Russia Today: The Alyona Show- 'Michele Bachmann Wants To Ban Porn’

Source:Russia Today- Alyona Minkovski on Representative Michele Bachmann. I guess President Vladimir Putin doesn't like Representative Bachmann either.

Source:The Daily Journal 

“Michele is the first 2012 Presidential Candidate to sign the “The Marriage Vow: a Declaration of Dependence upon Marriage and Family.” In it there are several issues when it comes to protecting the Institute of Marriage, you must always be against same sex marriage. And no one is for sexual abuse or slavery, or forced anything. But she’s for total banning of porn?! All forms of it?! Take a look.” 

From The Alyona Show 

“RT (formerly Russia Today) is a Russian state-controlled[1] international television network funded by the federal tax budget of the Russian government.[15][16] It operates pay television channels directed to audiences outside of Russia, as well as providing Internet content in English, Spanish, French, German, Arabic, and Russian.

RT is a brand of TV-Novosti, an “autonomous non-profit organization” founded by the Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti in April 2005.[10][17] During the economic crisis in December 2008, the Russian government, headed by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, included ANO “TV-Novosti” on its list of core organizations of strategic importance to Russia.[18][19][20] RT operates as a multilingual service with channels in five languages: the original English-language channel was launched in 2005, the Arabic-language channel in 2007, Spanish in 2009, German in 2014 and French in 2017. RT America (since 2010),[21] RT UK (since 2014) and other regional channels also produce local content. RT is the parent company of the Ruptly video agency,[5][6][7] which owns the Redfish video channel and the Maffick digital media company.[8][9]

RT has been described as a major propaganda outlet for the Russian government and its foreign policy.[2] Academics, fact-checkers, and news reporters (including some current and former RT reporters) have identified RT as a purveyor of disinformation[42] and conspiracy theories.[48] UK media regulator Ofcom has repeatedly found RT to have breached its rules on impartiality, including multiple instances in which RT broadcast “materially misleading” content.[55] RT’s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan compared the channel to the Ministry of Defence and stated that it was “waging an information war, and with the entire Western world”.[16][56] In September 2017, RT America was ordered to register as a “foreign agent” with the United States Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.[57] RT has been banned in Ukraine since 2014,[58] and in Latvia[59] and Lithuania[60] since 2020.”

From Wikipedia 

In other Onion worthy news, I actually agree with the Alyona Minkovski on something. Which tells me, it’s time for another head examination. I generally only listen to Alyona to see what Far-Left conspiracy theorists are up to. And if there’s anything I can do to help them. Suggest certain medicine, a good shrink, perhaps a mental institution.

But from time to time (about as often as oceans are dry and Lindsay Lohan is sober) the Alyona produces a good story that’s actually worth listening to and watching (and not just for entertainment value) and should be taken seriously. Actually, I tend to like and respect Alyona. It’s her politics where we tend to differ. 

Back in July when Michelle Bachmann (perhaps better known as the Iron Lady at her mental Hospital)  made pornography and same-sex marriage her key issues. That is what happens when she is off her medicine. 

Hopefully Michele is back now getting the help she badly needs at her institution. And perhaps she is now running for President and away inside her mental hospital, where she’s a resident. But during her time (as an escaped mental patient) she and Rick Santorum took the same pledge, to outlaw pornography. If the Pope were to convert to Islam and Ron Paul were to declare himself now as a Socialist and only then would Michele or Rick might have an ice balls chance in hell of winning the presidency. 

Michele and Rick both argued over who singed the pledge first to outlaw pornography and same-sex marriage and return America to the 1950s. Michele Bachmann finally won the debate, by saying: “Ha! I Singed it first” Nanny nanny boo boo stick your head in dog doo.” How you come back from that? This is the state of the Republican Party right now. This is what you have to do to be nominated for president there. 

These are the issues that drive the modern Republican Party right now, like cabbies drive car: Yeah, we might have 8.5% unemployment, a 15T$ national debt and budget deficit approaching 2T$ and rising costs of living, but it’s your positions on these that are the issues that only 10% of the country cares about, that the Far-Right of the Republican Party cares about. 

The Far-Right-Wing of the Republican Party, a small percentage of the country at large, but big enough that the Republicans still needs them to win, because of their inability to bring voters from outside of this small community into the party. These issues won’t put anyone back to work, except for people who fight against these things like on the Christian-Right, but lay off more people or put more people in prison that currently work in the adult entertainment industry. And Republicans will just drive up our national debt and put more people out of work in the process.

Huffington Post: Sam Stein- ‘John McCain’s 200-Page Mitt Romney Opposition Research Book From ’08 Found Online’

Source:The Huffington Post- Senator John McCain quietly endorsing Governor Mitt Romney for President. Maybe they should've used sign language instead.

Source:FreeState MD

“The oft-discussed 200-page opposition research book compiled by John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2008 against fellow candidate Mitt Romney has made its way online, courtesy of BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski.

The entire thing is worth a thorough read if only for an exploration of how little the current Republican field has scratched the surface with respect to Romney-related attacks.

The document also seriously undercuts McCain’s current position –- as an endorser of Romney for president in 2012 –- that attacks on the former governor’s Bain Capital days are anti-capitalism. There are 399 mentions of Bain in McCain’s Mitt Romney oppo book.”

From The Huffington Post 

“Senator John McCain came out today and endorsed Mitt Romney. Cenk Uygur discusses McCain’s endorsement announcement and other hilarious moments from John McCain speeches. Will the McCain endorsement have an effect on the 2012 election? Tell us what you think in the comment section below.” 

Source:The Young Turks- Cenk Uygur giving birth to a cow over John McCain. Trust me, I'm not that far off.

From The Young Turks 

Senator John McCain’s endorsement of Governor Mitt Romney: “I’m sorry, Mitt, I didn’t mean it. I thought you were an oil-slick schmuck five years ago. Well, I still do, but hell, at least you’re better than President Obama. Well, I’m 75 years old and I”m not always sure what I believe. I was Captain of the Straight Talk Express back in 2000. But that train ran out of gas in 2007, because there was this other job that I wanted as well. And besides, I’m a Republican­, so it was my turn to run for it. Thats how we roll in the GOP, a party I’m sure you’re familiar with.”

I can’t swear to it (at least not under the oath under the threat of perjury) that this is what Senator McCain said about Governor Romney. But I’m willing to bet this is what Senator McCain thinks of Mitt Romney.

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.