by Ederik Schneider

Source: The Daily Review

When I look at the 1985 Chicago Bears, I see how the 1980s Bears should have been. Dominant defense, strong offensive line with a great running game that can also pass block, but with a healthy Jim McMahon a passing game as well. Pre-1985 or so all you needed was a strong run defense and a team that could score about twenty points a game or less to beat the Bears. They had Walter Payton, Roman Harper and Matt Suhey running the ball and that was basically it for their offense. Especially Payton and if they had a big game running the ball then maybe Jeff Fuller or whoever the quarterback was could hit a few passes to James Scott, or Willy Gault and Payton in the passing game.

The 85 Bears with a healthy McMahon, now had an offense to go with perhaps the best defense that the NFL has ever seen for one season in the 85 Chicago Bears and their 46 Defense. Jimmy Mc, was the difference between the Bears being a good, or very good team and a great dominant team that was perhaps better than any NFL team we’ve ever seen at least in the 1980s. But for that one season the Bears were about as good, or better than any NFL team that the NFL has ever seen. Because they had all of their parts both on defense and on offense. Mike Ditka, running the offense and Buddy Ryan running the defense. With the offense only having to come up with 14-17 points, but that could give you 25-30, even though they didn’t have to do that very often if ever.

The reason why the 1980s Bears only won one Super Bowl and the Bears haven’t won another one since is because they either couldn’t protect Jim McMahon, or he couldn’t protect himself. Or a combination of both, plus he only weighed about 190 pounds. And when you’re 6’1 and you’re playing QB in the NFL and play on Astroturf, you probably need to weigh 200 or more so you’re strong enough to take a beating every week. By when McMahon was healthy and on he was about as good as any QB in the NFL at least in 85. He was athletic and quick and had a strong accurate throwing arm. And he had a great offensive line and running game and you got to see how great the Bears back then could be in 85.

The reason why we can’t talk about the 1980s Bears like we can talk about the 1970s Pittsburgh Steelers, or the 1980s San Francisco 49ers, or even the 1980s Washington Redskins that played in three Super Bowls and won two of them, is because the Bears only did it for one season. And to be that team and a dynasty you must have more than one great season. You have to win multiple Super Bowls in the same decade and have at least one great Super Bowl champion. But in 1985 for one season we got to see how great and NFL team can be on both sides of the ball for 19 games. The 18-1 Chicago Bears that only lost to the Miami Dolphins who were the last NFL franchise to go undefeated in the NFL. And the 85 Bears were real special and still are.

Posted in NFL Greatest, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Active News: ABC World News Tonight, July 10, 1978: The Soviet Union Making Trouble

Posted on September 10, 2015 by Erik Schneider

ABC WTN

Source: Active News: ABC World News Tonight, July 10, 1978: The Soviet Union Making Trouble

The thing that people need to know about Marxist states which is exactly what the Soviet Union of Russia was for over seventy-years before the Soviet Union broke with all the non-ethnic-Russian states breaking away and creating their own independent countries, is that they can consider anything that goes against the state as treason. And anyone that says anything in opposition to the central state, is a treasonous. Which is what the fake trial of Natan Sharansky back in 1978 was which was fake. Here’s a man who was simply calling for human rights in a Marxist state where human rights don’t exist. The only rights that exist in a Marxist state all belong to the central government. Which is supposed to use that power to take care of the people.

In the late 1970s you saw Russia get more aggressive with their foreign policy and make moves in North Africa and Central Asia to protect their interests. Like in Ethiopia to protect a Marxist government there and of course in Afghanistan to install a Marxist government there. While at the same time you saw Russian activists and non-ethnic-Russian activists in Russia like Natan Sharansky speak out in favor of human rights in a country where they simply don’t exist. As well as Russian citizens and non-ethnic-Russian citizens including Russian-Jews fleeing their country in hopes of finding freedom and coming to America so to speak because of that. And part of that had to do with President Jimmy Carter making human rights as part of his foreign policy.

1978 was a big year for tax cuts and a bad year for high taxes. As you saw several states with movements calling for cutting taxes across the board. Even in the so-called Republic of California that has always had high taxes and has been one of the most progressive states in the union when it comes to taxation. And yet they had a movement led by anti-tax advocate Howard Jarvis, who you could call a 1970s Tea Party leader who managed to get on the state ballot there a measure that would cut property taxes across the board. And it passed even though California is one of the biggest Democratic states in the union as far as party registration. With a 2-1 Democrat to Republican party ratio. With Democrats controlling both houses of the State Legislature going back to the 1950s.

Posted in Classic News | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dejan Jankovic: Masters of Cinema (1972) Pia Lindstorm: Interviewing Alfred Hitchcock

Posted on September 9, 2015 by Derik Schneider

Master of Cinema

Source:Dejan Jankovic– The Master Alfred Hitchcock, in 1972.

Source:The Daily Review 

“Alfred Hitchcock (UK, 1899-1980) is undeniably the world’s most famous film director. His name has become synonymous with the cinema, and each new generation takes the same pleasure in rediscovering his films, which are now treasures of our artistic heritage. Hitchcock started out in the British silent cinema of the 1920s, which reached its peak with successful thrillers such as “The Man Who Knew Too Much” (1934), “Sabotage” (1936) and “The Lady Vanishes” (1938). Recognized as a ‘young genius’, Hitchcock moved to Hollywood and set about reinventing cinematic tradition,combining the modern with the classic in films such as “Vertigo” (1957), “North by Northwest” (1959)and “The Birds” (1963). Hitchcock gave talented actors such as James Stewart and Cary Grant the chance to play enduring antiheroes and imprinted the public imagination with the myth of the ‘blonde’, as embodied by Grace Kelly, Kim Novak and Tippi Hedren.”

From Dejan Jankovic

Alfred Hitchcock, is the master of suspense and perhaps the master of entertainment when it comes to movies. Because here’s a director who can scare the hell out of you and make you laugh hysterically in the same scene. North by Northwest from 1959 is probably the best example of this. Where you have a mystery suspense Cold War movie involving espionage and yet it is also a very funny movie. With funny sarcastic lines and characters in each scene of the movie. With people cracking jokes as they’re facing life and death consequences. Cary Grant, with the quip about he has dinner and theater plans right as he’s being kidnapped. And saying how inconvenient the kidnapping is for him.

Not sure you could put together a better comedic team when it comes to actor and director than Cary Grant and Alfred Hitchcock. They were like Magic and Kareem, to use an NBA basketball analogy as far as the professional chemistry that they had together especially when it came to humor. They shared the exact same off the cuff out of nowhere sense of humor where they could both make fun of practically anything. What I love about Hitchcock, is that he gave you best of everything when it came to his movies and put everything that he had to offer on a lot of those movies. North by Northwest, my favorite Hitchcock as well as my favorite movie of all-time, is a perfect example of that.

Hitchcock, gave you mystery, suspense, drama, comedy, action and even horror, in the same movie. And he seemed to be the best at all of these types of films at least when he put them all together. North by Northwest and To Catch a Thief, are both mystery suspense movies and yet they are also both very funny. With funny people and a lot of funny lines, funny scenes and with Cary Grant, comedic improvising. And maybe Hitchcock is where I get a lot of my humor as well. He wanted to scare people and then would use humor and charm, perhaps so he wouldn’t lose his audience, but also because that is exactly how he was personally. If you listen to him narrate his TV series The Alfred Hitchcock Hour you see him almost doing standup as his talks about his shows. Hitchcock, is the master of suspense thriller, but he’s also one of the best comedic directors of all-time as well.

Posted in Classic Hitch, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Keith Hughes: The Balanced Budget Amendment Explained

Posted on September 9, 2015 by Rik Schneider

Keith Hughes

Source:The New Democrat

On its face I guess the Balanced Budget Amendment sounds like a good thing. The problems are several and not just the impracticality of it. That it would take two-thirds of both the House and Senate to pass it and then if Congress were to pass it then you’re looking at thirty-four states having to approve if it as well. But then there’s also the economic problems with it. When the economy is slow, you don’t want to cut infrastructure and Unemployment Insurance. If anything you want to invest more in those programs to put people back to work and help people get back to work faster. When the economy is doing well, that is when you want to keep your deficit and debt down. So when the economy slows down it doesn’t have a high debt and deficit to go with it as well.

One easy thing to get our debt and deficit under control would simply to have a Federal PAYGO law. Pay as you go and under that Congress wouldn’t be able to invest more in, or create a new program anywhere in the government without paying for it. Through either taxes, fees, or cutting other spending to pay for it. And Congress wouldn’t be allowed to cut taxes without paying for that loss in revenue to government as well. You could also do things like not allowing for government to grow faster than the economy when the economy is growing and when you have a large workforce. Reforming the government and budget and having Washington do less and using public assistance to put people to work and become economically independent.

What we really should be doing is start with, “shall do no further harm.” Don’t add to the current debt and deficit by creating higher deficits. And that is where PAYGO comes in. And then go from there like having fewer people in poverty and on public assistance with a stronger economy that is producing not just more jobs, but more good jobs where people don’t also have to have public assistance to support themselves at all. As well as using public assistance to again not just support people in the short-term and put them to work, but to put them to work working good jobs. So they don’t need things like public assistance to support themselves at all. And that gets to things like more education and job training for non-working low-skilled adults and for unemployed workers who need additional skills to get a good job.
Keith Hughes: The Balanced Budget Amendment Explained

Posted in Keith Hughes, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Liberty Pen:John Stossel: U.S. Senator Rand Paul on Cutting Government

Posted on September 8, 2015 by Ederik Schneider

Rand Paul

Source:The New Democrat 

Just from this clip in this video Senator Rand Paul as President Rand Paul, if that ever happens, would cut about one-hundred-forty-six-billion-dollars a year. Which to anyone who lets says makes sixty-thousand-dollars a year and has maybe ten-thousand in the bank, sure! That sounds like a lot of money and would be a lot of money to that person. But welcome to Washington! Where they now speak in terms of hundreds of billions of dollars and now trillions of dollars. Where the Federal budget alone is four-trillion-dollars a year. The budget deficit is somewhere around four-hundred-billion-dollars, which again normally on planet Earth that would sound like a lot of money. But sometimes Washington, especially Congress looks nothing like planet Earth.

The Department’s of Education, Commerce, Labor, Housing and Urban Development, whatever you think of them and other than Commerce, I have real issues with each of them, these departments aren’t the reasons for the budget deficit. And eliminating Federal education funding completely and things like public housing, you could argue which actually hurt the economy and add to the deficit. Because that money keeps low-income people in homes and low-income school districts from having to layoff teachers. The famous bank robber Billy The Kid was once asked the brilliant question of why does he rob banks? Where he gave an obvious answer to that and said, because that’s where the money is.

The main reasons for the budget deficit and national debt right now, have to do with the Great Recession, which we never completely recovered from, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that both went on the national debt card and our looming retirement crisis thanks to the Baby Boomers when it comes to Social Security and Medicare and you add our bloated tax code and the overall military budget as well. I use the Billy The Kid line because what I just laid out is where the money is when it comes to our national deficit and debt. You don’t have a serious budget deficit plan without addressing those areas of the Federal budget. As well as having an economic plan that produces stronger economic growth with more people working with good jobs.

Posted in Liberty Pen, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ABC News: America Held Hostage: The Iran Crisis

Posted on September 8, 2015 by Erik Schneider
ABC News

ABC News

Source: ABC News: America Held Hostage: The Iran Crisis

I never make excuses for terrorists and terrorism and don’t respect anyone who does. But the U.S. Government including the Carter Administration and every single American administration going back to Harry Truman, have some responsibility for this crisis. The Iran Hostage Crisis is the perfect example of the weakness and consequences of backing unpopular authoritarian dictatorships. Whatever you think of the Shah of Iran Mohammed Reza Pahlavi and he did have come progressive qualities liked developing the Iranian economy, he was a brutal dictator to his opposition. Both Islamic Theocrats and more liberal democratic factions in that country.

The Iranian people and the Islamic revolutionaries in that country were simply fed up with the Pahlavi Regime there and wanted a different form of government and a different future there. Which is what and whatever you think of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeni, a different future as an Islamic theocratic dictator of Iran is exactly what he represented for Iran. A different future for that country. The Iranian people essentially replaced one authoritarian dictatorship for another one. Which sort of goes to the judgement of that country and doesn’t make them look very good. But perhaps that’s for a different discussion. The United States, backed the Shah of Iran, because they were worried about what type of government would come to Iran instead and because of Iranian oil and gas.

The United States and the United Kingdom, interfered with the governmental operations of Iran for almost forty-years, because they were worried about the Shah falling and being replaced by an anti-Western authoritarian regime. But that is exactly what they got anyway which was an extreme Far-Right Islamic theocratic government to replace a more moderate and reasonable monarchy that they wanted all along. As America also found out with their backing of authoritarian dictator Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, there serious and deadly consequences that come from backing unpopular dictators. And the way you prevent even worst regimes from coming to power is to work with the people on the ground. Not backing unpopular dictators.

Posted in Iran Hostage Crisis | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Film Archives: C-SPAN’s Booknotes With Brian Lamb: Christopher Hitchens on Hatred, The Left and His Favorite Authors (1993)

Posted on September 7, 2015 by Derik Schneider

 

Source:The New Democrat

I guess Chris Hitchens rouge’s list would be similar to Richard Nixon’s enemies list. Both men have come across a lot of people in life that simply don’t like them and who they don’t like at all. But when you’re a self-described Socialist and you are perhaps even to the left of the British Labour Party, a Democratic Socialist party in Britain where Hitchens is from and you put yourself behind a lot of Far-Left fringe causes like supporting Fidel Castro in the 1960s and calling all sorts of people on the Right like Henry Kissinger and Dick Nixon war criminals, even though you don’t apply that label to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in the 2000s, you’re going to make a lot of enemies.

Chris Hitchens, I guess was always a Democratic Socialist on economic policy and perhaps social issues, except for perhaps civil liberties where he became a Neoconservative hawk in the 2000s and that is where I’m getting to, because he was a strong defender of President George W. Bush’s so-called War on Terror in the 2000s, including the Patriot Act and War in Iraq. You know you’re petty unique when you’re a Socialist on economic policy and a Neoconservative hawk on national security, foreign policy and civil liberties. Chris Hitchens, was more fun for me and fun to talk about and was funnier when he was a committed Socialist across the board.

Bill Clinton and what Hitchens thinks of President Clinton, is the only thing I’m getting out of this interview. Not that it isn’t interesting, but as far as what I want to cover here. Hitchens, accused President Clinton of essentially destroying the welfare state in America. Even though we really never had one, but the signing of the 1996 Welfare to Work Law that required people on Welfare to finish their education and prepare to go to work and go to work. Hitchens uses that to accuse Clinton of essentially ending Welfare and the welfare state in America. And the 1994 Crime Bill is also something that Hitchens uses against Clinton to call him some type of hard-right Conservative.

Posted in Christopher Hitchens, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Liberty Pen: ‘Donald Trump- Then and Now’

Posted on September 7, 2015 by Ederik Schneider

The Donald

Source:Liberty Pen– The one and only Donald J. Trump. We can thank God there is only one of him.

Source:The Daily Review

“Have Donald Trump’s politics really evolved or does he simply value pragmatism over principles? Liberty Pen”

From Liberty Pen

The so-called success and popularity of Donald Trump (and no one knows especially The Donald how long it will last and only time will tell and back to Bob and the whole bit) has to do with dumb voters in America who are simply looking for someone to represent them. And at the very least take them back to a time where the country looked and acted like them.

The Donald, who is more qualified to run for uses car salesman in chief, or narcissist in chief than Commander-in-Chief, sees a huge financial opportunity here to create his new realty show: “Who Wants Donald Trump For President?” Which should also be his campaign theme by the way. Because it would actually be accurate.

You have a group of Middle-America, or Silent Majority voters, old, dumb Anglo-Saxon, Southern/Midwestern Protestant (voters to be more accurate) who are looking for someone who talks like they do. Who doesn’t speak in terms of diversity and that diversity is one of our greatest strengths and immigration is what built America and we need make America great again, as if we’re not currently great and go down the line.

The reason why a Donald Trump can replace a Mitt Romney as Flip Flopper in-chief, is because he’s speaking to voters who don’t bother to look at the records and careers of politicians. Because that would require reading and perhaps having a computer. What they do instead is go off the latest soundbites and speeches.

Anyone who follows and takes American politics seriously, knows that Donald Trump is not only not a politician, because he’s never held office, but if he was a politician he wouldn’t get away with perhaps half of the flip-flops he’s had in his career.

If The Donald could only speak to Americans who take politics seriously like the real activists on both sides who bother to looks at candidates records and see if what they’re saying now matches up with what they said before, The Donald would have to run a completely different campaign. And he also couldn’t run as a Republican because of his long support for Planned Parenthood, the Clinton’s, saying Democrats do a better job of managing the economy and again go down the line.

How else can you explain someone like Donald Trump, who has been multiple choice on most of the major issues in the country, getting away with being about hundred-percent pro-choice on abortion and even in favor of Planned Parenthood, who once supported the flat tax and called Bill Clinton a good if not great president and said that single-payer is the way America should go when it comes to health care reform and these are just a few examples, getting away with changing every single position that he’s had on these issues.

The voters The Donald speaks too don’t bother to look at the records and past policies of their candidates. Because that would require effort and work and perhaps intelligence as well. And besides, they are just soundbite voters who breathe a lot of hot air, even in Minnesota in January.

Posted in Liberty Pen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

All Things Film: Goodfellas- The Making Of A Classic

Posted on September 7, 2015 by Rik Schneider
Paul Servino

Source: All Things Film – Actor Paul Servino

Source: The Daily Review

If you ask the people who were actually part of these Italian crime families in New York in the 1960s and 1970s when Goodfellas takes place, they’ll tell you watching this movie is like watching their lives take place on the big screen. Henry Hill, who was played by Ray Liotta, who a lot of this movie is based on and Henry’s life, would tell you this movie is a true story. And what I would add to that is that it’s a true comedy, or at the very least a true dramatic comedy. Because this is not just perhaps the best Italian Mafia movie of all-time, but I believe also one of the funniest movies of all-time.

I talked a lot about this about the piece about Joe Pesci with David Letterman. But a lot of the humor in this movie is improvisational. Here is this very true story about some really bad people who have all killed a lot of people in their lives. Most of those people being bad people, but still guilty of a lot of murders, but a lot of these characters live such crazy lives and do a lot of dangerous things. And I believe humor is a way that these real-life characters use to get through each day and simply survive. Otherwise they might go crazy always worrying about if your best friend just poisoned your drink, or food trying to whack you, or something. Or is this the day the FBI puts you way, or whatever the case.

And I think Martin Scorsese and his crew meaning his cast especially Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci and Ray Liotta, who are all great improvisational comedic actors to begin with all saw about the characters that they’re playing. And decide to play their characters as if they’re playing wise assess as well as wise guys and played them like they’re crazy and hysterically funny. If you listen to Ray Liotta narrate the movie, there is one dry joke after another in how he narrates the movie. Like the way he talks about how you cut up a dead body and does it in such a casual way. And to be honest with you I’m not sure if Bob De Niro and Joe Pesci especially when they’re together, are capable of playing a character in a completely straight way. They’re humor always comes out.

Goodfellas, is about the crazy and at times at least the hysterically funny lives of people who work in and out of the Italian Mafia in New York in the 1970s. And even though it is a true story and a dramatic story, it’s still one of the funniest movies ever. And I believe the funniest Mafia movie of all-time. Just because of the characters that these actors play and the actors who play them. Who are all great improvisational comedic actors. And then you throw in the great soundtrack with Eric Clapton, Tony Bennet, Johnny Mathis, The Crystals and many others and you’re talking about really I believe the perfect dramatic comedy movie.
All Things Film: Goodfellas- The Making of a Classic

Posted in Organized Crime, The Daily Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment