Storm: Dallas- 'J.R. Ewing's Best Quotes': Featuring Larry Hagman

Source:Storm- Larry Hagman, as J.R. Ewing on Dallas.

“Dallas: J.R Ewing Best Quotes (Volume2)”

From Storm

Have you ever met a wiseass, perhaps asshole even in the jerk sense and not someone who consistently speaks, out of their rear let's say, but who just isn't a nice person who has a real rough streak and perhaps temper, but is so good at putting people and things down, perhaps even yourself that you almost have to give him credit for it? Similar to sports teams that are playing against anther team who has this incredibly great players who makes all of these incredible plays to hurt and beat you, that you almost feel like cheering and celebrating when he makes one of those great plays against you. Well, that is what J.R. Ewing ( played by the great Larry Hagman ) represents to me.

Source: Taigan McCauley- Larry Hagman, as J.R. Ewing on Dallas 

J.R. Ewing, wasn't a good guy and perhaps even a bad guy, perhaps not a criminal, but someone who at the very least would stretch the laws and rules to benefit. ( Similar to how a current President acts now and has during his entire career ) J.R. wasn't an evil man and he did generally love his family, including his kids, younger bother Bobby ( played by Patrick Duffy ) his parents and perhaps even some of his wives. J.R. had more wives than a lot of Mormons or Saudi men and probably didn't marry any of them including Sue Ellen ( played by the great Linda Gray ) because he loved those women. But similar to a Hollywood marriage to advance his career and saw marriage as a business opportunity.But was someone who would do just about anything to advance his career, including blackmail or hitting someone to rough up one of his competitors.

Source: Melissa Owens- Oil man J.R. Ewing, played by Larry Hagman 

That great line that Sue Ellen had about her husband J.R., where they were talking about horses and J.R sarcastically saying that a guy who is about to run a horsing stable knows which end of the horse is which, the front and back let's say and Sue Ellen with the great line saying, "we all know which end of the horse you are." Sue Ellen calling her husband a horses ass in public without out using those two words. J.R. was a horses ass, but he was so damn good at it that you had to respect, if not admire him for it.Because he had such a quick and sharp wit and would use humor to communicate how he felt about people and situations, to put people and situations in their places.

The J.R. Ewing line about the truth is in the eye of the beholder, obviously not something that J.R. coined or came up with himself, but an intelligent way of saying that the truth is relative. ( Again, does that remind you of any POTUS? ) If you're someone with the business background of a J.R. Ewing who was born a rich man with his own store of silver spoons with most of those being stuck in his mouth to the point that they were falling out, you don't learn unless you have great parents what's it's like to earn a living and earn a great living, because so much was given to you early on in life and you probably believe that life is easy. J.R. Ewing, was interested in expanding the wealth that he was born with, knowing he would never have to create something for himself and would step on anyone who got in his way. The truth was never his concern, but what was believable that could help him, whether it's truthful or not.

Bobby Ewing, was supposed to be the rich businessman with morals, who wouldn't screw people over just to advance his career, out screw women to do that ( ha, ha ) unlike his older brother J.R., but Bobby could be very tough when it came to protecting himself and his family, including his wife and kids. With J.R. sort of being the devil in this family and the anti-Bobby who saw business as a zero sum game with nothing but winners and losers. "You either destroy your competitors, or they'll destroy you," which is sort of the J.R. Ewing business handbook. Which is why I believe this relationship and brotherly love even worked so well on Dallas, because they counteracted each other and held each other in check. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

C-SPAN: Q&A With Brian Lamb- Charles Krauthammer: April 22nd, 2005

Source:C-SPAN- Brian Lamb, interviewing Charles Krauthammer in 2005.

"Charles Krauthammer was interviewed about his syndicated column in the Washington Post and the policies of President Bush in his second term. He also talked about his life and career, political philosophy, and observations about American politics and culture." 

From CSPAN

I could just start with the first couple minutes of this interview on Charles Krauthammer's comment on positive liberty versus negative liberty, because this is one issue where I agree with Krauthammer as a Liberal myself who believes in negative liberty over positive liberty and make that this whole piece. But I saw this interview last week when C-SPAN replayed it and there are a few other things I would like to talk about well like right-wing Progressives, which I believe Krauthammer was one and get into that as well.

Source: The Truthseeker- Charles Krauthammer quote 

As far as positive liberty versus negative liberty: positive liberties are things that government are supposed to provide for the people that they promise, when a political party that believes in positive liberty over negative liberty comes into power. Which is basically the freedom for people to not have to make decisions for themselves and not take control over their own lives. Not have to decide how to finance their kids education and where to send them to school. Choose which hospital to go to and send their kids. Not have to decide where to get their health insurance, because government would provide that for them. Not to have to plan their own retirement, because government will take care of that for them. Things that Socialists both democratic and communistic believe in.

Source: WFAA-TV- Charles Krauthammer quote

What Charles Krauthammer described as negative liberty, is probably the same definition that former Senator Barry Goldwater from Arizona ( Mr. Conservative ) would give for negative liberty, which is the right to be left alone from government short of hurting innocent people with what they're doing. That goes for both economic as well as personal freedom. The right for people to make their own financial decisions like with health care, health insurance, education, retirement, starting their own business and making their own business decisions. Just as long as they personally pay for their own decisions and take personal responsibility for their own decisions.

But that negative liberty also covers personal decisions and personal freedom as well. Again, to go back to the right to be left alone short of hurting innocent people with what they're doing. If romantic couples want to live together and even have kids together before they're married, that's their business. If adults want to smoke and posses marijuana, that's their business. If they want to gamble their own money, that's their business. If they want to image in pornographic activities and watch and read porn themselves, that's their business. And these are just a few examples, just as long as they're not forcing their personal adult activities onto minors or even adults that choose not to engage in them.

The main different between supporters of positive liberty which tend to be Socialists both democratic and otherwise, versus supporters of negative liberty which are Liberals, ( Classical Liberals, if you prefer ) and Conservative-Libertarians has to do with the right to be left alone short of hurting innocent people with what they're doing. Socialists, tend not to believe in risk and investment, unless of course it's government that's doing the investing and tend to see freedom as the freedom to make mistakes. Liberals and Conservative-Libertarians, view risk and private investment, as the necessary tools and resources to have a truly free society.

Like I said, I could've made this whole piece about positive liberty versus negative liberty, but there was one other aspect here about Charles Krauthammer that I would like to get into as well which is his definition of Neoconservative people who I call right-wing Progressives, not former Liberals, but right-wing Progressives. The Nelson Rockefeller's, George Romney's, Newt Gingrich's, of the world, people like Representative Paul Ryan today before he became Speaker of the House. And I know right-wing Progressive sounds crazy sort of like how a Libertarian-Communist would or even Libertarian-Socialist would sound in today's crazy American politics, but I'll explain what I mean by that.

According to popular American political and political pop culture, a Progressive today is essentially a statist, both democratic and communistic. Someone who believes in the state ( meaning government ) over everything else and that it's the job of government to manage people's lives for them and that there is a big government solution to solve everyone's problems for them. And to get back to one of my points about positive liberty, that freedom to too risky and is dangerous and you need big government to limit individual freedom so everyone in society is taken care of. But that is not what Progressives are what progressivism is about.

The best and easiest definition of Progressive, is someone who believes in creating progress through government action, but through limited government action. That government can't do everything for people, but needs to be there to help people are struggling get onto their own feet. With things like temporary financial assistance and a broader safety net, but who wants to use that safety net to help people get on their own feet and become economically self-sufficient and free. With things like education, job training, job placement into good jobs, infrastructure and encouraging economic development into low-income community with large populations of low-income and low-educated people.

You have the right-wing Progressives that I've already mentioned and then you have left-wing Progressives who again aren't Socialists and who also puts real limits on what government should try to do for the people. Left-wing Progressives like former President Barack Obama, who believed government could be used to help people and empower people to be able to take control of their own lives. And people like former President's Bill Clinton, Lyndon Johnson, Harry Truman, Franklin Roosevelt, and Theodore Roosevelt. Center-Left Progressives, who believed in positive government to empower people who are struggling to take control over their own lives.

Charles Krauthammer was a Progressive, but on the Center-Right a Center-Right Progressive, people who would be called Neoconservatives today. People who are very hawkish when it comes to national security and law enforcement and don't tend to trust international organizations like the United Nations and international rule of law. Who even believe in what's called America First, but who aren't Nationalists, but people who believe that America should step in whenever they believe is necessary even by themselves, to protect innocent people from authoritarian regimes and to remove those regimes so democracy can takeover. The 2003 Iraq War, perfect example of that.

But, Neoconservatives are not anti-government even when it relates to the economy and tend to believe in commonsense regulations, a safety net for people who truly need it that encourages work and self-sufficiency. So Neoconservatives tend to support the American safety net like the New Deal and Great Society, but who again are very hawkish when it comes to national security and law enforcement and tend to not believe in civil liberties for suspected criminals and terrorists.

I'm just as sad as anyone else who didn't personally know Charles Krauthammer, but who respected him even though I tend to disagree with him especially on foreign affairs and national security, because he was really sharp and honest. Wasn't a political hack for anyone who just defended someone just because they were a Democrat or Republican, but instead spoke his mind and told people what he thinks and believes regardless of who and how to may have benefited or hurt someone.

Charles Krauthammer was brilliant at using humor to make his political arguments to point out the stupidity in American politics and government. He was a breath of fresh air in an American political culture that's dominated by polluted air like FNC and MSNBC, that is only in the business to back their side and try to destroy the other side. And he'll be missed indefinitely, especially by people who simply just want to know what's going and what people think about, instead of how the news can be used to hurt or benefit one side or the other.

You can also see this post at The FreeState, on Blogger.

What Show R U Watching: The Facts of Life- 'Blair Warner Tribute: Perfect Isn't Easy'

Source: What Show R U Watching- Blair & Jo, on The Facts of Life.

"Blair Warner Tribute ✰ Perfect Isn't Easy"

From What R U Watching

Source: Zetaboards- Lisa Whelchel as Blair Warner, on The Facts of Life

Blair Warner ( played by Lisa Whelchel ) on her gorgeous, adorable baby-face, comes off as someone who looks down on people who drive Mercedes instead of Rolls Royces and owns one vacation home, instead of at least two, as people who are poor. As a very snobby, self-centered, narcissistic person, who looks down at middle class and even upper middle class people which is most of the students at the Eastland School where all these girls went. And that for anyone at this school or who comes across there, that it's their honor to just be in her presence. But if you're familiar with the cliches you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover, or appearances can be deceiving, you know those cliches could've been written for Blair Warner.
All the snobby, selfish, self-centered, narcissistic characteristics about Blair Warner, are true. Except for perhaps the selfish characteristic. If you're familiar with The Facts of Life, you know that Blair is a very caring and feeling person, who would've given her right arm to save Jo Polniaczek ( her arch-rival on the show ) and if you watch these two characters on that show, you might get the slight impression that they hate each other.

Especially Jo ( played by Nancy McKeon ) because Blair represents everything that Jo hates, because Blair wasn't born with a silver spoon, but with a collection of silver spoons for each vacation home that the Warner Family owns. And has been given everything that she's ever wanted materialistically, while Joe comes from a broken home with her father being in prison and her mother working 2-3 jobs just to able to support herself and her daughter.

On the surface, Blair Warner looks like a goddess princess, perhaps the Queen of the Goddesses from Paradise World, who couldn't do anything wrong even if she tried or even wanted to and yet is a very adorable sweetheart who is always interested in what people around her are going through and tries to help others whenever she can and perhaps even especially Joe, even though they seem to hate each other on the show.

And yet Blair goes through the same issues that middle class and even upper middle class teenagers go through. Including self-doubt and knowing if they're good enough. Her parents get divorced on the show and her parents send her to Eastland at least partially to get away from her. Her father rarely if ever visits her on the show. Her mother seems more interested in starting a new life, than visiting her daughter at Eastland. Blair gets caught plagiarizing a poem, things that happen to middle class students and people struggling just to get by in school all the time. Blair seems to be perfect and yet is never able to find that one guy on this show even while they're in and out of college.

Blair goes through experiences that most if not all teenagers perhaps especially girls go through, in their adolescence. Things that happen to middle class kids all the time and yet Blair with her background and ability to get just about anything that she ever wants at any given time, goes through the same struggles and pains that everyone else goes through and is in need of the name support system that we all need. Which are people around us to support us when we're going through the rough waters of life not sure if we're going to make it through or not.

Blair Warner is my favorite character on The Facts of Life, not because she comes from a wealthy family and seems perfect on the outside. Yes, she's this gorgeous, baby-face adorable princess, with the personality and body to match and if anything is overly adorable and comes off as a little girl in many cases and if you look at Lisa Whelchel 30-40 years later today, she doesn't look much if any older. She still has that gorgeous baby-face and can still come off as a big little girl. But what I really love about this character is that she's real and honest. There's a real person and human inside of that goddess appearance that goes through the same struggles that almost every other middle class American goes through, especially when they're growing up. 

You can also see this post on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FreeState Now, on WordPress.

The Express Online: 'Raquel Welch- Through The Years'

Source:The Express Online- The Red Hot Raquel Welch.

"Raquel Welch through the years. Delve into Raquel Welch's career SUBSCRIBE for more at:The Express Online...

From The Express Online

Source: Wooden Boat- The Red Hot Raquel Welch 

Every generation at least in Hollywood, has that one woman and perhaps man as well, that the rest of that generation is defined by and becomes the standard for how that generation is judged. And I'm talking both in a physical as well as professional sense. Rita Hayworth, who was not only perhaps the best and most famous actress, as well as most popular, and perhaps best look actress of the World War II Generation. Marilyn Monroe, is certainly the most popular and famous actress in the Silent Generation. But to me at least Sophia Loren is not only better looking than Marilyn, hotter, sexier, grown up and doesn't come off as a little girl both as fas as her face, but personality as well. But that's me.

Source: Got Celeb- Hollywood Goddess Raquel Welch 

Raquel Welch born in 1940, if you put her in the Baby Boom because she was born in the 1940s at the start of World War II, even though she doesn't officially qualify as a Baby Boomer ( according to the Census Bureau ) I believe would have that title for the Baby Boomers. As the best looking actress of that generation. Every generation in Hollywood at least has that one actress that every other actress is judged by. Both in a physical, as well as a professional sense. How the look and how good of an actress that they are.

Source: Daily Mail- Hollywood Goddess Raquel Welch 

Raquel Welch is certainly not the best actress of either the Silent Generation or the Baby Boom. But who from either generation is better looking than Raquel? What woman from either generation is hotter, cuter, and sexier, than Raquel. There women who are cuter than Raquel. There women who are sexier than Raquel. But hotter? Perhaps Sophia Loren, but anyone else? When I think of red hot, Raquel Welch is at or near the top of the list.

I also think of women from her era like Jill St. John, Stefanie Powers, Mariah Carey from today. These hot, gorgeous, sexy redheads, who are also all tall, who are also all baby-face adorable. So cute to the point that you could just focus on who cute they are. And if they weren't also gorgeous and sexy, they would all be too cute.

You look at Raquel Welch from 1966, 1970, 1978, 1985, the early 1990s, mid and late 1990s, at any point in the 21st Century and what in each of these years and eras there are a few things about her that are always there and still there. She's not just gorgeous, but hot. She's not just cute, but adorable and baby-face adorable and still is. And she's very sexy and has a great body in each period as well.

There are actresses that come out of nowhere and perhaps appear in a commercial or reality TV program, who suddenly become famous, but after their first 2-3 movies or TV shows flop, or or they end up in jail or on rehab, or someone else who is more popular at the time comes along, the first pop star is never seen or heard from again. Or comes back 10 years later with a new look and persona. And there are actresses who stand the test of time who make a real life for themselves with all the ups and downs of any real life for anyone who has actually lived in life and makes a great career for themselves and is as beautiful today as they were fifty years ago.

Raquel Welch is a Hollywood Goddess, because she has lived a real life and made the best of it for herself and the people who care about her and depend on her. We're not just talking about a great actress, but a great comedic actress, satirist, comedian even, who has used her incredible sex appeal and physicality to make fun of people who only judge her by her physical appearance. As well as someone with her own successful fashion line and has become a successful fashion designer and bestselling author as well. Raquel Welch, the Hollywood starlet who is also a star, because she's had one of the best careers as a Hollywood actress ever.  

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on WordPress.

Marcia Clark Investigates: The First 48- The Billionaire Boys Club

Source:Underground LA- Sue Horton's The Billionaire Boys Club..

“World famous prosecutor, Marcia Clark, investigates one of the world’s most infamous cases: The Billionaire Boys Club. Was the leader of the club, Joe Hunt, so obsessed with money and power that he became a cold blooded killer? Or was Joe Hunt scammed by one of the world’s best con artists? Marcia will examine the First 48 and dive into the world of greed, money and power to unweave the tangled web of ambition and lies that strangled The Billionaire Boys Club.”

From A&E

“Marcia Clark Investigates The First 48 – 8: Billionaire Boys Club …

Source: A&E- Former LA prosecutor Marcia Clark. 

From A&E

Source: Sue Hunt- The Billionaire Boys Club 

I don't want to compare the Billionaire Boys Club to the Hollywood Rat Pack or even the Hollywood Brat Pack, because the two Hollywood entertainment groups were actually talented and have real accomplishments on their resumes. Also, neither of them are currently in jail or are doing a life sentence in prison for anything. But the BBC does have few things in common with The Rat Pack at least.

Source: Picmog- Murder made Joe Hunt famous 

Both groups were based in Los Angeles. Both groups lived the high life by having great times and spending a lot of money on their social lives. The difference being The Rat Pack could afford to live the way they did because they brought in a lot of money for themselves and the people they worked for. TRP included both Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin, as well as several other great people like Sammy Davis and Peter Lawford. Money was never an issue with these guys.
Where the BBC separates with TRP and successful social clubs in Los Angeles and I'm sure several other places, is for one the other social groups were legitimate businesses. And because of that and that they were successful they brought in a lot of money again for themselves, but the people they worked for which just meant that money was always coming in for them. They lived the high life, but they also invested their money wisely and didn't spend everything plus more than they were taking in. And that is where I mercifully drop the Billionaire Boys Club-Rat Pack comparison.

Now, who were the Billionaire Boys Club? Think about Bernie Madoff and Ponzi schemes, but then add murder to that and then go back 25 years. The Madoff scans were going on during the late 2000s ( 2007-09 ) in that time period during the start of the global financial crisis and at the start of the Great Recession. The BBC were operating during the early and mid 1980s and by late 1983 the American economy was booming again and the BBC wanted that action ( to use a catch phrase ) and be part of that, but not do the work and come up with a business where their clients would benefit from it. They saw their business as a zero sum gain where they would get everything, instead of seeing their investments as exactly that as investments and transactions where both sided would invest and then benefit from those investments mutually.

The crime that put Joe Hunt ( the leader and founder of the BBC ) in life for prison without the possibility of parole, has to do with their murder of Ron Levin. Who was just a much better, more experienced, more accomplished scam artist than Joe Hunt could ever be in his best drunken fantasy. There are a few expressions that seem very app here intaking about the BBC. You don't exchange verbal jabs with a wiseass, unless you're also a wiseass. You don't get into a fist fight with the world heavyweight champion, unless you're also an accomplished pro heavyweight boxer. And you don't try to con a con artist or even work with one, unless you're an accomplished con artist yourself. And can tell when that person is being real with you, or just scamming.

Joe Hunt and his partners murdered Ron Levin, because he was scamming them and they couldn't get their money back from Levin and needed that money back. The BBC were at best a talented but lazy group of high school seniors headed to some preppy Ivy League school, or another great school in the Northeast or Pac 12, who wanted everything now and didn't have the patience to wait or do the work themselves and pay the price needed to be successful investors. Like getting a degree in business management, to use as an example and then getting a job on Wall Street or working for some other investment firm and learning the tricks of their trade. And then commit their last amateurish act by murdering a fellow scam artist, because that person scammed them.

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Biography Channel: The Facts of Life'

Source:Click Americana- The Facts of Life is Americana.

"About ‘The Facts of Life’ TV show & stars – plus the theme song & lyrics (1979-1988)"

From Click Americana

"The Biography Channel Facts Of Life."

Source:Jessie Britany- Actress Molly Ringwald, part of the first season of The Facts of Life.

From Jessie Britany

Looking back at the time I grew up in and the generation I'm a member of, I feel really good about and perhaps even lucky. The 1980s wasn't the perfect decade to grow up in, but that decade doesn't exist, but it was a great decade to grow up. I was only 14 by the time 1989 ended, but I remember the whole decade including Ronald Reagan being elected President in 1980.

And it was a great time for entertainment and television. If you look at the shows from that decade, you had Dallas which came out in 1978, but ran into the early 1990s. The Dukes of Hazzard which came out in 1979 and ran into 1985. Newhart which came out in 1982 and ran into 1990. The Cosby Show, ( named after guess who ) Different Strokes, Family Ties,  Cheers, The Fall Guy with Lee Majors that comes out in 1981, Magnum PI, with Tom Selleck, great decade for prime time soap operas like Dallas, but Dynasty, Falcon Crest, and Knots Landing.

It was a great decade for TV and the 1980s was probably the last decade in America where families actually got together and not just ate dinner together, but watched TV together. Cable TV wasn't a major player yet and the networks which back then was really only CBS, ABC, and NBC, were still dominant when it came to entertainment in America.

But then comes one show that was made for one particular generation about growing up in the 1980s and what that generation went through as kids and young adults. At a time when NBC needed a hit show and was actually in third place out of the three networks. The Facts of Life comes out at a time when NBC needed a hit and when Generation X deserved a show that was about them and what they go through growing up in America as this generation.

The Facts of Life is not the only sitcom about Generation X and for Generation X. Saved by The Bell from the early 1990s and Beverly Hills 90210 for the entire 1990s, Living Single,  and I'm sure other shows that follow were also about Generation X, but Facts of Life was the first show about this generation and also the first hit show about this generation. And it The Facts of Life was exactly as the title of the show suggests which was being about The Facts of Life and what life was like and everyone goes through in life and what life was like growing up during this era and time period.

That life wasn't always great or awful, but it was always real and there were always challenges and struggles that people especially kids and teenagers go through in life. And that life growing up was a learning curve and a time for people to try to learn and figure out what life was like.

That we make good decisions, but we also make a lot of mistakes and with all of those mistakes are opportunities to learn and improve. About each other, but about people around us as well. People that we are close to and have good relationships with, but also about people we don't know as well, or people we know well, but don't like and perhaps even learn about people we don't like and find things in common with those people as well.

What The Facts of Life did through both comedy and drama as well and in some cases dramatic comedy by using humor to address difficult situations and show people what life was like and what it was like growing up as teenagers.

But at the heart of the show it was a sitcom. Great funny writers, with a very funny cast that all had great comedic timing that was on to entertain people by making then laugh and even when they would go through tough situations like dieting, or even suicide, they would do it with humor and always look for the light side of life, because even in our worst situations in life except for perhaps the death of our relatives and friends, there tends to be a point where we can look back at it and laugh about. Which happens when people learning about The Facts of Life ( pun intended ) and what real life was like.  

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at FreeState Now, on WordPress. 

You can also see this post at FreeState Now, on Blogger.

Professor Noam Chomsky: The Nanny State

Source:Chomsky's Philosophy- Uncle Sam's Big Government.

“Noam Chomsky – The Nanny State”

Source:Chomsky's Philosophy 

Noam Chomsky’s definition of a nanny state, is what almost every else including people who favor the nanny state on both wings of the American political spectrum, would call corporate welfare. Where government at taxpayers expense subsidizes wealthy successful corporations and individuals. That is not a nanny state, but corporate welfare.

A nanny state is big government that tires to do too much for the people themselves. Make decisions for individuals that they ( meaning big government ) believe should be left to big government and not individuals. Like how much and what people should and can eat, or what and how much they can drink. (tT use as examples) Big government telling people who they can sleep with and marry, when romantic couples can start living together, would be other examples of a nanny state.

There are two ideological forms of the nanny state both in America and in the rest of the world. One coming from the Far-Left which seems to get more publicity than anything else when it comes to big government as it relates to personal issues, is very secular to the point that Far-Leftists would even outlaw religion if they could and have in most communist countries. Far-Leftists both democratic in a socialist sense and authoritarian in a communist sense, who believe they’re the only smart moral people and have all the answers to the point that even questioning them is somehow immoral and should be punished by government force. The Communist Republic of Korea ( which is what North Korea really is ) is a perfect example of that.

The other form of the nanny state in America and in other places in the world, tends to have Far-Right fundamentalist, theocratic, religious tones, as well as nationalist, tribalist, fascist tones. That they ( the supporters of this fascism ) are the real Americans or whatever nationality you want to use, that they’re the only real Patriots ( not from New England, necessarily ) and everyone who disagrees with then are immoral and hate their country. We saw this with Senator Joe McCarthy and his McCarthyism movement in the 1950s and backers of the so-called Un-American Activities movement in the late 1940s and early 1950s. And their religious and moral values are so superior to everyone and everything else, that their values and religion should be the law of the land. And that anyone who violates these values should be in prison or even worst. You see this in the Islamic Republic of Iran. (To use as an example)

Corporate welfare and the nanny state, even though they’re both related to big government and backed by big government, are two different things. One is about subsidizing wealthy individuals and corporations at the expense of everyone else. The other is about telling people what they can’t and can’t do and trying to use big government to manage people’s lives for them. Because they believe that personal freedom is dangerous and just the freedom to make mistakes and commit immoral acts, as they would see it. Corporate welfare and the nanny state, both come from big government, but aren’t the same things. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.