This is the speech where President Lyndon Johnson calls to continue President John Kennedy’s agenda. Putting his tax cut plan through Congress that President Kennedy badly wanted. As well as calling for the Civil Rights Act it be passed that was finally passed in the summer of 1964. As well as calling for medical insurance for the elderly and poor which became Medicare and Medicaid. As well as all sorts of new programs to help low-income Americans that became part of the so-called War on Poverty. Late 1963 and 1964 was about finishing President Kennedy’s agenda in that Congress. Because again remember Lyndon became President, because President Jack Kennedy was assassinated and LBJ was Vice President at the time. So LBJ didn’t become President under his own mandate. If he had a mandate in 63-63, it was full fill President Kennedy’s agenda.
The Classical Liberal Constitution is the United States Constitution. With all the constitutional and individual rights that it protects. The problem with the USC is not the Constitution itself, but big government supporters on the far-right and far-left who do not support the Constitution and judges they believe who do too far to protect our freedoms. And then they back politicians who look for ways to try to change our Constitution.
The way to know that our Constitution is a Classical Liberal Constitution, just look at our Bill of Rights and all the amendments to it and I’ll give you a few of them.
1. Our Freedom of Speech that gives us the right to essentially say whatever the hell we want to. As long as we aren’t libeling people or threatening people or inciting violence.
2. Freedom of Assembly the ability for Americans to get together with each other and even hold meetings. Without government getting in our ways as long as we aren’t planning criminal activities.
3. Freedom of Religion to go along with Separation of Church and State. The ability to practice or not practice any religion that we want. But that we are a federal republic and governed by our Constitution and not by any religion.
4. The Right to Self-Defense which is critical in a developed country our size with all of our wealth. The fact that law enforcement can’t protect all of us all the time.
5. Our property rights and Right to Privacy which in a way go together. The fact that government can’t come into our homes and take our property from us without just cause.
6. Our Equal Protection Clause that guarantees under law that no American is discriminated against based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion which is critical in any liberal democracy.
It is not the United States Constitution that is the problem in America. But the people on fringes of both political wings who believe we have too much freedom. And have too much power as far as the political offices that they hold on both sides. So the solution to this is to elect more people on both the Left and Right who support our Constitution and will defend it.
Gregory Mankiew seems to be arguing in his New York Times column that the best way to help the working poor is to take from the economically successful that is the middle class and not the struggling middle class. But Americans making lets say seventy-thousand-dollars and up per year. And the upper class those making lets five-hundred-thousand-dollars a year or more to take care of the less-fortunate. There a couple of big problems with that and not so much how socialist of an idea that it is.
That somehow government would decide what people need to live well in life. But the fact that we would be discouraging people to be productive in America because if they are, a lot of that money would go to people who aren’t very productive as far as what they are able to produce for themselves. But on the other side now we are encouraging people not to be productive because if they aren’t, the economically successful in America will be forced to take care of them.
Gregory Mankiew also seems to be saying that instead of expanding education and job training opportunities to the low-skilled working poor that we should instead just financially take care of them instead. Because education and job training and are more long-term solutions that will take time. And these workers need financial relief now. And the education and job training solutions aren’t politically possible right now.
Well if you are not familiar with the current makeup of Congress. We have a Republican House of Representatives as part of one half of a very divided Congress. With Democrats controlling the Senate with a Democratic president. And even if we had a united Democratic Congress with a Democratic president, there still wouldn’t be enough Democrats to support these more social democratic policies. And there would be enough Republican Senators to block them in Congress.
So instead of arguing for what is politically possible right now, how about we instead come up with a plan that actually solves the problems. And then come up with a political coalition in Congress that would support the plan.
1. We increase the minimum wage and move towards more of a living wage. But not quite getting there with these workers probably still needing public assistance to support themselves. But part of that minimum wage increase comes with educational and job training opportunities for these workers. So they can actually get themselves a good job instead and move from public assistance. We go from $7.25 and hour to ten-dollars and hour within two years and even twelve dollars within five-years. And index it for inflation so the purchasing power of the minimum wage keeps up with inflation. With a thirty-percent tax break for small employers so their payroll costs don’t go up too high. As well as another tax break for all employers small and large to train their low-skilled employees. So they can move up in their companies.
2. Expanding educational and job training opportunities for our low-skilled workers. And put in a requirement for everyone on public assistance whether they are working or not for them to finish their education. And if that means they haven’t finished high school, they would need to do that. And for those workers with high school diplomas, they would have the opportunity and be expected to go to a community college or vocational school. To get themselves the skills that they need to do get themselves a good job.
3. Requiring employers who pay low-wages to pay payroll taxes that goes to pay for Medicaid, Welfare Insurance, Public Housing and Food Assistance. So these employers would no longer be able to pass the cost of living of these employees on to average taxpayers.
4. If you want to talk long-term. That means education reform and having a public education system where everyone can get themselves a good education. No matter the income level of their parents. And that means having public school choice so students are no longer required to go to school based on where they live, but what is the best school for them and their parents would be able to make that decision. Funding public schools based on need and not where they are located. And that means additional resources to fund public schools and not just using property taxes. And paying teachers based on how well their students are learning and not how long they’ve been teaching. And we could do this when the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is extended
This debate shouldn’t be about what is politically possible at the current moment in time. But what we should be doing as a country to address these problems and then finding the people in Congress. And the people who are running for Congress both House and Senate who would support these policies.
I covered this last night, but David Brooks is actually right when he says and the video from last night makes it clear that Americans want to see more economic freedom and opportunity in America. Through things like expanding quality education for all students no matter the income levels of their parents. And expanding educational and job training opportunities for our low-skilled workforce. So they can do well in life. In other words expanding economic freedom and independence in America.
David Brooks is also right when he says what Americans don’t want to do as a country. Even though Progressives and Social Democrats people even further to the left of Progressives are for this. They do not want to see new big government programs and taxes that are designed to take from the wealthy to take care of the less-fortunate to expand public assistance in America. Which is why most if not all Democrats who run on these issues outside of the Northeast or Northwest tend to lose. And be labeled as tax and spenders or Socialists. But what Americans would pay for is more educational and job training opportunities for people who are low-skilled. To get the skills that they need to do well in life.
Not sure if America is a center-right or center-left country and not sure how Cenk Uygur gets that. But we certainly aren’t a country that goes very far right or left even though we certainly have a Far-Right and Far-Left in this country. That at times I believe has too much power, but that is really a different discussion. But we certainly are a county that believes in a high degree of both economic and personal freedom. And a big reason why I believe Jack Kennedy, Ron Reagan and Bill Clinton were so successful as presidents politically as well, because they all believed in both of those things and connected very well with average voters.
Where I agree with Cenk Uygur is that Americans believe in things like equality of opportunity. And of course some Americans will always start off life better than others because of how they were raised. But equality of opportunity and not results which is different and a topic for another blog, is about all Americans having the opportunity to be successful in America. And that starts with education growing up that all Americans have the opportunity to go to good schools. Regardless of their parents incomes and even the ability to go to college as well. And that our low-skilled workforce has the opportunity to be successful as well with educational and job training opportunities to move up and do well in life.
So maybe Cenk is right in the sense that America is a Center-Left country. But Center-Left not being as far to the left as he would like it, but more about expanding freedom to more Americans. And having more Americans with real economic power in this country so they do not need public assistance to pay their bills. But not a country that expects government to provide a lot if not most of the services that we need to do well. Just there to see that we all have those opportunities for success in life on our own.
The thing about the St. Louis Cardinals is that they are not only one of Major League Baseball’s best franchises right now, but all-time as well. And perhaps the premier franchise in the National Baseball League and haven’t had any real off decades were they weren’t contending at all, or stuck in mediocrity except for perhaps the 1970s and 90s. Where they didn’t make the NL Playoffs at all in the 70s and only made the NL Playoffs once in the 1990s.
Which would be 1996 Tony LaRussa’s first season in St. Louis, which means there are a lot of great player from the Cardinals to choose from a franchise that has won eleven MLB World Series. Something like twenty National League Championships and a bunch of division championships. A franchise that at best plays in a mid-size market in St. Louis, but has fans and reach that goes all over the Midwest. Especially the Western Midwest.
This would be my all-time Cardinals lineup as someone whose not even a Cardinals fan.
1. Leading off Lou Brock- I would have of course Lou Brock and in the outfield. The only leadoff hitter I would take over Brock would be Rickey Henderson. Brock stole over eight-hundred bases, hit around three-hundred in St. Louis scoring a lot of runs. And even had occasional power as a leadoff hitter.
2. Hitting 2nd and playing 2nd Base Rogers Hornsby- Perhaps the best all around 2nd Baseman of all-time hitting four-hundred with power twice in his career. Had a lot of great years in St. Louis.
3. Hitting 3rd and in the outfield Stan Musial- Even with Albert Pujols I still have Stan The Man as the greatest Cardinal of all-time. Especially considering he played his whole career in St. Louis. And by the time Big Al is done he may have played about half of his career somewhere else.
4. Cleanup Hitter Albert Pujols- With the Cardinals Big Al was not only the best hitter in baseball, but I believe the best all around player in baseball. And a very good first baseman as well.
5. Ken Boyer hitting fifth and playing 3B- A very solid power hitter with the Cardinals and a very good third baseman as well. Hit over two-hundred home runs in St. Louis and drove in over a thousand runs as well.
6. Hitting sixth and doing the catching Ted Simmons- Unfortunately for Ted Simmons he played for the Cardinals in the 1970s the entire decade. When they were in transition and no longer a NL contender. So he doesn’t get the respect owed to him for being a great player. But perhaps only Johnny Bench with the Cincinnati Reds was a better all around catcher than Ted Simmons in his era. Someone who hit three-hundred, with power and would drive in over a hundred runs as well. And was a very good defensive catcher as well.
7. Hitting seventh and playing in the outfield Enos Slaughter- With Enos Slaughter you have a three-hundred hitter hitting seventh for this Cardinals team. I have him there because the guys ahead of him have better power.
8. Hitting eighth the best all around defensive SS of all-time Ozzie Smith- Almost exclusively known as a great defender before he came to St. Louis, but someone who developed into a solid 270 hitter, run scorer and base stealer who fit the 1980s Cardinals offense perfectly as a solid contact hitter. Who didn’t strikeout with great speed who was also a great baserunner.
9. Hitting ninth and doing the pitching Bob Gibson- Bob Gibson might have been a better hitter than Ozzie Smith and you could go the other way with Gibson pitching. And have Lou Brock end up following Ozzie Smith and sorta have a lineup with two leadoff hitters. But Bob Gibson I believe is the greatest big game pitcher at least of his generation. And only Sandy Koufax was better in the 1960s.
You would win a lot of championships with this lineup. A team that could hit for power that wouldn’t need to score much with Bob Gibson pitching, but would be able to do so anyway. That would’ve also had a lot of speed and would’ve been able to steal a lot of bases as well.
Source:GI Bomber– Texas Rangers pitcher Nolan Ryan, pitching against the Anaheim Angels in 1993 and being rewarded by the Angels fans for his great career.
“The ESPN telecast started in the 3rd inning. I was there. It took me 20 years to find out this game broadcast. History at his best. 62.000 fans on a friday nigtht : we didn’t know that was going to be the LAST strikeout of Nolan Ryan’s career (at min 30.40 of this video). And how bout the nice move of Rangers manager Kevin Kennedy, who sends Ryan to the mound in the bottom of the 8th, only to take him out after the warm up tosses, for one of the greatest standing ovation I’ve ever seen (Around 1h.23min of this video) Greatest memory I have in sports.”
Nolan Ryan, what forty-six years old and still a very effective starting pitcher at this point and pitching his last game ver. Capping off a great twenty-five year career.
Not saying Nolan Ryan was the best pitcher, or the most dominant pitcher of all-time, but when he was on, he was those things, at least as far as what I’ve seen. He was generally very good, but not always great and have some games where he would become somewhat hittable and give up big hits and home runs.
When Nolan Ryan was on, I believe he was the most dominant pitcher I’ve ever seen and the most dominant for the longest time. A twenty-five year, you know and how many bad seasons did he have.
I just wish his last game was against a better team and it had something to do with who was going to win the AL West in 1993. But the Rangers who did have a good season in 93, finished eight games out of first place behind the Chicago White Sox.
And the Anaheim Angels, finished tied for fifth place in the AL West and only winning seventy-one games. And in the Rangers case 1993 is pre-wildcard, so you had to win your division to make the playoffs in the American League or National League. And the Rangers being this far out of first place at this point of the season, meant this was their last game.
I have a hard time believing that people on Medicaid would end up going to the emergency room more often now that they have health insurance especially for conditions that aren’t emergencies. As this article from The Fiscal Times suggests. And besides even if that is the case why wouldn’t these ER’s just turn these people away or tell them to make an appointment with one of their doctors. And come back tomorrow and if ER’s aren’t allowed to do that, than they should be allowed to.
This whole debate about Medicaid is about the fact that we do not finance it very well. And we do not finance it very well because we do not have a direct revenue source for it. Unlike Medicare and rely on general tax revenue from the Feds and states to pick up the tabs for it. And until recently before the Affordable Care Act the Feds hadn’t been paying their fair share for Medicaid. A public health insurance program that covers low-income Americans. And the Feds haven’t been paying their share under law because of the high costs of Medicaid. But you give Medicaid a direct revenue source and allow each state to run their own Medicaid program and you fix financial problems of it. And no longer have states debating whether they afford to expand their Medicaid or not.
The way to fund Medicaid would be to have a payroll tax on it that would be paid for by employers. And workers to not only cover their employees Medicaid insurance, but for unemployed workers as well. Or increase what people get on Unemployment and Welfare Insurance to pay for Medicaid as well. And we could also either give our low-income workers and expanded Earned Income Tax Credit to pay for. This or increase the minimum wage substantially to cover it as well with a break for small employers. And we wouldn’t have to worry about Medicaid financing in the future again.
David Brooks even though he’s a Conservative, ha, ha is dead right. When he says that it is not capitalism or economic freedom that is the problem in America or that is unpopular, but the fact that not enough Americans have access to economic freedom. And to the tools that they need to live well in America. And that what we need to do is invest more in education and job training for low-income adults in America. And education reform so more Americans can get themselves the skills that they need to be successful in America. And that these are mainstream center-left liberal issues that Democrats should be pushing.
Isn’t David Brooks supposed to be getting big government off my backs Conservative. Yet he’s taking a position about marijuana that says the state knows best what Americans should put in their own bodies and government should be making these decisions for people instead. And his position just doesn’t have much intelligence around it when he says that we shouldn’t legalize marijuana. Because people getting stoned all the time is not a good idea. Well no joke David! To keep the language clean here. But neither is getting drunk all the time good for society either. But we don’t see a lot of Americans doing either, now do we.
Before you go about addressing the income gap in America or what others call income inequality, you have to first know why we have it. And no it is not because we have a capitalist system. There are socialist state-owned economies in other countries that have a good deal of rich and poor as well. It is just that those countries poor tend to make up most of those countries. North Korea perfect example of that and Cuba lets say ten-years ago as well before they moved to start privatizing parts of their economy.
And the reason why for our income gap in America has to do with lack of education and opportunity in our low-income communities. A big reason why both parties are so interested in education reform. And of course if you come from a middle especially upper-middle family or a wealthy family, you’ll most likely have all the educational opportunities that you’ll need to do well in life. And then it will become about you and what you are able to do with those opportunities. So the lack of education with our low-income workforce is the major factor for our income gap in this country.
I’m all for raising the minimum wage in America substantially and I’ve already made that clear in several posts on this blog alone. Hell, I would go further than that and even have employers who pay low-wages be charged a payroll tax that goes to pay for Medicaid, Food Assistance, Public Housing and Welfare Insurance as well. Because with the low-wages that they pay the cost of living costs go from the employer to average Joe and Mary taxpayer instead. Which is very unfair to Americans who work very hard just to pay their bills in this country.
But we can’t close the income gap in America until we address the cause of the income gap. Which is another gap that is called the education gap. And come up with an education system that guarantees every American no matter their parents income with the opportunity to get a good education in life. As well as an educational and job training system for our low-skilled workforce as well so they can get themselves good jobs.
Otherwise until we do things like this and start proposing and passing policies like this either at the federal or state level or a combination of both, instead of using these issues just to get voters to the polls or make the other party look bad or something, we will always be having these discussions and debates. Why do we have so few rich and many poor and why are middle class wages dropping. And what we do about the high cost of living in America.
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.
Derik Schneider
Ederik Schneider
Erik Schneider
FredSchneiderUS
kireschneider
The Daily Review
Rik Schneider
TheActionBlogUSA
The New Democrat
The New Democrat 
You must be logged in to post a comment.