Janet Jackson :The Pleasure Principle

Source:Janet Jackson- The Pleasure Principle.

Source:The Daily Journal 

“Music video by Janet Jackson performing The Pleasure Principle.”

From Janet Jackson 

The Pleasure Principle which I think is not the best written song ever, is certainly one of the sexiest music videos ever. And certainly one of Janet Jackson's best.

Source:Janet Jackson- The Pleasure Principle.

The Pleasure Principle which I think is not the best written song ever, is certainly one of the sexiest music videos ever. And certainly one of Janet Jackson's best.

Source:Janet Jackson- The Pleasure Principle.

To be completely honest with you, if you were to judge The Pleasure Principle as just a song and listened to Janet Jackson just sing the song standing in front of a microphone and without the dancing, we are not talking about a very good song.

I’m a Janet fan, but the song itself is not that great and maybe that is just part of the era that it came from which is the 1980s, which wasn’t a very good decade for American music rhythm and blues, or anything else. And I think this song is somewhat cheesy compared with the 1990s which was great decade for American music.

I’ve seen this video and heard this song countless times and I’m still not sure what this is about. But if you judge the song by just the video, this is a great video, song or no song. The music to the lyrics are very good and you throw in Janet herself and I don’t know if there is a better singer/dancer than Janet Jackson. Easily one of the best musical dancers of all-time and one of the sexiest as well if not the best of all-time. 

Janet is a very attractive beautiful baby-face woman with a great body. Who almost thirty-years later after this song came out, she hasn’t lost a thing anywhere. And if anything she is a better entertainer now than she was in 1986

Chuck Collins: George McGovern 1972- The People's Campaign

Source:Chuck Collins- George McGovern for President, 1972. 

Source:The FreeState MD 

"This is about the truth of it, sadly.  Yet even knowing all that, we re-elected him in a landslide.  What does that say about us?" 

From Chuck Collins

The 1972 Democratic National Convention, was real Amateur Night at the Apollo. Or in this case Amateur Night at the Miami Convention Center. Just because Senator McGovern didn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning the 1972 presidential election because of how popular President Nixon was then and with his foreign policy success. Including ending the Vietnam War and opening Russia and China. 

And with the state of the Democratic Party thanks to the emergence of the New-Left in it that became todays Green Party and Occupy Wall Street movement. It was as if what Democrats were saying with George McGovern:“We’re not going to win anyway. So we might as well nominate our heart and go down big, but swinging.”

Just because you probably aren’t going to win an election, it doesn’t mean you have to prove to the wold how unqualified you are to not just govern a huge divided country, but to even win the presidency. And go out-of-your-way to do what you can to make that happen for yourself. And not run the best campaign that you can. Otherwise you might as well not have bothered running for president in the first place. And stay in the Senate and continue be part of the loyal opposition in Congress instead. 

But what happened with the McGovern Campaign is that they never gave themselves much of an opportunity to win this election. And neither did the Democratic Party with the division between the Center-Left and Far-Left in the party.

I have a lot of respect for how George McGovern as far as how he managed his life and career. He truly was a public servant and a people’s politician and always believed in doing what was in the public’s interest. Also as far as what he accomplished politically and moving the Democratic Party from being dependent on racists anti-minority Dixiecrats to win presidential elections. By bringing in ethnic and racial minorities, as well as women and men. And making the Democratic Party very competitive in the North. 

But the McGovern presidential campaign represents what can happen to the Democratic Party when their leadership is weak. And they don’t have a strong Center-Left establishment. And as a result they become divided and their Far-Left takes over. And they nominate George McGovern as their leader in 1972.

Vice President Hubert Humphrey: 1968 Democratic National Convention Acceptance Speech

Source:EFAN- Vice President Humbert H. Humphrey (Democrat, Minnesota) accepting the 1968 Democratic presidential nomination, in Chicago, Illinois.

Source:FreeState MD 

"Here is Vice President Humphrey's acceptance speech from that turbulent and wild convention in August 1968.

He was very much the establishment candidate in '68, and was the favorite through the race after President Johnson quit. He might not have been the most popular choice in  '68 but he did come close to winning, which might have been the closest anyone could have come that year, but it depends on which history expert you ask. Humphrey does seem like a nice guy however." 

From EFAN

Hubert Humphrey, didn’t lose the 1968 presidential election because he was a bad candidate or ran a bad campaign or wasn’t qualified to be President of the United States. The opposites are true and even though as it turns out 1968 was his best shot at being elected President of the United States, something he had been thinking about at least since 1957 after Dwight Eisenhower was reelected President in a landslide, Vice President Humphrey was caught in a perfect political storm for both the Democratic Party because of how much damaged it did to the party that lasted at least until 1976 and came back again in 1980 the same political divisions that reemerged again in the late 1970s.

But it was also a perfect political storm for the Republican Party because it not only brought them back to power with Richard Nixon, but made them a real competitive conservative national party again. Where the Republican Party represented the center-right in the country. And the Democratic Party now representing the center-left in the country. 

1964 and 1968, even though only one of those elections resulted in short-term success and if you count 1966 and that would be two elections for the Republican Party which they won made them a conservative national competitive party, that would fight communism and other authoritarianism. That would promote economic freedom and business and be a fiscally conservative party. These were the positive aspects of the GOP merging with the South.

What these elections did to the Democratic Party, was create chaos for them. Because it meant they could no longer count on the South for votes and to win elections with them. Plus, they had this emerging young more social-democratic, anti-military New-Left, coming into the party. That pushed the Democratic Party to the Far-Left on many national issues through the 1970s and even into the 1980s. Which they didn’t recover from until 1992 when the Democrats nominated Bill Clinton for president and of course he wins that election and Democrats keep control of Congress as well. But what 1968 along with 66 and even 64 did, was realign both the Republican Party and Democratic Party.

Alena Daydream: 'Mariah Carey-Happy Birthday To You'

Source:Alena Daydream- R&B Goddess Mariah Carey seinning Happy Birthday, to The Greatest of All Time, Muhammad Ali. 

Source:The Daily Journal 

"Mariah Carey-Happy Birthday To You" 

From Alena Daydream

I’m going to be real blunt here and say that Muhammad Ali’s rocket took off to the moon once Mariah not only came on the stage, but as she approached Muhammad. His rocket then took off to another galaxy. I could put it more direct than that, but I think you get the idea. 

I mean seeing Mariah live is not a birthday present, but a lifetime of birthday presents and may prevent Muhammad from developing Alzheimer’s . Because he’ll never forget this performance. She’s the goddess of my generation I believe at least in the music industry. A hot, baby-face, adorable goddess with a body of a goddess and she knows all of these things and uses them os well. And oh by the way, the best singer in the business at least when it comes to her voice post-Whitney Houston and Frank Sinatra.

CBS News: The Longines Chronoscope- Norman Thomas (1953)

Source:CBS News- Socialist Party Leader Norman Thomas.

Source:FreeState MD 

"LONGINES CHRONOSCOPE WITH DR. NORMAN THOMAS - National Archives and Records Administration 1953-02-16 - ARC Identifier 95979 / Local Identifier LW-LW-48 - TELEVISION INTERVIEW: William Bradford Huie and Hardy Burt talk with Dr. Norman Thomas, Socialist Leader, on criticism of the new Eisenhower administration policies regarding Formosa and Chiang Kai-shek, communism, bombing of Manchurian bases, recognition of the People's Republic of China, Korean truce, a third World War and world peace. Copied by IASL Master Scanner Thomas Gideon." 

From Public Resource

What I respect about Norman Thomas (even though he was a Socialist and we probably agree on almost nothing as it relates to economic policy) is that he was a real Democrat. A real American Democrat, a real Democratic Socialist. 

Norman Thomas was probably against communism as much as any Conservative, or Liberal and spoked out against communism. Which is different from democratic socialism. Democratic socialism, is democratic and communism is authoritarian. At least in how it's been practiced around the world. He wasn’t one of these far-lefties that spoke up in favor of Communists and other authoritarians, who were dictators around the world, for a couple of reasons. One, he was against communism, but also because of how badly socialism has been made to look like.

Thanks to the success of right-wingers, going back at least since the late 1960s in America, socialism has been made to look like communism, as if they are part of the same philosophy, because they are not. And Democratic Socialists like Norman Thomas tend to believe in at least a certain level of capitalism and private enterprise. Just not at the expense of the people and what want as many people as possible to benefit from private enterprise. 

Norman Thomas, was the Bernie Sanders of his time. He and Henry Wallace, another Democratic Socialist, who ran for president for the Progressive Party in 1948, were very similar when it came to economic policy. But Thomas, was perhaps not as much as a dove when it came to foreign affairs and national security.

If you pay attention to this video, you consistently hear Norman Thomas criticize the Soviet Union, totalitarianism and even communism. That the Russian people, were essentially subjects of the Russian Government in the Soviet Union. You didn’t hear him unlike others on the Far-Left in America, try to claim that Russia was misunderstood during the Cold War. Or even try to suggest that America might have been the bad guys in that war of words. Or even the wrong country won that war. 

Thomas, was a Socialist in the European sense. Democratic in nature and even supported capitalism and private enterprise. But wanted a big central government to manage the resources of the country and support the people with a welfare state. So no one would have to go without, or have too much, according to him.

CBS News: Face The Nation With Bob Schieffer: 'The Confident Defeat That Wasn't'

Source:CBS News- U.S. Senator George McGovern (Democrat, South Dakota) appearing on CBS News Face The Nation, in 1972.

"Democrats Sen. Hubert Humphrey and Rep. George McGovern appeared together on "Face the Nation" while they were campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination. They both expressed confidence that President Richard Nixon was beatable. Of course, neither of them ultimately did."

Source:CBS News

Senator George McGovern (Democrat, South Dakota) and 1972 Democratic presidential candidate talking to CBS News Face The Nation about Senator Hubert Humphrey and their presidential campaigns. The video that this photo is from, is not currently available online right now.

Source:CBS News- Face The Nation talking to George McGovern & Hubert Humphrey.

The fact is there wasn't any Democrat who could even beat President Nixon in 1972, or even give him a tough race, because of the disarray in the Democratic Party between it's Center-Left and Far-Left. Similar to how the Republican Party is today. And there wasn't a Democrat who could bring those two sides together. 

But even without the emergence of the McGovernites that put all of their support behind Senator George McGovern in 1972, I think they would have a hard time defeating President Nixon. Because of the emerging Southern base in the Republican Party and that the Democrats hadn't locked down the Northeast and West Coast, as well as big Midwestern cities as far as their base. African-Americans and Latinos, were still voting Republican in 1972.

Compared with the late 1960s at least, 1972 looked like a fairly peaceful and establishment friendly year. And when that is the case the party in power and that is the party with the presidency, tends to do well. Even if the young Baby Boomers and the broader New-Left in the Democratic Party felt differently. 

By 1972, the Vietnam War was ending, America was negotiating with Russia and China and opening up a relationship with the People's Republic of China. The country by in-large felt pretty good. The Great Deflation of the 1970s that basically hammered the American economy from really 1973 on, hadn't happen yet. So when the country is like this they tend to feel fairly good and aren't looking for a change in leadership. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

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

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

Joey Teefizz: MISL 1982-Baltimore Blast @ New York Arrows: First Half

Source:Joey Teefizz- The New York Arrows and Baltimore Blast, from 1982.

Source:The Daily Journal

"MISL Soccer in New York-please see the great contest at halftime with Shep messing in goal with civilians shooting on him...then see Zungul go wild..."

From Joey Teefizz

The New York Arrows were around in the early days of the MISL. Late 1970s to mid 1980s or so. Pro indoor soccer has never caught on in New York. Which is a shame, because New York is a great sports market. A great pro soccer market and the biggest sports market in America. And indoor soccer is a great sport when played well and is a very exciting fast-paced game. But only the New York Red Bulls of the MLS an outdoor soccer league has ever caught on and done well in the New York/North Jersey area. Unlike the Baltimore Blast, that have been around since I believe day one in the MISL, which was 1979 and are still in business today. And like the San Diego Sockers are the class of American indoor soccer. As far as the type of fan support that they’ve had and all the championships that they’ve won.