My Footage: This is Adlai Stevenson: 1956 Presidential Bid

Posted on September 7, 2012 by Derik Schneider
Adlai Stevenson For President

Adlai Stevenson For President

Source:The Daily Journal

Adlai Stevenson running on what would later be known as the Great Society in the LBJ Administration. He wanted to expand the safety net in America and perhaps even go further than the Great Society and social insurance and even create America’s first welfare state. Where the Federal Government would become primarily responsible for taking care of the welfare and well-being of the people. Which is what the New-Left of the late 1960s and early 1970s wanted to create in America. But when Adlai ran for president in 1952 and 56, he was basically running on what would be called the Great Society. Government guaranteed health insurance for the elderly and the poor. And more Welfare for people who were struggling in America.

There wasn’t ever any real shot of Adlai defeating a very popular Army General in Dwight Eisenhower who commanded allied forces in Europe and defeat General Eisenhower for president in 1952. Or much of an opportunity for Adlai to defeat a popular president in Dwight Eisenhower in 1956. What I believe was the real motivation for Adlai running for president in 1952 was to expand the progressive movement and to give Progressives real issues and policies to run on against then Vice President Richard Nixon in 1960. And in that case Adlai’s 1956 presidential campaign was pretty successful. Because then Senator Jack Kennedy ran on those social insurance and economic issues when he ran for president in 1960 and defeated Vice President Nixon.

Posted in The Daily Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CBS News: ‘Mitt Romney & Barack Obama: No Difference’

Posted on September 3, 2012 by Ederik Schneider

Romney and Obama_ No DifferenceSource:CBS News– President Barack H. Obama: D, Illinois- 45th POTUS.

Source:Real Life Journal 

“Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are the same. They have the same policies and are both puppets for Bilderberg and the CFR. No matter how the media spins it or what the candidates say, they are not representing real change. There is one candidate that does represent real and true change in America, change for the good and we must all put our differences aside and support this man any way we can.”

From CBS News

Trying to tell the difference between “RomneyCare” and “ObamaCare” is like trying to tell the difference between a couple of lemons. You have to feel each of them, look closely, get into the details. But on paper they are essentially the same plans. Expanding private health insurance through tax credits, patient protections and requiring that all Americans pay for their share of their health care.

But other than health care reform, telling the difference between Mitt Romney, depending on which Mitt he decides to be based on what day it is, how the wind is blowing, how the weather is, which clone he decides to be that day, it can be very difficult without x-ray vision. They are very different on Iraq and Afghanistan and Iraq. Mitt believes we should stay there, Barack believes we should get the hell out.

Mitt and Barack are different on deficit reduction. Mitt apparently believes that we can cut the debt and deficit, raising taxes on the poor and focusing on around 15% of the Federal budget. Or 555B$, he doesn’t want to eliminate all of that by the way. Thats the non-defense and entitlement parts of the Federal budget. President Obama believes everything should be on the table, except raising taxes on the poor.

They are different on growing the economy. Mitt believes in more tax cuts and subsidies for corporate America and rich people. I don’t have a problem with the tax cuts, if it comes with eliminating tax loopholes. Which Mitt views as tax hikes, apparently Mitt believes that if you eliminated all taxes on the wealthy and corporate America. And then eliminate all of the tax loopholes as well, Mitt would call that tax hikes, because you would be giving them less money. (Talk about fuzzy math)

I believe that’s what would come under George W. Bush’s definition of “Fuzzy Math”. The President believes the way to grow the economy is to rebuild the country, its public infrastructure, infrastructure investment. Developing a national energy policy that would expand and create new energy industries in America. Putting millions of Americans back to work, as well as incentivizing people to spend money in the country. Including tax cuts for the middle class that need tax relief. Here a few areas where Mitt and Barack unfortunately are similar and why I’m disappointed with President Obama as a Liberal Democrat and it relates to social issues and civil liberties.

Mitt and Barack both support the Patriot Act, indefinite detention and the War on Drugs. You expect Republicans today to take these Big Government positions. If Mitt Romney was truly a Liberal as critics in the GOP call him and if he’s a Liberal, the majority of people living in the Bible Belt are Muslims. If this was the case, then Mitt Romney would be against these things. If Barack Obama was a real Liberal and not a Moderate Liberal he would be against these things as well. And this is where the President has been disappointing and why Liberal Democrats are taking a look at Gary Johnson the Libertarian Party nominee for president.

There’s plenty of differences between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama that Ray Charles could see. I just wish there were a hell of a lot more. So to call them twins or clones, is inaccurate. Mitt Romney already has a clone but his name is Mitt Romney as well. And that’s the only twin or clone that he needs.

Posted in CBS News, Real Life Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

It’s Time For a Change: Hubert Humphrey 1968 Political TV Ad: What Has Richard Nixon Done For You?

Posted on September 2, 2012 by Derik Schneider

HHH

Source: The Daily Journal

Hubert Humphrey running as the Washington insider in 1968. What Have You Done For me Lately? Which is a Janet Jackson song, but that could also be the title for this political commercial in 1968. Hubert Humphrey, was a U.S. Senator during the first half of the 1960s and is a big reason why the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed. By 1968, Richard Nixon was out of political office completely for almost eight years. His last job in government was as Vice President of the United States under President Dwight Eisenhower. And he was an effective Vice President and had real responsibility under President Eisenhower as his counselor and adviser on all issues. And chief political enforcer if not strategist. But by 1968 America even though it was moving right was still in the Progressive Era.

Dick Nixon, was out of office for most of the 1960s. When a lot of popular progressive legislation was passed. Medicare, Medicaid, the Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the 1968 Fair Housing Law. Humphrey, either in the Senate, or as Vice President, had a role in all of this legislation that was passed in Congress that was signed by President Lyndon Johnson. And unless you were Barry Goldwater, or another Conservative Republican with a safe seat like in the West in Congress, you needed to show voters that you at the very least wouldn’t try to repeal all of this legislation. Nixon at the very least wasn’t quick to support all of these bills even though he did.

So what the Humphrey Campaign was trying to do with this commercial, was to say that Humphrey and other Progressive Democrats were responsible for all the popular legislation from the New Deal and Great Society. While Dick Nixon was either on the sidelines or trying to defeat it. I don’t know how effective this commercial was, but at the very least Humphrey has a very good case here. What Have You Done For Me Lately? Nixon didn’t have an answer to that. He was almost a Washington outsider at this point even though her served in Congress for six years and was Vice President for eight. But in the 1960s he made a lot of money in the private sector and campaign for other Republicans while he was out of office.

Posted in The Daily Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ron Paul: How to Sell Liberty (1990)

Posted on August 31, 2012 by Ederik Schneider

Ron Paul

Source:Real Life Journal

You convince people they are more qualified to make their decisions than government. When you have an educated society and not just an educated class, but a society where most of the country is educated and has the tools to manage their own affairs then you won’t need a big government, or any government trying to manage the people’s affairs for them. Because the people will know how to do these things for themselves. Both from a personal and economic perspective. The biggest threat to big government and statism and what big government supporters should worry about the most is not individual freedom. Individual freedom and limited government are the alternatives to big government. The biggest threat to big government and statism is an educated society.

When people have the tools which is education to manage their own affairs, then they’ll know what to do and what not to do with their own lives. They’ll know not to attack innocent people, because they’ll know that is wrong. They’ll know where to work, because they’ll know what they’re qualified to do and what the pay and benefits comes from the jobs they are qualified for. They’ll know where to live and what is the best place for them, because they’ll know what they can afford and what would be the best community for them. They’ll know where to get their health insurance, what to eat and drink and how much they can handle of those things. How to plan their own retirements, where to send their kids to school. Whether they should smoke, or drink, including marijuana. And who they should sleep and live with and when if ever they should marry their romance partner.

Statists, especially nanny statists both on the Far-Left and Far-Right generally view people as stupid. And not able to manage their own affairs and see freedom as the freedom to make mistakes. Which is why they believe in statism whether its Marxism, or some type of religious theocracy. Which again is why education is the biggest threat to big government. And why statists can’t afford an educated society, because then they won’t have the support for their big government philosophy. So you educate the society and make quality education universal for everyone including low-income children and you’ll have a society that believe in liberty, because they’ll know how to manage their own affairs for themselves.

Posted in Real Life Journal, Ron Paul | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Libertarian Party: ‘The Libertarian Party’s 41 Year Campaign to Abolish the Federal Reserve’

Posted on August 30, 2012 by Ederik Schneider

Ron Paul

Source:Libertarian Party– U.S. Representative Ron Paul (Libertarian, Texas) 1988 Libertarian Party nominee for President.

Source:Real Life Journal 

“The Libertarian Party’s 41 year campaign to abolish the Federal Reserve”

From the Libertarian Party

President Richard Nixon, the Federal Reserve and War on Drugs, probably are reasons for the creation of the Libertarian Party in 1971-72. But you could probably go back to the New Deal of the 1930s, the creation of the Federal highway system of the 1950s and the Great Society of the 1960s, as other reasons for the Libertarian Party.

The Christian-Right comes about in the mid and late 1970s, the New-Left in the Democratic Party from the late 1960s and 1970s that you see as part of the Green Party today. These are all reasons for why we have a Libertarian Party today because there isn’t a pure anti-big government party in America between either the Democratic or Republican parties. Both parties have anti-big government factions, but aren’t purely anti-big government.

The Republican Party has the Christian-Right and Conservative Republicans who support thinks like Social Security, Medicare, and environmental regulations. The Democratic Party has the New-Left (Far-Left, really) a combination of Democratic Socialists who want to bring Sweden to America as far as how our economic system looks. And they even have people farther left than that who sound more like Marxists when it comes to free speech in that they don’t seem to believe in it.

The Democratic Party also has the whole so-called political correctness movement that wants to ban offensive, or critical speech towards groups that they believe are vulnerable. As well as people who want to use government to tell Americans by force what they can eat and drink. Nanny statists on the Far-Left.

These are all reasons for the Libertarian Party today. And I’m not a Libertarian even though I’m completely against big government myself, but whether you’re a Libertarian or not at least we have a party in this country that believes in individual freedom completely as a party. They don’t have factions, or groups that believe in both economic and personal freedom. But they believe in those things completely as a party.

The Libertarian Party believes in the U.S. Constitution as a whole and don’t just speak about aspects of it that they like as they’re trying generally in secret to weaken aspects of the Constitution they don’t like, or constantly trying to amend it and strip protections from the Constitution that they disapprove of.

Posted in Real Life Journal, Ron Paul | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

WEWS-TV News: Dr. Martin Luther King in Cleveland, Ohio (1967)

Posted on August 28, 2012 by Derik Schneider
Equal Rights Leader

Equal Rights Leader

Source:Free State MD

I wanted to write a blog about Dr. Martin Luther King’s Poor People’s Campaign that he launched in 1967-68. A few years after the Civil and Voting Rights Acts of 1964 and 65 respectfully were passed by Congress and signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson. But I couldn’t find footage of that campaign that was more than a couple of minutes long. But the video I did find is still pretty good. Dr. King, understood as a freedom fighter, that he was someone who fights for freedom, not the other way around.

That of course it was important that all Americans be treated equally under law for all of us to live in freedom. But for America to be a real liberal democracy, we had to do something about poverty in America. That at the time of the late 1960s, was around 25%, perhaps twice that much for African-Americans. And that these people no matter their race to truly to live in freedom, they had to have economic freedom as well. The ability to support themselves. And not forced to live off of public assistance and be forced to live in rundown ghettos, or be forced to live in rundown shacks in rural America. But be able to have a quality of life-like the rest of the country and be able to live in security.

The Poor People’s Campaign, or as I would call it the Campaign Against Poverty, was the next phase of the civil rights movement. They already established the Civil Rights Act, that no American would be allowed to be discriminated against based on their race, ethnicity, or gender. The Voting Rights Act, establishing that no American would be allowed to be denied the right to vote based on race, ethnicity, or gender. But after that was a movement to fight poverty in America. To first bring awareness to the problem, “this what we face as a country” and then hopefully come up with steps to address the issues of poverty.

They didn’t get to this part, MLK died in April, 1968. But this would’ve been the next phase of the civil rights movement. To go along with furthering non-violence, taking on the Vietnam War and perhaps fighting for human rights worldwide. This is just one example of why the assassination of Martin King was so tragic, especially at the age of 39. An early middle-age man if that. Because there was so much left for him to accomplish and work on and he simply just ran out of time because of an ignorant escaped prison inmate, who should’ve been rotting in a Missouri prison instead.

Posted in Dr. MLK, FreeState MD | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ABC News: ABC Evening News 1972 VP Drama: The George Mcgovern Convention

Posted on August 27, 2012 by Derik Schneider

Howard K. Smith

Source:ABC News– the ABC Evening News with Howard K. Smith, in 1972.

Source:The Daily Journal

From EFAN

George McGovern did a lot to bring in new voters to the Democratic Party by reaching to African, Latin, Asian, and Jewish Americans. As well as women and suburban voters, after the civil rights movement of the 1960s with a large number of Southern Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans heading to the GOP because of civil rights. And you could credit Senator McGovern with even saving the Democratic Party because without these new voters, all of these new people would’ve ended up Republicans, or not voting at all.

Without George McGovern we would’ve seen Republican Congress’s, not just a Republican Senate, but the GOP would’ve won back the House and Senate well before 1994. Perhaps even by 1980 with the Reagan Revolution, because the Democratic Party would’ve been left with a large hole to fill. With all of those Southern voters heading to the GOP, without other voters heading to the Democratic Party. So by bringing in all of these new voters to the Democratic Party, Senator McGovern deserves credit for saving the Democratic Party. From future losses in Congress and the White House after 1972.Democrats added to their majorities in Congress in 1974. And they won back the White House while holding both the House and Senate in 1976.

The Democratic Party paid such a heavy price for it in 1972, yes President Nixon was pretty popular, but they were a very divided party between establishment Progressives who wanted a united party to face the Republicans in the fall and the anti-war New-Left Socialists that wanted to take over the party and return it to where it was in the 1960s and build on the New Deal and Great Society. And George McGovern also deserves credit for running the most disorganize convention in the TV era.

Even if Senator Tom Eagleton didn’t have the pass mental health controversy going on, George McGovern not just loses, but loses going away. The Eagleton Affair (as it was called) was just another reminder of how disorganized the Democratic Party was in the early 1970s. And it’s until 1975 or so after the Watergate affair that the Democratic Party finally recovered at the presidential level, from what went on in the late 1960s.

Posted in Classic News, The Daily Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Pac Film: Libertarian Party Conference 1980: Murray Bookchin & Karl Hess

Posted on August 27, 2012 by Ederik Schneider

Source:Real Life Journal

I find it interesting that a self-described leftist who has both socialist and anarchist leanings would be at a Libertarian Party conference. But that is exactly what you have in this video with Murray Bookchin speaking at a 1980 Libertarian Party conference. But I guess if you’re a true Libertarian you believe in free thought, free expression and free ideas. Even if they don’t completely agree with your own ideas and views. Murray Bookchin, sounds to me like Noam Chomsky ideologically. Professor Chomsky is a self-described Libertarian Socialist. Which almost sounds like an Oxymoron, but Chomsky takes the libertarian ideas when it comes to social issues and social policy. And is a Democratic Socialist when it comes to economic policy and foreign policy.

The New-Left in America might be a lot further along had they went the Noam Chomsky route when it came to their ideas. Instead of being about big government all the time and everywhere. And today even now questioning whether free speech is a good thing, because it also allows for the opposition to speak freely. With their whole political correctness movement. But instead said say, “that capitalism and private enterprise are risky things. So you need to limit for-profit enterprises and tightly regulate them. While having a big government there to take care of people when they fall through the cracks of the capitalist private enterprise system. But that personal freedom should be vast and for everyone.” Instead of using a big government to try to protect people from themselves.

Had the New-Left in America taken the Murray Bookchin, Noam Chomsky and even Bernie Sanders route when it came to both economic and social policy, as well as foreign policy, instead of always being about a big state and that individual freedom is always dangerous whether its economic, or personal and that freedom of choice gives people the freedom to make mistakes that government has to pay for, then they would find that they have a lot in common with the Libertarian Party, libertarian movement as a whole, classical Conservatives and even Center-Left Liberals who are the real Liberals. And they would have a lot more support politically in America. Because they wouldn’t sound like Marxist Communists fascist statists.

Posted in Real Life Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reagan Foundation: Video: Ronald Reagan: A Time For a Choosing

Posted on August 27, 2012 by Rik Schneider

.
Source:The FreeState

The so-called Reagan Revolution of 1980, that brought Ronald Reagan to the presidency and thirty or so new House Republicans and the Senate Republicans winning control of the Senate for the first time since 1952, actually started in 1964 under Barry Goldwater. Ron Reagan just had the personality to sell American conservatism to the country and show Americans that it wasn’t scary. It took really sixteen years for the Republican Party to control both the White House and at least one chamber of Congress.

But all of these steps were put in place starting in 1964, when the message was put together. When Republicans started winning in the South consistently in 1966, a big reason Richard Nixon was elected President in 1968, won a landslide in 1972, because Southerners were becoming Republicans. The Democratic Party was losing its grasp on the South and hasn’t gotten it back since. Congressional Republicans lost overwhelmingly in Congress in 1974, but a lot of that had to do with Watergate.

Republicans lost again in at least partially due to Watergate 1976 and Ron Reagan ran for President in 1976. And came damn close to winning the Republican nomination from President Gerry Ford and kept this message of individual freedom and personal responsibility alive. The tax revolt of the late 1970s, especially in California, all of these things were part of the Goldwater/Reagan Revolution. Thanks to Barry Goldwater, the Republican Party was changing from a yes fiscally conservative socially moderate party.

The GOP was mostly in the Northeast and Midwest and became a party that was able to communicate this message across the country and take this message to the South. The only thing with the South, is they brought in the Religious Right to go along with Republicans who are more libertarian than statist when it comes to social issues. But the GOP understood that they were simply too small and had to grow their base to compete with Democrats in the future.
Ronald Reagan

Posted in Ronald Reagan, The FreeState | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Arizona Public Media: America Experience The Presidents: Jimmy Carter The Man From Plains

Posted on August 26, 2012 by Erik Schneider

Source:The Daily Press

Had it not have been for 1974 and the Watergate scandal, Jimmy Carter doesn’t get elected President of the United States, at least in 1976. He probably runs for reelection for Governor of Georgia in 1974 and probably gets reelected and waits for 1980. And looks at his options then. Jimmy Carter, basically was in a time that was perfect for someone like him, after Watergate and President Nixon resigning in 1974. Americans were looking for decent honest person to lead the country.

Which is what President Gerry Ford was, but they were also looking for an outsider and a new voice that was not from Washington. Not a cabinet official, or someone in Congress, but a breath of fresh air, someone who wasn’t an elitist and someone who spoke their mind and could take the country on a different course. And perhaps end the gridlock in Washington and to a certain extent that’s what President Carter brought to Washington. He was able to pass a lot of legislation out of Congress.

Yes President Carter, had a Democratic Congress with large majorities, including a 3-5 majority in the Senate his first two years. But he was also able to get a lot of Congressional Republicans to vote for his legislation, because he worked with the Republican Leadership in the House and Senate. He probably actually had more Republican allies in Congress, than Democratic allies. He had problems with Congressional Democrats.

Former Senate Republican Leader Bob Dole who was in Congress during the Carter Administration, once said that Jimmy Carter was the smartest President he had ever served with, which might be true. But great intelligence and knowledge is a great thing to have as President, but you also have to have a political feel as a politician. You have to know what you want to do, where you want to take the country and how far you can take it, based on the political situation and what’s possible.

Which is something that President Carter didn’t have unlike President’s Reagan and Clinton and wasn’t sure how to communicate a message that he could get Americans to rally behind. And move Americans to get their Senators and Representatives behind him. He also had a Democratic Congress to deal with that was run by New Deal/Great Society Progressive/New Left Democrats, that since there was a Democratic President, automatically felt that it was time to move back to days of the Great Society and big government progressivism. And that wasn’t the type of Democrat that Jimmy Carter was.

President Carter, was ahead of his time in the Democratic Party in this sense. That he understood the limits of the Federal Government. And that there was only so much that it could do on its own to solve the nation’s problems and that it was time for a different approach. And even though his political feel wasn’t that good, he understood that by the late 1970s, that America had moved past the Progressive Era. And that Americans were ready for a different approach. Which also caused him problems with Congressional Democrats. So Jimmy Carter, ended up being a President with few allies in Washington, which made his job even more difficult.

Posted in Jimmy Carter | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment