Fran Drescher: Funny Women of a Certain Age

Posted on October 24, 2025 by kireschneider

“Funny Women of a Certain Age featuring Fran Drescher, Carole Montgomery, Luenell, Lynne Koplitz, Kerri Louise, and Vanessa Hollingshead is now available on Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV, YouTube, Google Play, Dish, and more.”

Source:Comedy Dynamics with a look at comedian Fran Drescher.

From Comedy Dynamics

“Funny Women of a Certain Age featuring Fran Drescher, Carole Montgomery, Luenell, Lynne Koplitz, Kerri Louise, and Vanessa Hollingshead is now available on Amazon Prime Video, Apple TV, YouTube, Google Play, Dish, and more.”

Source:Comedy Dynamics with a look at comedian Fran Drescher.

From Comedy Dynamics

So I’m guessing this Fran Drescher stand up performance is from late 2017, or early 2018, because she says she just turned 60 in 1 of these videos. But she was born September 30, 1957 (not that I’m her personal biographer or anything) and it’s now October, 2025. So she’s 68 today. Now, if anyone is still awake from that, I’ll give both of you the rest of this story.

Not that I would ever guess that Fran Drescher is 68 today. She’s just too, damn cute, with those eyes, big baby cheeks, and smile. I think even her Jewish, Queens, New York accent, is very cute. Even though some people might think it’s as annoying as spam calls at dinner time. I think she sounds like a sweetheart with it. And part of her Jewish Queens background, is how she got the lead in Nanny. So it obviously paid off for her. (Not that I’m trying to sound too ethnic here)

Speaking of very funny women… the hilarious and adorable Joan Collins, who made at least 1 appearance on Nanny with Fran Drescher, is known for the quote:

“Age is just a number… unless you are a bottle of wine”. I guess an old bottle of wine, wouldn’t be a fine bottle of wine. But that’s besides the point.

And my point is not it’s “not how old you are, but how you feel”. That cliche is the great, great, grandfather of “only time will tell” and it’s not accurate either. My point and I think it’s Joan Collins point as well (even though I’ve never even spoke to the woman, let alone know here) is that it’s not about years that you lived, but your quality of life. And besides, a crazy person could think they can walk on air, even at 85 years old, or jump out of a window, and fly away. But it’s about how you are mentally and physically, how productive and happy you are, regardless of how old you are.

There are 19 year olds who are currently in prison for murder and looking at as many as 30 years, maybe even the rest of their lives, in prison. Are you going to try to convince me that their quality of life and that they should feel better about their life, then a beautiful, adorable, 68 year old woman, who is a professional comedian and a very successful 1 at that? You wouldn’t try to convince me that the 19 year old in prison is having a better life… unless you were currently high, drunk, insane, current suffering from brain damage that was never even diagnosed. Or, you drugged me, or spiked my glass of ice tea, with entire bottle of scotch, without me knowing about it.

And as far as Fran Drescher having a gay husband: I would bet anything (that someone else has) that Fran didn’t send her husband into homosexuality. Or broke into his closet, tore it down even, and through him out of it.

But Fran Drescher’s marriage to a gay man does remind me a series of Seinfeld episodes back in the 1990s, when George (played by Jason Alexander) is engaged to marry his girlfriend. And she calls it off, splits up with him and they run into each other later on, only this time she now has a girlfriend.

Now, George Constanza could send Marilyn Monroe, Sophia Loren, Jaclyn Smith… into homosexuality. 3 of the most beautiful and cutest, most feminine women, in the history of Planet Earth. But have them date George Constanza for a while, they would not just give up men, but they would become so gay that they would all try out to play for the New York Giants football team and all make the team as linebackers, not kickers, or cheerleaders. They would make former Clinton Administration Attorney General Janet Reno, look like Miss America, in comparison, after a few dates with Mr. Constanza.

I mean George is like:

5’6-5’7, 190-200 pounds,

balding,

can’t see his fingers in front of his face, without his glasses,

unemployed, still living with his aging parents in his mid 30s…

he couldn’t give a damn about anyone other than himself, even for a million dollars. George, is the perfect candidate to send an attractive, feminine woman, into lesbianism.

But Fran Drescher:

5’7 and built,

beautiful, baby face brunette,

who is very sweet and funny, as well as successful.

I think her ex-husband, was living out-of-a-closet and pretending to be straight man’s, man, (meant in the straight man’s sense) to keep his secret safe.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in Life, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Columbo: Lovely But Lethal (1973) Review of Vera Miles

Posted on October 23, 2025 by Ederik Schneider

“Lovely but Lethal” is a Season 3, Episode 1 episode of Columbo that features Vera Miles as a beauty industry executive, Vincent Price as her rival, and Martin Sheen as a young chemist. Reviews describe it as a solid but not top-tier episode, highlighting Miles’ performance as memorable and praising the supporting cast, even while acknowledging that the plot formula isn’t as strong as other episodes.”

Source:IMDB with a look at the beautiful and adorable Vera Miles. 

From IMDB

As my colleague Fred Schneider write about this episode back in 2023:

“I got into this episode of the Columbo series 4-5 years ago and was blown away by the fact that Vera Miles was on it. And thanks to Sundance and COZI-TV, probably seen this film 10 times now and even have it on DVD. Only 70 minutes, not a dull moment in it and that plus Vera’s presence and her being so cute and beautiful on it and just comes off as a total sweetheart on it, (at least for a two-time murderer) I can see it over and over again, to the point that I wanted to write about it.”

From The New Democrat

I’m just going to give you a little of my own background information about this episode, first and then I’ll give you my response to what Schlock Horror (who’ll you will hear from later on) said about this episode on YouTube.

I first started watching Columbo in my mid-teens and when I was just out of high school in the mid-1990s. A&E back in the 1990s had this series on as part of the Mystery Matinee series almost everyday, with other shows like Rockford Files, McMillan & Wife, McCloud, and perhaps a few others.

And now that classic TV and movies has gone through resurgence that last 10-15 years, with cable networks not just going 24 hours of day of classic TV reruns and even modern TV reruns, but doing marathons of a specific type of programming, like mystery TV, Columbo, which is still 1 of the most popular TV cop detective shows, ever… this series is now on 3-4 cable networks, almost everyday now. If it’s not on COZI-TV, you can find it on Hallmark Mystery, or Sundance, METV had for a longtime as well.

To make a long story shorter… I saw the Lovely But Lethal episode from COZI-TV, 10-11 days ago. Similar with Fred, I’ve seen this particular episode, at least 10 times the last 7-8 years. Vera Miles is just that good and that great to look at and to listen to. A better looking Lana Turner, who was born to do soap operas and mystery TV, because of her great appearance, but her ability to verbal jab and comedic timing, and keep her counterpart on the run and even guessing as far as what she’s doing and how that person might stop her.

And I’m with IMDB on this… Lovely But Lethal is in my personal top 10 as far as my favorite Columbo episodes. But not in the top 3, or even top 5:

The Jack Cassidy episodes (which I wrote last December on The New Democrat)

as well as Lee Grant’s episode, (which Kire Schneider wrote about on The New Democrat)

Robert Conrad’s episode (Exercise in Fatality) and the 2 Robert Culp episodes, I think are better than Lovely By Lethal. But what Schlock Horror said about this episode, I think goes too far:

“We’re (finally) back with the weakest season opener of the ’70s.”

Source:Schlock Horror with a look at Lovely But Lethal.

From Schlock Horror

And I think Nicholas Schroeder had the perfect response to Schlock Horror:

“Completely baffled by the dislike of Vera Mills: I think she’s deliciously evil in this–and she’s supposed to be shallow. She’s just an aging, mercenary beauty queen. This episode is also loaded with humor.”

So Schlock Horror’s main criticism of Lovely But Lethal episode, is centered around Vivica Scott. (Played by Vera Miles) He’s says there isn’t any depth to her and we don’t really learn anything about her. He says she’s not all that dastardly or that sympathetic. “She’s just kind of there”.

So my response to Schlock Horror, is… pre-1974, Columbo episodes were only 70 minutes on NBC. Sure, that’s more than a Rockford Files episodes, which were about 45 minutes. (Not including commercials) But when the network is giving you about 100 minutes, (give or take) including commercials, to put together what’s essentially a short film, do you really want them to spend a good part of their limited time talking about:

what it was like growing up in Oklahoma in the 1930s and 40s?

Or, what it was like breaking into the Los Angeles cosmetics industry in the 1950s?

How about Viveca Scott explaining what life was like without TV when she was growing up in Oklahoma?

Anyone who is familiar with the Columbo series, knows this is not A&E Biography. It’s a police detective show. All they’re going to give you is a little background as far as what the murderer does for a living, the pressures that person is under, why they killed the person that they did, and the actual homicide itself. You are not going to see Peter Graves or Harry Smith, Jack Whitaker (3 A&E Biography hosts) talk about the life and career of Vivica Scott in the Los Angeles cosmetics industry, before she murdered 1 of her cosmetics designers, Carl Lessing (played by Martin Sheen) in 1973.

And the thing about Vincent Price… I agree he’s great at playing the bad guy. He can be both very evil and hilariously funny at the same time. Which is an impressive talent, especially in Hollywood. But replace Vera Miles with Price and it’s no longer “Lovely But Lethal”. The episode would be more like: “Tall, Gruesome, and Lethal”. With of course Vincent Price playing the lead, because who better, (at least from Price’s generation) at scaring the hell out of people… while making them laugh at the same time, then Vincent Price

But as Fred got into on his post, Vera Miles is perfect for Lovely But Lethal, because that’s exactly what she was. She’s 44 at this point and still as cute as a doll and beautiful as most young women back then, even in Los Angeles. So who more perfect to play a cosmetics company owner, who is struggling financially and needs a new hit product, or risk having to sell off her business, then Vera Miles.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in Classic Movies, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sam Harris: Reflections On Christopher Hitchens

Posted on October 22, 2025 by Derik Schneider

“Sam Harris is the author of five New York Times best sellers. His books include The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation, The Moral Landscape, Free Will, Lying, Waking Up, and Islam and the Future of Tolerance (with Maajid Nawaz). The End of Faith won the 2005 PEN Award for Nonfiction. His writing and public lectures cover a wide range of topics—neuroscience, moral philosophy, religion, meditation practice, human violence, rationality—but generally focus on how a growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live.

Sam’s work has been published in more than 20 languages and has been discussed in The New York Times, Time, Scientific American, Nature, Rolling Stone, and many other publications. He has written for The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Economist, The Times (London), The Boston Globe, The Atlantic, Nature, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), The Annals of Neurology, among others. He also hosts the Making Sense Podcast, which was selected by Apple as one of the “iTunes Best” and has won a Webby Award for best podcast in the Science & Education category.

Sam received a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from UCLA. He has also practiced meditation for more than 30 years and has studied with many Tibetan, Indian, Burmese, and Western meditation teachers, both in the United States and abroad. Sam has created the Waking Up app for anyone who wants to learn to meditate in a modern, scientific context.”

Source:Sam Harris talking about Chris Hitchens.

From Sam Harris

After you see this, you’ll know why Sam Harris likes Chris Hitchens so much:

“Author Christopher Hitchens discusses his book “God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything” as a part of the Authors@Google series. The author of Why Orwell Matters and Letters to a Young Contrarian, Christopher Hitchens is a Vanity Fair contributing editor, a Slate columnist, and a regular contributor to The Atlantic Monthly. He has also written for The Nation, Granta, Harper’s, The Washington Post, and is a frequent television and radio guest. Born in England, Hitchens was educated at Balliol College, Oxford, where he received a degree in philosophy, politics, and economics. He now lives in Washington, D.C., and he became a U.S. citizen in 2007. This event took place on August 16, 2007 at Google headquarters in Mountain View, CA.”

From Talks At Google

I was hoping to hear from Sam Harris what he thought about Christopher Hitchens and any impact (if any) that Hitchens might have had on his life, career, etc. But it was just a 4 minute video (which is very short for YouTube) and they just talked about the last day that they spent together.

So, we’re all Agnostics at The New Democrat. And that’s a big reason why we’re Liberals. Not that all Liberals are Agnostics, but a big part of liberalism has to do with facts, evidence, and reason, not faith.

If you think about it, liberalism might the least romantic and idealistic philosophy, in the world. And probably the most successful (up until Donald J. Trump) political philosophy, at least in the western and developed world, because it’s all about facts, evidence, and reason, as the core of the philosophy. And of course we use those values to argue for individual rights, personal autonomy, property rights, checks and balances, the rule of law, equal rights and protections, etc.

Liberals don’t tell people “it’s going to get better”. We would say: “If we do this, that, and the other thing, and stop doing these things, life will get better”. But we don’t say “it will get all get better. You’ll see”. If we don’t believe that, we’re not going to say that.

So I tell you all of this, because 1 of the goals for The New Democrat is to send as many people as possible, into a severe, deep, sleep. Just not while they’re driving, or flying a plane, trying to run a government… trying to do anything that requires being intelligent and responsible.

Actually, I share some of the liberal values of liberalism, to tell you why we respect the Chris Hitchens, the Sam Harris’s, the Bill Maher’s, the Richard Dawkins’s, the Michael Schnurer’s,,, all men of reason, facts, and evidence and, not faith. I’m sure there are plenty of women who share these values as well. I just can’t happen to name 1 right now.

And another liberal value, is consistency. Actually, credibility is another liberal value as well. You get credibility as a communicator, by being consistent… being factually accurate helps as well. Chris Hitchens, wasn’t an Atheist because he was a militant Communist, or something, who believed in State Atheism. Or 1 of what The New Democrat would call New Atheists from the 2010s, who are really just anti-Christians… people who bash and put down Christianity, especially Anglo-Saxon-Christianity. Or some hippie/hipster who claimed to be spiritualist, but not religious. (Even though religion and spirituality are siblings of each other)

Hitchens and Sam Harris are both Atheists, because they don’t believe in God and both oppose religion, period. And it’s not just the so-called Christian Right (who are about as Christian as ants are elephants, in too many cases) but fundamentalists from eastern religions, like Islamists and the Islamist regimes in the Middle East and their Islamist, terrorist networks.

Bill Maher got in trouble with the far-left back in 2014-15, because he spoke out against Islamism and Islam in general. But Islamists and fundamentalist Christians, especially Anglo-Saxon-Protestants, share a lot of the same cultural values, when it comes to women’s place in the world, their opposition to personal freedom, free speech, and individualism. And had Maher given the same speech about fundamentalism Anglo-Saxon-Evangelicalism, as he gave about Islamism and Islam in general, the far-left would’ve treated Maher as their “progressive hero”.

I didn’t agree with Chris Hitchens on everything. He was a self-described Democratic Socialist, at least up until 9/11, 2001. And perhaps remained a Socialist on economic policy for the rest of his life. And after 9/11, Hitchens became more of a Neoconservative when it came to foreign policy and national security and supported President George W. Bush on practically everything as it related to foreign affairs and national security. But his belief in reason and evidence, as well as facts… what we know, what we can see for ourselves, the real facts and evidence on the ground… instead of faith, has always been the reasons why I and the rest of The New Democrat have always been fans of Hitch as well.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in Sam Harris, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dan Mitchell: Socialism Humor

Posted on October 21, 2025 by Rik Schneider

“Building on columns from May and July, let’s enjoy five more reasons to laugh at socialism.

Though we may want to cry after seeing this first bit of satire since Donald Trump has morphed into Bernie Sanders and is having the government take partial ownership of various companies.

Next, we have a reminder that we should be nice to our socialist friends when they suffer trauma.

Our third item points out that socialism is for the young and hardy (actually for the naive and foolish).

Next we have some helpful ways of diagnosing a health emergency.

As usual, I’ve saved the best for last.

This final meme shows that capitalism “exploits” us by providing many products, albeit at a cost. Socialism, by contrast offers nothing, but at least it is free.

Reminds us that the choice is full socialism or full stomachs. Or maybe this bread meme is most appropriate.

Source:Dan Mitchell with a look at the Socialist Don.

From Dan Mitchell

If some of Dan Mitchell’s comments here don’t make sense and you are wondering what he’s referring to, it’s because it’s his own personal captions about photos that he posted on his own blog about socialism. And those photos aren’t here, except for the first 1.

So 1 of MAGA’s favorite targets and talking points, is of course Socialists and socialism. Their Dear Leader Donald J. Trump attacks Socialists and socialism, almost every time he’s talking about Democrats. Fine. But he has a credibility problem here and the photo on this posts shows you exactly what I’m talking about.

So in a year Donald John Trump, who is almost completely, personally, responsible for the January 6 riots on the U.S. Capitol, who also happens to be a convicted felon, (but not for the felonies that a lot of Americans wanted him to be convicted of) is reelected President of the United States, just a couple months before, a Socialist wins the Democratic nomination for Mayor of New York City.

You would think Zohran Mamdani’s winning the Democratic nomination for MYC Mayor and who is also the most likely Mayor of New York, (unless NYC Republicans get a brain and Curtis Silwa drops out of the race) would be a great target for Donald Trump and his MAGA Party. 1 problem: as much as they’re bashing socialism, the U.S. Government is buying and taking parts of private companies and threatening to take over other companies, if they don’t change their politics.

As I wrote about Donald Trump’s socialism back in August:

“As Erick Erickson’s said on his blog post:

“When the federal government took control of General Motors, GM no longer engaged in risk assessed based on shareholder value and economic value, but in political risk…

I would add to that, once the Feds become part of a private company, that company starts taking more bad risks because they now know they have the taxpayers there to bail them out. Unlike if they are completely in private hands, there’s no guarantee of even a private buyout if they go under or pile on so much debt from their own bad investments, that they either have to be bailed out, or go into public bankruptcy…

From The New Democrat

To hear Donald Trump or any other MAGA head talk about how bad socialism is, would be like:

hearing Vladimir Putin talk about the need for peace in the world… or at least in Europe, or in the Slavic world.

Or Donald Trump talking about the need for law and order, the rule of law, peace and civility in our politics. As well as talking about the dangers of lawfare in our politics.

Or Marjorie Taylor Greene talking about the need for moderation in Congress.

Ilhan Omar and Rasheda Tlaib both giving speeches in opposition to antisemitism.

It would be almost impossible (unless you were on a 2-week binge consuming nothing but alcohol and meth and somehow managed to survive that experience) to take these people seriously, when they’re talking about those issues. So maybe as the the photo on this post suggests… assuming the Trump Administration continues their own policy of state socialism, that the next time they’re speaking out against socialism, they something like:

“We are taking down socialism by taking down 1 private company at a time, until the root out all of the socialism in America”. Just as they’re building their own socialist empire to replace the 1 that they claimed was socialist.

You can also see this post on Blogger

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in Dan Mitchell, Originals | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

John Thune & Chuck Schumer: Government Shutdown Press Conference

Posted on October 20, 2025 by Erik Schneider

Senate Majority Leader John Thune: “Good afternoon. I think the American people are wondering when the Senate Democrats are going to end their temper tantrum and vote to reopen the government every day that goes by, there are more and more Americans who are getting smaller and smaller paychecks. People work for the federal government. Now, fortunately, the Trump administration has been able to make sure that our troops, our military, gets paid for a while longer. But there are limits to what they can do.

But, they will have a ninth opportunity today to vote open the government. They had an opportunity yesterday and they will have, if necessary, a 10th opportunity to reopen the government tomorrow. All we need, all we need are five courageous Democrats with a backbone who aren’t afraid to buck their leadership, who are marching them right over a cliff.

Chuck Schumer may think that every day gets better for them politically, but I can tell you that is not the experience of the American people. This needs to end. We can end it today. The bill is sitting at the desk. We’re going to get a chance to pick it up and pass it open up the government and get to work for the American people”.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer: “Well, here we are on day 15 of the Trump shutdown. That’s right. It’s now over two weeks since Republicans shut the government down because they refuse to negotiate and fix the health care crisis that they themselves created. In fact, House Republicans haven’t been here doing their job in weeks. Thousands of federal workers continue to work and not get paid. House Republicans continue to get paid and don’t work.

Cost is the number one issue facing American people. How are they going to pay each week their bills and because of Trump’s tariffs, because of what they did on electric rates, because food costs are going up so much, and health care is the tip of the spear of that cost increase. And yet Republicans are not moving forward.

The bottom line is they won’t even negotiate with us. So that’s a premature question. But of course I’m not going to negotiate in public. We need to address the crisis that is afflicting and that’s the right word, the American people.

Republicans hold the blame for the government shutdown “because they refuse to negotiate…

Source:Associated Press covering at the Senate Majority Leader’s press conference.

From the Associated Press

But as the Senate Minority Leader said so himself back in March about why he didn’t shut down the government then:

“First I’d say, Sunny, no one wants to fight more than me, and no one fights more than me. We got to fight smart. It is not true — that bill had far less — it was bad, I hated it,” Schumer said. “But it does far less damage to — Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are far more susceptible to being eliminated, which is what that horrible Musk — can you imagine this guy Musk, a billionaire, saying $1,100 for a senior citizen is not necessary? Or a Ponzi scheme?”

If you have two choices, one bad, the other devastating; one chops off one of your fingers, the other chops off your arm? So I want to fight, and we are fighting, we’re going to fight every day,” he explained.”

From The New Democrat

So the 1st question here should be: what has changed from March to now October? Like any good lawyer, I’m asking a question that I already know the answer to. This is what has changed in the last 7 months:

“Because Leader Schumer made the right decision not to shut down the government in March, the so-called Squad (which most of the time looks no more professional and experienced than the Columbia chapter of Students For a Democratic Society) threatens his job and tells him he has to step down, or face a primary challenge… probably from U.S. Representative Alexandria O. Cortez in 2028. She’s probably not just the most popular and powerful Socialist, inside of Congress right now (sorry, Senators Sanders and Warren) but probably the most powerful and popular Socialist outside of Congress as well.

So the reason why the government is shut down right now, even though it gives the power to the President to cut and layoff at will as many people as he wants, during the shutdown, because 75 year old Chuck Schumer (who has been in Congress since 1981, served 9 terms in the House, now in his 5th term in the Senate) is worried about losing his job 3 years from now. So this is just 1 reason why The New Democrat is calling this government shutdown, the Schumer shutdown. Because it’s not based on what’s good for the country, or even the Democratic Party next year, but what’s good for Chuck Schumer’s political future…

From The New Democrat

If you are wondering why I’m posting all this background information and you are thinking that I’m doing it because I’m worried about some insomnia crisis going on in the country (that of course Robert F. Kennedy JR knows nothing about… or, is just denying it) I can see why you might believe that. But there’s another reason for it. What Chuck Schumer is doing here (and I think it’s now safe to say that he’s the distinguished Minority Leader from New York) is taking a page out of Donald J. Trump’s.

Is this how all New York politicians try to govern? Someone you don’t like says something bad about you in public, someone you thought was an ally, or just someone you know doesn’t like you… and what you do in response is to have them inducted simply because you don’t like them. That’s what Donald Trump has done in the last couple of weeks.

This is a little different from Leader Schumer. Instead of cancelling next year’s midterm elections, (President Trump hasn’t done that yet) because he’s worried about his party getting their political tails handed to them, (to be kind) the Senate Minority Leader shuts down the government because he’s worried about losing to Alexandria O. Cortez in 2028 and he doesn’t like how the Trump Administration governs.

When you were a kid and you wanted to go to some concert or movie or something on a school night with your friends and you knew you would be home pretty late, if you went to it and your parents said you can’t do that because you have to get up early next morning for school… perhaps you had the big test or something… what was your response to your parents saying no… or what would you have done? Would you run away from home so you could do whatever you want and not have to listen to your parents say no to you? Some kids have done with with horrible results that soon followed.

But hopefully you were disappointed but understood why your parents turned down your request. And maybe they said something like:

“If you do well on the test, you can go to any concert or movie that you want on Friday night and stay out all day on Saturday and go out that night as well. And we’ll even give you the money for that”.

That’s how a mature adolescent would respond to that and how I think intelligent parents would’ve handled that. That’s would part of the carrot and stick approach to parenting: you lay down solid and understandable rules and expectations for your kids and reward them when they do well.

But there are times, even when members of Congress can look like immature 16 year olds who think they own the world because they have all the latest fashions and gadgets and follow the “hottest” celebrities. And it’s not difficult to see what Congress on a good day, gets around 20% in approval (and with that 20% made up of only meth heads, alcoholics, and mental patients) because being there is almost never about serving your constituents.

Congress is like some social club that the members love so much that it cost them work and other opportunities because they spend so much time there and love the perks so much. And love it so much, that losing their membership there, would be like someone stealing your home and family on the same day. They can’t see themselves out of their club that much, to the point that they will do anything in their power to stay there as long as they can, regardless of how many innocent people they have to hurt.

I’m not a political psychologist… not sure if 1 even exists. But that’s going on with Chuck Schumer right now. The government is shut down right now because he won’t let his members vote for cloture on the only bill that has a majority of support in the Congress, to reopen the government. And he’s doing all of this because he’s worried about losing his exclusive membership to this political club, known as the U.S. Senate and end also ending his membership in the U.S. Congress.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook and Threads.

Posted in AP Video, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sara Sidner & John Berman: John Bolton Arrives At Federal Court a Day After Being Indicted

Posted on October 17, 2025 by FredSchneiderUS

“John Bolton arrived at federal court in Greenbelt, Maryland, on Friday morning. Bolton, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser-turned-adversary, was indicted by a federal grand jury in Maryland on Thursday.”

Source:CNN with a look at Ambassador John Bolton.

From CNN

I will get into the John Bolton story as well. But just on a personal note first: (and since this is Friday, I feel the freedom to do this) isn’t great to have the real Sara Sidner back at CNN?

The Sara Sidner you see in this video, looks a lot like the Sara Sidner in this photo. This is the Sara Sidner from 2022, or even back in 2011 when she was an international correspondent at CNN. Tall, plus-sized, beautiful, long, black hair, and a beautiful babyface. I thought she had the best hair, at least at CNN back in 2022. She’s a woman that I would call a beautiful plus-sized baby, because as tall and big bone as she is, she has the face and smile of a little, baby cutie. Her hair is a little shorter now then it was 3 years ago before she got sick and she’s lost a lot of weight to help her stay healthy. But she has her hair back and looks absolutely beautiful.

Source:CNN anchor Sara Sidner.

As far as the John Bolton case: You could look at this case from 3 different ways:

You could look at it from a partisan point of view and not just as a Democrat, but as a Conservative Republican, who simply doesn’t like Donald Trump and his MAGA party. (Doesn’t like might be generous) Or as a Democrat, who doesn’t like John Bolton, but who believes in the rule of law and doesn’t want to see even Republicans get prosecuted simply because they oppose Donald Trump.

You could also make a political lawfare argument here as if you are a defense attorney and saying that if they had the same evidence against someone like Pete Hegeseth, (who just happens to be Secretary of Defense) that DOG would’ve never brought this case against Secretary Hegseth. Why? Because the Secretary is an ally of President Trump. But since Ambassador Bolton has been in opposition to the President, at least since the President fired him back in 2018, that’s the only reason why DOJ is prosecuting him today.

And then there’s the lawyer’s-lawyer argument and you heard that in this video from Tom Dupree and Michael Moore (not that Michael Moore) where they’re looking at the evidence that DOJ has already made public against Bolton and talking about the case based on that.

Did New York Attorney General Leticia James prosecute Donald Trump back in 2023-24 because she doesn’t like him and wants to put him prison?

Did Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg prosecute Donald Trump back in 24 because he doesn’t like DJT and wants to see him in prison?

The answer to both of my questions is obviously yes. But the point is both the NY Attorney General and Manhattan DA had excellent cases against President Trump. That’s why they won those cases. And the Bolton case is not that different, if any different from those 2 Trump cases.

I’m not a lawyer, don’t even pretend to be 1 even in my mind, let alone on TV. But I know enough about the law and juries to know that at the end of the day, if the prosecution has a case for conviction, regardless of the reason or reasons for bringing the case at all, they’ll probably get their convictions. And that’s what the Bolton case will come down to as well, if it makes it that far. Does the U.S. Attorney have a case for conviction in this case, or not.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook and Threads.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tara Palmeri: How Zohran Mamdani & Donald Trump Use The Same Playbook

Posted on October 16, 2025 by kireschneider

“What if the boldest voices in politics—from rising stars like Zohran Mamdani to entrenched figures like Donald Trump—are secretly reading from the same scripted page of tactics and maneuvers?
In this episode of Tara Palmeri Live, dive deep into the uncanny parallels shaping today’s political battlegrounds, where progressive upstarts and conservative powerhouses deploy identical strategies of disruption, narrative control, and crowd mobilization to advance wildly opposing agendas. Joined by Steve Schmidt, the veteran strategist behind incisive takes on political peril, we unpack how these playbook moves expose the raw mechanics of influence in a divided America, from viral messaging blitzes to coalition-building gambits that flip the script on conventional wisdom.
What overlooked tactic from this shared playbook do you see dominating the next election cycle?”

Source:Tara Palmeri doing her impression of a lot in space valley girl. Actually, I don’t know what she’s doing there.

From Tara Palmeri

So the basic point of what Tara Palmeri and Steve Schmidt is talking about here, is that what I would call the Squad-Left, or the Bernie Bro-Left, has taken on the establishment wing of the Democratic Party and has beaten them. All that’s obvious and Palemeri and Schmidt got into what they call the establishment wing of the Democratic Party.

If you are from Washington, like myself, the establishment is the K Street wing of the Democratic Party. The Squad-Left is basically the hipster, coffee house wing, of very young and idealistic… leftist Democrats and people who aren’t officially Democrats, but vote Democrat when they see Democrats who are leftist and cool enough for them.

And the K Street wing of the Democratic Party, are the corporate backers who can finance mainstream Democrats campaigns all by themselves, just from their corporate pacs, or with their own money. And those folks don’t want to be seen as Republicans, even mainstream Republicans. But what they are really worried about is the Democratic Party becoming too left-wing and too far-left, too idealistic and populist. And think you win campaigns by being mushy-middle, but never ever having any solid principles about anything to win purple states and districts.

And I agree, part of the problem with the Democratic Party is that they’re seen as the party of Ivy League, wealthy people, who’ve never had to even worry about they would pay for their own college education, let alone their kids and people are very awkward when they have to talk to ordinary Americans, who have to work really hard everyday, just to pay their bills.

So Zohran Mamdani comes along in 2025 in New York City who has taken some real far-left, whacked-out positions like:

NYPD: “Racist, anti-queer & a major threat to public safety, and a rogue agency.”

Property rights: “If there was any system that could guarantee each person housing — whether you call it the abolition of private property or you call it a statewide housing guarantee — it is preferable to what is going on right now”.

Government-run grocery stores: Zohran Mamdani has proposed to create municipal owned grocery stores in New York City. He’s proposing that the government there run and own grocery stores in that city.

But since Mamdani speaks to the concerns about a lot of New Yorkers there, when it comes to affordability and has no issues about telling people what he thinks about anything, regardless of how far-left he sounds, he’s doing something in New York City, what Donald Trump is doing nationally… or at least in the states that Trump won… which is win in all of these places simply by being himself. And running against the corrupt establishment in his own party.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in Tara Palmeri, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tom Mullen: Donald Trump’s Tariffs Harm Americans No Matter Who Pays Them

Posted on October 15, 2025 by Ederik Schneider

“President Trump announced Friday that his administration would impose a 100 percent tariff on Chinese imports “over and above any Tariff they are currently paying” in retaliation for China’s threat to impose export controls on rare earth exports, which the U.S. consider vital to national security.

This latest exchange of trade restrictions is purely intended to harm the other party rather than to achieve any benefit for the respective countries’ populations. But it has occurred in the context of the trade war with China started by Trump in his first term. The ultimate goal of these trade wars is still mysterious, given Trump’s own self-contradictory statements.

Trump continues to claim both that the tariffs will restore American manufacturing and that foreign exporters will pay the tariffs rather than American consumers. Both cannot be true. The only way for the tariffs to reestablish American manufacturing is if they do raise the prices American consumers pay for the imported goods, and not just marginally. They must raise the prices so dramatically that they exceed the much higher prices for the same goods domestically produced that led to the imports in the first place.

If the foreign exporters reduce their profit margins to absorb the tariffs and thereby make their exports available to American importers at the same price, as they have in most cases so far, then American manufacturing is not stimulated. Americans are still buying the imports at the same price just as they were before, which is still lower than they can buy goods produced domestically.

Trump represents this as a “win” for America, citing all the new tax revenue flowing into the treasury, but this doesn’t help Americans as workers or consumers. It doesn’t create new jobs or lower the cost of goods. On the contrary, the tariffs ultimately harm Americans even if foreign exporters continue to absorb them…

Source:Tom Mullen is a Libertarian blogger & author.

I’m going to respond to the title of Tom Mullen’s blog post, first and then I’ll get into what I really want to talk about.

To start with a hypothetical:

Imagine someone just getting elected mayor of some big city. And this person has strong political connections with a local company, or an association of companies in the city and has an agreement with those executive that says, if the new mayor drives up the taxes on their competition, this company or association will bankroll this candidate’s campaign for the mayorship of that city.

So now there’s a new mayor and that’s what he or she does in the first year of his or her mayorship: the new administration drives up the taxes on this company’s competition. The competition responds by leaving town and going somewhere where their tax burden is not as high. The company that’s still there, that is friendly with the new administration, drives up their prices on their products for the people in that city because they no longer have any competition to worry about.

Competition is for private enterprise, what fuel is for motor vehicles: there is no private enterprise, without free competition. The competition is what keeps prices affordable for as many people as possible. But with crony capitalism, the idea is to eliminate the competition, even with government force and drive up your prices on your consumers.

Tariffs are not that different from crony capitalism. You eliminate the competition (in this case foreign investors) by raising their prices through tariffs (which are domestic taxes) making it some expensive for them to do business in your country, that they either raise their prices (which is like raising domestic taxes) or they get out of your country to go somewhere which is better suited for them financially.

But the problem with tariffs is not just the higher prices (or taxes) on your domestic consumers, but it also weakens your domestic supply chain, because you’ll have fewer foreign companies who will want to invest in your country, because your government has made it too expensive for them to invest in your country. And that gives your population fewer options in where they can buy goods, which jacks up the prices for them.

The answer to rebuilding the American manufacturing industry, is not to raise the prices on your population and raise their taxes. But encouraging more domestic companies to produce here, instead of going somewhere else and encouraging more of your own people to start their own businesses in your country. As well as producing a higher quality of goods that can compete with the foreign competition, so Americans would want to buy domestic, instead of foreign goods, or a combination of both.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in The New Democrat, Tom Mullen | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Democratic Shutdown Strategy Is Having Disastrous Consequences

Posted on October 14, 2025 by Derik Schneider

“Trump MASS FIRING Federal Workers In TOTAL MASSACRE”

Source:Secular Talk with a look at the President of the United States and some of his protestors.

From Secular Talk

This is the point that Kyle Kulinski made that I want you to concentrate on:

“They already completed 48% of Project 2025 and now they’re going to put it into overdrive. Now, you do need to understand though… they were going to do this anyway. They did it with Elon Musk with DOGE illegally, right. They were going to do this anyway. So Democrats were correct to put up a fight over health care for the American people. But you need to understand that that these people are legislative terrorists. And its incumbent on the media and the Democrats to explain to the American people exactly what they’re doing”.

But as I wrote 3 weeks ago (and feel even stronger about it today):

“So, under The Anti-Deficiency Act, when the government shutdowns, the executive branch, under The White House and Office of Management Budget, gets to decide who is essential and who is nonessential, when it comes to the federal workforce. Meaning, who gets to show up to work, who has to stay home, who has to show up and work for free, during the shutdown.

In case anyone who sees this, was born last night, (and if you are able to read before you even reach 1 day old, I’m fairly impressed) Donald John Trump is currently President of the United States and Russell Vought is currently the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Do you really want these two “gentlemen” in charge of what stays open and is closed, who gets to go to work, who stays home, who has to work for free, during a government shutdown?

Mr. Vought is 1 of the chief authors of Project 2025, which is a document that lays out how a President Trump could claim and use more executive authority, then the Constitution currently gives the President of the United States. And how they could essentially get away with that. Is this who you want in charge of the government shutdown in Washington?

At least if Congress passed a government funding bill, (whatever you actually think of the actual bill) there are laws there that the courts can protect, requiring the executive branch to spend this amount of money, with this amount of workers in place enforcing those spending requirements. But put Trump and Vought in charge, thanks to your shutdown, there’s no one left in place who could even try to hold the President and OMB accountable during a shutdown…

From The New Democrat

So look, the Kyle Kulinski’s, the Ron Filipkowski’s, MSNBC talk can argue all they want that “they were just going to do this anyway” when it comes to the mass Federal layoffs, firings, forcing people to work for free, etc. But what they don’t understand, or won’t admit, is because of Chuck Schumer’s led government shutdown here, Congress has just given The White House permission and Congressional authority, to do what Kyle Kulinski says they would’ve done anyway.

But if the government was fully funded right now, the The White House wouldn’t legally be able to fire, layoff, and force work for no pay all these workers, people making maybe $50,000-100,000 a year, without Congressional authorization.

Imagine being a not so bright bank robber (which is not uncommon with bank robbers) and you have the bank held up and maybe you have 10 hostages there and the police are outside telling you to release the hostages or this, that, and the other thing will happen to you and the lead bank robber says something to the effect:

“We might as well just kill them all now. We’re already going to prison for life for bank robbery and kidnapping. What more could they do to us?”

When an intelligent person might say: “We shouldn’t have done this in the first place. But now that we’re here, the sooner this is over, the less trouble we’ll be in and maybe we can escape from life sentences in prison”.

Not the best analogy for what Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and is Democrats are doing here with their government shutdown. I’ll be the first to admit that. But it makes my point.

The smart political play here (which I argued for 3 weeks ago) was to let the House funding bill pass. Not to vote for it, but just let it come up for a vote and for it to pass. But that obviously didn’t happen, so we’re here where we are (to state the obvious) and plan b now would be, for the Senate Minority Leader to end his shutdown by calling for a vote on the House bill and letting it pass. Tell his members they can vote for it and there won’t be any negative consequences coming from him because of that vote. But I don’t see that happening, at least for a while. Senate Democrats are going to have feel some political heat from their own constituents, first.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in Secular Talk, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MAGA: Donald Trump’s Political Reality TV Show

Posted on October 13, 2025 by Rik Schneider

So over the last few weeks, including this weekend, I saw a couple of blog columns about MAGA and what it really is. The first from Jonathan V. Last (from The Bulwark) arguing that what’s called “conservatism” today, is basically just the 2020s version of fascism. He didn’t put it that way, but that’s what he’s arguing.

Jon Last argues that what’s called “MAGA”, is really just a “domination fetish” by these folks to take down everyone who tries to oppose them, even through government force. And if you look at the indictments of President Trump’s former national security advisor, (John Bolton) his first FBI Director, (James Comey) and now the Attorney General of New York State, (Leticia James) you could certainly argue what Jon Last is arguing here:

Source:Britannica with a look at Donald J. Trump’s political cult movement.

“So let’s start at the very beginning: What did “conservatism” used to mean?

At the foundational, philosophical level, conservatism was about slowing the pace of change in order to avoid unintended consequences. Which is why the obverse of conservatism wasn’t “liberalism,” it was “radicalism.”1

Radicals wanted rapid, systemic changes. Conservatives prioritized three things that buffered systemic change:

The rule of law

Subsidiarity

Institutions…

From The Bulwark

Jon Last would go onto say in making his arguing about conservatism versus radicalism:

“Radicalism insisted that change must come, as quickly as possible and by any means necessary. If laws stood in the way, then they should be overturned or obviated. If local or state governments were recalcitrant, then the federal government must overrule them. If institutions slowed change, then they must be either captured or scuttled…

Last is arguing that “MAGA” is not about conserving, but imposing their radical vision of change on the rest of the country: And if you try to oppose them, they’ll use government force to try to stop you:

“You are with us 100% of the time, or we’ll treat you like criminals”.

Just saw that last week with U.S. Representative Jim Jordan in an interview saying that he would be open to impeaching Federal judges, simply for ruling against President Trump.

This is what I wrote about 3 weeks ago about what’s called MAGA today and their relationship with Christianity:

“Now, based on what I showed you from URI, does that sound like MAGA today?

Does their Dear Leader Donald John Trump sound like a man who believes:

“love of God and neighbor, emphasized a God of love and mercy, and taught a form of virtue ethics focused on compassion and selfless living, as best summarized by his command to love God and love your neighbor as yourself and his use of parables to convey moral lessons…”?

Is what you hear from FOX News, or Newsmax every night (assuming you even watch FOX News or Newsmax) sound like people who believe:

“love of God and neighbor, emphasized a God of love and mercy, and taught a form of virtue ethics focused on compassion and selfless living, as best summarized by his command to love God and love your neighbor as yourself and his use of parables to convey moral lessons…”?

Do you think any of these MAGA podcasters, their reality TV stars, their religious zealots who bash people to their face, for being gay, or simply using their First Amendment of free speech, to speak out against the President of the United States… do those people sound like people who believe:

“love of God and neighbor, emphasized a God of love and mercy, and taught a form of virtue ethics focused on compassion and selfless living…

From The New Democrat

If there is any religion that “MAGA” follows, (and of course there are exceptions to every rule in the rule book) it’s a religion that was founded by Donald John Trump back in 2015. And the core of this religion is essentially this:

“We’re the real Americans. Anyone who tries to oppose us, are the Un-Americans, including Conservative Republicans”.

And if this “MAGA” religion has any core to it, it’s everything is about The Donald and yourself in this movement. Get everything that you can for yourself. Don’t worry about breaking any laws or rules because as long as MAGA is in power, The Donald will protect you. Which is a long way from the conservative rule of law value of:

“Government of laws, not men”

So 1 of the main reasons why I call Donald Trump’s movement a political reality TV show, because if you look at lot of his cast members, they look like reality TV show characters, starting with his wife.

I”m not in the habit of speaking ill of Melania Trump, but that “marriage”, is nothing more than a business relationship. As long as the money is good for her, she’ll probably never leave him. And as long as she meets her husband’s political needs, like having a wife in public, etc, he’ll keep her around.

But you look at the President’s cabinet with his Secretary of Homeland Security Krsti Noem and her $50,000 Rolex. She doesn’t look like a public servant. But a reality TV character on some show that films her high-end lifestyle.

The Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth… he’s there because he looks and sound good on TV and his 100% loyal to The Donald. Not because of anything that he knows about national security policy.

The press secretary Karonline Levitt… she’s not there to inform the American people about what The White House is doing, what the President is up to, for the most part. She’s there to talk about how great she thinks her boss is and bash everyone who opposes them. And she like her boss sees the mainstream media as “the enemy of the American people”. So she’s there to bash them, every time she gets a serious question.

A couple final points about “MAGA” and then I will close. MAGA originally stood for “Make America Great Again”. Well, if even you took that seriously 10 years ago, it implies that America wasn’t already a great country. Which is insulting to a lot of Americans, including Republicans. But that’s not what they’re about. They’re about:

“Get mine and as much as I can after that. And defend The Donald 100% of the time regardless of the costs of the consequences. Never treat him anything less that God himself”.

MAGA is not just an insult to conservatism, with their beliefs in radicalism and blowing up the system and see the Constitution and the rule of law as annoyances to their political agenda, but they’re an insult or Christianity as well. Because they don’t believe in “love my neighbor as myself”, “do onto others as done to myself”. They believe in the opposites of that.

“MAGA” believes in a political philosophy and religion, that up until 10 years ago, didn’t exist in America… or certainly wasn’t out in the open. Which is just 1 reason why and also because Donald John Trump is the founder of this movement… I call “MAGA”, just his political reality TV show.

Source:The New Democrat

You can follow me on Facebook, Threads, and Twitter.

Posted in The Donald, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment