Gadget

This content is not yet available over encrypted connections.

John F. Kennedy Liberal Democrat

John F. Kennedy Liberal Democrat
Source: U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy in 1960

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

National Constitution Center: NCC Staff- How Dr. Martin L. King Cited The Constitution in His Mountaintop Speech

Source: National Constitution Center-
Source: National Constitution Center: NCC Staff- How Dr. Martin L. King Jr. Cited The Constitution in His Mountaintop Speech

Dr. King used the Constitution to make his case for the civil rights movement all the time and did it in a very intelligent and accurate way. Saying that African-Americans had the exact same constitution rights as every other American including European-Americans and even English-Protestants simply because they were Americans. That the Equal Protection Clause in the U.S. Constitution does exactly that. It protects all Americans regardless of race or ethnicity equally. It doesn't say that some Americans are more valuable and worthy than others simply because of their race or ethnicity.

With Southern Anglo-Saxon states in America who were govern by Neo-Confederates who decided that they since they lost the Civil War that what they would do now is simply deny African-Americans their constitutional rights and argue they can do that under some bogus ( to be nice ) argument that under the 10th Amendment and what they call states rights that they states can essentially do whatever they want. The problem with that argument is that the Constitution supersede's states rights. The states have to be inline with the Constitution just as much as the Federal Government has to be.

Another part of the Constitution that Dr. King consistently cited in his argument for the civil rights movement is the First Amendment. The guaranteed right for all Americans to free speech and free assembly in America. The right for all Americans to peacefully assemble together and express their free speech rights and speak out against injustices and anything else that they want to speak out against. Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and other states back in the 1960s, obviously had another interpretation of the First Amendment. And simply saw African-Americans as not much more than criminals and terrorists and in some cases still as animals like in the era of slavery and believed they could breakup these protests and deny these Americans their First Amendment rights.

The civil rights movement even if it was considered radical back in the 1960s before racial and ethnic minorities became prevalent in America and before minorities had large numbers and before racism was considered to be evil by in large in the Caucasian community, the civil rights movement was about as mainstream as any political movement we've ever seen in America. Because it was about the U.S. Constitution and enforcing it for all Americans. Which under the Constitution itself it's supposed to be enforced equally for all Americans anyway. And I believe Dr. King always understood that.
Source: News Politics Info: Dr. Martin L. King's Last Speech- "I've Been To The Mountaintop"



Monday, January 15, 2018

Talking Union: Celebrating The Life and Work of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Source: UNAC/UCHP-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

Every time I hear our President Donald Trump speak and give one of his shithole comments or says something else that is disgusting about an entire group of Americans and people, I think about the worst and most ignorant of Americans. Bigots and racists from all races and ethnicities in America.

America, which could be called the world instead because America represents the entire world as far as everyone now lives hear and represents the best of America which is our diversity and individualism. The ability for all Americans to be exactly who they are and make the best life for them that they possibly can. Our diversity and individualism represents the best of America, while Donald Trump and his backers including Neo-Nazis and other European-American hate groups, representing the worst of America.

Dr. Martin Luther King represents the best of America. A Silent Generation baby born in 1929 at the start of the Great Depression. Which for an African-American born in them and born in the deep South in Georgia, would be worst than a depression, compared with European-American babies and even English-Protestant-American babies born during the same time and period. Born not to poverty but certainly modest means and having to fight racism his whole life but certainly growing up and coming through all of that working his way through college and becoming one of the best Reverends and religious leaders, as well as civil rights leaders that America has ever seen.

Dr. King represents the best of America because he proves that every American regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or who they were born to and the economic status of their parents, can make it in America if they want to make it in America and do the work to make it in America. Live a responsible life, get themselves a good education, and then apply those skills in the workforce. That it’s not about how people were born or who they were born to, that determines what kind of life you’ll have in America, but what you do with your life after you’re born that determines if you make it in America.

Dr. King’s life and vision for America with his I Have a Dream speech, represents America at it’s best. I mean think about this for a minute . “I have a dream where my children will one day be judged by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin.” That is what America is about and should be about. That every American regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender, can make it in America is they simply apply themselves and get the skills that they need to make it in America. So when you hear Donald Trump or some other shithole, make a shithole comment, treat that comment or comments for what they are, but also remember there is another vision for America that is more accurate about what America really is and represents America at it’s best.
Source: Above Inspiration: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.- Be The Best of Whatever You Are

Saturday, January 13, 2018

Foundation Interviews: Betty Garrett- Discusses The Hollywood Blacklist

Source: Foundation Interviews-
Source: Foundation Interviews: Betty Garrett- Discusses The Hollywood Blacklist

Betty Garrett saying in this interview that workers in Hollywood we're interested in the Communist Party (Communist Party USA) and not just interested but politically active, because the Communist Party back then were talking about issues like affordable housing, health care, civil and equal rights, what would be called progressive causes and that they were a progressive organization. Hearing the words communist and progressive, to describe Communists, is ironic at best.

I don't doubt that Communists believe in adorable housing and that government has a big role in seeing that is available for everyone. Or that they believe in affordable health care and health insurance. Or that they believe in equal rights for everyone in the country. Keep in mind, the civil rights movement was just a baby back in the mid and late 1940s when the so-called Communists in Hollywood investigations were going on in Congress with the so-called House Un-American Activities Committee. Perhaps not even a baby and not even born yet. Equal rights for all Americans and seeing that Non-European Americans had the same civil rights and constitution rights as English-Protestants in America, was not a mainstream issue. After all, Communists are Socialists when it comes to economic policy and today even there's still a lot of Marxism in the communist movement in America.

But, if Communists were to ever come to power in America (and it started snowing in Hell on the same day) most if not all of our civil liberties and constitutional rights would disappear. Most rights in America are individual rights. Free speech, the right to not be discriminated against under law based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion. The right to privacy, our property rights, equal justice under law. The right to a fair and speedy trial, etc.

Communists don't believe in individual rights and individualism in general. They believe everyone in society should be subjects of the state and that it's the job of the central state to see that everyone is taken care of and that the central government has to have not just broad but unlimited powers to see that everyone is taken care of in society, but to keep the regime protected and in power indefinitely. The Communists do have socialist leanings and policies when it comes to welfare rights and the general welfare, but it is a very regressive philosophy by in large especially when it comes to civil liberties and individualism.

As far as the Hollywood Ten and the Communists in Hollywood investigations. Americans (even in Hollywood) have the same free speech rights as Americans who believe in individual freedom and limited government. Or Americans who believe Christian Theocracy and ethno and racial nationalism. Or Democratic Socialists, or actual Progressives, or people who don't believe in any form of government at all.

Americans have a guaranteed right to free speech in America because we are a constitutional liberal democracy with guaranteed individual rights under our Constitution. And therefor have the right to believe what they believe and speak out on what they believe and work for people who share their political beliefs. And shouldn't be punished simply because of their politics. Which is what happened in Hollywood to the Hollywood ten and with by their own Federal Government by being persecuted by Congress because of their political beliefs.

Friday, January 12, 2018

David Hoffman: Governor George Wallace Defends Segregation on TV in 1968

Source: David Hoffman-
Source: David Hoffman: Governor George Wallace Defends Segregation on TV in 1968

The video is not about segregation but poverty in Alabama instead. Why David Hoffman who put the video together called titled the video about segregation instead, you would have to ask him.

The man who questions Governor George Wallace in this video asked his about poverty including starvation in Alabama, with Governor Wallace essentially saying, "what about New Jersey and states up North that also have poverty in them? How come you aren't asking about them." Trying to change the subject and do a what about. "Things might be horrible here, but what about these other places where things are bad?"

Alabama is different today and no longer a big state geographically with poverty everywhere. Alabama has become a lot more urban and more educated. While still dealing with high levels of rural and even urban poverty, but back in the 1960s and before that Alabama was a big West Virginia or Arkansas. Deeply rural and undeveloped with a lot of ignorant people at least in the sense of people who simply didn't finish school and perhaps never even made it to high school. A lot of that having to do with their families needing them to work early so they could have food and a place to live.

Governor Wallace who had already served two terms as Governor of Alabama by the time 1968 came around, obviously knew all of this. But instead tried to distract and deny the obvious about high levels of poverty in Alabama.

Thursday, January 11, 2018

BCP Theater: Featuring Marsha Mason & The Cast of Chapter Two!

Source: BCP Theater-
Source: BCP Theater: Featuring Marsha Mason & The Cast of Chapter Two!

Not saying Chapter Two is one of my favorite movies, at least not yet. Maybe after I've seen it another 10-20 times which will probably happen, then maybe it will become one of my favorite movies. Chapter Two is certainly one of my favorite Marsha Mason movies as well as James Caan. And is certainly one of my favorite dramatic comedies. And this is exactly what it is. A movie with a lot of humor, with very funny people and not the just the two main players, but Joe Bologna and Valerie Harper as well. But also a  movie with serious drama with a man dealing with serious issues about not getting over the death of his first wife and not ready to move on from her, but not realizing that until he remarries a beautiful woman that he truly loves.

Dramatic comedy to me at least and speaking as a fan of Alfred Hitchcock who I at least believe is the master of both dramatic comedy but suspense comedy, is comedy about serious issues. If you look at the great sitcom M*A*S*H you see exactly what dramatic comedy is. People who find themselves in crazy but serious situations but then find a way to make fun of that as a way to let out how they feel about their situation, as well as a way to maintain their sanity. If you watch the movie Chapter Two, the first hour or so of the movie is all comedy and sarcasm about romance and romantic relationships that the four main characters have been involved in life. With the characters being very open and honest about their struggles and successes with their relationships.

The Joe Bologna character Leo essentially saying that he loves his wife, but he loves women more and can't be satisfied with just one woman. He loves being married, but he can't handle being settled down with just one woman. The George Schneider character (played by James Caan) not ready to move on from his first wife who is dead, but is pressured by his brother Leo to start dating again. Talking about his last few dates and how awful and flawed the women that he went out with were. And being very funny about those dates and the women he went out with.

The whole way that Jennie (played by Marsha Mason) and George get together is funny. Neither one sure they want to go out with the other, but are intrigued attracted enough with the other that they don't want to let the opportunity go and share a few funny and charming phone calls together before they finally set up a pre-date with each other. And spend 5-10 minutes together starting to get to know each other before deciding that they want to go out on a real date.

And then the drama, well depression really as far as George sets in and he goes into this deep mental shell. After it sets in that he's married again to a different woman  a beautiful adorable charming witty woman in Jennie and now has officially moved on from his dead wife and starts taking out his frustrations on his new wife. And the rest of the movie becomes about whether George and Jennie will stay together. Will George break out of his shell and bring his new beautiful wife into his life.

Chapter Two is a great movie for people who are fans of both drama and comedy, because you get the best of both worlds. very dramatic serious scenes involving very serious and honest people, who have a great way of expressing those feeling with very quick and smart humor. This is not a softball comedy about very ordinary or less than ordinary people who find themselves way in over their heads and as a result commit all sorts of screw ups. Or a heavy-hitting drama that can leave people crying half way into the movie because of how dramatic and depressing the movie is. But instead a movie about good honest people who find themselves going though rough times, but use smart humor as a way to express how they feel and get though those situations in life.

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Tom Woods: Christopher Snowden- Killjoys: A Critique of The Nanny State

Source: Tom Woods-
Source: Tom Woods: Christopher Snowden- Killjoys: A Critique of The Nanny State

There isn't really one form of a nanny state or one ideology that backs a nanny state. The nanny state comes from both the Left (and not Center-Left) and the Right. (And not Center-Right) People on the Far-Left who at the very least have communist leanings and see individualism and personal autonomy as dangerous and people who don't share their politics as stupid. And view people in general who at least don't share their cultural values and politics, as stupid. And people on the Far-Right who see certain forms of personal behavior as immoral and offensive to their religious and cultural values to the point that they believe those certain activities should be outlawed. And are also people who believe individualism and personal autonomy at least as it relates to personal behavior are dangerous.

I don't believe any intelligent American on the Left or Right is going to argue that there not only stupid people in America, but a lot of stupid people. People who make such bad decisions that it does affect the lives of others. Drunk driving, would be an example, obesity that drives up the health care costs of other Americans especially because of emergency care that people who eat and drink poorly and don't exercise, end up consuming a lot of emergency care because they can't afford to financially pay for the costs of their consequences from their own bad behavior. And therefor end up passing those expensive health care costs onto healthy Americans.

The question should always be what should be done about it. Do you really want to penalize and even make criminals out of people who only hurt themselves at least in the short-term. Or do you want to hold them personally and financially accountable for their own poor decision-making and not allow for them to pass their health care costs onto healthier intelligent Americans. And I'm not talking about denying people health care simply because they made bad decisions with their own diets. But instead having them pay for those costs either upfront through taxation, or through higher health insurance premiums.

The nanny state coming from the Christian-Right primarily in America, is not about stupid personal behavior at all. But really about certain activities that Christian-Conservatives find immoral and offensive to their religious and cultural values. Whether its gambling, pornography, adultery, adult language, adult music, adult movies, homosexuality, women working out of the home, etc. And unfortunately there are many more examples, but I've given you several. But activities that the Christian-Right would outlaw in America and would put people in jail for doing them if they were ever to come to power, simply because these activities offend their religious and cultural values.

Again, its not a question of whether there are stupid people in America and a lot of Americans who do things that are simply not in their personal interest. As well as activities that don't even come with much of a level of danger, but for whatever reasons aren't for everybody which is why not everybody does those things. The questions are who gets to make the decisions when it comes to their own personal lives and who has to deal with the consequences of their own personal decisions. And as a Liberal because I believe in liberty I come down on the side of the individual. As someone who believes in personal freedom and personal responsibility. Not someone who not only believes in big government, but government big enough to protect people from themselves.


Tuesday, January 9, 2018

The New York Times: Opinion- Thomas J. Knock: George McGovern, Vietnam & The Democratic Crackup

Source: The New York Times-
Source: The New York Times: Opinion- Thomas J. Knock: George McGovern, Vietnam & The Democratic Crackup

There was a Democratic Party crackup in the 1960s and the debate is really when it happened. Pre-JFK assassination (which should be a clue for you) the Democratic Party was made up of Progressive cold warrior anti-Communists and Dixiecrats who today would be not just right-wing Republicans, but Far-Right-wing Republicans. But what the Democratic Party had in common was that they were anti-Communists. President John Kennedy is assassinated in 1963 and there was a leadership void and leadership that kept the Democratic Party together ideologically and politically.

Plus, you have the Baby Boom Generation starting to come of age in the early and mid 1960s who weren't anti-Communists at least when they were young and didn't see communism as some threat to their way of life. Who were anti-war pacifists at least when it came to the American military, who hated America's involvement in the Vietnam War and wanted to create a new America by any means necessary. That was less individualist, less capitalist, and less military.

The New-Left emerges as this movement that was a socialist movement made of both Democratic Socialists and even Communists. Groups like Students For a Democratic Society, The Weather Underground, and other New-Left socialist groups in America. This is the movement that broke the Democratic Party in half in 1968 and a reason why Hubert Humphrey loss the presidential election to Richard Nixon in 1968 and backed George McGovern for President in 1972.

If you look at George McGovern 1972 presidential campaign, he was the Bernie Sanders Democratic Socialist of his era. Someone who believed America was too decentralized when it came to its form of government. Who wanted to create a Scandinavian welfare state for America with the Federal Government being responsible for lot of the basic human services that we consume in life. Who was anti-wealth and believed that Americans were generally undertaxed. But McGovern pre-1968 or so was lot more mainstream with his politics. A World War II veteran who served honorably as a fighter pilot. Born and raised in North Dakota, who was very religious. George McGovern was never a New York City or San Francisco radical Socialist, who was anti-American and saw America as the real evil empire in the world. Even in 1972 he didn't believe that.

But on economic policy George McGovern was the Bernie Sanders of his era and Bernie Sanders was the George McGovern of his era. Not people who believed American capitalism was evil and should be destroyed and replaced with some type of Marxist economic system. But was someone who believed that American capitalism should be used to finance a very generous welfare state and go together as part of a new American economic system. A large private sector and private enterprise system, to go along with a generous welfare state financed through high taxes on everyone. On economic policy at least George and Bernie, were always way to the left of most Americans on economic policy, even if they would be considered mainstream Center-Left Social Democrats in Europe.
Source: AP Archive: Senator George McGovern Speaks on Vietnam- 10/28/1972

Monday, January 8, 2018

Marilyn Monroe Family: The Death of Marilyn Monroe

Source: Marilyn Monroe Family-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

Marilyn Monroe is now such a pop culture icon and hero to so many fans of pop culture and hipsters in America, that they simply can’t handle the fact that a woman like this who is so popular and is now such a fashion icon, could actually kill herself and did kill herself. Whether it was accidentally, which has always been my argument since I’ve been following this case closely for three years now, or intentionally which I don’t believe happened.

The followers of John F. Kennedy who can’t believe that a career loser like Lee Harvey Oswald, could actually put together the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, have the same love and devotion to JFK, as the followers and admirers of Marilyn Monroe. One side believing that a loser couldn’t kill their hero. The other side believing that their hero couldn’t had possibly kill herself. This is my more positive approach and take about the conspiracy theorists regarding the death of Marilyn Monroe.

My my more realistic and cynical view about the conspiracy theorists when it comes to the death of Marilyn Monroe, has to do with people who view this as a money making opportunity for them, a business investment. Knowing that there is small but large enough faction of Americans who are willing to believe that the official position on the death of Marilyn having to do with being suicide and accidental overdose, couldn’t possibly had happen because Marilyn was such an icon and goddess that she couldn’t have possibly had kill herself and that people will be more than willing to buy books, documentaries, view documentaries on TV about conspiracy theories involving how Marilyn died that night. Ranging from President Kennedy ordering the murder of Marilyn, to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy the President’s brother committing the murder himself.

Anybody can have a conspiracy theory. But if you want to have that theory be taken seriously by people who aren’t already there with you and ready to believe you, who don’t come off as people who just got out of a mental institution, perhaps escaped from one, or act as if they might need to be in one and are headed to one, you need real evidence. You need evidence that puts someone in the room at or about the time that Marilyn died. And you need a cause of death and show that someone else other than Marilyn is responsible for her death. And the people who believe or claim to believe that someone other than Marilyn Monroe herself is responsible for her own death, have never offered any evidence that someone other than Marilyn killed herself on that summer might in 1962.
Source: All Time Conspiracies: The Mysterious Death of Marilyn Monroe