Hoops Encyclopedia: NBA 1985-Chicago Bulls @ Philadelphia 76ers: Highlights

Source:Real Life Journal

The 76ers still had a lot of talent in 1985. Just look at their starting lineup featuring four Hall of Famers in it with Julius Erving, Moses Malone, Charles Barkley and Maurice Cheeks. The Bulls were a young and up incoming team, but most of the guys who won championships with the Bulls in the early 1990s were not there yet. With the 76ers having won the NBA Finals in 1983 and made it back to the Eastern Conference Finals in 1984.The Bulls of this period, other than maybe Orlando Woolridge, who was pretty solid and an up and down Steve Johnson at power forward, this was still the Air Jordan Show in Chicago. With the help that the Bulls needed to be a real Eastern Conference contender, about three years away with Scottie Pippen, Horace Grant and Bill Cartwright.

NBC Sports: MLB 1986-5-03-GOW-Anaheim Angels @ Milwaukee Brewers: Full Game

Source:The Daily Journal

The 1986 Angels were a very good, if not great all around team. Hitting, pitching and defense that should’ve at least gotten to the World Series. But of course lost three straight games in the ALCS after having a 3-1 lead in that series.The Angels, who contended both in 84 and 85 in the AL West, which was back before the wildcard came into both leagues. Looked like the team to beat in the AL West both seasons. 1986, they weren’t expected to win the AL West, especially the way that they did by being in first place most of the season. But in 86, they put it together for the whole season. Both with their offense and pitching. And managed to avoid fading in August and September like they did in 84 and 85. The 1986 Brewers, were somewhat in transition. Especially with their pitching and weren’t contenders at all and about a 500 ball club.

Classic MLB 11: Video: MLB 1978-7-25-30-This Week in Baseball

Source:The Daily Post 

There were a lot of interesting stories about the 1978 MLB season. The World Series was a great one with the Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Yankees. The two league championship series were good as well. With the Dodgers having to beat the Philadelphia Phillies and the Yankees having to beat the Kansas City Royals just to get to the MLB World Series. There were new divisional contenders, like the San Francisco Giants in the NL West. The Milwaukee Brewers in the AL East. The Anaheim Angels in the AL West. There was Pete Rose’s 44 game hitting streak. The long streak of games with at least one hit since Joe DiMaggio in 1941. And of course the never-ending Yankees soap opera involving George Steinbrenner and whoever he saw as a rival to his absolute power in New York. In the late 1970s and 1980s that of course was manager Billy Martin. There was a lot going on in 1978 making TWIB a very interesting show. Especially with Mell Allen as the host.

Fishy Paw: Airplane! (1980) 'Everything is Fine Up Here: Oh by the Way, Can Anyone Fly a Plane?'

Source:Real Life Journal

Everything is fine up here in the cockpit. Oh by the way can anyone fly this plane so we do not crash? That's right, the only problem that we have in the cockpit of this commercial passenger plane, is that we don't have anyone who can fly the plane. Which is no worst than doctors who are about to perform brain surgery on someone so they can save that person's life, but do not have anyone who knows how to perform brain surgery. Or an English teacher who doesn't speak any English. 

Other than these issues, there's nothing to be worried about. No reason to panic, I mean seriously what is the worst thing that could possibly happen with one being able to fly a plane that is already in the air, the plane crashing? I mean come on! The plane is already insured, so the money there will to replace the plan. And most of the passengers are wealthy anyway, so they probably have life insurance. I mean seriously, these passengers didn't have to get on this plane to begin with.

Classic MLB 11: Video: MLB 1979-TWIB-8/07-79

Source:The Daily Post 

1979, is still one of the best seasons in Major League Baseball and another example of why MLB should’ve went with the wildcard playoff format much earlier than they did, which was 1995. You had three teams that won 90 or more games in the AL East alone. The Orioles, Red Sox and Milwaukee Brewers. The Yankees, won 89 games, but had a better record than the Anaheim Angels, that won the AL West. But because of no wildcard and that only division winners qualified for the playoffs, the Yankees didn’t qualify. The Orioles, were the only team in the AL East that made the playoffs in 79. Even though four AL East teams won 89 or more games.

In the AL West, the Angels won the division with 88 games. Their first division championship ever. And two clubs in the Kansas City Royals and Texas Rangers that battled them for that division. The NL East, you have a very good divisional race as well. With Pirates winning that division, who won several division championships in the 1970s and won two MLB World Series as well. The Montreal Expos, who up until the late 70s, were consistent losers, made a strong run at the NL East, but finished three games back of the Pirates. The Expos, were actually very good in the late 1970s and early 80s and even the early and mid 1990s. But only made the NL Playoffs once in this whole period, because they only won one division championship.

The NL West, only two teams with winning records, but two good teams. In the Reds and Houston Astros. The Reds winning that division with 91 wins, with the Astros finishing a couple of games back. In 1979, you had three great division races. The AL West, NL East and NL West. And even though the Orioles won the AL East by seven games, they also won 102 games that year. And were in a division with two other clubs that were good enough to be very good playoff teams, that won 90 or more games as well. And the Yankees, again if they were in the AL West, would’ve won that division. MLB, was behind the times back then and should’ve expanded their playoff format much sooner than they did.

NBC Sports: MLB 1984-NBC MLB-GOW-6/23-St. Louis Cardinals @ Chicago Cubs: Full Game

Source:The Daily Press 

The baseball game that seemed like to would never end. A classic game in this great Cardinals-Cubs rivalry, great rivalry even though the Cardinals are traditional winners and champions. And the Cubs generally are not only losers, but tend to finish way out of contention. A great game if you hate pitching and perhaps see pitching as an inconvenience to slugfest and perhaps as a necessary evil that is necessary so that baseball games actually come to conclusion at some point. This game was essentially a home run derby where the team that could find away to get more outs and scored last was going to win. But not a great game in the sense that it was a great all around played game. With good pitching, defense and with timely hitting, that went down to last outs and into the ninth inning not knowing who was going to win at the end.

Thom Hartmann: Dennis Prager: Leftism is a Different Approach to Americanism

Source:Free State MD

When did Dennis Prager become an expert on the American Left? The man is not even an expert on something that he claims to be which is a conservative. He’s at best a Religious Conservative who bases his political beliefs on his religious beliefs. Which is not conservative in a political sense. Dennis Prager is not Barry Goldwater, but probably has more in common with Rick Santorum, or Michelle Bachmann and perhaps other Tea Party Confederates. Who believe Barack Obama is an illegal alien and a Muslim-Socialist or something. Than he has in common with real Conservatives in America.

As far as leftism being a different approach to America. Of course we do not have a dominant political philosophy in America. No functioning liberal democracy does. Other than maybe liberal democracy itself. A society based on liberal values dealing with individual and constitutional rights and individual freedom. And that includes both personal and economic freedom. If that’s the case, then the Center-Left has won and Liberals have their liberal democracy known as America. But one question because it gets to what you mean about leftism. Because leftism is a collection of different leftist political philosophies going from liberalism on the Center-Left to Socialists and Communists and Anarchists on the Far-Left. So when you are talking about what you might call leftism, it helps whoever is listening to you to know what form of leftism are you talking about.

But also again go back to liberal democracy. There’s not just one Left version of what America is and what it should be, but multiple versions. Also there’s multiple versions or rightists views or rightism if you want to call it that, multiple rightists views going from a very fundamentalist religious theocratic view of what America is and what it should be. To more of a conservative or conservative libertarian view of what America is and what it should be. So of course there are different views on what America is and what it should be.

Dennis Prager and Thom Hartmann, Prager especially were not making news in this interview. By saying there is a Leftist view of America or a Rightist view of America. The only news here for anyone whose not already aware of this, is forget about the Left, because seriously when Dennis Prager gives these critiques about the Left let’s get real, because he’s talking about Liberals and what he believes liberalism is. Something and people he knows as little about as fish know how to drive trucks. Not an expert on anything related to the American Left.

The North Star: Dario Cancovic: Capitalist Oligarchy & Socialist Democracy

Source:Free State MD

If you want to know what Social Democrats or Democratic Socialists should be about at least in America, look no further than Senator Bernie Sanders. The only self-described Democratic Socialist in the United States Congress. But you could also look at former U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich who was essentially redistricted out of office, or look at Ralph Nader. And why do I say this. Because these men aren’t great fans of capitalism, or private business and certainly not corporations. But understand economics well enough that you must have a certain level of private enterprise, to have a strong functioning economy.

Democratic Socialists in America understand economics well enough to know to have a functioning economy you must have at least a certain level of private enterprise. That there is indeed a limit to what government, even a Federal government can do for their people. Who need the freedom to succeed and be able to make a living for themselves and run business’s and so-fourth. Central-planning, when it comes to economics, tends not to work. And you need at least a certain level of competition to have the strongest economy possible. Where as many people as possible can succeed in it.

Now where democratic socialism comes in, is to make sure that the private sector is regulated. By the private sector, is taxed by the public sector to fund all sorts of things that Socialists believe that government should be doing for the people. But also so you have a strong enough economy to fund the centralized superstate. That Socialists, tend to be in favor of to provide the human services that people have to have in order to live well anywhere. Like healthcare, health insurance, education, public transportation, childcare and the regulators that the central state in the social democracy needs to make sure that private business are behaving and not abusing their workers and their consumers.

Europe, is full of social democracies like this. Especially in Scandinavia, but Britain is another good example. And these countries are functioning developed countries. But a big reason for that is because of their economies all have capitalist economic systems with strong private sectors to provide the central state with the revenue it needs to do the things for the people who Socialists want done.This is what democratic socialism is about in Europe and what it should be about in America. Which is a socialist form of capitalism. Which I know sounds strange, but it is true.

Because socialism, is a broader political philosophy, not just an economic system. But once you go past this and say capitalism is too risky and too many people get hurt. While a few do very well and start talking about nationalizing industries if not all industries. And having state take over the economic system, you don’t produce a socialist utopia. But you get an inefficient North Korea, or China from the 1970s. Or the old Soviet Union, a failed gigantic superstate trying to do too much for its people.

PBS NewsHour: Hari Sreenivasan- Nathan Gonzalez: ‘Would a Third Major Party Ease Congressional Gridlock?’

Source:PBS NewsHour- Nathan Gonzalez from the Rothenberg Political Report.

Source:The Daily Times

“For the past 10 years, Gallup has asked: Do the Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job representing the American people or do they do such a poor job that a third major party is needed? This week, respondents saying the two major parties did an adequate job hit an all-time low, and the percentage of people saying a third party is needed hit an all-time high. Nathan Gonzales, Deputy Editor of the Rothenberg Political Report joins Hari Sreenivasan from Washington.”

From the PBS NewsHour 

“The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is an American public broadcaster and television program distributor.[6] It is a nonprofit organization and the most prominent provider of educational television programming to public television stations in the United States, distributing series such as American Experience, America’s Test Kitchen, Antiques Roadshow, Arthur, Barney & Friends, Between the Lions, Cyberchase, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Downton Abbey, Elinor Wonders Why, Finding Your Roots, Frontline, The Magic School Bus, Masterpiece Theater, Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, Nature, Nova, the PBS NewsHour, Reading Rainbow, Sesame Street, Teletubbies, Keeping up Appearances and This Old House.”

From Wikipedia 

I expect to be a Democrat my entire life. Unless the Far-Left were to takeover the Democratic Party, which is not likely. More likely would be a socialist third-party emerging that could actually challenge Democrats.

But the two-party-system simply does not work and even though I do blame the Republicans especially their Far-Right and their anti-government Libertarian-Right more on this, one strong political party in America which is the Democratic Party right now if you look at the power, that they have, but also where they are on the issues compared with Americans as a whole, where they are blowing Republicans away right now, is not enough for a large liberal democracy.

One strong political party even if that political party is my party the Democratic Party is simply not enough. The two-party system right now is not just broken, but it is broken and bankrupt and failing. American voters not just themselves with their gerrymandering and their primary systems that in many cases especially the Republican Party, tend to select the most fringe candidates and people who are least interested in governing. And more interested in building their movement and becoming popular. As we see right now in the House Tea Party Caucus.

The current Republican Party is designed to fail and will go out of business as even a potential governing party, probably within ten years. And if that does happen and a real Center-Right party does not emerge to replace the Republican Party, we will become of a one-party-state in a country that is supposed to be a liberal democracy. Not healthy, because that is how centralized dictatorships get created. And why we need short-term at least a new Center-Right party to replace what use to be a Center-Right party in the Republican Party.

Northeastern and Midwest Republicans and Blue Dog and Southern Democrats need to think about creating a new Center-Right party and getting together with Center-Right Independents who are not Republicans, because of either the Religious-Right or the partisanship and the Tea Party calling them rhinos and all of that, to save our political system. Long-term I would like to see a multiple-party system going from Socialists, or Communists on the Far-Left, to Christian-Nationalists on the Far-Right. Let everybody be heard and have their voice and let the voters decide who should be in power.

Progressives on the Center-Left and Classical-Liberals Conservatives on the Center-Right, for most likely always be governing America, at least at the Federal level. But short-term we need a strong Center-Right party in America to compete against the Center-Left Democratic Party for the good of our political system. So the Republican Party as it is currently set up doesn’t become a failed party. Without a strong party to replace it.

ABC Sports: MLB 1981-ALDS-Game 3-Kansas City Royals @ Oakland Athletics: Full Game

Source:The Daily Journal

The expanded MLB Playoffs is not the problem I have with the MLB Playoffs in 1981 in the American League and National League. It's how they did it which is the problem. With the teams having the best records in first and second halves of the season in each division qualifying for the playoffs in each league. Which meant four teams making the playoffs in both leagues, which is how MLB did it from 1995-2011. Which again I don’t have a problem with, but how they did it.

Instead of having the teams that had the best records in their divisions for the entire season and have the two second place teams in each league qualifying as wildcards in each league, they had the best teams in the first halves of the season, play the teams with the best record of the second half of the season. Which meant teams like the Cincinnati Reds who had the best overall record in the NL West in 1981, missed the NL Playoffs. Because they didn’t have the best record in their division in either the first or second half of 1981.

The Globalist: Uwe Bott: 'The Need For U.S. Constitutional Reform'

Source:Free State MD

I’ve blogged about this before, but the problems with America do not have to do with the United States Constitution. But the some of our so-called leaders and public officials who in some cases represent a hard fringe on the Far-Right, or Far-Left. Some represent the people who send them to Washington. And some actually represent their constituents pretty well. And deserve to be reelected over and over. And to say that we should change our Constitution just because there is precedent to do so, is not a reason.

It is like saying, “I had steak for dinner last night so I might as well have it again tonight.” Without looking at what else is available to eat that night and what would be the best thing to eat that night. And if you are going to do something drastic like changing the U.S. Constitution, the document that fathered liberal democracy in the world and what a lot of other democracies are built around with all the rights and freedom and what comes from that, as well as the checks and balances and separations of powers, you gotta have a hell of a reason to change such a great document. That has only been changed I believe twenty-seven times in two-hundred and thirty-seven years.

To say we must change the U.S. Constitution because we have a faction in one party in one chamber of one branch of government, essentially holding the rest of the government and I don’t like using this word unless I’m actually talking about real hostages, But holding the rest of the government back (for lack of a better word) unless they are able to kill a law that has already been settled by the U.S Supreme Court and a general election where President Obama is reelected to go along with most if not of the members of Congress in the House and Senate, is crazy. The answer is to vote out people who aren’t governing responsibly.

All of these Congressional Democrats who supported the Affordable Care Act, voted for it and even wrote parts of it. To change a Constitution, just because House Republicans don’t like one law, is not a good reason. What you do in that situation is what Democrats are doing now and hold them accountable. “These are the people who are preventing the Federal Government from reopening, because they’ve failed over and over to get a law killed that they hate.” And you keep pointing them out in public until their leadership gets the message. And says, “enough is enough. We aren’t going to let this fringe ruin us in the next election.” And you hold them accountable again at the ballot box in 2014 and get them replaced by responsible adults.

If you love social democracy so much, how about living in one for a while. And see if you like that more than America. And live somewhere where elections do not have consequences. And votes in a way do not matter. Because if a majority of people and that majority just might be one and they decide that current government in power is not popular, new elections can be called right away even if there is already a new government.

America, is a Constitutional Federal Republic in the form of a liberal Democracy. And we are different and we have basic fundamental rights that can’t be taken away from us. Like being abused my a majority and we have minority rights in this country. And just because 50.1% of the country thinks people shouldn’t be allowed to do something, doesn’t necessarily mean they get to rule over the 49.9% of the country that says, “how we live our own lives, is none of your damn business. So why don’t you butt the hell out.” As we are seeing with the gay rights cases that going through the court system including gay marriage. Where gay marriage bans are getting thrown out. Even gay marriage bans that were popular and voted for by the will of the people, so to speak.

Social democracy, is essentially rule by majority including the majority being able to rule over the minority. And being able to tell them how they can live their own lives. And that is just not how liberal democratic America rolls, so to speak. We say power to the individual and let them govern themselves as long as they aren’t hurting innocent people. And we have constitutional rights that can’t be taken away from us that protect our privacy. And our ability to live our own lives that can’t be taken away from us by a popular vote. And as I said before the problem with America, is not our Constitution. But some of our public officials who do not understand it who need to be kicked out of office.

Democracy Now: Kevin Phillips on Roots of American Revolution, Future of American Politics

Source:FreeState Now

When you think of the United States of America, you think of a government that has separation of powers and checks and balances. And why is that, because the United States was founded on the notions that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Because America broke away from the United Kingdom of Britain. That had a king who was essentially a dictator and Americans for the most part are suspicious of centralized power. And having so much power in the hands of one government. One branch of government and most importantly, one person like a dictator. Whatever the title of the dictator is. We are a constitutional federal republic in the form of a liberal democracy. We are governed by our Constitution. Not by a Bible, or any other religious book. Which are some of the differences between a liberal democracy like America and a Theocracy like the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Because we are a liberal democracy, Americans have a lot of freedom and responsibility. Including a constitutional right to practice religion, any religion we want to practice. We also have the freedom not to practice religion if we choose to. But because we are a liberal democracy, we are not governed by religion. But our Constitution which is one thing that makes us different from Iran. We don’t have a central government religious, or otherwise, telling us what we can have and can’t have and how much of it that we can have. With a central government responsible for seeing that we get what we need and how much of that we can get. The Far-Right of the Republican Party, the Christian-Right, doesn’t like the Islamic Republic of Iran. But they like at least certain parts of their system. That their government is governed by religious views and policy. And would bring that to America, if only they could.

But again, what makes America better and different from Iran, or at least one thing, is that we aren’t govern by religion. Because our Religious, or Theocratic-Right, simply doesn’t have the numbers that it has in Iran, or Saudi Arabia, or several other countries in the Middle East and Central Asia. Richard Nixon’s Southern Strategy, was successful in bringing the South to the Republican Party and with it the Religious-Right. And people who want Christianity to become the official religion of the United States and for us to be governed by their views of the Bible and everything else. But again, the Religious-Right, is a large faction of one political party. That is losing numbers in the country and perhaps even in the GOP. Especially with the GOP’s growing Conservative Libertarian wing. And Christian Conservatives, will never have the success n America, that the Islamists had in Iran.

PBS: NewsHour- ‘Shields and Brooks on Shutdown’s Tectonic Effect For Republicans’

Source:PBS NewsHour- PBS NewsHour political analyst and New York Times columnist, David Brooks.

Source:The Daily Times

“Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week’s top political news, including how Republicans and Democrats have fared in the “catastrophic” polls coming out of the shutdown, and whether or not a solution to the stalemate is in sight.”

From the PBS NewsHour

“The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is an American public broadcaster and television program distributor.[6] It is a nonprofit organization and the most prominent provider of educational television programming to public television stations in the United States, distributing series such as American Experience, America’s Test Kitchen, Antiques Roadshow, Arthur, Barney & Friends, Between the Lions, Cyberchase, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Downton Abbey, Elinor Wonders Why, Finding Your Roots, Frontline, The Magic School Bus, Masterpiece Theater, Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, Nature, Nova, the PBS NewsHour, Reading Rainbow, Sesame Street, Teletubbies, Keeping up Appearances and This Old House.”

From Wikipedia 

The effect of the government shutdown on the House Republican Conference where most of the blame should be targeted, with the House Republican Leadership not being able to take on the Tea Party Caucus and the Tea Party Caucus setting out to destroy the Affordable Care Act at all costs and then a few Senate Republicans like Ted Cruz obviously, but go to Mike Lee and Rand Paul. So most of the blame for the government shutdown goes to Congressional Republicans.

And the consequences are Speaker Boehner looks like a bigger weakling than he already is. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who was already in danger of being reelected next year, facing both a strong Republican primary challenge from of course a Tea Party Republican in Mark Bevin, but whoever wins that race will face a well-funded with the backing of the entire Democratic Party, Democrat in Allison Grimes. And remember, Kentucky is not Mississippi. Democrats win at all levels in Kentucky. The governor of Kentucky is a Democrat and the state House is controlled by Democrats. Facing a very unpopular Republican in Mitch McConnell.

And the U.S. House of Representatives because the Tea Party Republicans who won Democratic seats in 2010, now have to go home and explain why they supported the government shutdown. And Northeastern Republicans, whether they are in the Tea Party or not. Who represent swing districts, will either have to take on the Tea Party. And risk a primary challenge from the Tea Party, or be in favor of the government shutdown. And risk losing their seat to a Democrat. And the Democratic Party will not let House Republicans forget about the government shutdown or be able to dodge i

CBC Sports: NHL-1987-Stanley Cup Finals-Game 6-Edmonton Oilers @ Philadelphia Flyers: Third Period

Source:Real Life Journal

I only remember reading about this series and seeing highlights of it on some sports show the next day. I was eleven years old at this point and my family didn’t have cable yet and this series wasn’t on American network TV. But I knew the Flyers were really good at this point. I remember them being beating my Capitals in the conference playoffs that year. In game 7 and in overtime.

I hated the Flyers back then and I still do. They were the Capitals arch-rival back then and I still consider them to be, especially since we are back in the same division. Have a great history of great tough physical games each other. Which both teams playing a similar style of tough hockey. Witch clutch scoring and solid goaltending.

This series represents NHL hockey at its best. Two great all around teams with a lot of skill, who are also physical. And the NHL needs to get back to that, instead of trying to make hockey like indoor soccer. In order to pick up young American fans who don’t appreciate defense in any sport. And are only interested in seeing a lot of scoring.

The American Conservative: Daniel McCarthy: Why The Shutdown is a Disaster For Small-Government Principles

Source:The FreeState

I saw and interview on CNN’s The Situation Room today. And Wolf Blitzer who was interviewing Republican Representative Peter King, a Conservative Republican by any standard outside of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, who basically said this that he’s voted against the Affordable Care Act what Republicans like to call ObamaCare every chance he’s gotten. But for Republicans to get what they want they need more power. That they do not have the power to get what they want. Which is to eliminate the ACA and downsize the Federal Government to the vision that Barry Goldwater had for it when he wrote his famous book. And ran for President and when the modern Conservative movement lets say was being built in the 1960s.

The American people, in poll after poll have spoken about ObamaCare and said they still do not like the law. But aren’t willing to shut the government down just to see if they can repeal, or defund it. Which is what House Republicans are trying to do right now which is to see how can they push the American economy to the cliff, before Democrats retreat. And give them exactly what they want for the good of the country. The country has spoken about ObamaCare and they didn’t like it when it was passed. So the threw out sixty-two House Democrats where most of them probably voted for the ACA. And gave House Republicans a sizable majority for 2011-12. But the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken about the ACA as well and ruled it constitutional.

We had a general election in 2012, both the president and Congress and the American people spoke again. And reelected President Obama overwhelmingly the man who signed the Affordable Care Act into law and campaigned on it. When he ran for president in 2007-08 and ran on it again when he ran for reelection in 2011-12. Then you look at the Congressional elections, Senate Democrats not only still control the Senate, but added two seats to their majority. Again they all voted for the ACA and the members who were elected in 2012 support the ACA as well. A bill that is still unpopular in most polls in the country but gaining support. Republicans still hold the House, but lost eight seats and now are in danger of losing their majority all together in 2012. Thanks to the government shutdown over ObamaCare.

House Republicans, especially the leadership say well they were reelected to. The problem with that argument is that they weren’t reelected to do everything that they want to do. Their voters in their little House districts may have reelected them to repeal, or defund ObamaCare. But the rest of the country didn’t give them the power to do that. So it is very simple for Republicans going forward. We have a divided government, but Republicans have the smaller share of this divide. Which means they simply do not have the power to get everything they want. And for them to repeal, or defund ObamaCare, they simply need to take back the Senate and White House while holding the House. And they won’t get that opportunity until the 2016 general elections. Short of that, they need to work with Democrats on things they can work on, or risk losing whatever power they still have.

Blake Lively: Out in Jeans in Boots

Source:Real Life Journal 

The only thing this video is missing and it could at least arguably be viewed as important, is a picture of Blake Lively herself. And I’m really talking about her face to show the audience that this is really Blake Lively in this video and not someone else perhaps pretending to be her. But assuming that was Blake Lively in this video, you can see why sexy celebrities perhaps especially female ones are so popular in skinny jeans, especially with boots and why they get so much attention in that combo while they are out in public. Perhaps especially on Facebook and YouTube. But also why so many celebrity interest bloggers and I’m not one of them for the most part, but why they blog about celebrities sexy women especially celebrities in their jeans and boots. Because when they wear that combo people notice right away and their jeans and boots get noticed right away. Which is great business for everyone involved.

Foreign Affairs: Francis Fukuyama: The Future of History: Can Liberal Democracy Survive the Decline of the Middle Class

Source:FRS FreeState 

I saw a blog post last night on The Dish with Andrew Sullivan which is also on WordPress, if you are interested in The Dish and the blog was called. Why hasn’t there been a Liberal version of the Tea Party. I’m paraphrasing, but that is pretty close to the title of it. Referring to groups like Occupy Wall Street as if these are liberal groups. Granted these groups are on the Left, but they aren’t Liberal. And ideologically have more in common with SocialDemocrats in Europe than they do with Liberal Democrats in America. 

Liberal Democrats like Wendell Willkie from the 1930s and 40s. Or Jack Kennedy or Bill Clinton or Dick Durbin the Assistant Leader in the U.S. Senate. Or Representative Jared Pollis one of my favorite members of the House who I would love to see run statewide at some point. A real New Democrat, a true Liberal Democrat who is pro-gay rights, anti-war on drugs, pro-marijuana legalization, fiscally responsible. The men that I mentioned are the real Liberals in the Democratic Party and the country. Senator Ron Wyden would be another and I’m sure there are plenty women like this, Wendy Davis in Texas. That make up the real Liberals in America as well. 

So perhaps Andrew Sullivan’s blog should’ve been titled something to the effect. How come there hasn’t been a leftist version of the Tea Party. Whether it comes from Liberals where I am or Social Democrats. Who are a bit further to the Left and perhaps not even center-left. But the point is taken that there hasn’t been a liberal response to the Tea Party in this century. When Republicans took control of the House and the state governorships in 2011 after the 2010 elections, the Democratic response led by President Obama was a defensive one. 

President Obama responded with you meaning the "Republicans are back in power and we have divided government now, but we are here to stop you and prevent you from getting everything you want". And this went on for over a year until Democrats got back into campaigning and decided they wanted to get reelected. And not have a President Mitt Romney with a united Republican Congress including the Senate. And set out to essentially destroy these people . Tea Party Republicans running for election in swing states and of course Mitt Romney who gave Democrats plenty of weapons to hit him with. But it wasn’t a positive reaction to the right-wing Tea Party.

In 2005-06 when the Democratic Party started rebounding thanks to the Iraq War, President Bush’s failed Social Security reform effort, Hurricane Katrina after President Bush was reelected in 2004-05. And with Republicans in Congress going downhill thanks to corrupt House Republicans and President Bush’s lower thirties approval ratings. One poll I saw in late 2005 had President Bush at twenty-nine percent. And to go along with the Iraq War and House Republican scandals some bad Senate Republicans incumbents. running for reelection in 2006. 

Like George Allen in Virginia and Conrad Burns in Montana all of these things led to the first Democratic Congress since 1993-94. Democrats won back the House and Senate in 2006, but not because of some liberal or social democratic revolution similar to the Tea Party on the Right. But because Republicans had ten toes that year and probably shot off eight of them. So Democrats coming back to power in 2006 was a response to Republicans failing in power with a united government, not because of a Democratic revolution liberal or otherwise.

To go back even further with the Goldwater-Reagan Conservative-Republican movement, that started in the mid 1960s and went up all the way through George H.W. Bush losing reelection for president in 1992. And this revolution was in response to the Progressive Era of FDR and LBJ. Where Progressive-Democrats essentially were in charge of the United States from 1933 until 1969 with a small break with Eisenhower years in the 1950s. Who did not seek to roll back the New Deal. But even added to it with the creation of the interstate highway system. 

There wasn’t a counter-movement from the Left at all until the mid or late 1980s after Democrats had taken it on the chin for twenty years. Basically at least at the presidential level losing 5-6 presidential elections from 1968-88, four of those by landslides. Jimmy Carter’s defeat to Ron Reagan in 1980 was so bad it also cost Democrats the U.S. Senate. And gave House Republicans a large minority working with Southern Democrats an ideological majority in the House. But it wasn’t really to 1985 or later that Liberal Democrats woke up and said "we need to take the party back from the Far-Left if we are going to govern again".

The closest thing I believe we’ve seen to a liberal version of the Tea Party as far as in power and the ability to mobilize is what is known as the New Democrat Coalition in the Democratic Party. An organization that was put together to respond to two ideological factions the Goldwater-Reagan Conservative Republicans. And the George McGovern Social Democrats in the Democratic Party. New Democrats are Democrats whose message is basically this. What we aren’t crazy like these people on the far-left in the Democratic Party and we are responsible and know how to govern". 

New Democrats  aren’t going to tax or regulate people out of business. But they aren’t Conservatives either, but that don't believe government has a strong role to try to take care of everyone and try to run people’s lives for them. But there to support people who need it and to see that there is opportunity for everyone to survive on their own. And government is there to protect consumers and workers from predators. Not try to protect people from themselves which is different. And this movement produced Mike Dukakis for president in 1988 who ran a horrible campaign. And Bill Clinton who of course was elected president in 1992 and reelected overwhelmingly in 1996.

But since the Tea Party was created in 2009, there hasn’t been a strong Democratic movement that could gain the support and manpower. As well as a political and governmental agenda to counter the Tea Party from the Liberal-Left in America. And I would like to see that happen, because if this movement were put together and it would have more than enough resources to compete with the Tea Party because it would be business friendly. Not owned by business, but be able to raise funds from them. Because there are plenty of liberal business groups, as well as be able to raise a tone of money online from individuals as well. And as a Liberal Democrat I would love to see this happen.

Jack Scalia: Torch Song (1993) Starring Jack Scalia & Raquel Welch

Source:The Daily Press

I’ll be the first to admit, Torch Song is not a great movie. It was probably one of the last made for network TV movies, which were all but gone by the late 1990s. But Raquel Welch and Jack Scalia are great in this movie and I believe Alicia Silverstone is as well. Raquel plays an alcoholic actress whose career is now suffering as a result. The last straw with her alcoholism and what gets her to admit it, is that her daughter not only catches her drunk one night, but catches her drunk on video tape and shows her. That is what gets Raquel’s character in alcoholic rehab where she meets a man there another alcoholic played by Jack Scalia. And they start a relationship. Even drunk Raquel is still a hot baby-face adorable goddess who is also pretty funny.

CBS Sports: NBA 1979-Christmas Day-Philadelphia 76ers @ New York Knicks: Highlights

Source:The Daily Press 

Philadelphia-New York, is a great rivalry in any sport. Eagles-Giants in the NFL, which is probably the best one. Flyers-Rangers, in the NHL, Phillies-Mets in MLB and yes the 76ers-Knicks in the NBA. Which today is not nearly the rivalry it was twenty-five or thirty years ago. But it was a big deal in the 1960s, 70s and 80s. But now both franchises, especially in the 76ers case, haven’t been very good for a long time. The 76ers, have only been to the Conference Finals twice since winning their last NBA Finals in 1983. And the Knicks have struggled just to make the Eastern Conference Playoffs for the last ten years or so.

As far as this game, the 76ers were still one of the best teams in the NBA at this point. They lost in the Eastern Conference Finals in 1978 and got to the Eastern Conference Semifinals in 1979. Dr. J Julius Erving, certainly the best forward in basketball at this point and arguably the best all around player in the NBA as well at this point. Trying to lead the 76ers under head coach Billy Cunningham back to the NBA Finals. This was a bit of a homecoming for The Doctor who played for the Nets on Long Island. And the fact that he now played for the 76ers in this game was on Christmas Day, 1978 and they Sixers won big, made this game much more special.

What is also interesting about this game, is that Bob McAdoo, one of the top power forwards in the NBA in the 1970s was playing for the Knicks in this game. That were a pretty bad team in the late 70s. After leaving Buffalo in like 1976, he ends up playing for like three teams in four years. Here’s one of the best players in the NBA at this point getting shipped around from bad team to bad team in the late 70s. Before finally finding a home where he could finish his career with in Los Angeles with the Lakers in 1982. There was a lot of talent on both teams in this game, especially for the 76ers, but they were clearly the better team.

The Tonight Show With Johnny Carson: Politician Taking a Polygraph Test

Source:Real Life Journal

If all American politicians were required to take polygraph tests, no American politician would ever get elected yet reelected in America, because Americans tend to like being told what they want to hear and not what is the truth. Like saying "we can do this, but it costs money, which means I’ll have to raise your taxes or cut spending somewhere else". And when politicians tell the truth, they tend to pay a heavy political price for that. Truth serum would be death penalty for the careers of American career politicians. 

But imagine what a bad politician would sound like on truth serum. "Senator Jones, why did you vote against the gun control bill? Because the NRA has me on in their back pockets, but both back pockets, as well as the front pockets. Yeah they bought me off. Oh be the way, my constituents aren't going to know about this, are they? Because then I would actually have to get a real job and work for a living". Or you ask a crooked politician why they voted against the school reform bill that increases standards on teachers and students. Imagine a crooked politician on truth serum answering that one. 

The crooked politician with a 90 plus approval rating of the teacher unions might say this. "Because in that bill, school districts would be able to fire bad teachers. Which would mean people would be out of jobs, even the bad teachers. And I rather have bad teachers teaching, even if that means their not students not learning, then for them not to be working at all. Or having to something that they are more qualified for. Like flipping burgers and taking parking tickets, asking customers if they want paper or plastic. Oh by the way teacher unions have bought every pocket I have in all of my pants". 

But we wouldn't need truth serum or polygraph tests for crooked politicians, if we simply had an educated electorate. And what does that mean? A lot of educated voters who know who they are voting for, before they actually vote for that person or decide not to vote for them. Which sounds like commonsense I know, but again we're talking about America where commonsense is not always common, because it is not always popular. And Americans tend to prefer to feel good, then to know what is good for them. Our political system is a perfect example of that.

Modal Fifty Rabu: Video: Tall Sexy Blonde In Tight Denim Jeans in High Heel Boots With Chains

Source:The Daily Post 

A tall sexy curvy blonde women. I just wish her top wasn’t so low or was tucked in her skinny jeans and we would’ve had some idea what kind of butt she has. But tall sexy curvy blondes which twenty years ago might have seemed as common as blizzards in Miami, Florida or Muslims in Alabama, now are fairly common today. As the bone-thin look which has been proven not to be healthy because it means people male or female simply aren’t strong enough to live healthy when they are that frail. Is now out of style because it is unhealthy and guys like women with meet on their bones and we tend to like healthy sexy looking women. And that means women who aren’t rail-thin and certainly not obese. But look like the eat properly and stay in shape so they do look healthy, but also are able to live healthy.

CBS Sports: NBA 1987-ECQF- Game 5- Philadelphia 76ers @ Milwaukee Bucks: Last Minutes of Julius Erving's NBA Career

Source:Real Life Journal  

A bad way for The Doctor Julius Erving to end his great sixteen-year professional basketball career as a player, in a blowout loss on the road to the Milwaukee Bucks of all teams. Because the Bucks and 76ers played a lot of great series’ and games against each other in the 1980s. And Bucks beat the 76ers in the playoffs. So this was probably one of the last ways that The Doctor wanted to end his brilliant career as perhaps the greatest all around small forward of all-time. But his career ending this way wasn’t because of him. It wasn’t his best game obviously, but 1987 was a rough year for the 76ers that had all sorts of injuries and had to play hard just to make the Eastern Conference Playoffs. And because of all the series injuries, were never a real threat to dethrone the defend NBA champion Boston Celtics. So it’s not surprising that Julius’s career ended this way, but it is a damn shame. It would’ve been great to see at least one more classic playoff series between the Bird Celtics and the Erving 76ers. But the Bucks weren’t going to allow that to happen.

CBS Sports: NBA 1988-Chicago Bulls @ Detroit Pistons: Fourth Quarter

Source:The Daily Press 

The Chicago Bulls weren’t that bad in 1988, they were actually good winning fifty games, but were still developing as a team and still not good enough to beat a team like the Detroit Pistons, Boston Celtics or Los Angeles Lakers. They had Horace Grant developing at power forward with Charles Oakley still having that position, who was very solid and very good for them. But the Bulls by the late 1980s were moving to become a quicker, more athletic, trapping type of team on defense. That moved the ball a lot on offense to the open scorer.

The Bulls traded Oakley in the offseason. And made Grant their starting power forward for the next season. Scottie Pippen wasn’t even starting for the Bulls during the 1988 season. So the Bulls were still about Michael Jordan on offense, with Orlando Woolridge as their second option. Who at times was very good, but not a great player. And the Pistons were one of the teams that they had to get by in the Central Division to accomplish what they wanted, which was to win the NBA Finals. And this was the start of the Bulls-Pistons rivalry, which is still alive today, but not as strong.

The Pistons in 1988 were an NBA Finals contender, but better than they were in 1987. Because they had already gotten to the Eastern Conference Finals and lost it and knew they were very close to what they wanted which was an NBA Championship. And if Isiah Thomas doesn’t sprain his ankle of game 6 of the 1988 NBA Finals, who knows maybe they win the championship that year. The Celtics were getting older and no longer had a good bench and the Pistons already knew they were good enough to beat the Celtics.

Dave 690: Video: Casino 1995 Trailer: Great Las Vegas Movie Based on a True Story

Source:The Daily Post 

Definitely the best Las Vegas Italian mafia movie all-time if not the best Italian mafia movie of all-time. It brought you into the world of the Italian mafia as well as the Jewish mafia that worked together to bring Las Vegas to organize crime in America. As well as the general public because Jewish gangster Bugsy Siegel saw Las Vegas as a goldmine back in the 1940s. Which is how the Las Vegas casinos got started and the Casino movie brought this story up to the mid and late 1970s and how the Italian mafia was involved in Las Vegas casinos. 

This movie is based on a true story about Las Vegas gambler Frank Rosenthal and others who worked in Las Vegas during this period and had to deal with the Italian mafia while they were in Las Vegas. It brought to you how big time professional gamblers like Frank Rosenthal and others were brought in by organized crime officials both Italian and Jewish-American mobsters, to run Las Vegas casinos for them. The Sam Rothstein character played by the great Robert Deniro, is based off of Frank Lucky Rosenthal, a real life Las Vegas professional gambler who is originally from Chicago. 

The Nicky Santoro character played by the great and hysterical and one of the funniest people ever in Joe Pesci, who is also a great character actor, is based off of Tony Spilotro. A real life Las Vegas Italian mobster, who is also from Chicago originally and grew up with Frank Rosenthal. The movie Casino is based off of the book and screenplay Casino, that was written by Nicholas Pileggi. So the movie Martin Scorsese put together in 1995 was based of a lot of good and factual information that was in the movie. 

Casino is not a true story completely. The characters are different and some of the stories are different. But it is based off a true story similar to Nixon which came out the same year as Casino and The Doors in 1991, that were both directed by Oliver Stone. But this movie does give you a great look inside of the world of the Las Vegas mob, both Italian and Jewish and what the lives were like for those people. And how people who certainly are not Saints, like the Sam Rothstein character played by Bob De Niro, which was based off of Frank Rosenthal, get caught up in illegal activity because of their associations. 

CBS Sports: NBA 1987-ECF-Game 7-Detroit Pistons @ Boston Celtics: Final Minutes

Source:Real Life Journal

The Pistons had to play this game without their leading scorer Adrian Dantley and their third-guard Vinnie Johnson, who gave them a lot of points off the bench. Two players that the Celtics didn’t really have anyone who could matchup with them, other than Dennis Johnson. And even the great Dennis Johnson, who should be in the Hall of Fame by the way, can only cover one player at a time. And Dantley wouldn’t have been much help defensively against either Larry Bird or Kevin McHale, or been much of a help on the boards, against Larry Legend. And the Pistons still scored 114 points in this game without two of their best scorers. But they got whipped on the boards in the fourth quarter and had no one to defend Legend. They had the players for that, but Legend was still either hitting his shots, creating points for other people and getting big rebounds. Like he always did in big games.

Carla Thony Online: Video: Martha Mitchell: The Loud Belle of Watergate

Source:The Daily Post 

According to Martha Mitchell the wife of John Mitchell, the scandal that was dubbed Watergate in 1972 by the American media was planned by the Richard Nixon presidential campaign in 1968. That they were planning to break in to Democratic headquarters before even coming to office. We now know, or at least of heard that John Mitchell is a logical source and suspect as far as who was the person who ordered the 1972 Watergate break in. 

Keep in mind a couple of things. John Mitchell was the Attorney General of the United States, the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the United States and he could’ve if not most likely was the person who ordered the Watergate scandal. And perhaps even hired the crew who did the botched burglary. Mitchell was also the head of the Richard Nixon Reelection Campaign Committee For President in 1972 and a very accomplished lawyer himself, like Dick Nixon. 

I mean these were the people working for Dick Nixon the President of the United States, criminals who would break the law to do what they believed was right. And not just breaking the law, but violating constitutional rights of American citizens as well. And you can see how the President of the United States who came to office with high hopes and having a country behind him and expecting him to good things. And leaving office disgraced and viewed as a criminal