Bad Lip Reading: Rick Santorum

Source:Bad Lip Reading- Rick Santorum: having an off day or he's just more honest when he's drunk. LOL

Source:The Daily Times 

"Rick Santorum” — A BLR Soundbite”

From Bad Lip Reading 

Imagine this: you’re a member of the opposition party, facing a President that has presided over the Great Recession (the worst recession we’ve had since the Great Depression of the 1930s) you’re facing a President that’s also presided over a fairly modest if not weak economic recovery (we are still growing at around 2% GDP with 8.2% unemployment) and you run your worst possible candidate to try to defeat the sitting President, in Rick Santorum. In fairness to Senator Santorum: Michele Bachmann’s presidential campaign didn’t make it to January. And Sarah Palin didn’t bother to run for President.Perhaps she can’t get a fly of Alaska.

The up in-coming presidential election is almost completely about the economy, at least to Independent voters that will decide the presidential election. So all you need is a presidential nominee that can talk economics and communicate a plan back to strong economic growth. And bring down our high unemployment rate. You do that and ask the question: “Are you better off today, then you were four years ago?” You win the presidential election by 5-10 points and take Congress with you.

I just laid out the perfect storm for how Republicans should be able to win back the White House. But the problem is we are dealing with a Republican Party that’s now dominated by Christian-Nationalists that believe gay marriage and pornography are bigger threats to the country, than terrorism or the weak economic recovery.

The Far-Right in America, doesn’t live in the same world as sane people. They care more about ideological purity than they do winning presidential elections. Someone who represents their Far-Right, big government political ideology, then winning the presidential election and doing what’s in the best interest of the country.

The whole reason why Rick Santorum is seen as a serious contender for the presidential nomination, is because he appeals to Christian-Fundamentalists and blue-collar Republicans. When thirty years ago he would’ve been seen as nothing more than a Far-Right presidential candidate, like Pat Robertson. Like an escaped mental patient who wondered into a political convention and just got this vision that he was President of the United States and got someone to fill out the paperwork for him.

But the problem with the GOP today is that they have more Pat Robertson’s than Barry Goldwater’s or Ron Reagan’s, when it comes to social Issues and national security. Sure, the Far-Right has it’s presidential candidate. And a competitive shot at winning the presidential nomination. The problem for the GOP is most of the country isn’t part of the Far-Right. And someone like a Rick Santorum would have a hard time winning 45% of the vote. And would kill the GOP’s chances of retaining the House and winning back the Senate.

Jon Bon Jovi: Video: It's My Life: Living Life Your Way as an Individual

This post was originally posted at FRS Citizen Journal on WordPress

I’m not a big Jon Bon Jovi fan, but one song of his that I’m a big fan of is It's My Life. Because that song perfectly describes how I look at life. It's My Life, that tells me that I have to live it and I better be in charged of it. And not let others live my life for me, meaning being in charged of it. Because I’m the one that's going to have to deal with the consequences of it good or bad. So I better be the one making the decisions in it, calling the plays.

There few ways to be alive. The first one and unfortunately the most common one at least from my perspective, is living your life the way people around you want you to live your life. Living your life to make other people happy. This happens a lot when men who are looking to pass their business down to their kids. To run their business, whether their kids are interested in the business or not or even want to run the business. 

Another way to live your life is risk free take, no chances. Don’t do anything that can hurt you. You life your life that way, you may a live a long time if you don’t bore yourself to death. But you're probably not going to be very happy. To me that's being alive, but not living, which are two different things. The third way and the way I prefer to live my life and this starting during the Hippie Revolution, is to live your life by living it, living your life the way that makes you happy. 

Figuring out what you want to do with your life and then being as productive at that as possible. Whether that makes people around you happy or not. If they really love you and you're not hurting yourself and they understand that, they’ll be happy that you're happy. Even if what you're doing with your life is not how they would live their own lives. That's called living your life, not just being alive technically, but being alive emotionally as well. And that's what life is about to me. Because at the end of the day you're the one, that has to deal with the consequences of your own decisions. So make the best of them and make them.

Thom Hartmann: Video: Caller: The Civil Rights Act Was Passed by Republicans: The GOP Legacy on Civil Rights

Source:The FreeState

Up until the last fifteen years or so the Republican Party had a long proud history on Civil Rights. Thanks to moderate and progressive Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller and classical conservative Republicans like Everett Dirksen. Civil Rights doesn’t pass in Congress in the 1960s without the help of Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen. And him bringing Republican Senators with him to cut off a Senate filibuster led by Southern Democrats. 

Southern Democrats who would be far-right Republicans today. And who left the Democratic Party shortly after the civil rights laws of the 1960s were passed, people like Strom Thurmond. It was President Abraham Lincoln who of course was a Republican, who freed the African slaves and saved the United States. But Abe Lincoln would probably be considered a Liberal by today's Republican Party. All of these civil rights laws doesn’t pass without Republican votes. Which is a credit to the Republican Party, but the “Party of Lincoln” is no longer that party, but a Party of Religious and Neoconservatives. 

Neoconservatives who see civil rights laws as an intrusion on states rights. When in the 1960s these laws passed because of help from Congressional Republicans in the House and Senate. “The Party of Lincoln” is now a party that bashes people for their sexuality. Or for not being a Christian, or speaking a foreign language. Or speaking with a foreign accent. Or for what music they listen to, or what they do with their free time. The “Party of Lincoln” is no longer that Party and it's no longer the “Party of Reagan”. But the Party of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum.

The Republican Party has a long great history when it comes to civil rights. But to state the obvious, history is in the past tense. The GOP’s recent record isn’t that good and to know this, all you have to do is look at the GOP as far as how African and Latin-American Voters vote for. The two largest racial minorities in America. They overwhelmingly vote Democratic and is something the GOP is going to have to correct, to remain a major political party.

Los Angeles Times: Charlotte Allen: Liberals vs. Conservatives

Source:FreeState Now 

If you understand both liberalism and conservatism and don’t just go by what the “mainstream media” reports about them and actually get passed the negative stereotypes about them, you understand that they don’t sound very different. To someone who doesn’t follow politics closely. They both believe in individual liberty, they are both based on the U.S. Constitution, they both believe in fiscal responsibility, for the whole budget, not just parts of it.

Conservatives believe in both strong defense and an internationalist foreign policy. They both are against big government and worry about government becoming too big. These are the things that they have in common. Liberalism vs conservatism, is not about Al Sharpton vs Rush Limbaugh. Because neither represents either side very well. But are both on the fringes.

When you think of liberalism and conservatism, the two dominant political ideologies in the United States, they represent the mainstream politics in America. Unlike progressivism or democratic socialism and its hard to tell the difference between those two on the left. Or neoconservatism on the right. Liberalism vs conservatism is not about Dennis Kucinich on the Left and Rick Santorum on the Right.

But more like Jack Kennedy or Bill Clinton or John Kerry on the left, vs. Barry Goldwater, Ron Reagan or Rand Paul on the right. They are somewhat similar, but with different approaches. Liberals believe in empowering individuals who need to be empowered and protecting individual liberty for all. Where Conservatives tend to have more of a free market approach to these issues.

Liberal vs. Conservative is not about the Far-Left vs the Far-Right. With only centrism being the mainstream political ideology in America. Liberalism is Center-Left, where the Democratic Party tends to be. As much as today’s so-called Progressives want us to move farther left. And conservatism is Center-Right where the Republican Party use to be. Up until about the late 1990s or so when the GOP moved away from Newt Gingrich and started listening more to religious and Neoconservatives. And nominated George W. Bush as their Leader.

President John F. Kennedy: Proposes Tax Cut (1962)

Source:FRS FreeState

In 1962, President Kennedy a Liberal Democrat, but an actual Liberal Democrat, not someone who’s called a Liberal Democrat, but who’s politics suggests they are something else instead, realized that economic growth was too low. And tax rates were too high and that the Federal deficit was growing too high and that we needed a strong economy to bring down the Federal deficit and put more people back to work. In order to eventually balanced the Federal budget. Which is something that was accomplished by President Lyndon Johnson. The last President with a balanced budget, until President Clinton in 1998. Thats why President Kennedy came out in favor tax cuts in late 1962, if not before and send his plan to Congress. Unfortunately he didn’t live long enough to see his tax cuts passed.

President Kennedy, understood to have a liberal democracy, people had to have the liberty to live their lives. And incentive to be productive with their lives. And not see government collect most of their production. That you had to incentivize people to be productive. For the most people possible to work hard and be productive. And that government spending and activity as it relates to the economy isn’t the only way to incentivize economic production. That you also had to incentivize the people themselves to be as productive as they can in the economy and produce as much as possible. And be able to keep most of what they produce. So they see the benefit of their production.

President Kennedy, wasn’t making a case for supply side economics. That George H.W. Bush before he became Vice President called “Voodoo Economics”. Where you cut taxes dramatically across the board without paying for them up front. The theory being that the new economic growth generated by the tax cuts will pay for themselves. President Kennedy, was also concerned about the Federal deficit. What he was saying was that the Federal Government had to be smart about how it spent money. Limit government waste and not spend money on things we shouldn’t be doing. Or spending too much on things that we should be doing. As well as incentivizing economic growth, with a tax code that doesn’t take too much of what people earn. Jack Kennedy, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, represent where Liberal Democrats should be on taxes. That no one should have to pay a lot in taxes. Meaning so much, that it harms economic growth. But we should all pay our fair share, in a progressive tax system.

Another thing that makes the Kennedy tax cuts from 1962 different from the Ronald Reagan tax cuts of 1981 and the George W. Bush tax cuts of 2001 and what makes the Kennedy tax cuts similar as the Barack Obama tax cuts of 2009, is that the benefit of the tax cuts were aimed at middle-income Americans. And also the Kennedy tax cuts, cut a lot of loopholes in the tax code. He cut rates across the board, but also got rid of a lot of junk in the tax code. For one, to help offset the tax cuts and help to pay for them. But also to get rid of a lot of junk in the code that wasn’t generating economic growth and tended to only benefit the wealthy. President Kennedy, brought down the top rate of the tax code from ninety-percent, to seventy-percent. And the bottom rate from twenty-five percent, to twenty-percent. This tax cut plan that was passed by Congress in 1964 and singed by President Lyndon Johnson and of course the Vietnam War, started an economic boom in America. That lasted the rest of the 1960s.

Commentary Magazine: Alana Goodman: Rick Santorum Wants to Ban Gambling

Source:The FreeState

I’m thinking about starting a brand new blog about Rick Santorum. I’m going to completely dedicate it to the former member of Congress who’s benefited greatly since leaving Congress, as so has the rest of the country. I might call it the World of Big Government Courtesy of Rick Santorum. The beauty of it would be, that Senator Santroum would provide me with all the material on his big government position of the day. I might even pay the former Senator royalties, for his contributions to this blog.

The problem with this potential blog, is that it would take up all my time. Forget being a political junky, I would end up becoming a Santorum junky. All Rick 24 hours, seven days a week all the time. Because Rick comes up with a new big government position basically everyday. Stick around and I’ll go through them with you. Reason a libertarian oriented media operation, they have a publication, website and an online TV operation. Something that any Liberal and Libertarian, as well as classical Conservative should be following. 

Reason has two segments called Nanny of the Month and Nanny State. And they pick one new Nanny of the Month for every month. Generally politicians, which would only be as shocking as the sun coming up. They find one person who tried to protect people from themselves. And making new restrictions on how we live our own lives each month. Apparently they haven’t been following Senator  Santorum very much. Because he would win that prize every month and every year. The only question, would be who would finish 2nd. And could they ever see 1st with a telescope.

In the last two weeks, Rick Santorum has come out of favor bf banning heavy metal music, which is why Dave Mustaine endorsed him. Trying to suck up to the Senator with a straw and has lost so many brain cells from heavy metal, which is why he endorsed Rick Santorum. And why Rick wants to ban heavy metal. He’s come out in favor of banning pornography, trying to lure Michelle Bachmann wing of the nut house to endorse him. Condoms, birth control and now today gambling. 

Calling Rick Santorum a Conservative is like calling a midget a giant or a cow a horse. A dog a cat, water, fire, it doesn’t past the laugh test, unless you don’t have a sense of humor. And if that's the case you shouldn’t read this blog either. Rick Santorum would give any Socialist you want to name a great run for being in favor of big government. David McReynolds, Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich have nothing on this guy. They would all be midgets compared with Rick, not just Dennis Kucinich. And every time he finds a new way in how to protect people from themselves, lovers of liberty need to call him out on it.

Salon: Opinion: Steve Kornacki: The GOP's Emerging Bob Dole Problem

Salon: Opinion: Steve Kornacki: The GOP's Emerging Bob Dole Problem

This post was originally posted at FRS FreeStates on WordPress

Back in 1995-96 when I was really getting into the political junky scene and when I basically didn’t know squat about politics, hopefully I know more about politics now, but you can judge for yourself, I was following things like, the brand new Republican Congress. The first one since 1953, people like Newt Gingrich, who I knew as House Minority Whip (In english, the 2nd Ranking Minority Leader) I saw this guy who looked like one of the Founding Fathers. (or Founding Liberals) Seriously, all Newt needs is a Whig and maybe bring back the Whig Party and he would fit in perfectly with the Founding Fathers. (Founding Liberals)

And people would be saying when they see the former Speaker, turned nutty presidential candidate, "look its Thomas Jefferson!" And they would tell him, "damn you look great for someone who’s, I don’t know 270 years old" at the time. I’m not Tom Jefferson’s biographer, (there’s a news flash) and people have been burned by fire. (there’s the other news flash) I also new Bob Dole the new Senate Leader, but I knew him a little bit as Senate Minority Leader with the deficit reduction debate of 1993, the healthcare reform debate of 1993-94. I was following politics a little bit in high school, but not quite the political junky yet. 

Sports was my first love growing up and paid most of my attention to that. I never saw Leader Dole as too old or not capable of the job. Or unintelligent, he was clearly a distinguished gentlemen in Congress. That term was invented for people like him, one of the most effective legislatures we’ve ever produced. But I did see him as out of touch in 1996 America that was basically happy as a country and at peace. And unless you're drowning in your own scandals, If you're the President, that benefits you.

Bob Dole probably made a mistake running for President in 1996. He wasn't too old, but he was pass his time as far as where the country was. Who was President and the situation of the country and the fact that he was leading the opposition at a time when the country liked who was in charge. But that he should’ve won in 1988 and I agree with him there. The Bush attack machine took him down in South Carolina. Just like the Romney attack machine took down Newt Gingrich in Florida this year. 

And had George H.W. Bush teams not done those things, chances are Bob Dole is the 1988 Republican nominee for president. And Mitt Romney is no longer the frontrunner this year. Mitt may be in third place right now, only ahead of a Libertarian. Leader Dole in 1996 was trying to convince the country of something they weren’t. Which was happy, unemployment 5%, high economic growth, falling budget deficit, the country was at peace. 

In 2012 what Mitt Romney is trying to do is convince the country of something that Barack Obama isn’t. Soft on defense, socialistic, dictator, anti-American, wants to make the country like Europe etc. I’m not going to layout all of the false charges, because hopefully you have better things to do with your time and I would like to keep you awake for the whole post,  but you get the idea. 

But to tell you this is exactly why the Far-Left doesn’t like President Obama, Occupy Wall Street, the so-called Progressive Caucus, MSNBC talk and company, the real socialist McGovernites in America, because Barack  Obama isn’t any of these things that the Far-Left in America wants him to be. While at the same time, Mitt has been unable to convince the country why he should be President and stand up for himself. And answer the charges that are thrown at him. What he does instead is try to change the subject, with his attack machine. And he’s paying a heavy price for it.

The Atlantic: Dino Grandoni: Jon Stewart Shows That Pandering Can be Tricky

Source:Real Life Journal

Telling people what they want to here is the easiest thing to do. Whether you're a politician, or candidate, or not. But it's probably more tempting to tell people what thy want to hear when you're an incumbent or candidate, because you need votes and more votes than your opponents in order to get elected or reelected. And if you're somewhat addicted to your job, (like an obese person addicted to all you can eat meat lovers buffets) meaning you can’t imagine a good life outside of public office, then its more attempting to tell your voters what they want to hear. 

You can tell progressive voters in metro Areas that you support Gun Control. And then tell conservative voters in rural areas, that you're pro-2nd Amendment and anti-gun  control. The same candidate or politician giving different messages on the same issue. But to different voters. Or in John Kerry’s case and I think he gets a bad wrap here, so I’ll make this bipartisan, but when you're considering running for President back in 2002, you can say "you support authorizing military operations in Iraq. 

This way Senator Kerry looks strong on defense, but when you're actually running for President, now you decide you're against the Iraq War. The classic "I was for it before I was against it". Here’s the best flip flopper in the business today and headed for a first ballot nomination to the Political Pandering Hall of Fame and that's assuming he retires from running for public office, Mitt Romney.

Mitt Romney- "I was a Liberal when I was running for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts. A Moderate when I was Governor of Massachusetts. Now that I’ve decided I should be President of the United States, I’ve decided that I’m going to be a Conservative Republican or what passes today as a Conservative Republican today." That would be Mitt on truth serum. Imagine forcing politicians and candidates to take truth serum every time they spoke to the public. Would the public still say they want honest politicians? 

But wait it gets better. Religious and neoconservatism isn’t very popular with Independent voters. Who tend to want big government out of their wallets and bedrooms. "So I’m still a Conservative, but a Conservative who’s tolerant, who focus’s on economic and foreign policy". Where Republicans tend to be strong with voters, "but I don’t push Social Issues". That is what a conservative establishment Republican would tell Independent voters. So they just get the votes of Christian and Neoconservatives in the Republican Party.

But then focus mostly on Economic and Foreign Policy if I become the Republican nominee. You run far-right in the Republican primaries. But then once you get the nomination, now you know the far-right won't get you elected President by themselves. So you move to the center-right and say "what people do with their personal lives is personal, or should be left up to the states". As you focus on economic and foreign policy while in office. 

Again its easy to tell people what they want to hear, to be for everything. Just not everything to the same people at the same time. Because then you don’t have to be against someone and risk losing their vote. The hard part and where leadership comes in and how public officials become successful at doing their job and not just keeping their job is doing things because they are right, even if it offends your base right or left, or even offends Independents. 

Knowing you're going to offend people, but that its the right thing to do. Which means telling people things they don’t want to hear from time to time. Which is where political pandering becomes a weakness. You can’t please everyone all the time and be a leader. Because otherwise you're just a follower with your hand down someone's wallet, or up their ass, looking for every available dollar, perhaps even foreign dollar you can grasp to get either reelected, or run and get elected to higher office.  

Music Junkie: Janet Jackson Rhythm Nation Tour in Concert: Miss Rhythm Nation

This post was originally posted at FRS Citizen Journal on WordPress

This weekend as music fans we've mourned the lost of Whitney Houston. Who I consider is the voice of at least my generation. And there's  a separate post about her today and I want to take the time with this blog, to share my thoughts about another very talented musical artist, who’s still alive and very well and from the same generation. Which is a credit to my generation, which is perhaps better known for our style rather than substance. 

But in Janet Jackson’s case she's known and should be known for her great talent as a performer. As a singer and dancer and even a songwriter, but also one of the sexiest and best looking performers not only of our generation, but also ever. A women who combines, beautiful baby-face looks and with a great tight sexy body to go with it.

Janet Jackson has a keen intelligence, who knows the world around her. And what’s important and what she thinks about it and what she believes needs to be said. That perhaps isn’t said enough, overlooked perhaps, or communicated in a way where the most people possible can hear and understand it. This is what Janet Jackson is about and why she’s gone as far as she has to the point I believe her music and act, has topped her brother Michael. 

But Janet probably doesn't have the same popularity as far as the number of great songs she’s produced. She’s completely involved in producing her own music. Because she knows better than anyone what she’s trying to communicate. When I think of Janet Jackson and her music, I think of songs like Black Cat which is a great classic rock song. She performs this song as well as any classic rocker. Even though she’s basically a R&B Singer and a great one. 

And that's another thing about JJ, her versatility. Her ability to combine two great sounds into one song. Another song from JJ would be Love Will Never Do, again the same Rhythm Nation album. Twenty years later still her best album another very sexy video shot on a beach, the actual song Rhythm Nation. Where she sings about we are all members of the same world basically. So lets us make the most of it.

Janet Jackson combine both physical beauty, sex appeal, intelligence, talent. All into one package and can communicate all of these abilities as a singer, dancer and commentator on world events as well as can be done right now and one of the best ever. Whitney Houston is the voice of this generation, but Janet Jackson is the best spokesperson as far as how are generation looks at the World.

Curt Ammerman: Video: Touch Me by Peace Frog: The Doors Cover Bands

This post was originally posted at FRS Citizen Journal on WordPress

Even though The Doors lead vocalist Jim Morrison died forty years ago and would 68 today and probably still performing, had he grown up and decided to take care of himself like a lot of rockers from his generation, the ora or genre of Jim Morrison still lives on. Sort of like Elvis Presley, except there aren’t as many of any Jim Morrison witness’s today who claimed to see him alive today forty years after he died. 

Unlike of course with Elvis, there people claiming to see Elvis alive. Practically everyday, but there’s sort of the next closest thing with the Lizard King. That's people pretending to be him, with his classic look. The leather suit cowboy Boots, the concho belt, the long thick black hair. The whole package who are lead vocalists in bands. That are basically cover bands of The Doors, playing their music. 

You have a guitarist doing his version of Robby Krieger, a drummer doing his impersonation of John Densmore, a Keyboard Player, doing his impression of Ray Manzarak. But of course the guy who gets the most intention, is the person playing the Lizard King. And there several different versions of The Doors cover bands. Even a Mexican Doors band, with Mexican Lizard King, who has the whole look down. As well as the voice, playing The Doors music, I follow them on YouTube and they do a great job.

The original Lizard King and Jim Morrison will always be the Lizard King. The man who put skin-tight leather jeans on the map, who made leather suits, cowboys boots, concho belts fashionable and mainstream. To the point where a lot of rockers especially the headbangers, but classic rockers and rocker chicks like Melissa Etheridege, Meredith Brooks, Joan Jett and rocker guys, The Scorpions, Aerosmith are all now and have been wearing leather jeans with Biker or cowboy boots, with metal belts. 

Modern rockers wear these outfits and move very well in them, like they are wearing a basketball uniform. And to a certain extent at least Jim Morrison wasn't afraid to look crazy on stage in concert or in public. Or when he was so drunk he couldn’t tell the difference. But he always has fans that love him so much, with YouTube channels, Facebook pages, other websites, to the point that they’ll do their best job they can being him.

Jim Morrison died at the age of 27, which is a damn shame considering his talent and brilliance. But his legacy will always live on and there will always be guys carrying on the Lizard King as if he didn’t die. To keep his memory going and which is something that’s also part of Jim Morrison’s legacy.

Saturday Night Live: Celebrity Jeopardy: The Best of Stupid Celebrities

Source:Real Life Journal

As someone who tends to be very flip if not sarcastic, or that’s what I’ve been told, I see myself as humorous. I see something funny and I give a quick off the cuff observation to it. But whatever is close enough, I’ve always had a low-tolerance for stupid questions. And my definition for a stupid question is pretty simple. Any question that someone asks as if they don’t know the answer, that they should know the answer to. “What color is red?” Would be an example of that.

Like the famous question from Ferris Buehler’s Day Off, the high school principal at the bar because he can’t handle the stress of his job. Taking a look at the Chicago Cubs baseball game and asks the bartender “what’s the score?” The bartender answers 0-0. The Principle asks, “who’s winning?” The bartender says the Bears or perhaps Da Bears being in Chicago. The Chicago Bears are obviously a football team, but the good thing about stupid questions, is they give wiseass’s like me, the opportunity to give smart answers to stupid questions. The Bears to that question would be an example of a smart answer to a stupid question.

What’s a smart answer? Well if you’re paying attention you already know the answer to the question. Because the answer is in the question. What is a smart answer, which would be like asking what state is Florida in. You follow, hopefully I haven’t lost you yet. It’s a simple concept, but thats another example of a stupid question. Asking a question, again as if you don’t know the answer. That has the answer in the question. But a smart answer would be a clever humorous response to a stupid question. Or someone saying something dumb, perhaps they weren’t thinking. Not paying attention whatever.

I have about twelve years experience working in customer service. So I’ve heard more than my share of stupid questions from people who just had brain surgery and the doctor forgot to put the brain back in. Or the person was high or drunk, not paying attention and I’ve had plenty of opportunities to give smart answers in response. If you ever watch SNL Celebrity Jeopardy, its sort of the same thing, but different. Will Ferrell playing Alex Trebek, who does a better Alex Trebek than the real Alex Trebek, has the dumbest celebrities on possible.

Or what SNL sees as the dumbest celebrities they can think of. Even though I didn’t see Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Jessica Simpson, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Michael Moore or Ben Affleck up there. Its more like people like Tom Cruise, Marlin Brando, Sean Connery, Burt Reynolds and people like that. Who are all fairly intelligent people in real life. But SNL loves to make fun of these people and Trebek asks these people intentionally the dumbest questions possible, but on purpose. Like he’ll show them the color red, Burt Reynolds is wearing a red shirt and Trebek will ask Burt, “what color is red?” And of course Burt blows the question. Or Trebek will ask the panel, “what year is it? Which Holiday comes on December 25th, that involves giving and receiving presents?”

And you would think Trebek is asking these people questions about ancient Greek history or something, but they are so dumbfounded. One piece advice I can give anyone who approaches me or tries to start a conversation with me, including online where I get a lot of less than brilliant questions, which is putting it nicely, like “what does individual liberty or freedom of choice mean?” Again two questions that have the answers in them. And my answers will be like, well its the freedom of choice. “Well what’s that?” The freedom to choose and if they are still dumbfounded.

I’ll ask people online do they speak and comprehend English, should I answers these questions in a different language. My advice for people Is to think at least a little bit before asking me something or talking to me. Because I do have a quick lip to things that I consider dumb. And will respond to them in a humorous way. Thats not a threat, just something to keep in mind. But I won’t try to devastate you and use name-calling. But to let you know, you just asked me a dumb question and you may even laugh with my answer.

CATO: Roger Pilon: Our Constitution is Out of Step With the Rest of the World

Source:FreeState Now 

If you look at the United States, all of our constitutional rights and individual liberties come from, well if you guessed the U.S. Constitution, you’ve been paying attention I haven’t lost you yet. But wait there’s more, because that's how our form of government and the Federal Government is built around. Unlike in authoritarian republics or even in some social democracies, there’s a limit to what our Federal Government can do, especially the Executive. It's what limited Government is built around in a liberal democracy. To limit the power of government to interfere in how free adults live their own lives. 

Which is why we have things like Freedom of Speech. So if the people doesn’t like what the government is doing, they have a constitutional right to protest that and organize a movement to reform. And that's just one example of free speech. 

The U.S. Constitution has things like yes the First Amendment, which guarantees our free speech, but also rights like the Second Amendment, the right for us to be able to defend ourselves. 

The Fourth Amendment, which is our Right of Privacy as well as well as the Fifth Amendment which guarantees our property rights, so government can’t take our property away without probable cause.

 The Tenth Amendment that limits the power of the Federal Government. So they can’t do whatever they want, but instead their power is limited. 

We are a liberal democracy, which means free adults have the Constitutional Right to live their own lives. And not be interfered by government without Probable Cause. Basically as long as we are not abusing others with what we are doing.

We are a liberal democracy with probably the most liberal Constitution in the World. We have constitutional rights that other democracies just doesn’t have. Because they are social democracies and less individualistic, that believe one of the roles of government is to take care of their people and even at times protect people from themselves. Our Constitution might be out of step with others in the World. But thats because of how free we are, which is what liberal democracies are about. Not because we are doing something wrong.

Free OJ: Video: The Doors, When The Music's Over: Jim Morrison and The Doors

This post was originally posted at FRS Citizen Journal on WordPress

The 1960s was an incredible decade for the Boomer Generation and everyone else. With the Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war movement and all other political movements on the left-wing in America. And also a great decade for pop culture and Rock and Roll. Especially with Bob Dylan, Eric Clapton, Jimmy Hendrix, but one band that stood out for me, The Doors.

The Doors I believe represented the Boomer Generation as well as it could be represented. The Doors who became famous in the late 1960s after being together for a few years. And one member of that band that stood out the most was Jim Morrison. Who was what he called himself, a Rock and Roll Poet. Who use his music to communicate how he felt about life and what was going on in his life. 

As well as being called the Lizard King, for the way Morrison moved and his wardrobe. With his go to black snakeskin leather suits. With the snakeskin leather suit jackets. And his black snakeskin skin-tight leather jeans. That would definitely be called leather jeans today. There’s only one Jim Morrison. Morrison put leather pants on the map in Rock and Roll. Leather pants weren’t common back then with Rockers. 

Even denim pants probably weren’t that common either. As they both are today with male and female Rockers. Jim Morrison put leather on the map in Rock and Roll. But also changed what a lead vocalist is supposed to be, which is the leader of the band. Jim Morrison was a lot of things both good and bad. He had a lot of talent and ability as a singer and writer. The ability to be honest about himself and how he saw the World. Who put everything on the line whether everyone liked it or not. 

The Lizard King had a lot of intelligence and could communicate exactly how he felt. But he was also an alcoholic, fit the drunk Irishman stereotype like a glove. Who didn’t seem to be able to tell himself he had enough. And would even perform drunk and drink on stage and do crazy things. Like crash to the floor, but was so good of a performer, if anything the alcohol made his performances even better. He picked out his own outfits like the leather suits. Where from 1967-69, was his main outfit on stage and in public as well. 

He wore his leathers, cowboy boots, concho Belt  everywhere. As a way to draw attention from women on himself and it worked perfectly. So The Doors had this crazy, but brilliant lead bocalist. But with an excellent supporting cast around him. Ray Manzarak on keyboard, Robby Kryger on guitar and John Densmore on drums.

The Doors were like a great football team, with a clear leader. And supporting cast that backed the leader up and all doing their parts to make the team as good as it cane be. So they can be as successful as they can be. And had Jim Morrison not died prematurely in 1970 at the age on 27, they are might still be in business today. Like some other bands from their generation headed to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.