MOX News: Countdown With Keith Olbermann- 'Michael Moore Says Occupy Wall Street Will Only Get Bigger'

Source:Mox News- Filmmaker and New-Left political activist Michael Moore, on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, talking about Occupy Wall Street.

Source:FreeState MD 

"Michael Moore says Occupy Wall Street will only get bigger"  

From Anon Saint

Source:Mox News- Filmmaker and New-Left political activist Michael Moore, on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, talking about Occupy Wall Street.

Wow! I’m shocked that Michael Moore one of the leading so-called Democratic Socialists in America, is behind the Occupy Wall Street movement. I’m not sure he has much credibility on the issue. Bashing a governmental and economic system that he’s benefited greatly from. Fine, he sees a country that’s in a lot of trouble and wants to see us get through this and recover from it. I get that, but bashing a system that he’s benefited from, is hard to swallow. (Sort of like peanut butter or chocolate sauce on a hot dog)

Talking Points Memo: Senator Barack Obama- 'Confesses to Socialist Leanings'

Source:Talking Points Memo- U.S. Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois) talking about his opponent Senator John McCain (Republican, Arizona)

Source:FreeState MD 

"Obama Confesses to Socialist Leanings ...admits to sharing in kindergarten. Oct. 29, 2008." 

From Talking Points Memo

If Barack Obama is Socialist, then then John McCain is a Christian-Right Theocrat, as well as a Islamic Theocrat, wanting to bring both fundamentalist Evangelicalism, and Sharia Law to America. (Impressive guy to pull both of those off at the exact same time) 

2008 was obviously a very trying year for America economically and with the Republican Party in The White House and presiding over all of this turmoil, Senator John McCain and company knew they were in a lot of trouble politically. (Which would explain their political hail marry pass known as Sarah Palin) And when political campaigns are in trouble, they tend to get desperate, especially when both Congress and The White House are at stake. And throw every name in the book (and perhaps some names that haven't been invented yet) at their opponents. 

Richard Nixon Library: Oral History- Tim Naftali Interviewing George McGovern

Source:Richard Nixon Library- Former U.S. Senator and 1972 Democratic Party presidential nominee George McGovern, talking to presidential historian Tim Naftali, in 2009. 

Source:The FreeState MD 

"George McGovern recorded interview by Timothy Naftali, 26 August 2009, the Richard

Nixon Oral History Project of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum." 

From the Richard Nixon Library 

“George Stanley McGovern, who rose from small-town roots in Avon and Mitchell to the highest heights of American politics, died Sunday morning at a Sioux Falls hospice facility from a combination of medical conditions associated with his age. He was 90.

Though he was known mostly for his unsuccessful 1972 presidential campaign, McGovern was more than that. He was an accomplished student and debater during his school days in Mitchell; a World War II bomber pilot decorated with the Distinguished Flying Cross; a doctorate-level scholar; a history professor; the rebuilder of the South Dakota Democratic Party; a U.S. representative; director of the Food for Peace program in the Kennedy administration; a U.S. senator; an icon of the anti-Vietnam War effort; a lifelong crusader against the scourge of hunger; a United Nations delegate and ambassador; the author of 14 books; and, in his later years, an elder statesman who remained a sought-after speaker and commenter on issues of the day.”  

Source:The Mitchell Republic- U.S. Senator George McGovern (Democrat, South Dakota) running for President in 1972.

From The Mitchell Republic

George McGovern was someone with one hell of a political and professional resume. Who represented South Dakota in both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate as a Leftist-Democrat in one of the reddest states in the union. And yet he represented South Dakota in Congress for twenty-two years. Who served as Director of the U.S. Food For Peace Program, who won the Democratic Party nomination for President in 1972, who rebuilt the Democratic Party almost on his own. By bringing in so many new Democrats. Who thought the Democratic Party was still the Dixiecrat Party that didn’t welcome ethnic or racial-minorities or women and so-forth.

Senator McGovern benefited the Democratic Party by 1976 with Jimmy Carter being elected President in 1976. Who was a Liberal Democrat from the South and not as far to the left as the national Democratic Party. George McGovern was a man who truly believed in public service. That it was about representing the public and not furthering your career financially. George McGovern grew up in the New Deal era in the Democratic Party era. The Progressive Era of Franklin Roosevelt and thought this was the politics of the future. And something that he believed in and was the dominant political philosophy up until the late 1960s or so.

The problem that Senator McGovern had was that by the time he was a national Democrat and becoming a major contender For President of the United States, Senator McGovern was not a New Deal Progressive Democrat, but more of a Henry Wallace Democratic Socialist,  during a time when the country was moving to the right on economic policy and when high taxes, Welfare, big government were becoming unpopular.Yet Senator McGovern was not just running as a New Deal or Great Society Progressive Democrat, but as someone who in his 1972 presidential campaign wanted to create round three and create a real welfare state in America. And create a national healthcare system to use as an example. When high taxes were becoming unpopular.

The main difference between Barry Goldwater and George McGovern’s landslide presidential losses, is that Senator Goldwater was ahead of his time and the country wasn’t quite ready for his let’s call it conservative-libertarianism in 1964. At the heart of the Great Society era in the country. But in Senator McGovern’s case the country moved past his and LBJ’s progressivism and democratic socialism. And that we just didn’t need t have the New Deal and Great Society. But that we needed to expand it and create a real welfare state in America. Like they have in Scandinavia to use as an example. With things like a national healthcare system universal higher education run by the Federal Government. Americans by-in-large, weren’t ready for democratic socialism in the 1970s.

Senator McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign, wanted a lot more Federal funding for public-schools in this country as well as regulations and so-forth. And the country simply didn’t want to pay the taxes to finance all of these new public programs. By 1976 the New-Democratic wing in the Democratic Party (the real Liberal wing of the party) that has a healthy skepticism of governmental-power in the economy and our personal lives, but not anti-government, was already forming. And we're replacing the Dixiecrats in the party that we're becoming Republicans. Jimmy Carter perfect example of that. So by 1976 the Democratic Party and country were moving past FDR progressive policies and Lyndon Johnson. So of course they weren’t ready for a Democratic Socialist (the Bernie Sanders of hims time) in George McGovern.

But what I call the McGovern wing of the Democratic Party, that’s different from the FDR or LBJ wing, was forming, but hasn’t had the power to nominate another McGovern Socialist to run for President in the Democratic Party. They tried with McGovern again in 1984, Jesse Jackson in 84 and 88, Dennis Kucinich in 2004 and 2008. But none of these Far-Leftist Democrats, have come even close to being a major contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. And we are now seeing McGovern-Democrats running for President in social democratic third-parties. George McGovern’s legacy for the Democratic Party, is that he expanded it. Taken it away from the right-wing Religious-Right of the South. And giving the Republican Party a Christmas gift from hell. And turning the Democratic Party into more of a Northern and West Coast party. That relies on minorities and women, to be successful politically.

CSPAN: President Barack Obama- 'At The 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner'

Source:CSPAN- President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) speaking at the 2011 White House Correspondents dinner, in Washington.

Source:The FreeState MD

"President Obama at the 2011 White House Correspondents' Dinner. View the complete program here:CSPAN." 

Source:CSPAN- comedian Seth Meyers.

"Journalists, politicians and celebrities gathered for the White House Correspondents' Association Annual Dinner where journalism awards were presented. President Obama gave humorous remarks focusing on his potential 2012 Republican presidential candidates. His speech featured a fake trailer for “The President’s Speech,” a spoof sequel to the film “The King’s Speech.” He was followed by “Saturday Night Live” head writer Seth Meyers."

From CSPAN

Ever since the mid-term elections of 2010, the President has been in full reelection mode. Thinking that if Democrats can lose the House, he could lose the White House just as easily.

And every decision and policy position and speech President Obama has given, has been based on that. Only when President Obama has to take a stand on anything, it's after endless concentrated thought on every possible proposal and idea that's out there. Libya being a perfect example of this and then after finally taking a position on anything.

Watching Barack Obama make up his mind on anything, (from a distance, anyway) is like watching a midget try to tackle an elephant: it is really difficult and painful thing to see that you want it to end and for some resolution to the matter: "If we do this, than that will happen and that will be bad. But if we don't do this, then this could happen and that might be worst". Politicians who try to please everybody tend to be the most unpopular. Because they end up offending everyone. And that is sort of where President Obama is right now.

It's the weakest position possible designed to offend the very least. It's Independent voters that the President is targeting. Meaning that he can’t seem too strong on anything, because he might offend those who look for the middle ground on everything­.

Which means that President Obama ends up doing what he wants the least, which is looking weak. Because he can't figure out what the hell he should do. Right now President Obama who’ve I tended to agree with on foreign and economic policy, is the On the Other Hand President.

President Barack Obama: "Well, if we do this, it could work, but on the other hand if we do this instead, it might work better. And costing the country economically because we have a weak economy that needs strong action".

Sometimes you just got to say, screw it! And do what you think is right and let the chips fall where they may. That is what leadership is about and what being President of the United States is about. The On the Other Hand Presidency might turn out to be effective leadership in the long-term, but it's definitely weak leadership in the short-term. And costing President Obama popularity and the ability to lead a large divided country.

Fair Economy: David Morris- 'Why You Want Government Running Health, Education, and Defense'

Source:FreeState MD- good look at big government.

Source:FreeState MD 

"This article by David Morris of OnTheCommons.org supports the commonly made argument that privatization is not always the answer because certain services, such as health care, are more cost-effective and better managed by the government. It includes data, examples, and charts supporting this point." 

From Fair Economy 

“President Obama on why the private sector is more efficient than government” 

Source:U.S. Representative Jeff Duncan- President Barack Obama, talking about the government shutdown, in 2013.

From Jeff Duncan 

The title of this article from the AlterNet that I read is called: “Why You Want the Government Running Health, Education and Defense”. No, for real, just look up top incase you missed it. Yet the whole article is about comparing the American health care system with foreign health care systems.

This article had nothing about education and defense. Because I believe this writer understands that the American public education system isn’t very good right now. We’re ranked I believe by the United Nations, and organization that the Left especially the Far-Left puts a lot of faith in, 39th in the World. And no one is calling for privatizing the Defense Department. Except for perhaps Dick Cheney, Ron Paul and Libertarians in the Tea Party.

Another issue I have with the AlterNet article is some of its so-called facts: I know, why would the AlterNet care about fact or let them get in their way of a good ideological argument. But saying that in America the private sector runs our health care system and in the rest of the developed world the public sector runs their health care systems,  is purely false.

Holland, Switzerland, France, Germany, Italy, Taiwan and Japan (to use as examples) France, Germany, Italy and Japan all being large countries, all have private/ public health care systems. America has a private/public health care system. It’s just different and not nearly as effective as these other countries, with its health insurance.

Socialists like to say that government ownership or management of the economy and other key services, is the best way to go to have the best country possible. And they point to Sweden as their example of how well this system works. Not recognizing or realizing the fact that Sweden has a very large private sector and a lot of their economy is privatized.

What Sweden does have and why I call it a social democracy, well because that is exactly what it is. (Speaking of facts) But what they have is a very large welfare state (at least by American standards) with very generous benefits financed through high taxes. (Again, at least by American standards) In other words, the Swedish Government or Swedish Socialists tax most of their people’s money away, so they can give that money back to take care of them. Or another way of putting it, they tax people to death and them bring them back to life with their own money.

The economy’s that work best are the economy’s that privatize most of their economy, but regulate them well to prevent and punish abuses. That has unlimited fair and open competition and a substantial and affordable safety net for people who fall through the cracks. That empowers them to get on their feet.

America used to have an economy like this, but we moved away from it and look where we are now. What doesn’t work well in an economy are monopolies, whether they are public or private. Where Big Government, “my people are essentially if not officially, because my public school monopoly doesn’t teach them very well. So what I have to do is take most of their money from them to prevent them from spending it unwisely, to take care of them”. And you can just look at the former Soviet Union, or Cuba or North Korea today.

What also doesn’t work well is what I and others would call “cowboy capitalism”. Which is capitalism with essentially no rules or the rules aren’t enforced. Or the referees are paid off and essentially taking coffee breaks over at the closest Starbucks from the stadium the whole game and they allow whatever to happen to happen, the free market being everything that is. Except that it is not free when the government at taxpayers expense pays these companies for the hell of it, who play by no rules. And I give you the Bush Administration of 2001-2009 as the only example I need. And look at where we are today.

Government should let the people be free to live their own lives as long as they are not hurting anyone else with their freedom. Thats the economy that works the best, freedom with responsibility.

I don’t and I imagine most Americans don’t want a Federal, or for that matter a state, country or municipal babysitter (meaning government) to take care of us, for us, at of course our expense. Big Government to its taxpayers: “Give me your money, so I can take care of you for you.” Uh no, just give the people the tools they need in life to be successful and allow for them to take care of themselves. Freedom and responsibility: reward good behavior and discourage bad behavior.

Mary Queen of Shops: 'Designer Jeans Advice- From Mary Portas'

Source:Mary Portas- designer jeans advice.

“Mary Portas takes Diana, the owner of fashion store 117, to find a high end designer jeans market for her shop. A great pair of jeans is the staple of any fashionable woman's wardrobe.”

From Mary Queen of Shops 

I found this photo on Flickr or Photobucket. It’s not directly related to the Mary Portas video, except for the designer jeans. It also adds the jeans in boots look that’s been with us for the last 5-6 years with so many sexy women in and out of America tucking their skin-tight or skinny jeans into their long boots. And the jeans over boots looks is still with us and very popular as well where women now are wearing their skinny jeans over their boots even to work not and when they out to dinner and dress up their denim that way. 

Source:The Daily Journal- Jeans in boots.

This photo is also not directly related to Mary Portas's video about designer jeans. But you do see a beautiful, sexy woman, with great curves, in her 21st Century designer denim jeans, that's she's wearing in her black, leather boots. Which is a look that came back in 2005-06 and has been around with us ever since. Designer jeans or skinny jeans aren't designed for skinny girls or women, but for women with meat on their bones who like to show off their legs and butts. As you see with this woman on the left.

Source:The Daily Journal- jeans in boots on the left.

The jeans denim explosion especially since the late 1990s and which went even further in the last decade and has probably gotten even bigger in the first two years of this decade especially with skinny denim and leather jeans for women. And with skinny jeans for women that have been around since 2005 or 06 which as guy I gotta admit I think it's great checking out sexy women who love their tight jeans. Especially checking out sexy female celebrity's in their tight jeans. And now that even tight jeans have become such a versatile pant for women, no longer considered just a casual pant. It has completely changed how sexy women dress in and out of work.

With women now wearing skinny jeans to the office, not just on Casual Friday, as well as out on the weekend and at night. And wearing them in all weather not just in the fall or winter. But during hot humid summers, like in the Mid-West, Mid-Atlantic and Southeast. Wearing tight jeans not just with t-shirts and tank tops, but with sweaters, blouses, suit jackets it's become very important for women to make sure that when they are out in tight jeans or shopping for tight jeans, that they are wearing the tight jeans and buying the tight jeans that show off their bodies as best as possible.

That they don't wear tight jeans that make them look fat, skinny or look like hookers. Like with the famous ass crack jeans of 2001-02. Where if a women sat down or bended over, she was at risk of revealing her ass crack and perhaps seeing it on TV or the internet or both. Especially with the camcorder revolution and people being able to record video on their cell phones. Low-rise jeans, skinny jeans good. Ass crack jeans bad, women should find the balance that makes them look sexy in them. And shows off their figures but doesn't make them look like prostitutes looking for a man to pay their bills.

Perhaps this video can help women find that right balance. Also for me anyway, not a fan of trouser jeans, they might be stylish for a women and make them feel like they can wear jeans to work and still look dressy or professional. But the office far as I'm concern might be the only good place for them. I'm not going to get the feeling to check out a women, I don't care how sexy she is physically, just because she's wearing trouser jeans. I would get the same satisfaction checking out a women wearing baggy sweatpants or slacks.

Denim to me on women anyway, like leather are meant to be tight. One reason why there are both denim jeans and leather jeans and a lot of women and men shopping for both denim and leather jeans that are the tightest possible without sucking the blood from their legs so they can no longer walk. Sort of like that Seinfeld episode (sorry I watched the show a lot) where Kramer was wearing designer jeans from like 1982 or something that were so tight that he literally couldn't move his legs in them.

So low-rise and skinny jeans great, jeans with boots, whether they are under or over the jeans are great. The tight dark wash designer jeans explosion for women in the late 1970s, the greatest advancement in style for women I believe ever. As far as sex appeal goes, but women should where the jeans that are best for their body and don't buy jeans that are for another body. That just causes problems. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.  

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

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

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

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

The Doors: The Lizard King Jim Morrison In Concert

Source:The Doors- The Lizard King Jim Morrison in concert.

Source:The Daily Journal 

“Mixed by Fabrizio Federico:Fabrizio Federico. *I do not own any of the copyrighted music and video.

Article about Jim:Pink Manifesto. Jim Morrison’s on stage shaman dances during The Doors transcendent live shows of 1967-68.

‘Life is a playground just do what you want’

PINK8 Manifesto.”

From The Doors

When I see Oliver Stone’s movie The Doors from 1991, I see a pretty entertaining movie. Where Val Kilmer plays Jim Morrison, the vocalist of The Doors, does a pretty good job of playing the Lizard King. Sings all the lyrics himself, with no lip syncing. Except that he’s three inches taller and a bigger man physically than Jim Morrison.

From what I know about The Doors, the only scenes that were accurate, were the concert in New Haven from 1967. Where Morrison gets arrested in concert for being vulgar to New Haven police. And the Miami concert, where Morrison again gets arrested for in descent exposure and trying to incite violence. It’s a very entertaining movie, funny even, but a fantasy of what happened with that band and especially Jim Morrison in the late 60s.

Oliver Stone is a big fan of Morrison, but I think he directed the movie, the way he thought Morrison was and his experiences of The Doors. Instead of the way they actually were. Val Kilmer who plays Jim Morrison in the movie, is in I believe all the scenes. The movie looks more like a fictional portrayal of Jim Morrison. Rather than an autobiographical movie of The Doors. Robbie Krieger who was the guitarist in the real band The Doors said that the only scene that happened in real-life, was the Miami concert scene.

The Miami concert wasn’t much of anything other than an improv. With Morrison showing up two hours late for the concert, more drunk than even usual. Jim Morrison didn’t drink like a fish, but a see of fish. He’s too drunk to sing, paranoid and a few minutes into the concert once it finally starts, Jim Morrison stops singing or giving his pathetic personation of singing. And starts cursing at the audience and insulting them. Actually accusing Miami of hiding Adolph Hitler of all people. The concert turned into Amateur Night at the Improv real fast.

One thing that Oliver Stone got correct besides Miami, was the Jim Morrison’s wardrobe. With over an hour of footage of the Lizard King wearing his famous skin-tight lambskin black Leather jeans. Silver concho belt, brown suede cowboy boots and black leather cowboy boots. There’s over an hour footage of Morrison wearing his black leathers the pants that he made stylish on his own. There’s a great line in the movie where Pam, Jim’s girlfriend tells to change those stinky leathers that he’s been wearing the last three weeks. Classic Jim Morrison.

The black skin-tight leather jeans you now see a lot of rockers wearing, I know this only because I’m a big fan of the Lizard King, I love blues rock, The Doors sound. And I own several books and movies about The Doors. So watching this movie was like reading a great fiction. Very entertaining, but you don’t learn anything knew about the subject that you’re watching. The real Lizard King is in this video.