Gadget

This content is not yet available over encrypted connections.

Liberal Democracy

Liberal Democracy
The Free State

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

The Lady Channel: Catherine Fulop in Tight Leather Jeans- Some of the Style Differences Between European & American Women


Source: This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Post

Leather pants on women seems to be a lot more common in Europe, on the street and on TV there. Especially on their soap Operas and so-called reality TV and on the music performances. Especially skin-tight leather jeans, to me which combines the two worlds of leather and jeans, but they are leather jeans instead of denim jeans. For me this would be reason enough alone to watch European soap operas, especially in Germany and Italy. European women in Europe tend to be a lot more comfortable with their bodies and are more willing to take risks with them. Especially when it comes to skin-tight leather, like with leather jeans than American women.

Tight leather is a lot more common over there than it is in America. Where in America women love skin-tight denim jeans and we see them all the time on sexy women here. And they have become such a versatile pant that now women are wearing them to work, not just at manual labor jobs or in the entertainment industry. But at the office where wardrobes tend to be more conservative, but not so much anymore. Where we now see American women wearing tight skinny denim jeans to the office and not just on Casual Friday.

And we now see American women wearing tight skinny denim jeans with boots at the office. With either a suit jacket or a leather jacket. Where in Europe women wear tight leather jeans to work and at the office. Tight leather suits at the office and with boots. Tight denim is very revealing, but tight leather even much so and any mistake you make wearing tight leather jeans, people will notice in a big way. Especially with skin-tight leather jeans. Just ask Jim Morrison from his Ed Sullivan appearance. And European women seem to be more willing to take that risk than American women.

Both sexy American and European women love their tight jeans, the difference being that European women love their tight denim and leather jeans. They where both skinny denim and skinny leather jeans and they are just more common there than they are in America. You see them on the street and on TV and in the movies and not just worn by entertainers. But everyday women as well, they I believe tend to have more confidence in their physical appearance than American Women on average. And are more willing to take risks and as a man I wish leather jeans on women were more common in America. Because they are just as sexy if not sexier than Denim Jeans.
The Lady Channel: Catherine Fulop in Tight Leather Jeans

Monday, September 29, 2014

Tammy Rose: Hot Biker Babes Take on the Boys


Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Professional career women and no not that kind of professional women that you might be thinking about, (stop thinking with your dick) but real professional women who have college degrees and are perhaps cops, teachers, doctors, construction workers, bankers and so-forth. Who work hard and are productive during the day and week. But also no how to have a good time at night. Beautiful sexy biker babes on the weekend and perhaps at night.

This is what sexy women look like and are. Not that all sexy women are biker women, but women who are intelligent and do not need to be sexy to make a good living. Do not need to work on a street corner trying to sell their bodies and satisfy their pimp. Or have to work at a strip club to make a good living, but real women  with real intelligence. Who also happen to be beautiful and sexy and are because they take care of themselves and know how to have a good time.
Tammy Rose: Hot Biker Babes Take on The Boys

Friday, September 26, 2014

Human Events: Opinion: John Stossel: "The Economy Needs no Conductor": How to Create an Opportunity Society



This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, April, 2012

There’s been this endless debate in America in the last few years about what creates economic and job growth. Is it the private sector or public sector. Does government actually create any jobs, well the answer to that question is yes. In the sense that they create government jobs that can contribute to private sector job growth, by rewarding contract to the private sector that then hire additional workers. To perform the new work that their contract requires, to complete the new work. 
But what really creates jobs, is consumer demand. When people need to buy things or want to buy things and have the money to do so, then they go out and buy those things, which leads to economic and job growth to meet the new consumer demand. The way to create job growth, is through economic growth. And government can help and hurt in several ways.

They can help buy keeping taxes down, so consumers have money to spend.

Only having needed regulations that can be understood and doesn’t make employers jobs even harder. And make their cost of doing business more expensive.

And they can help with things like infrastructure investment that creates work for construction companies and builds and repairs, new roads and bridges around the country. So people can get around in an efficient way.

They can help with Energy Policy, by allowing the American energy industry to capitalize and produce all the natural resources we have in America.
Where government can hurt the economy, is through over taxing. For example passing Tax Hikes on people who can’t afford to pay them. So now they have even less money to spend.

Over regulating to the point that no one understands the regulations and they aren’t even be enforced. Because government doesn’t even understand them.

And they can hurt the economy by overspending. Running up huge debt and deficits, driving up our interest rates. Making everything more expensive for everyone. Which results in everyone spending less money. Which is what happened in the recession of the early 1980s and early 1990s. And they can hurt by not trading enough and over taxing private companies. Making their cost of business more expensive.

It's really consumer demand thats what drives economic growth, that leads to job growth. So as long as people have incentive to spend money and have the money to spend, then they’ll do those things. So what government can do, is try to ensure that consumer spending is always high. That we always have a need to spend money.

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Human Events: Opinion: Patrick J. Buchanan: The Socialist & the Social Darwinist

Human Events: Opinion: Patrick J. Buchanan: The Socialist & the Social Darwinist  

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, April, 2012 

As much as President Obama may campaign as a Progressive Populist who runs on class warfare and someone who believes in “soaking the rich” to take care of the rest with Federal social programs, he’s not. You gotta remember Barack Obama is a politician. The President that Progressive Democrats want him to be, is not the President he is. If he were that President and candidate, wouldn’t of gotten elected. 
The Ralph Nader’s and Dennis Kucinich’s of the World, can’t get elected President in today’s America. The way President Obama is campaigning is to appeal to so-called Progressives to get their vote, what he’s telling them is that. "We have the same or similar goals". but then governs differently to accomplish those goals, to do it in a way that he believes works. President Bill Clinton used the term Opportunity Society, thats how he ran for President and how he got elected President, which is creating a society for everyone that gets a good education, works hard and is productive. 
Low-income people who have been left behind in the economy will have a solid opportunity, to make as much out of life as what they put into it. That not just the 10% of the population will be able to do well based on what they produce. But the other 90% of the country that works for the 10% will be able to do well in society as well. To be self-sufficient, get a good job and not live off of public assistance. Thats what an Opportunity Society is, a society of opportunity, good opportunities for all, that want a good education work hard and be productive.
An Opportunity Society is something that Barack Obama has been trying to create ever since running for President and being President. He’s not a Socialist, he’s not a Democratic Socialist. At best he's a Progressive in the FDR or LBJ sense, not today's sense. The main reasons why Progressive Democrats don’t like him, he doesn’t believe in soaking the rich to take care of everyone else. He’s a Liberal Democrat, a Moderate Liberal at best really, doing the best job he can in an economy, where we’ve basically been starting over.


Wednesday, September 24, 2014

The Book Archive: Video: Hustler Magazine vs. Jerry Falwell: Pornography and the First Amendment

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, September, 2013

Interesting case whatever your position on pornography is whether you think it should be legal or not. Or whether you enjoy it or not which isn’t the question. But the real question in this case is should it be legal or not based on the United States Constitution and what also makes this an interesting case is that it affects two amendments to our Constitution. Which affects our right to free speech and expression and our right to privacy. 

The First Amendment which of course guarantees our right to free expression and speech. And our Right to Privacy what people are able to do in their private lives and own homes. And does the rights to free speech and expression as well as privacy include pornography. Do Americans have the constitutional right to be involved in pornography or not. And manage their own private affairs themselves. Or does government have the right and responsibility to intervene in one's own private affairs.





Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Prison Reform Movement: Blog: Rina Palta: ACLU: Counties Opting For Incarceration, Not Rehabilitation

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, March, 2012

Prison Reform Movement: Blog: Rina Palta: Counties Opting For Incarceration, Not Rehabilitation  

California has so many people in their corrections system as far as inmates. And so many inmates that they are now under a court order to reduce the size of their inmate population. Not by accident because they arrest too many people. Fill up their prisons with inmates, basically just warehousing them. There are some exceptions and are left to wonder what to do with them once they reach overcrowding, for a State thats apparently as blue as California, That hasn’t voted Republican for President since 1988, they have a lot of “Bad Laws”, they simple incarcerate too many people who don’t represent a major threat to society. And after they do incarcerate these people, they don’t do a lot to prepare them for once they are released from prison.
California has what I would call a non-violent offender crisis. They incarcerate way too many people for drug abuse and drug obsession, when getting these people into drug rehab and halfway houses at their expense would save California taxpayers a lot of money. California had an opportunity to repeal one of their “Bad Laws” in 2010. To decriminalize marijuana and stop arresting people for use or possession of marijuana, which would’ve save their corrections system and Law enforcement billions of dollars, but that failed. 
And California is back where they started. But they could do things like drug rehab and halfway houses at the inmates expense. For Petty Offenders, people who are in prison for dumb mistakes. Like shoplifting and Drug Crimes. California could save its corrections system and law enforcement billions of dollars just with sentencing reform, keeping a lot of their non-violent Offenders out of prison and into halfway houses or drug rehab at the offenders expense. 
This would save California a lot of prison space for people who need to be there, putting their inmates to work and paying them so they can cover their cost of living and repealing their bad laws. And they would dramatically lower the size of their inmate population and still be able to protect the state.


Prison Reform Movement: Blog: Teshia Naidoo: Sane Drug Laws: How California May Finally Stop Prison OverCrowding

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, March, 2012

Prison Reform Movement: Blog: Teshia Naidoo: Sane Drug Laws: How California May Finally Reduce Prison OverCrowding  

California is the perfect example of why and how the War on Drugs in America is stupid. This is a State thats swamped in debt, that still has double figure unemployment. That still has a high crime rate and one of the highest inmate populations per-capita in the country as well as the largest inmate population in numbers. They are also one of the highest taxed states, so if I was a Californian I would be asking why, I’m not getting much of a bang for my tax bucks. 
And yet California has been doing the same things for the last ten years. They recalled GOV. Grey Davis partially because of its debt issues and the economy wasn’t doing very well. Ten years later they are still facing the same problems and have even more people locked up in this State. If I was a Californian, I would want my State Government to look at what its doing. Admit the obvious finally and change course. Find ways to get more out of the taxes that Californians are forced to pay every year. And its corrections system, probably the most expensive in the Union, is a great first place to start and overhaul it. 
Start with the War on Drugs, stop arresting free adults for smoking or possessing marijuana. Stop sending heroin and cocaine addicts to prison and get them in drug rehab at their expense. Stop sending non-violent offenders to prison who don’t represent a major threat to society. And get them in halfway houses at their expense. Stop sending these people to prison and save the prisons for the offenders who need to be there.
With GOV. Jerry Brown being a former Attorney General, he should know exactly how overcrowded their corrections system is and that it needs to be reformed and be more cost- effective. And hopefully he’ll put in the reforms to make that happen and save Californian Tax Payers billions of dollars.


Monday, September 22, 2014

Tampa Harley Group: Harley Davidson Motorcycle Riding Boots For Women


Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

What goes better for sexy biker women with their biker jeans than biker boots. Riding boots, brown and biker leather with the metal decoration, I'm not sure what you call those things on the foot of the boots. Sexy biker women with great legs and a great butt, showing those assets off with their sexy riding boots. No secret why guys love biker women, it is like checking ourselves out. Except that we aren't checking out guys, but beautiful sexy biker women on their bikes.

Another thing I love about biker women is that they are real. They aren't stick figures, or large dykish tom boy lesbian looking women. (Pardon my language) But they are real women who eat real food, who are real feminine, who take care of themselves and workout because they have to because of the lifestyles that they live. The women in this video is the perfect example of that and what a real biker women looks like. Very feminine and sexy who can also probably handle a bike as well as many guys.
Tampa Harley Group: Harley Davidson Motorcycle Boots For Women



Human Events: Opinion: George Will: "When Liberals Become Scolds": How the JFK Assassination Changed the American Left

Students For a Democratic Society
This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, October, 2013

Human Events: Opinion: George Will: When Liberals Become Scolds

I agree with George Will that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy changed America and changed the Left in America. But we disagree with how it changed Liberals and American liberalism, that really the Left changed. Now what is the Left, it is a group of leftist political factions including Liberals and Progressives on the Center-Left in America. But goes over to Democratic Socialists and Social-Democrats, people who came alive in American politics in a huge way in the late 1960s. In response to the Vietnam War and wanting to take on American capitalism, corporate America and deal with poverty in America in a huge way. 

The New Left wanted  to make America more like Europe and everything else, but as I said before it wasn’t Liberals that changed in America. But the broader Left which is what changed with Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats having a much bigger voice and influence in American politics. The death of President Kennedy was tragic in many ways and I believe most of them obvious. The fact that the President of the United States could be assassinated in a country that is as strong as America. 
But more importantly the tragedy it was for the Kennedy Family especially Jack Kennedy’s wife Jackie and their kids. But parents and siblings as well the entire Kennedy Family. But what is less obvious if you just look at it from a hard-core political point of view and the politics of it, is that it changed the Democratic Party and changed the Democratic Left in America. 
Because Jack Kennedy represented the transition from the FDR New Deal movement in the Democratic Party, to more of a movement about individual freedom and liberty. And what can government do for the people who need it so they can take care of themselves. Rather than creating new programs to take care of people instead. We’ll never know this of course, but had President Kennedy not had been assassinated in 1963 or ever, most likely he gets reelected in 1964 and finishes his two terms leaving in the solid Liberal Democratic leadership. 
And America does not get involved in the Vietnam War as far as trying to take it over and win the war for the South Vietnam. And there is no need for an anti-war-movement in the Democratic Party and the party is not divided in 1968 and yes there is a strong contest to see who replaces President Kennedy. Between Vice President Lyndon Johnson, Senator Hubert Humphrey and perhaps even Robert Kennedy. But not to the point that is would’ve risked Democrats losing to Republicans in 1968. The party would’ve been in much better position without the Vietnam War and the New-Left radicals on the march and so-forth.
The assassination of President Kennedy left a real leadership void not only in the Democratic Party, but on the Democratic Left. And instead of the country just moving forward and just addressing domestic problems like healthcare, civil rights and others, we get into Vietnam, we have race-riots because of the racism going on in the South and other places. Dealing with other issues like poverty and the New Left that came of age in the late 1960s comes alive to take the Democratic Party away from the liberal and progressive establishments that ran the party before.

Sunday, September 21, 2014

Tampa Harley Group: Harley Davidson Women's Low-Rise Boot-Cut Jeans


Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Aw, so that is why biker women and biker men where the tight denim and leather jeans so much when they are riding, well this one reason. To protect their legs from the heat that the engines on their bikes give off. But also lets face, biker women tend to be sexy and they are sexy because they take care of themselves and keep themselves in shape. For one they have to so they are strong enough to live the lifestyle that they do, like with their long biking trips.

But also lets face it. Sexy women  look great in tight denim jeans. Skinny and low-rise jeans and when they are both skinny and low-rise without being too revealing. And then you put them on bikes and at the biker rallies, with their biker boots and you have very sexy women in great outfits on their bikes. Which makes them very attractive and why guys love biker women so much. The beautiful sexy biker women in this video is a perfect example of that. 
Tampa Harley Group: Harley Davidson's Women's Low-Rise Boot-Cut Jeans




TV Days: President John F. Kennedy- Imagine What Fox News Would Say


Source: TV Days- President John F. Kennedy-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Here’s one thing that I love about Jack Kennedy. He wasn’t anti-government and neither am I, but he did have a healthy skepticism about what government could do for people. Meaning he didn’t want government trying to do everything for everybody or trying to take care of everyone. But he believed that government including the Federal Government could play a healthy role in seeing that all Americans had the opportunity to live in freedom.  John F. Kennedy believed that all Americans including African-Americans and others should  be able to get themselves the skills to do so. Which is why he was a real Liberal Democrat and not a Conservative or Social Democrat. He was the Bill Clinton of the 1950s and 60s, or Clinton was the JFK of the 1990s. But they both believed that government shouldn't try to do everything or nothing for people. But help those who need it get themselves the tools that they need to live well in life. 
TV Days: President John F. Kennedy- Imagine What FOX News Would Say

Saturday, September 20, 2014

The Street: Video: Joseph Deaux: A Brokered GOP Convention is Very Unlikely

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, March, 2012

If you read my blog on a regular basis, you know that a month or go or so I suggested that Rick Santorum end his presidential campaign and endorse Newt Gingrich. So the right-wing could unite behind one presidential candidate. And unite against what they see as a Damn Yankee Northeastern Republican. Who they believe doesn’t share their values, because he’s not a big Government republican looking to impose his values on the rest of the country. 

Senator Santorum doesn’t seem to be interested in social issues at all except when he talks to Religious Conservatives. Well all of these Far-Right big government groups are now backing Rick Santorum. Because they see him as someone who can win and will say whatever it takes to get their support, unlike Mitt Romney. Keep in mind these blogs about the Republican Party and the right-wing are coming from a Liberal Democrat who’s also a political junky. And a big reason why I blog about these things. 
But also keep in mind, without Newt’s lousy debate performance back in February, chances are he probably wins Florida or comes damn close. And the GOP establishment might be looking for a new frontrunner at this moment. And Newt might be the frontrunner that the rest of the GOP Is, pardon the expression, shitting bricks terrified about right now. But that didn’t happen, the bad debate in Florida, followed by the Romney attack machine taking him down. After that, ended whatever chances of Newt Gingrich winning the GOP nomination.
If Rick Santorum wins Kansas, Alabama and Mississippi, all of them Tuesday, Newt if he still gives a damn about the Republican Party would be smart to drop his presidential campaign. Endorse Rick Santorum and allow for Rick to build off of that momentum. And prepare for the Texas Primary. If Rick were to win Louisiana and Texas as well, we might have a new Republican presidential race. But with Rick and Newt competing for the same voters and everyone else voting for Mitt, Mitt Romney sails to the Republican Nomination.

Friday, September 19, 2014

The Weekly Standard: Opinion: Daniel Halper: Newt Looking to Deliver Knockout Punch in Florida

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, January, 2012

The Weekly Standard: Opinion: Daniel Halper: Newt Looking to Deliver Knockout Punch in Florida 

I don’t see Newt Gingrich delivering a “knockout punch” in South Carolina for Florida, but with Speaker Gingrich’s overwhelmingly victory tonight in South Carolina, it does change the political landscape for the GOP presidential race. Last week we I guess, the political pundits, were talking about South Carolina as the state that Mitt Romney is going to wrap up the GOP nomination for President. Because he had a big clear victory in New Hampshire. 

And all the momentum that Mitt needed to move on from there to get the GOP nomination and then move to concentrate on the President. Because Governor Romney was able to open up a big lead in South Carolina. So what happened, a few things. Newt has two great debates, Monday and Thursday nights last week. Mitt has a mediocre debate on Monday night and a bad debate Thursday night. Newt whips Mitt on the national stage where South Carolina is watching. Plus Mitt’s tax returns didn’t help as well.
My issues with Mitt Romney have always been with his honesty. Is he saying what he believes or what he thinks we want to hear. I believe Mitt is running for President for the right reasons. He believes America is in trouble etc and wants to help. And that his career in corporate America and experience can fix the problems. But Mitt has gone about it the wrong way, his whole strategy seems to be is to say "what it takes to get the job and then when you get the job" do what you think is right".  
That campaign strategy just doesn’t work in American politics. He just doesn’t seem to have a message of other, than he’s the best person for the job. But what he doesn’t understand, is to get the job you have to prove you're the best candidate for it. And Newt has capitalized on Mitt’s weakness’s at least for this week. Newt Gingrich should have some momentum going into Florida. And if he does well in the Monday night debate, may take the lead or pull very close to Mitt Romney. 
The Romney Campaign has already announced their strategy for taking down Newt and will have new attack ads focusing on Speaker Gingrich’s Speakership and leadership. And Newt is going to have to be prepared for that and be able to fight back against those political attacks and winning South Carolina should help the Gingrich Campaign with their fundraising. So Florida should be very interesting and as a political junky I’m looking forward to it.


Thursday, September 18, 2014

National Journal: Opinion: Ron Brownstein: Good News and Bad News For Newt Gingrich in Florida

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, January, 2012

National Journal: Opinion: Ron Brownstein: Good News and Bad News For Newt Gingrich in Florida  

What difference a debate can make, or how about, if you're a football fan, you're familiar with term, "live by the blitz, die by the blitz". Meaning for you English speakers, football teams that base their defense on blitzing, are successful and unsuccessful based on how they blitz. They do well and get burned by it and when you're a presidential candidate, who’s had most of his success so far based on his debating skills and quick wit and being able to turn things around on other people, you have to win the debates to win elections. 
You should have enough hints about who I’m talking about by now. And you have a bad debate, an off night however you want to put it, as a result you get burned by the debate, just like Newt Gingrich has had a lot of success in previous debates, practically winning all of them, Newt had such and off night last Thursday, he’s probably going to lose Florida tomorrow. And its just a matter of how much, 10 points being the key. Under or over for Newt.
The good news for Newt is that over weekend, he’s picked up some key endorsements. From Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, some Tea Party groups. Cuban Floridians seem to like him, that won’t pull Florida out for Newt. But may be able to keep Mitt Romney’s victory under ten points. And give the Newter Campaign with a floor in how far they can drop. So they rebuild their momentum going forward and be a factor in Nevada and other key states that are coming up. 
Especially in caucus states like Minnesota, where Newt’s style of campaigning, talking and listening to people up front, giving interviews and of course the debates and these endorsements could help Newt be a big factor in these up incoming primaries by getting people to the polls for him. The other good news for Newt is even though he’s fallen, Rick Santorum and Ron Pau haven’t given up and Newt’s been picking up some new endorsements. 
And there will be more pressure on Rick Sanrtorum to step down and endorse Newt. Especially if Santorum  has a bad night tomorrow. So Newt will still be able to target Mitt and go after the Santorum supporters and bring them with him. Especially if he beats the odds tomorrow night. And doesn’t get blown out in a Florida hurricane, pun intended.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Reagan Foundation: Video: 1980 Presidential Debate Between Governor Ronald Reagan & President Jimmy Carter, 10/28/1980

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, February, 2012  

How times have changed for the Republican Party. Because back in 1980 they actually did have a Conservative Republican leading their ticket. And leading them back into power in the White House and Senate. After spending another four years as they spent eight years, in the 1960s as the opposition minority party in the United States. With Democrats controlling both the White House and Congress. 


Back then the GOP had a Conservative Republican, because Ronald Reagan actually understood what conservatism is, which is how Barry Goldwater laid it out as conserving the individual liberty of individuals. Big Government out of our wallets and bedrooms, letting free people live their own lives. Not using government to try to control how people lived their lives. Which is what we see with the GOP today, with its Religious and Neoconservatives. The same-sex marriage debate case in point.
This is the perfect time to be talking about Ron Reagan, since it would be his 101st Birthday this month. And since he was the best Republican President we’ve had since Dwight Eisenhower and the best Republican President we’ve had since. And George W. Bush being the worst President we’ve had since, well maybe all-time. Ron Reagan described his politics as libertarian as late as 1975. He backed Barry Goldwater for President in 1964. 
Politically its hard to tell the differences between Goldwater and Reagan. Except for maybe foreign policy, Reagan I believe became a classical Conservative, because what he saw in the 1960s what he saw as the growth of big government with the Great Society, but he also saw the growth of big government in the late 1970s, in California. That in 1978 passed a law that would allow employers to fire homosexuals just because they are gay. And he disagreed with that law.
The Christian Right came to power and influence in American politics in the late 1970s. Perhaps even as early as the mid 1970s, with Rev. Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority. Arguing against things like homosexuality and pornography, arguing for censorship of certain forms of entertainment, that of course they see as immoral. And even though President Reagan would talk to these groups, he played them like a politician, he knew he needed their votes. But never gave them anything, unlike Republican politicians today who don’t seem to be able to say no to these Far-Right big government groups. And thats how the GOP is different today.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

PBS: Video: Frontline, JFK and the Mob, Nov. 17th 1992


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

It is clear that the Italian-American Mafia invested in the John F. Kennedy Campaign For President in 1960. And at least to a certain extent got Jack Kennedy elected President of the United States. Especially if you look at their role in Chicago in the Illinois election. And what JFK ever knew about the Mafia's involvement in his presidential campaign, I don't think we'll ever know. But his father Joe Kennedy certainly knew about it and perhaps even reached out to Italian-American mobsters.

But as President of the United States especially because of his Attorney General, who just happened to be his little brother Robert Kennedy, the Italian Mafia didn't get much if anything for their investment in JFK. The Kennedy Administration if anything under Bobby Kennedy went harder after the Italian Mafia and put policies in place that essentially eliminated the Italian Mafia in America by the early 1990s. With new wiretapping laws and isolating these crime families and going after their leaders.

So yeah, the Italian Mafia may of stole the 1960 presidential election for Jack Kennedy and I'm not saying that is a good thing and not serious. But they if anything invested in their own demise and help bring themselves down, instead of investing in Richard Nixon for President in 1960, who didn't have any special plans to go after the mob, or at least didn't run on them. So you can't make the case that the Italian Mafia had bought President John Kennedy, because if anything the opposite is true.

Andrew Kaczynski: Video: C-SPAN: U.S. Representative Speaking Against the House Democrats Budget in 1982

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, March, 2012

Back in the day when Newt Gingrich was a Junior Representative in the House and I would argue up to a certain extent even when then Minority Whip Gingrich became Speaker of the House, even though to a certain extent, getting in the bed with the Christian Right, Newt Gingrich was a Reagan Republican. Someone who believed in limited government and that Uncle Sam shouldn’t be telling Americans how to live their lives.  


Who believed in decentralizing the Federal Government and balances budgets, tax relief, strong defense, but he was more progressive than President Reagan on welfare policy. He did believe in welfare reform before it became popular. Where President Reagan basically just wanted to gut the safety net. But Representative Gingrich was basically a Reagan Republican in the 80s and 90s.
Three months ago I thought Newt Gingrich on paper anyway would be the best Republican to take on President Obama. Not just in the debates, but Speaker Gingrich would’ve had the Republican base behind him. And had he did a better job in the Florida debate in January. Maybe he’s not the frontrunner right now, but based on how he’s ran this his campaign ever since, its almost impossible to make a credible case that he would be the strongest Republican today. 
But unlike Mitt Romney, Newt is someone thats trusted by the entire Republican Party. By Reagan Conservatives, the Tea Party, Religious Conservatives, Neoconservatives. Even Libertarians have a certain respect for Newt. The thing you get with Newt Gingrich, similar to Barry Goldwater, is someone who speaks his mind and is not worried about offending people. Including Republicans, so he’s clearly not a smooth politician. Which is a big reason why he’s fallen down so far. Finishing fourth in one of the primary’s last week.

Monday, September 15, 2014

PBS: Video: Firing Line with William F. Buckley: Newt Gingrich, Where is the GOP Headed

This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, April, 2012

Not really Newt Gingrich himself, but his movement and followers represented where the Republican Party was headed post Ronald Reagan. Not George H.W. Bush who succeeded President Reagan as President, but didn’t offer a vision other than maybe on foreign policy. Of where he would take the GOP with him. President Bush was more of an operator or pragmatist as President. 

George H.W. Bush took  issues and problems as they came up, but not having a set of ideas and policies, or direction where he wanted to take the Republican Party. Whereas Newt Gingrich and his Conservative Opportunity Society group had a vision where they wanted to take the Republican Party. That later became known as the Contract with America in 1995. Shortly after being elected to the House in 1978, December, 1978, Rep. Elect Newt Gingrich when House Republicans were still in the minority. 

The House GOP had around 160 or so seats during the Carter Administration. They put together working groups that would work on bringing a House majority for the GOP. Raising money recruiting like-minded candidates, putting together and agenda. That they would try to pass, that later became the CWA of 1995-96. But it took them sixteen years to get there. But only he and his group believed they had any shot of taking back the majority. This was back in the day when the House Republicans had for the most part had around 160-180 seats, the late 1970s and 1980s. 

And House Democrats controlled the House since 1955. I don’t agree with Newt on much and he has personal characteristics that I don’t like, but I respect him a lot as a political strategist. Probably the best we’ve had since Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson. He could see things happening that no one else could. Because he knew how to get there and deserves a lot of credit for that. 



Sunday, September 14, 2014

Commentary Magazine: Opinion: Jonathan S. Tobin: Report of Tea Party Demise Premature






Big Government Republicans 
                                              
Two years ago when I started blogging about the Tea Party, I upfront blogged and predicted that the Tea Party was the Christian Right of the 1990s, with an economic libertarian message. But they still wanted to tell Americans how to live their lives and outlaw activities that are currently legal. Which is what we saw with Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign. Where once Newt Gingrich lost any hope of being a serious Republican Candidate. 
A lot of Newt's support went to the Santorum Campaign, that already had Religious and Neoconservatives with them. Two years later I’m back to believing what I originally believed. As some of the Tea Party leaders, like Sarah Palin and Representative Michelle Bachmann who are both Religious Conservatives, which has basically become the same movement. When I saw people like Rand Paul of Kentucky, guess who is father is. Senator Rom Johnson of Wisconsin and Mike Lee of Utah, all people with Conservative Libertarian leanings on Social Issues. 
These are not big government Republicans, getting elected to the Senate. Then I was thinking they have problems with things like the Patriot Act, indefinite detention. And the Federal Government regulating marriage, I thought damn I was wrong about the Tea Party. And glad I was, good news for the Republican Party and even though I’m a Liberal Democrat. I believe in having two strong parties, because I don’t want to see America become a one-party state. Thats not good for liberal democracy.
Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann and Rick Santorum, even though Palin and Bachmann have lost influenced in the GOP, are 21st Century Religious-Right leaders. If Mitt Romney doesn’t get elected President in 2012, Rick Santorum will be the Frontrunner going into 2016. If he plays that right, which is all the evidence that you need to know that at least a big portion of the Tea Party has merged with Religious and Neoconservatives. And have become big government Republicans. 
There are still Conservative Libertarian elements in the Tea Party. Senator Paul and Senator Lee are perfect examples of that, but when the Republican alternative to be President is Rick Santorum, thats all you need to know that big government republicanism is alive and well in the GOP and not going anywhere The Tea Party when they first started had an opportunity to move the GOP back to Reagan conservatism. 
And not only give Republicans but also Independents people to get behind. And move the party past Bush Neoconservatism but with all the big government positions. They’ve now come out in favor of like outlawing pornography and same-sex marriage from the Federal level. They are now just the Christian Right of the 1990s. But with a conservative economic message.


Saturday, September 13, 2014

Human Events: Opinion: Ann Coulter: Fighting the Last War: Dixie Republicans vs. Northeastern Republicans


This post was originally posted at FreeStatePlus on WordPress, April, 2012

Human Events: Opinion: Ann Coulter: The Last War  

The Republican Party back in the 1980s and even before that going back to the 1930s and even farther than that, were a real conservative party. And why Libertarians use to be Republicans. The GOP  were the get big government out of my wallet and bedrooms party. That Big Government shouldn't be involved in free adults private lives. That people should be able to make their own decisions and then be responsible for the decisions that they make.

This was a party that could compete in the Northeast and Midwest and West. Back in the 1960s and before that, it was the Democratic Party that represented the Dixiecrats, the Christian Right and Neoconservatives. All these people who are now Religious and Neoconservative Republicans. The Republican Party use to be about both economic and personal freedom. Not just economic freedom for business and religious freedom for Christians, but the whole scale. That government shouldn't tell people how to live their lives. And outlaw things just because they don't like them, that was for limited government.

A party that believed in fiscal responsibility, strong, but limited defense. And a limited internationalist foreign policy. That was about about defending American interests not trying to police the World. How times have changed, this was the party of Dwight Eisenhower, Bob Taft, Tom Dewey, Everett Dirksen, Barry Goldwater, Gerry Ford, Ron Reagan, Bob Dole. And today Olympia Snowe and Mitt Romney and many others would feel very welcomed in the GOP, where today they are now considered too liberal.
The Republican Party of yesterday that was about individual liberty. And a classical conservative party. Today is a Religious and Neoconservative Party that believes they know best how Americans should live their own lives. That as much as they claim to love America, they don't seem to love Americans and want to take the country back to the 1950s. So much to the point that Rick Santroum emerges as the presidential alternative to Mitt Romney. Because other Republicans like Mitt, like GOV. Mitch Daniels. Again who would've fit in perfectly with the GOP thirty years ago, and has a solid conservative record, is considered too liberal to run for President in the GOP today.
The Republican Party has become so Neoconservative and even authoritarian that Northeastern republicanism is dying in the GOP. Where Sen. Olympia Snowe who looks pretty conservative by traditional Republican standards, is essentially getting kicked out of the GOP. And not running for reelection, because she's worried about a primary challenge from the Far-Right. Even though 20-30 years ago, she would've fit in very well in the GOP. And considered a Conservative Republican. But today's GOP is so far to the right, that conservative looks liberal to them. So Sen. Snowe no longer fits in. 

Friday, September 12, 2014

The Book Archive: Video: CBS News Longines Chronoscope: Senator Prescott Bush in 1953

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

Senator Prescott Bush who of course is the father of George H.W. Bush and the grandfather of George H.W. Bush's children, was what we would call a Northeastern Republican today. Someone who leans conservative, but who isn't anti-government and someone who believes government should help people in need, but not try to run people's lives for them. Someone who believes that physically and mentally able people should work.

A Northeastern Republican is no Progressive New Dealer or Great Society advocate, but not someone who fits in well with the anti-government more libertarian leaning Tea Party movement of the Republican Party either. Or the Religious-Right in the Republican Party. Who leans right on economic and foreign policy, but not anti-government. Someone who believes the best government is the government that is closest to home and shouldn't be running people's lives for them. Out of people's wallets and personal lives.