Source:The New Democrat
I guess Alex Kreit is saying that “we shouldn’t be a drug war victim unlike the millions of Americans who are already drug victims”. Since this wasteful authoritarian paternalistic bogus War on Drugs was created by the Nixon Administration in 1971. And has been enforced by every other American president both Republican and Democratic since some forty-three years after this so-called war on what people put into their own bodies has been launched.
| Drug War Opponents |
Source:The New Democrat
Cal Thomas standing up for traditional Anglo-Saxon America when Anglo-Saxons and to me that is people of British descent were essentially running the country both culturally and politically. People on the religious and cultural right in America who tend to be of Anglo-Saxon descent, but not all of them and Protestant as well essentially believe that America has been going down hill since the Baby Boomers came of age in the 1960s.
Pre-1960s America was a collectivist country culturally as far as how Americans tended to live. Dad worked, Mom stayed at home and essentially raised the kids, but not as a single mom because Dad paid the bills and saw his kids early in the morning, at night and on the weekends. African-Americans were second-class citizens and essentially around to serve Caucasian-Americans. Gays were locked in the closet and boys were raised to be live this way. And girls were raised to serve their men.
That all changed in the 1960s with the Baby Boom Generation and the hippy movement where millions of Americans figured out that they didn’t have to live in the social and cultural box that their parents and grandparents created for them. And decided that is not how they wanted to live and rebelled and set out to live their own lives the way they wanted to. And the traditional values coalition paint back to the 1960s as the time when America started going downhill. And elements of the Tea Party has been trying to take America back to the 1950s ever since culturally and even though law.
Source:The Young Turks– Cenk Uygur is not exactly sanest guy you’ll ever hear. Or maybe that’s just all the caffeine doing the talking for him.
“Bill O’Reilly is pegging Laura Ingraham’s opinion of using mass deportation to address illegal immigration as a “draconian” idea that would “destroy the Republican Party.”
The heated debate arose on Wednesday after O’Reilly asked on his Fox News show, “The O’Reilly Factor,” what Ingraham would do to address the tens of thousands of children and adults that have been apprehended trying to cross the U.S-Mexico border.
“No. 1, first thing you do is start deporting people, not by the hundreds, not by the dozens, by the thousands,” the conservative radio talk show host said.”* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.”
From The Young Turks
I disagree with Cenk Uygur on at least one thing here. Bill O’Reilly is not that much of a radical, or Nationalist on immigration, either for political reasons, or in general. He is actually in favor of some type of legal status for the 10-15 million undocumented immigrants in this country. Cenk seems to think that is just for political reasons. Fine, but O’Reilly makes a good point here that he shared with Laura Ingraham who was a roommate of Michele Bachmann and Ann Coulter at the nuthouse. (Ha, ha) When O’Reilly said that “if the GOP takes this draconian approach towards illegal immigrants, they’re done”. O’Reilly because he’s read the polls and sees the changing demographics.
Today’s Republican Party is an Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, male party that is located primarily in the South and to a certain extent in the Midwest and rural areas in the Mountain West. With the libertarian-right that doesn’t have much influence over the Republican Leadership when it comes to policy at least as it relates to social issues, immigration and foreign policy.
The Republican Party is not even a Caucasian party even though Anglo-Saxons are Caucasian. But an Anglo-Saxon party with other non-Protestant Caucasian ethnics tending to be Democrats or Independents.
The Nationalists in the Republican Party want to keep the Republican Party the way it is at all costs even if that means everyone else becoming Democrats. So instead of looking for ways to reach out to their non-traditional base of the party and the elected officials in their back pockets look for ways to prevent non-Republicans from voting, or even coming into the country, bogus (on a great day) Voter ID laws and mass deportations are a couple of examples of that.
If the Republican Leadership tries to do what Laura Ingraham suggested that they do in this video and they do it before the elections this year, we’ll see Democrats win back the House and hold the Senate. Why, because that would bring the Latin-American vote out for Democrats who normally do not vote in large numbers in mid-terms voting for Democrats. It would probably bring African-Americans out to vote as well again another population that doesn’t tend to vote heavy in mid-terms.
Bill O’Reilly is smart enough to understand that, Laura Ingraham is off of her medication apparently and doesn’t get it.
Source:The New Democrat
Just to be serious for a minute and then go to being an asshole. Today’s Progressives (lets say) especially MSNBC make the mistake in how they judge Congress. They also make the mistake in what they call Congress. They call it the Republican Congress even though Republicans only control the lower house of Congress. And they refer or our national legislature as the Congress and Senate. As if they are two different institutions apparently unaware that the Senate is not only part of Congress. But the official and actual upper chamber of Congress. Unlike many other developed countries.
But the mistake that Cenk Uygur makes in this video even though he seems to be aware that the Senate is actually part of Congress along with the House of Representatives is how he judges Congress. You shouldn’t judge Congress and that is what both chambers pass together after they work out the final bill, by how much legislation they pass. That would be like judging a cook by how many meals they prepare. Or a pitcher by how many pitches they throw. Or a teacher by how many students they teach.
You should judge Congress by what actual legislation they pass. The quality of legislation they pass, not the quantity of legislation they pass. A pitcher could throw 110 pitches in a game, but if he gives up six runs on ten hits and they are all earned. Or a cook makes a hundred meals one night and half of their customers comes down with food poisoning. Or a teacher with a hundred students, but half of them can’t read at grade level and the teacher is an English teacher, well these people aren’t doing their jobs even if they are doing a lot of work. They aren’t doing a good job the job they were hired for.
The productivity of this Congress a divided Congress with a Republican House and a Democratic Senate (what the American people voted for) is as slow as a mule in a NASCAR race. They simply aren’t acting on things that they should be doing. Like fixing the highway trust fund and passing a highway bill to use as an example. But it isn’t a bad Congress because they aren’t passing a lot of legislation. But what they are actually doing. Are they passing good legislation or not. Are they addressing the concerns of the country, or not and this Congress is clearly failing at that.
Source:The New Democrat
The death nail and actual fall of liberalism once you start talking about nationalizing the media. Because there is nothing liberal about state-control and monopoly of how the people get their media and other information. You have to know if you don’t already that Free Speech and Freedom of the Press are liberal values and ideas. Its authoritarians either far-left like in Cuba and Venezuela, or the far-right in the Middle East that want to control the media. So they can control what their people hear and not get hurt by that information.
I understand the power of big media especially once it becomes too big and too powerful and starts looking like a monopoly. But that is what anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws are for. Once a company becomes too big as far as how much control they have over the private market the answer is to break them up. The answer is competition, not going from a private monopoly and creating some new state monopoly where now the people in official power can control how we get our information. And even protecting themselves from negative information that can hurt them.
Source:The New Democrat
I’m getting tired of hearing people say when I tell them or explain in my blogs about what liberalism really is which is about individual rights, individual freedom both personal and economic. Rule of law, constitutional law, equal rights, creating opportunity, education, responsibility, freedom is worth defending even the costs of defending it. Tolerance, open to different views and evidence with the willingness to change. These are the true liberal values and why the ideology was founded and what it was founded on. And I’m getting tired of hearing people say “that is not what liberalism is about now”.
Values of an ideology doesn’t change. Otherwise it is no longer that ideology especially if now looks a hell of a lot different and that ideology. It becomes something different that should have a different name and label. Only people change and when people who have different ideological values, but claim to be part of a another ideology then from one they claim to be associated with like a Socialist or some other type of collectivist on the Left claiming to be a Liberal, then the ideology loses it’s meaning and becomes something else that should have a different label to it.
The MSNBC talk lineup and their audience (even as small as it is) to go along with all of the so-called liberal or even so-called progressive blogs and other publications like The Nation, AlterNet, Salon the modern New Republic (lets call it) are not liberal media outlets. They call themselves liberal except for maybe the AlterNet, TruthDig and TruthOut, which is has the guts to use the socialist label. Because they are afraid of what comes from the political stereotypes and political stigma with being associated with Socialists and socialism.
There is nothing liberal about fascism. Liberals wrote the First Amendment and created Free Speech for crying out loud. But if you listen to these collectivists and communitarians on the Left they seem to think “fascism is what is needed to create their progressive utopia”. Or whatever except they don’t call it fascism when they try to get a right-wing radio host or columnist shutdown even through government force when they say things that goes against their values. Especially as it relates to women’s issues as we saw with Rush Limbaugh in 2012 and George Will in 2014.
There is nothing liberal about nationalizing the news media even so the progressive message can get out. Which was proposed by Fred Jerome in Salon back in February or January. There is nothing liberal about proposing to nationalize Google even “for the better good of the general public”. As Richard Eskow proposed to do last week in the AlterNet. See what is supposed to pass as liberalism today is not just about the welfare state and a collectivist state with no poor or rich where we are all the same. Because government would be so big to make sure that everyone has what they need to live well.
So-called modern liberalism has also become about the nanny state and telling people what is good for them even if it means protecting people from themselves. As it has to do with junk food, bike helmets, soft drinks, how we are able to talk to each other and even what we say in the media. So-called modern liberalism which again is not liberalism, but something different has become about using the state meaning the national government to look after the general welfare of people for them. Which includes both economic policy and how we live our personal lives as well. “That freedom is dangerous and must be regulated to the point if there is any freedom so people don’t make bad choices and hurt themselves.
Liberalism is about the liberal values that I mentioned early on. And you might think that sounds like libertarianism. Well I agree and great ideologies tend to overlap because they have values that are so great that other people want to share them as well. But Liberals aren’t anti-government that at least the modern Libertarian tends to sound like they are. Liberals just want a limited government to do for the people what we can’t do for ourselves. Which is a topic for a different blog, but it is smaller than what these modern collectivists on the Left want and a little bigger than what Conservative Libertarians advocate for now.
Source:The New Democrat
This was the one thing that was missing from Richard Nixon’s career that I believe could’ve made his career even better and more successful. And he did by most standards had a very successful career in public service even with the way it ended. Especially considering where he came from and how far he went and how much he accomplished. But I believe the one thing that was missing about his career was candor about himself and letting people into the personal world of Richard Nixon.
I believe he had two great lines from this speech that were lessons and advice that he gave the American people based on his own personal experience. “You’ll never know what it is like to be on the highest mountain until you’ve been in the deepest valley”. Meaning you’ll never know what it is like on top until you’ve been at the bottom. Because success isn’t given to anyone and before you achieve success there are certain steps you have to take first and even failures so you know how to improve and get to the top.
The other great line I believe from President Nixon’s speech is. “Don’t ever get discouraged and ever be petty. Because others may hate you, but they only win when you hate them and then you destroy yourself”. Meaning people may hate or seriously dislike you, but that shouldn’t bother you as long as you are doing your best and are a good person. So what if some schmuck hates you especially if you are a good productive person. What the hell they know and they may hate you for being what they are not which is a decent productive successful person.
The main problem that Dick Nixon had that I believed destroyed what otherwise would’ve been a great presidency what that he didn’t live the advice that he gave at his farewell address. He didn’t take his own advice and let people who did hate him and he had perhaps more than his share of haters from his days in Congress to being Vice President of the United States and out of office all together from 1961-69 and he let those haters destroy him by feeling the need and urge to destroy them even by using illegal means. And it cost him his presidency.
Source:The New Democrat
Tina Turner saying that “it is time to move on and that I wish you the best. But I’m done and moving on with my life while I still can. Because I can’t take the fighting no more and want to have a life for myself”. The ultimate breakup song from the ultimate singer and musical artist at least when it comes to singing from her heart and from real life. And not needing to be able to think of things to say, or make things up. Because Tina sings from real experiences as this song was about.
Source:The New Democrat
A lot things about Mr. Smith Goes to Washington are simply inaccurate. Rarely do you see even fifty senators on floor of the U.S. Senate let alone a hundred. Or back when this movie came out in 1939 we had ninety-six U.S. Senators because we had forty-eight states back then. The only time ever do you see a full Senate is when they are voting on amendments to bills or nominations. Or final passage of bills, or when there is some special ceremony going on in the chamber. And if you watch this movie you see basically a full Senate whenever it is in session.
But what Mr. Smith did very well (and I’m talking about the movie) is the writing and the speeches. The writing looked like stuff they got from the Founding Fathers (the first Liberals of America) when Jimmy Stewart’s character Senator Jeff Smith is talking about the Constitution. And liberty and freedom for all. The line that is in the title of this post. “Liberty is too precious of a thing to be buried in text books”. You probably would never see a line in a movie like that today. For one it would sound corny to Hollywood filmmakers. But also Hollywood has moved so far left they would probably see that line as conservative or libertarian or something and doesn’t deserve mentioning.
But that is a great line and one of the best ever written with real meaning that should never be forgotten. Because once the concept of liberty is forgotten we then become slaves of either the state, or private organizations that want to control us and use us to make profits off of us. That liberty can never be forgotten as long as we want to be free people with the right to chart our own courses in life and live up to our own choices and responsibilities and not be under the control of anyone else.
It would be impossible to write out and cover the entire 1960s decade in one blog post. For one I wasn’t born in the decade and didn’t live in the decade at any point. I was born in 1975 which makes feel a little better because I don’t seem as old. So everything I know about the 1960s is what I’ve read, people who lived though the decade that I’ve talked to and movies and documentaries that I’ve seen about the decade. Another reason would be that it was simply such and important and incredible decade that I simply couldn’t cover it in one post. Unless I wanted to spend the rest of my life on it.
But what I can give you in even one blog post is a summary of the highlights and lowlights of this monumental decade. A decade that saw so much horrible violence with a U.S. President being assassinated and just five years after that in 1968 the greatest leader we’ve ever had when it comes to equal constitutional rights Dr. Martin King being assassinated as well. And of course a U.S. Senator running for president who wanted to end the horrible Vietnam War which I’ll get into later being assassinated as well.
If you think that is too much horror for one decade, take a breath because there is plenty more. The race riots having to do with poverty, racism and how police mistreated African-Americans especially in low-income communities. And of course having to do with the assassinations of Dr. King and counter-violence to the violence that was brought down on African-Americans and others who were simply marching for their freedom and constitutional rights. And of course the Vietnam War where hundreds of thousands of Americans were killed for fighting someone else’s war.
But if I have you now in a depression, this might get you out of it. The 1960s was a great decade of social liberalization. Which is another away of saying social liberation. Notice how liberalization, liberation and liberal all sound similar. And sound nothing like socialist or collectivist or statist or paternalistic or communitarian. The 1960s was a great decade of social liberalization for people of all races, ethnicities, genders and even sexualities. A decade where more Americans than ever at least up to that point now felt the freedom to be individuals and Americans and live their own lives the way they wanted to.
Now of course social liberalization meaning social freedom has its limits when it doesn’t come with responsibility. Which is what the right-wing especially the religious-right who fought back starting in the late 1960s and the 1970s and Tea Party of the late 1960s and 1970s what Richard Nixon called the ‘Silent Majority’ have gone out of their way to point out. But this was a decade where millions of Americans now felt the freedom to be themselves and live their own individual lives. And didn’t feel the need to live the way their parents or grandparents lived.
But the 1960s was a decade thanks to the Baby Boomers and the hippy movement where all sorts of Americans including women, Gays, African-Americans, Latin-Americans and others now felt the freedom to be themselves. And no longer felt the need to have to live in some social box that was created by their parents and grandparents and the right-wing in America about what it means to be a real American. Because now they felt the freedom to make those decisions for themselves.
 |
| 1960s |
Derik Schneider
Ederik Schneider
Erik Schneider
FredSchneiderUS
kireschneider
The Daily Review
Rik Schneider
TheActionBlogUSA
The New Democrat
With Barry W. Lynn
Current affairs, news, politics, sports, entertainment
Trying to find out how things work...
Current affairs, news, politics, sports, entertainment
Sexy professional adults in action. Everything from people in Hollywood to other professions like music, biker and western culture, to fashion.
Blog About Everything That is Interesting
Football Stadium Digest covers major stories and events in the planning, construction and operations of NCAA and professional NFL football stadiums across the United States and Canada.
How Science and Reason Lead Humanity Toward Truth, Justice, and Freedom
Where Suspense Lives!
Current affairs, news, politics, sports, entertainment
thriller,spy,action,drama,detective,medical thriller,horror,mystery and paranormal movies
TGM - Challenge The Status Quo!
The Lighter Side of Life
A study and appreciation of the films and legacy of Alfred Hitchcock (with occasional detours to other classic films).
Just another WordPress.com site
Current affairs, news, politics, sports, entertainment
Author comments
Observation et Analyse Indépendante pour le Proche Orient
The New Democrat 
You must be logged in to post a comment.