The Young Turks: Cenk Uygur- ‘Dick Cheney The Living Embodiment of Eisenhower’s Greatest Fear’

Posted on July 23, 2014 by Erik Schneider

IMG_5631

Source:The Young Turks– Dick Cheney, versus Dwight Eisenhower. One led us into the 2003 Iraq War. The other led us to victory in Europe during World War II. Who do you playing for you?

“Former Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that President Barack Obama is “devastating” the U.S. military and needs to divert more resources away from domestic priorities such as rebuilding roads and making sure low-income people can get food.

During an event sponsored by Politico, Cheney said the next president needs to “turn around the whole trend” of cutting defense dollars.

“That ought to be our top priority for spending. Not food stamps, not highways or anything else,” Cheney said. “Your No. 1 responsibility as president is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. [Obama] is the commander-in-chief and he’s absolutely devastating the United States military today.””* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.”

From The Young Turks

Dick Cheney_ Spend More On Defense, Not On Roads Or Food Stamps - Google Search

Source:The Huffington Post– Dick Cheney: Vice President of the United States (2001-09)

“Dick Cheney: Spend More On Defense, Not On Roads Or Food Stamps”

From The Huffington Post

Darth Vader Dick Cheney on the loose. So no I don’t like Dick Cheney or have much respect for our former Vice President, but Cenk Uygur in this video is the perfect example of why I don’t use The Young Turks as a credible news source other than to hear what the Far-Left and the rabid partisan left-wingers in the country are thinking.

Dick Cheney didn’t say we should pay for our defense and national security at the expense of everything else in that interview. He said that: “National defense should be our number one national priority. Not Food Stamps or infrastructure.” Which is a huge difference.

Now here is where I agree with Cenk: Dick Cheney is: “the living embodiment of what President Dwight Eisenhower’s feared” in his Military Industrial Complex speech. That some people especially in the military and people who have worked with the military as Dick Cheney did first as Secretary of Defense and then later as Vice President of the United States, someone who would put no limits on what we should spend when it comes to national defense. “That there is no such thing as waste in the defense budget. And there aren’t many if any limits to what our military can do in the world.”

Posted in Originals, TYT | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Washington Post: Catherine Rampell: Limousine Liberalism’s Good Works

Posted on July 22, 2014 by Erik Schneider

The Washington Post: Opinion: Catherine Rampell: Limousine Liberalism’s Good Works 

I’m sick and tired (and that is putting it mildly) of hearing people especially rabid partisan right-wingers claim that Liberals hate the wealthy and people with money and hate capitalism and private enterprise. I mean for anyone who actually looks at who has a lot of the money in the country, a lot of those people are Liberals and someone of them even further left than that. I mean seriously what is a so-called Limousine Liberal? A wealthy Liberal, but a Liberal who also cares about the poor.

As a Liberal myself people should be able to make as much money as their skills and production will allow for them to make and what people are willing to pay them for their services. And that includes everyone regardless of political and ideological affiliation. Now what separates me as a Liberal from Libertarians and hardcore Conservatives is that I believe everyone should pay taxes based on how much they make and that includes the rich. You take advantage of the opportunities you were given living in this great country, you should pay for them as well so those opportunities are available for other Americans as well.

I don’t have a problem with rich Liberals, but people who are supposed to care about the poor and the income gap, but who do little or nothing about it on their own. And hangout with and associate with people who they claim are the reasons for the income gap in America. Cheerleaders lets say for the poor who say they are on the side of the disadvantage, but don’t do a damn thing about it that could actually help those people. And essentially attack the rich to further their own nest. Which I believe was one of the points that Catherine Rampell was making in her column in the Post today. That is where I agree with her.

Again as a Liberal economic freedom is great and we should all be able to make as much money as we are capable of making based on what we bring to the table economically and professionally. But economic freedom shouldn’t be based on who you were born to or who your parents know. But it should be for everyone in the sense that all Americans should have the opportunity to live in economic freedom in America. And that doesn’t come with higher public assistance checks, but with quality education for all starting at K-12 and even before that for all of our students. And empowering low-income adults to finish their education so they have the skills they need to get themselves a good job.

Posted in Originals, The Washington Post | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The New Republic: Issac Chotner: James Garner Obituary, Actor Dead at 86

Posted on July 21, 2014 by Erik Schneider

Source:The New Democrat 

In an age where we are so dominated by social media and celebrity culture and by people who want to be their favorite celebrities and live their lives and even people who later become celebrities that want to live the lives of their favorite celebrities we had James Garner who personified the expression “keeping it real”. The only person that James Garner ever wanted to be in life was James Garner. Because that is the only person he knew how to be and was so confident in his own skin that James Garner was the only person he wanted to be. Or at least that is how he came off in his roles. Whether young people considered him to be awesome or whatever or not.

Garner represents the opposite of what we generally get from Hollywood today of a lot of cookie-cutter characters, actors and roles that are trying to be exactly like or very similar to whatever is considered to be awesome or hot when. He was a real genuine actor the genuine article an actor’s actor and not a clone of whatever is supposed to be hot at that time. But a great actor a true professional who did his work and played his roles the way they should be played by him. And not try to play them based on whatever is considered hot at the time.

He played his role in a charming professional real way where you got to see Garner in the character he was playing. You almost in a way got to him playing himself. It was almost as if he wasn’t acting but playing a character as if he was the character and the personality, intelligence and humor that he brought to all of his roles came from him. Instead of the director feeding him things to say and to do. You didn’t do that with Jim Garner. You gave him the role and script and he would study those things and delivered his part as himself.

Jim Garner wasn’t a great comedic actor, but a great actor who was very funny simply at being himself and bringing what he had to those roles. The Rockford Files is not a comedy. But a crime drama a detective show. But the thing is it is a very funny show and his detective movies were funny as well even though they were supposed to be serious. Because that is the kind actor Garner was and the directors of these shows and movies Maverick being another example of that wanted to bring that side out of him his charm and humor. To go along with his intelligence and personality.

The actors that remind me of Jim Garner pre-Garner would be Cary Grant. And after Garner would be Mel Gibson and George Clooney. Again none of these actors are pure comedic actors in the sense of most if not all of their roles are comedic roles. But these are all very funny intelligent actors that bring their personality and humor to all of their roles. So the directors of these movies and shows in Garner’s case would almost be stupid not to use these other gifts that these actors had even if their roles and the movies are supposed to be serious.

Cary Grant, Mel Gibson and George Clooney are all real and people who are very confident in their own skin. Self-confident actors who all have no interest in being anyone other than themselves. And these guys including Jim Garner could’ve all made great livings as comedians or comedic actors. But since they are all great actors as well as very funny actors they all have the ability to play serious roles and yet bring their humor and realness to all of their roles and that is what we see from them. And the type of actor that Jim Garner was. And he will be deeply missed especially with how cookie-cutter and repetitive that Hollywood has become.

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

The Young Turks: Cenk Uygur- ‘Bill O’Reilly: Downright Sane Next to Laura Ingraham’

Posted on July 17, 2014 by Erik Schneider
c7a5a94a-d4fd-45ab-888c-67f71bff30b8

Source: The Young Turks– Cenk Uygur: not exactly a spokesperson for sanity. 

Source:The New Democrat

“Bill O’Reilly is pegging Laura Ingraham’s opinion of using mass deportation to address illegal immigration as a “draconian” idea that would “destroy the Republican Party.”

From The Young Turks

I disagree with Cenk Uygur on at least one thing here: Bill O’Reilly is not that much of a radical, or Tea Party radical on immigration either for political reasons, or in general. He is actually in favor of some type of legal status for the 10-15 million undocumented immigrants in this country. Cenk seems to think that is just for political reasons. Fine, but O’Reilly makes a good point here that he shared with Laura Ingraham (who was a roommate of Michele Bachmann and Ann Coulter at the nuthouse) when O’Reilly said that: “if the GOP takes this draconian approach towards illegal immigrants, they’re done.”

The reason why O’Reilly says that because he’s read the polls and sees the changing demographics. Today’s Republican Party is an Anglo-Saxon-Protestant male party that is located primarily in the South and to a certain extent in the Midwest. And rural areas in the Mountain West. With the libertarian-right that doesn’t have much influence over the GOP Leadership when it comes to policy at least as it relates to social issues, immigration and foreign policy.

The GOP is not even a Caucasian party even though Anglo-Saxons are Caucasian, but an Anglo-Saxon party with other non-Protestant Caucasian ethnics tending to be Democrats or Independents. The Christian-Right Tea Party base in the GOP want to keep the GOP the way it is at all costs even if that means everyone else becoming Democrats. So instead of looking for ways to reach out to their non-traditional base of the party and the elected officials in their back pockets look for ways to prevent non-Republicans from voting, or even coming into the country, they pass bogus (to be nice) Voter ID laws and mass-deportations are a couple of examples of that.

If the GOP Leadership tries to do what Laura Ingraham suggested that they do in this video and they do it before the elections this year, we’ll see Democrats win back the House and hold the Senate. Why, because that would bring the Latin-American vote out for Democrats who normally do not vote in large numbers in mid-terms voting for Democrats. It would probably bring African-Americans out to vote as well again another population that doesn’t tend to vote heavy in mid-terms. Bill O’Reilly is smart enough to understand that, Laura Ingraham is off of her medication apparently and doesn’t get it.

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

Tina Turner: I Don’t Want to Fight no More

Posted on July 16, 2014 by Erik Schneider

Source:The New Democrat

“Written by Billy Lawrie/Lulu & Steve Duberry.
Published by Fairwood Music (UK) Ltd & Chrysalis Music Ltd.

Tina Turner at her best,truly classic song.”

From Libra

Tina Turner saying that: “It is time to move on and that I wish you the best. But I’m done and moving on with my life while I still can. Because I can’t take the fighting no more and want to have a life for myself”.

This is the ultimate breakup song from the ultimate singer and musical artist at least when it comes to singing from her heart and from real-life. And not needing to be able to think of things to say, or make things up. Because Tina sings from real experiences as this song was about.

If you’re familiar with the R&B group Boyz To Men who were a hit group in the early and mid 1990s, you’ll be familiar with the song End of The Road. Which is a song about a guy who is not ready to break up with his girlfriend even though they we’re going through a rough stretch.

I Don’t Wanna Fight is the complete opposite of End of The Road. Tina is saying it’s time to move on and she doesn’t want to fight anymore and trying to make that clear in a very respectful but honest way. Whoever said “honesty is the key”, knew what they were talking about.

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

The Democratic Strategist: J.P. Green: Public Wants Supreme Court Reform

Posted on July 15, 2014 by Erik Schneider

Source:The New Democrat

Reforming the U.S. Supreme Court is something that I’ve been thinking about for five years now which is also when I started blogging. And is something I take very seriously especially considering how important the Supreme Court is where it can essentially kill bills on its own and can practically rewrite legislation on their own. By saying “we accept this part of the law, but this is what must go. And if you reform this part of the law, we’ll accept it later on”.

This is not about ‘judicial activism’. I mean seriously judicial activism is something most of us can probably define either on the Right or Left. Which is laws that are written from the bench. Meaning judicial rulings that change the meaning and effects of laws. But as U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham has said Republican from South Carolina no moderate by any real definition. “Judicial activism are judicial rulings that you disagree with”. Which is sort of a simple definition, but the Senator is correct. Because when one side loses they tend to claim judicial activism pretty quickly.

We live in a country of over three-hundred and ten-million people with fifty-states. We have a bicameral Congress with five-hundred and thirty-five members in total from the House and Senate. Yet we have a Supreme Court that in many ways is just as powerful as Congress and even the President in some cases, but they only have nine members including the Chief Justice. Where none of the states have a representative on the court as far as representing them. And where they all have lifetime appointments and never have to reapply for a job regardless of the job they do and all live off of the taxpayer’s dime.

I’m not looking for a democratic Supreme Court and to turn them into official elected politicians. I’m not even looking for time limits as far as how long someone can serve on the Supreme Court. What I want to do is make the Supreme Court accountable to the people it serves which are the people who pay their salaries. As well as more representative to the country it serves in. Again not talking about making it an elected body, but increasing the size of the Court and holding the Justices accountable to the people.

So here is what I would do. Have fifty Justices one for each state. As well as perhaps some type of delegate for the U.S. territories, but perhaps without full voting power. The Chief Justice and their deputy would be an at-large member. And there would be a new position representing the opposition or minority on the Court as well with certain duties and responsibilities. That would lead the opposition in representing the opposing view and alternative when there is a clear partisan divide.

Each U.S. Justice would be their U.S. Justice from their state and get to rule on which cases from their state would make it to the floor of the U.S. Supreme Court with the other Justices weighing in. The President still appoints each Justice, but that Justice would now serve a six-year term if confirmed by the U.S. Senate. And then have to be reappointed and reconfirmed by the Senate again to stay on the Court. Instead of getting to stay on the Court indefinitely.

Again not looking or interested and would oppose any attempt to make U.S. Justices democratically elected politicians. Because the Supreme Court deals so much with the U.S. Constitution itself and Justices aren’t lawmakers or executives, but judges of law and the constitutionality of them. What I want to do is to make them a lot more accountable for the jobs they do and allow for the people through their U.S. Senators to decide if they deserve to keep their job and hold them accountable.

Keith Hughes: FDR’s Supreme Court Packing Plan Explained

Posted in Role of Government, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

VOA News: Congress to Focus on US Border Crisis

Posted on July 14, 2014 by Erik Schneider

Source:The New Democrat

At some point Congressional Republicans are going to have to decide if they want to solve the Texas border crisis, or keep it going to use it against President Obama and use it as an issue during an election year as part of their grand scheme to add to their House majority and win back the Senate. They can’t have it both ways because if the crisis is actually resolved, then their goes a political issue for them. But if they keep it alive then they can claim that “President Obama is not enforcing immigration law and securing the border”.

Take the Tea Party out of the equation in Congress and this is a fairly easy issue to resolve. Texas Governor Rick Perry calls up the Texas National Guard to secure the border and prevent violence from happening down there and to prevent further smugglers from entering the country. Governor Perry says he wants to do this, but so far has failed to act and has instead backed conspiracy theories that “President Obama not only caused the situation down there, but did it on purpose”.

Again without the Tea Party perhaps Congress comes together and passes a bill for the extra funding to deal with the illegal immigrants at the border last week. Because the House and Senate would’ve acted responsibly and saw the crisis down there and decided we need to do something about this. Doesn’t mean they would’ve taken the Obama Administration’s bill as written. Perhaps they would’ve amended it, but they would’ve passed something real that the President probably signs.
VOA News: Congress To Focus on U.S. Border Crisis

Posted in The New Democrat, VOA News | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The New Republic: Bryce Covert: How to Equalize Compensation’

Posted on July 11, 2014 by Erik Schneider

The New Republic: Opinion: Bryce Covert: How to Equalize Female Compensation 

Equal pay for equal work makes sense to me as a Liberal as long as it is exactly that. Meaning Joe and Sally who work at a law firm or a bank do the same exact job and are equally productive and are both paid well and the same for that job. But if they have the same job, but Joe brings in more clients as well as more business as an associate attorney, than shouldn’t Joe make more money than Sally since he is more productive? And vice-versa if Sally is more productive than Joe, shouldn’t she make more money than Joe since she brings in more business to the law firm even if they have the same position?

There is nothing wrong with equal pay for equal work as long it is exactly that. The problem that I have with people who push this idea and want more government interference here is that they seem to have this idea that women should get paid exactly what men do for the same job. Even if the man is more productive and brings in more business to the company. And that is where I draw the line and if we want a gender-neutral society, (and I’m not sure radical feminists and their supporters do) than gender really shouldn’t a consideration at all when it comes to compensating workers. But instead we should be compensating workers for what they bring to the company their personal and professional qualifications.

What we should be doing as a society is making quality education K-12 college and even beyond college universal for everyone regardless of income and the income of parents. So every American regardless of gender, race or ethnicity can get themselves the skills they need to be successful in life. And allow for them to make as much money as their skills and production will allow for them. Even if they are making a hell of a lot of money and a hell of a lot of more money than men or women. Because their production and the job they do calls for them to make all of that money. Not paying men and women equally even if one is more productive than the other.

Posted in Originals, TNR | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

VOA News: Olympia Snowe on the Divide Within the Republican Party

Posted on July 10, 2014 by Erik Schneider

Former U.S. Senator and Representative Olympia Snowe who served a total of thirty-four years in Congress is exactly what the Republican Party needs now. Because she believes in both economic and personal freedom. And she knows how to govern which is something the Tea Party doesn’t even seem to be interested in Congress, or not capable of doing, or a combination of both. Ronald Reagan was no moderate, but he knew how to govern and is a political hero of Senator Snowe.

Olympia Snowe is as Northeastern Republican as a Northeastern Republican can get as you might have noticed in her accent. She represented Maine in Congress for thirty-four years. That is the wing of the Republican Party and I believe the true conservative wing of the party. Along with the libertarian-right in the West because they are truly anti-big government as it relates to economic and social issues And Northeastern Republicans are  dying off. And for the GOP to be a governing party again they need more Northeastern Republicans and Conservative Libertarians to make that happen.

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

Brookings: Stephen Grand & Shadi Hamid: The Tension Between Democracy & Liberalism

Posted on July 9, 2014 by Erik Schneider

Liberalism and democracy are two different things. Liberals believe in both, but just because you are a Democrat doesn’t mean you are a Liberal as we see in the Democratic Party. Or if you are a small d democrat, meaning you are someone who believes in democracy, but you are not a member of the Democratic Party like let’s say center-right Republicans. So you can be both someone who believes in liberalism and democracy, but you can believe in another let’s say democratic oriented ideology that believes in at least certain amount of individual freedom and believe in democracy as well.

Now there is also liberal democracy which is what the two men in this video were talking about to a certain extent. Liberal democracy would be a national system or governmental system where we have democracy based on lets say liberal values. Where everyone is treated the same and fairly under law. Where we all have a certain amount of individual rights and liberty under a Constitution that can’t be taken away even if there’s some democratic or majoritarian will to do so. Which is how the American founding fathers set up America. A liberal democracy based on liberal values and constitutionalism.
Posted in Brookings Video, Originals | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment