Reason Magazine: Lucy Steigerwald: What We Saw at The Solidarity Concert for Pussy Riot

Posted on August 12, 2012 by Ederik Schneider

Reason

Source:Real Life Journal

Wow! I thought Religious and Neoconservatism was a problem in America, especially when it’s involved in politics. But didn’t realize how big of an issue it is Russia as well. That their Federal Government is trying to clamp down on pornography and perhaps other forms of adult entertainment. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that I don’t live in Russia, or aren’t of Russian ethnicity. You hear stories about Russia as it relates to the Putin Administration clamping down on speech as it relates to the press.

Because Russia does technically have Free Press over there, with private media and so-forth and the Federal Government gets involved when one of their news networks, or publications report a story that’s critical of the Putin Administration. Which is bad enough, but to take it to the next level and it interfere with how people live their own lives and what they do in their own homes, is beyond extreme. Its big government gone wild and is something that Neoconservatives would love to see in America. I can see one these groups holding rallies with some of their famous religious leaders in defense of President Vladimir Putin and what he’s doing to crack down on immoral behavior as they see it.

I can see it now, Neoconservatives holding rallies in favor or what the Putin Administration in Russia is doing as far as it regulates its own people. They would call it something like, “defending God in the name of morality and decency by trying to eliminate pornography in the Russian Federation.” They would be defending a country that just twenty years ago was a communist republic, a country they use to protest against, especially as it relates to religious freedom. But now they would be coming out in a favor of a country that still cracks down on freedom, but in a different way. People’s ability to express themselves and be able to live their own lives and control their own bodies. And perhaps see Neoconservatives holding rallies against people speaking out in favor of free expression.

Which is how pornography has been ruled constitutionally protected under the First Amendment in the United States. I could see rallies organized by Neoconservatives that would one defend the what President Putin is doing in Russia as it relates to pornography and rallies speaking out against people who are speaking out in favor of people’s ability to express themselves sexually. And calling these people immoral and people who should be in prison for what they do in private and what they are speaking out in favor of. Which is a big part of what neoconservatism is in America, restricting freedom to protect what they see as national security and morality.

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

FORA-TV: Political Satirist Will Durst Takes on Mitt Romney

Posted on August 11, 2012 by Derik Schneider

12227778_10205101419404187_6996517477540423147_n

Source: FORA-TV: Political Satirist Will Durst Takes on Mitt Romney

The best way to describe Mitt Romney the politician is to use his own gaffes, I mean words his own thoughts. He said he’s not a politician, which might be technically true in the sense that he currently doesn’t hold public office. But why is that, because he has a very hard time getting elected to anything, except in 2002 when he was elected Governor of Massachusetts. But that’s not the whole story, he ran for President in 2007-08 in wide-open GOP field and finished third. Despite having the best resources and perhaps organization. And loses a Senate election to a vulnerable Ted Kennedy in 1994.

Mitt, decides not to run for Senate against John Kerry in 1996, against another vulnerable Senator in John Kerry and decides to take a few years off from politics instead . But the man has been thinking about running for public office at least since 1992. He just hasn’t found a way to get elected except for 2002 as Governor of Massachusetts. The reason why he’s not a career politician, is because he keeps losing or can’t find an election he can win. Not because he’s only interested in being a successful businessman. He’s been thinking about being President of the United States since 2004 and started running in 2006. Its taken him six years just to win he Republican nomination.

It’s not just Mitt Romney’s gaffe that he’s not a career politician. That takes up a whole paragraph. Then there’s the one where he says he doesn’t care about the poor. Well pardon the term no shit Sherlock! Also in he news fire can burn human flesh and people can drown underwater. And concrete is hard etc, no real news made here. Here’s a good one, he’s unemployed, actually he gets paid to run for president with all he money he raised running for President. He was fired from that back in 2008 when the GOP decided not to hire him to be their presidential nominee. He did managed to get another job running for president in 2009-10, in about three months, he’ll probably be fired again.

And then of course there all the flip-flops, like not being in favor of his own healthcare law that he singed into law in Massachusetts. He figured out that’s not going to fly and has decided he’s now in favor of Romney/ObamaCare. The best way to describe Mitt Romney without using his own words, imagine a slick used car salesmen. Who has the attitude, “I need to tell my customers what they need to hear for them to buy a car from me and where I’m wrong, I’ll try to fix this in the future.” Like saying a car that’s supposed to have four doors, but it only has three will keep you warm in the winter in Wisconsin with only three doors. Thats sums up Mitt’s flip-flops. “What do I have to say to this crowd to get their support and how do I change that around to get the support of the next crowd that I’m speaking to.” He’s a slick used car salesmen which unfortunately is a great way to describe a lot of American politicians.

Posted in Mitt Romney | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bill McCune: Barry Goldwater- ‘An American Life’

Posted on August 11, 2012 by Rik Schneider

Bill McCune_ Barry Goldwater- 'An American Life'

Source:Bill McCune– U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater (Republican, Arizona) Mr. Conservative

Source:The Daily Post

“Barry Goldwater – An American Life – The quintessential biography of Barry Goldwater. The life of a 20th century renaissance man: Explorer, world renown photographer, cinematographer, pilot, businessman, Air Force General, U.S. Senator, Presidential candidate. Includes forty years of Goldwater home movies. This 96 minute film features Barry Goldwater, brother Bob Goldwater; lifelong friend Harry Rosenzweig, and historian/friend Lester Budge Ruffner.”

From Bill McCune

Anyone whose not as familiar with American conservatism as much as they would like to be and would like to learn more about American conservatism, I have some suggestions on how to do that. Stop watching Fox News or using it as a main source of info, because it’s really mostly neoconservative and Tea Party populist commentary.

And don’t read publications that claim to be Conservative but are really Tea Party Nationalist, Big Government Republicanism, like Human Events. Unless you are interested in neoconservatism and Tea Party Nationalism.

But if you are really interested in learning about American conservatism, research Barry Goldwater because that’s what it’s about. Read the book Conscience of a Conservative that was written by Senator Goldwater in 1960. That book lays out the conservative vision for America.

American conservatism is about freedom and Americans being able to live independently of the state, especially the Federal Government, as far as being able to pay our own bills, our living expense and so-forth. And that Americans should be able to live their own lives as they see fit as long as we are not hurting innocent people with what we are doing.

Senator Goldwater even believed in the right to collectively bargain, just as long as workers weren’t forced to join labor unions. Barry Goldwater’s politics didn’t change as some Republicans and others have charged today. The Republican Party has changed to the point that Senator Goldwater couldn’t win the Republican nomination for President today. Thats how far to the Right the party has moved.

When Senator Goldwater left Congress in 1987, the Republican Party was still the Conservative Party in America. Now it’s probably the farthest right party that we have in America and that’s different. Barry probably could win the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. Even though they probably wouldn’t of liked his foreign policy views. Senator Goldwater wasn’t an isolationist, but other than that he would’ve fit in very well with the LP. And they would’ve taken him. But the Religious-Right would’ve tried to kick Senator Goldwater, Mr. Conservative out of the GOP.

Barry was a real Conservative. Senator Goldwater wasn’t interested in things like homosexuality and pornography, he had a gay grandson. And his famous line about gays in the military, was that he didn’t care if soldiers were gay or straight, but could they shoot straight. He also said that the religion doesn’t belong in politics as it relates to policy and that abortion isn’t a political issue. But freedom of choice issue. And that he didn’t want Big Government in his wallet or bedroom. All reasons why he wouldn’t fit into the Republican Party today.

Posted in Mr. Conservative | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Theodore H. White: The Making of a President (1960)

Posted on August 11, 2012 by Erik Schneider

.
Source:The Daily Press

The 1960 United States presidential campaign was one of the best ever, because of who ran for President. The Democratic Party nominated the best person they had in Senator John Kennedy and the Republican Party nominated the best person they had in Vice President Richard Nixon. It was literally the best vs the best. Two men that represented the now and future of their party, who were the leaders of their party. It gave American voters a clear choice in who to select to be the next President and who to be the next President early in the Cold War with the Soviet Union.

It gave people another choice as well. Do we want to continue to do what we were doing as a country. Have the Federal Government stay the course and not make any big changes, or do we want to try a different path. Senator Kennedy tried and I believe was successful in making the argument that America was stagnating not moving and advancing as fast as it could. And that Vice President Nixon represented this conservative approach of not moving real fast, staying back and seeing how things develop. Where Vice President Nixon tried to make the argument that America wasn’t ready to chart a different course.

Dick Nixon didn’t want to chart a course with a somewhat young and inexperienced Senator that had never been an executive before. Thats the choice that America had for President in 1960. What Jack Kennedy represented for the country was a true vision of where he wanted to take the country and how we would get there. Making the argument that America was sitting still in the 1950s under President Eisenhower who was somewhat conservative. And that the country wasn’t advancing fast enough. And sitting still and even falling behind.

The recession of the late 1950s helped Senator Kennedy make the case that its time to move again. And Dick Nixon President Eisenhower’s loyal and influential Vice President represented the conservative wing of the Republican Party. Vice President Nixon I believe didn’t do much to counter this argument or defend himself. But what he did instead was try to make this campaign about Jack Kennedy’s youth and inexperience. Even though they both came to Congress the same time in 1947 to the House and were friends there. And remained friends when Nixon became Vice President in 1953 and Kennedy was elected to the Senate the same year. And Nixon was only four years older and were in the same generation.

One difference between Jack Kennedy and Dick Nixon, was that Kennedy did offer the country a change of course. That would finish off what was created in the 1930s with the New Deal. But in a different way, focusing on health care, civil rights and tax cuts. Making the case the country was overtaxed. Where I believe Nixon didn’t have what’s called the vision thing, at least in 1960. He developed that by 1968 when he was elected President. But 1960 for him was, “this is what’s been working, so lets continue what we’ve done.”

Posted in JFK, The Daily Press | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Icna Chicago: The Life of Malcolm X

Posted on August 10, 2012 by Erik Schneider
Freedom Fighter

Freedom Fighter

Source:FRS FreeState

Malcolm X, represents to me many ways what the American Dream and what that is and should be. Someone who started from very rough beginnings, essentially came from nothing and worked his way up in life. And got so far, that people actually saw him as a threat, or his message of freedom and responsibility, not just for African-Americans, but for all Americans, as threats. By the time he died, he believed that people should be judged as people. Who moved towards Dr. Martin King when it came to civil rights. By the time he died, even as a young man he was in prison and at one point was even a racist. He saw all Caucasians as racists or “White Devils”, and not just as people and not just the people. And not just the racists, but all Caucasians.

But once Malcolm left prison and left the Nation of Islam, he got himself educated and started hanging out with Caucasians that weren’t racist and believed in similar things. And learned better and that perhaps he could work with them so they could all accomplish the same things. That all Americans should be treated equally under law and not be held down because of their race. I wrote a blog arguing this a few months ago. But Malcolm X’s message was about freedom and responsibility. That people shouldn’t expect to be given things. That if we wanted to achieve anything in life and be successful, that we had to go out and achieve those things and not settle for failure.

That people, shouldn’t settle for poverty, or anything else. That the way to avoid these things, were to go out and get ourselves educated, work hard and be productive. Rather than expect government, or anyone else to hand us those things. Which is why I believe if Malcolm X were alive today, he would be a classical Liberal Democrat or Conservative, not exactly registered to either party. But he would have that mindset, that people shouldn’t expect government, or other people to take care of themselves. But they needed to be able to do that for themselves, if they expected to be successful in life. Had both Malcolm X and Martin King lived a natural life, meaning they didn’t die at a young age an lived into their senior years and not have been murdered, or killed, but died through natural causes, America would be a much different country and not just for African-Americans. Both of them would’ve helped a lot of people who weren’t free to live their own lives. Be able to achieve those things for themselves by preaching the message of individual freedom and personal responsibility through education.

Posted in FRS FreeState, Malcolm X | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reason Magazine: Zach Weissmueller Interviewing Gavin Polone- ‘Hollywood Hypocrites, Bad Films & The Future of The Industry’

Posted on August 5, 2012 by Ederik Schneider

Reason Magazine_ Zach Weissmueller Interviewing Gavin Polone- ‘Hollywood Hypocrites, Bad Films & The Future of The Industry’Source:Reason Magazine-talking to Gavin Polone.

Source:Real Life Journal

“In the entertainment industry, you see a lot of very preachy people, who are very ‘Save the Bay,’” says Gavin Polone, a Hollywood producer, former talent agent and columnist for New York Magazine’s Vulture.com. “And then, you know, they’re getting on a private plane.”

Polone, who’s produced such memorable projects as Curb Your Enthusiasm, Panic Room, Zombieland, and Gilmore Girls, has a reputation for speaking his mind, even when what he’s saying isn’t popular. He sat down to speak with ReasonTV’s Zach Weissmueller about the irritating and hypocritical preachiness of celebrities, why film subsidies are killing the entertainment industry and hurting the economy, the urgent need for the studios to adapt to new technology more quickly, and why he describes his politics as “more libertarian than anything else.”

About 9.30 minutes. Interview by Zach Weissmueller. Shot by Sharif Matar, Alex Manning and Tracy Oppenheimer. Edited by Weissmueller.”

From Reason

Hollywood is stereotyped as very far to the left compared with the rest of the country. And I’m not going to describe them as liberal, because they are not. Liberal on social issues, but not liberal in the classical sense, which is where my politics is.

A lot of Hollywood people talk like leftists, but live like liberal capitalists who love their wealth and freedom and would die in order to protect it. They will talk about saving the day and calling out the latest right-winger that they claim they don’t like during the day, while as Gavin Polone said flying on their private jets at night and living the Hollywood hipster lifestyle and going to one wealthy person party at night.

And as Gavin Polone put it and I would put it this way, so-called Hollywood leftists (who are just Classical Liberals in actuality) are always calling for more government and social programs, or restrictions on free speech and perhaps other personal activities, while they’re going out of their way to not pay taxes and defending their rights to free speech and personal freedom.

Some of the wealthiest people in the world, are actually people who talk like leftists and supposed leftists. Actresses Susan Sarandon and Jane Fonda are both worth over 100 million dollars. Where did they get all of that money if they hate capitalism and economic freedom so much? Not to pick on these two great actresses who I love as actresses and entertainers more broadly, but they are also acting when they talk like leftists and support leftist politicians and candidates. And talking like leftists and living like liberal capitalists is very common in Hollywood, it’s not just Sarandon and Fonda.

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

Pennebaker Hegedus: The War Room (1993)

Posted on August 5, 2012 by Erik Schneider

.

Source:The Daily Press

In 1991-92 I guess was the time that I started getting into politics to the point that I was actually following the news about it. I was 16 and a sophomore in high school and I saw a speech I believe on C-SPAN. I became a political junky pretty early in life and I was actually watching C-SPAN and saw a speech from then Governor Bill Clinton from Arkansas. And he was talking about how we could make college more affordable in America, an issue we are still talking about twenty-years later.

And Governor Clinton was talking about an idea called AMERICORE, where people would get tax credits, or be able to go to college at no financial cost to them, if they serve their country. They work in community service, join the military, become a teacher, work in law enforcement, become a doctor etc. Another words be able to go to college if they give back and serve their country. And this program that was enacted shortly after he became President in 1993 and he was able to inspire thousands if not millions of Americans to volunteer for their country. And in return would be able to go to college and when I heard this speech, it gave me the sense that Bill Clinton was a winner, a Democrat who could actually get elected President of the United States.

Listening to Bill Clinton’s speech and following his presidential campaign, gave me the idea that Bill Clinton was a different Democrat. Someone whose called a New Democrat, someone who doesn’t just believe in growing the Federal Government and raising new taxes to pay for it. And by doing this, that would automatically solve whatever problem the program was intended to solve. But that you had to make the Federal Government work and be able to reform or eliminate things in the Federal Government that wasn’t working.

That Clinton’s presidential campaign was about the people not government. How do you make government work for the people, so it empowers the people who need to be empowered. Not growing government to take care of people but using it in a way so the people who need it can take care of themselves instead, which are two different concepts. Americans were looking for a change in 1992, that’s clear with a bad economy, lack of economic and gob growth.

Americans saw President Bush as out of touch and not up to the job of turning the country around and were looking for a change. But weren’t sure they were ready to turn it over to the Democrats. People who have been stereotyped as big government tax and spenders and weren’t interested in seeing new tax hikes. But want to go back to work and take care of themselves. And what they got from Bill Clinton was a new Democratic voice, someone who could talk about liberalism and communicate it in a way that made it about people and not government.

Bill Clinton had this saying that people who collected public assistance will no longer be able to get it for free in a Clinton Administration. That people on public assistance were going to be expected to use that time to prepare themselves to go to work and serve their communities. Bill Clinton’s political hero is Jack Kennedy, same as mind along with Bill Clinton and a few other people. And of course one of President Kennedy’s famous lines is, ask not what government can do for you, but what you can do for your country. And I believe Bill Clinton took that to heart and made that a big part of his presidential campaign and a bigger part of his Presidency and it worked very well.

Posted in Bill Clinton | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

RT America: Alex Wahl & Alex Chance: Porn Stars Choose The Next U.S. President

Posted on August 4, 2012 by Derik Schneider

RTA

Source:The Daily Journal

As the so-called Family Values Party heads to the adult entertainment capital of America, which is Tampa, Florida where the Grand Old Party meaning the Republican Party will hold their convention, (you can have all sorts of fun with this) I thought it would be fun to look at how the so-called porn industry could affect Mitt Romney and his potential Republican vice presidential candidates. I guess we can drop Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee and Michelle Bachmann, from the list. Since they all support a constitutional amendment to outlaw pornography. And since the GOP is the Family Values Party, they’re not going to nominate someone for vice president who would outlaw porn. And risk getting kicked out of Tampa. And being forced to hold their convention in West Virginia, or somewhere else in the Bible Belt where they would all have to rent helicopters to get to the convention. Because there aren’t enough roads.

One of my favorite jokes is that you would have better luck finding a prostitute, or some other adult entertainer at a Southern Baptist Convention, then you would see the Chicago Cubs winning the World Series, or Detroit Lions winning the Super Bowl. But the problem with that joke is the Republican Party is in Tampa this year and there might be all sorts of adult entertainers at their convention looking for potential clients and showing them a whole new way of living. Like what its like checking out women other than your wife, (in public) or what its like to have sex, (with someone other than your wife) that not all women wear long dresses everywhere they go and aren’t afraid to show their legs and even butts in public. Tampa, is about as Bible Belt and Christian-Right of a city as Seattle is in the Southeast. A very friendly individualistic of a city where people are free to be themselves.

Its funny enough that today’s modern Republican Party is in Tampa in the first place. I guess they’ll be in Sin City Las Vegas in 2016, where you’ll have thousands of Republicans who perhaps have never seen a casino on TV before let alone actually been to one. If an adult entertainer endorses Mitt Romney for president in Tampa, it could cost Mitt twenty points in the GOP, even if his approval rating goes up with the rest of the country. And you may see Mitt trying to convince people that he was never endorsed by an adult entertainer, or the person had him confused with another Mitt Romney. Like the Mitt Romney from 2002, or 1994. I mean a party where you got a certain percentage of its members, maybe 1/3 who believe pornography should be illegal everywhere in the country, having their convention in the porn capital of the country, there’s a lot that’s ironic about this picture.

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

Cindy De La Hoz: ‘Marilyn Remembered: The Official Treasures 1926-1962’

Posted on August 4, 2012 by Erik Schneider

.
Source:The Daily Press

If you are going to look at the life of entertainer Marilyn Monroe who died at the very young age of 36, the same age I am today, but back in 1962 And you can get past the goddess parts of Marilyn Monroe, which I admit is very difficult, to me at least she’s the best looking women whose ever lived, whose not related to me, you are talking about the sexy baby of all sexy babies. The sexy baby that all Sexy Babies are measured by. Extremely hot, baby-face adorable, didn’t even look 36, more like 22.

And of course with one of the greatest if not greatest bodies a women has ever had. She looked like an athlete like a tennis player or something, but if you are able to get past all of that, I believe you’ll see a very talented, but somewhat lost women. Who lacked self-confidence and perhaps was never very happy. Which is interesting to me because she married someone who had similar issues in Joe DiMaggio. One of the top 3-5 baseball players of all time, but who perhaps never appreciated that.

Marilyn Monroe wasn’t a bimbo, perhaps not very knowledgeable or very interested in things outside of the entertainment industry. But someone who was very good at her craft who didn’t work very hard at it. She was famous for missing rehearsal’s, not showing up for events. Not being very professional, but she was very good at her craft. She didn’t have to work very hard at it. She was someone who was very funny like in the movie the Seven Year Itch.

And funny in person as well and she could also act. Either be a comedian or a dramatic actress and she could also sing and perform. She wasn’t an actress or a singer, but an entertainer. Perhaps so good at her craft and then you throw in her physical attractiveness, she seemed to have everything going for her. But apparently there was something missing that she wasn’t able to accomplish which is what brought her down.

They say genius’ are somewhat troubled because as brilliant as they are about somethings. They devote so much time those direct areas that they don’t have much else going for them and seem very mediocre in other areas. Like a nerd who knows everything about lets say chemistry but couldn’t tell you their favorite movie or something because they don’t have one or don’t watch any movies or something and seem somewhat unsatisfied. I’m not saying Marilyn was a genius, but she had some of those characteristics.

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

Reason: John Blundell: Margaret Thatcher, Meryl Streep and The Iron Lady: Fact vs. Fiction

Posted on July 28, 2012 by Rik Schneider
Meryl Streep

Meryl Streep

Source:The Daily Post

I saw the Iron Lady, the Meryl Streep bio movie about former United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher back in May. And I was expecting a great movie about one of the most important world leaders, in at least the last thirty years. And I was disappointed, I don’t believe this movie was intended for political junkies. Or even people who love history such as myself, whether its American history or world history. This movie was intended for people who love movies and feel the need to be entertained.

That consider the idea of learning about important historical events and people as not interesting enough to watch that type of thing or read about it. So they see a movie and hopefully its more dressed up for them and comes off as more and I hate this term to describe things like this, but as sexy. One credit I would give the Iron Lady and something that I was pleasantly surprised by, was that this movie didn’t try to make Maggie Thatcher look like some type of Conservative fool. Who was interested in selling out the interests of the country to private business interests and didn’t care about the needy and was always looking to go to war. I think Meryl Streep did a very good job of playing Maggie Thatcher as the person she was. And not some Hollywood Leftist vision of her.

To me, what stands out about Maggie Thatcher, who had about a twenty year career in the British Government in the UK Parliament, as Leader of the Opposition and then of course as Prime Minister, is all the important things in her career that they didn’t cover. They didn’t cover much of her as Leader of the Opposition and how she rose from that to be Prime Minister or. Her interactions with the UK Prime Minister. I believe they showed one Question Time performance, or her relationship with President Reagan, or, how she dealt with the Soviet Union. They covered a little bit of the Falkan Islands conflict with Argentina in 1982 and her attempts to cut the British debt and deficit. But about an hour of this movie was about her life post-Prime Ministership. Even though it’s as Prime Minister where she really made her impact, not only in Britain, but the world as well.

I thought that Meryl Streep did a very good job of playing Maggie Thatcher with the material that was given her. As far as what aspects of her life they covered. But no offense to Prime Minister Thatcher, this movie as far as appearances has a similar issue as the movie Game Change had with Sarah Palin. Except that I believe that Meryl Streep is too attractive, too cute and beautiful to play Maggie Thatcher. Whereas in Game Change, Julianne Moore is not attractive enough to play Sarah Palin, at least as far as I’m concern.

Posted in Reason, The Daily Post | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment