Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Film Is Now Movie Trailers: One For The Money 2012:-A Sexy Baby Bounty Hunter Gets Her Men


Source: Film Is Now Movie Trailers-
Source: This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Press Plus

When I first heard about and watched One For The Money, I thought Katherine Heigl was way too cute to play a bounty hunter. I don't care how tall she is and how great of a body she and she's tall and very sexy physically, but she comes off as a big kid. Like a baby-face teenage girl a lot of times and didn't look much older in this movie than she did in that 1998 Chuckey movie she did. So in that way she was sort of perfect for this part, because the people she was trying to catch wouldn't take her seriously and she would perhaps be underestimated.

But then you watch the movie and see the scenes where Katherine Heigl is actually involved in bounty hunting and catching suspects and she handles herself very well and even tackles a guy running away from his home suspected I believe on drug dealing. So her persona and appearance of "aw, you're so cute and sweet, I have nothing to worry about with you", worked very well for her and her character because she did know what she was doing once she learned the ropes and handled herself very well as a bounty hunter.

What I was expecting from One For The Money when I finally saw it on demand this summer, was perhaps somewhat cheesy bad written movie that was mostly about a sexy, gorgeous baby-face goddess kicking ass in tight skinny jeans in boots. With some explosive action scenes and car chases and perhaps some humor in it. This movie has all of that, except the writing is much better and it is actually a very good action/comedy and fairly well-written and Katherine Heigl and Jason O'Mara the two main bounty hunters do a very good job in it. 
Film Is Now Movie Trailers: One For The Money Trailer




Tuesday, July 23, 2013

James Miller Center: Video: 1980 State of The Union: President Carter on Iranian Hostage Crisis

James Miller Center: Video: 1980 State of The Union: President Carter on Iranian Hostage Crisis

The Iranian Hostage Crisis, was the final nail in the Carter Presidency. Not so much the day that it happened, but how long it went on. Plus the fact that it was one more big blow that President Carter and the Democratic Party couldn’t afford controlling both the White House and Congress going into the 1980 general elections. Going up against a Republican Party, that was on the rebound and anxious to get back into power. If you look at President Carter’s poll numbers from the summer of 1979, one of the worst summers that America has ever gone through, at least economically with the energy shortages and everything else, President Carter was in the low thirties.

Plus, the economy was going back into recession and was dealing with high interest rates and inflation. And then the hostage crisis starts in November, right before Thanksgiving that year. But the country sort of came together around the situation, because we wanted our people back. Especially the families and President Carter acted so strongly and swiftly in response to the crisis. And his poll numbers shot back up as a result. Progressive Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy, challenges the President for the presidency in the winter of 1980. But Carter whips Senator Kennedy is most of the Democratic primaries. It wasn’t so much the Iranian Hostage Crisis that ruined the Carter Presidency, but how long that it went on.

That a third world country of twenty-five million people, could hold the world’s number one military and economic power hostage for an entire year. If the crisis was over by the spring of the 1980, President Carter probably does much better against Ronald Reagan and the fall and perhaps even beats him. Because the economy started rebounding as well. The Carter Administration, tried to end the crisis in the spring of 1980 with a rescue attempt. That failed with a helicopter crashing in the Iranian desert. Which just made the President look worst and weaker and essentially guaranteeing that the crisis would go on.


Monday, July 22, 2013

VOA News: Rebels with a Cause Slam Corporate Greed

This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Press Plus

Sounds like the Symbionese Liberation Army of the 21st Century. The Symbionese from the early and mid 1970s were also New-Left if not Far-Left radicals who were fed up with poverty and corporate greed. And saw the wealthy as the main if not only culprit with these issues. And took it upon themselves to kidnap Patty Hearst, the daughter of a very wealthy California family. And would give the Patty back only if her father paid the SLA off. And then the SLA would give the money to poor people in poor Oakland communities and other towns in California.Rebels With a Cause, aren’t kidnappers, but people who also have a similar Robinhood image.

Apparently this movie was first put forward in the fall of 2011 when Occupy Wall Street came out. And they became the New-Left radicals of this decade that were going to fight against what they saw as greedy capitalism and private enterprise. If not capitalism and private enterprise all together. And fight for new wealth redistribution to tax money from the wealthy to take care of the poor. But by in large there haven’t been any terrorists linked to OWS. Just people protesting for not having permits and causing disturbances, but not actually robbing banks and taking people hostage. Unlike the SLA.

Whether you’re a fan of corporate greed and crony capitalism, or not and I’m sure as hell not as a Liberal, there ways of fighting bad things and ways not to do that. Violence, almost never accomplishes political objectives when you don’t have the people behind you and you’re just a fringe group. The way to do this is to have the people behind you and build a movement and get the resources that you need from the people behind you. And then form a protest movement to accomplish your objectives. Publish articles, put together publications about what you’re trying to accomplish and back politicians and political candidates who believe in what you want. And will then fight for it. Instead of violently trying to overthrow the system and creating new victims.

Sunday, July 21, 2013

The Highble: 'Possibly The Best Marijuana Documentary Of All Time'


Source:The Highble- two people from the documentary. Hopefully I'm not giving away too much here.

"This is a documentary we found on marijuana, possibly the best one we have seen to date. It's informative and goes very in-depth about weed, but most importantly it just makes you want to go roll a blunt and smoke it :)" 

From The Highble

"The 1930s marked the beginning of America’s war against marijuana. Here’s a glance at some of the most famous laws around cannabis prohibition:

The Marihuana Tax Act (1937)
The Boggs Act (1952)
The Narcotics Control Act (1956)
The Controlled Substances Act (1971)
In 1937, the Marihuana Tax Act was enforced, prohibiting marijuana federally but still allowing medical use. Prior to that, 29 states had already outlawed marijuana on their own.

But by the 1950s, a counterculture movement had begun, with young people using marijuana recreationally much more than previous generations.

Eventually, the Boggs Act (1952) and Narcotics Control Act (1956) were put in place to combat the counterculture. These laws set mandatory sentences for drug-related offenses, including marijuana. A first-offense marijuana possession conviction could result in a minimum sentence of 2-10 years with a fine of up to $20,000.

In 1970, cannabis was classified as a Schedule I drug—the same category as heroin—under the Controlled Substances Act. However, the 70s also saw an opposing shift, with a number of states beginning to decriminalize marijuana." 

From the Visual Capitalist 

If the goal of prohibition is to prevent people from using or doing something that's bad for them, then marijuana prohibition going back to 1937, is an utter failure in America. If anything, marijuana is now more available and legally available today, then it was 76 years ago with medical marijuana becoming legal in several states in America. And now marijuana becoming legal recreationally in the Colorado and the State of Washington in 2012. 

Just because you ban something whether it's in the United States or anywhere else in the world, doesn't mean it goes away, if people want to continue using or doing whatever you decided should be illegal. The oldest profession in the world is illegal in most places in America, at least outside of the State of Nevada. That's why marijuana prohibition has never worked, that's why alcohol prohibition didn't work in the 1920s and 30s. 

I'm not saying these things because I'm pro-marijuana. Marijuana is something that would never want to do or be involved with, other than arguing for its legalization. Actually, I don't even drink alcohol, I barely drink coffee, and I don't smoke tobacco either. I'm just saying that just because I don't like something or big government doesn't like something, doesn't mean I think it should be illegal. 

When you try to punish people for what they do to themselves, instead of what they do to other people, you just make the problem that you're trying to solve even worst, because again, just because you outlaw something, doesn't mean it goes away, it just goes underground. And now you have two problems, if you're a prohibitionist: the thing you outlawed is still going on, but now you're putting people in jail not because they hurt innocent people, because of what they did to themselves. 

And the other problem with prohibition being, you're now making people who otherwise could be self-sufficient and be solid contributors to society, wards of the state who are dependent on taxpayers who work for a living to take care of them. Which is what our jails and prisons are full of today.

ABC News: Video: This Week: Senator Ted Cruz Discusses Opposition to President Obama's Newtown Gun Agenda


This post was originally posted at FRS FreeState on WordPress

Anytime you are real popular in your party even if you’ve only been office for a short period of time, like in U.S. Senator Ted Cruz’s case and you are a Governor or U.S. Senator, you have to at least consider running for President at that point. Because it might be the best shot that you get and you may never get another shot at it. And if you are a U.S. Senator or a Governor of a major state and you are popular, you would almost be silly not to consider running for President. Because of what you would be able to do for your state and country. Which is what Senator Cruz is doing right now. Which is why Senator Cruz, Senator Marco Rubio, Senator Rand Paul, are all looking at running for President in 2016. Because they may never get another opportunity like this again. And may have issues in the future that prevent them from ever running for President again.

Friday, July 19, 2013

Black and Right: Malcolm X- Democrats Are Chumps


Source: Black and Right- Minister Malcolm X - The Nation of Islam 
Source:FRS FreeState Plus

The reason why there were so many Democratic members of Congress in the 1960s was because of the Dixiecrats the Southern Caucus in Congress who were famous for blocking civil rights legislation in the Senate and the African-Americans who could vote back then, were voting for more liberal or progressive Democrats and Republicans. Yes, Republicans were competitive back then with African-Americans as well as in the Northeast. Because they weren’t controlled by the Religious-Right, or people who I today call Neo-Confederates. Who are still fighting the Civil War let alone the Culture War who back then were blocking civil rights legislation in Congress. Today are pushing these so-called Voter ID laws bills that are a solution in search of a problem. But are actually designed to prevent traditional Democrats like African-Americans, Latinos, young people from voting in swing states. So Republicans can stay in power there.
Black and Right: Malcolm X- Black Democrats Are Chumps


Saturday, July 13, 2013

Associated Press: Texas Senate Passes New Abortion Restrictions: Big Government on The Rise in Texas

This piece was originally posted at FRS FreeState on WordPress: Associated Press: Texas Senate Passes New Abortion Restrictions: Big Government on The Rise in Texas

Texas taking a stand for big government and involving big government into the lives of women’s health care in Texas. I’m not pro-abortion as much as the Religious-Right might want to label people who are pro-choice as pro-abortion. And I hate that term pro-abortion, because it doesn’t exist. There aren’t people who are pro-abortion. What I am is pro-choice and pro-choice generally and not just as it relates to abortion. But I’m in favor of individual choice and freedom broadly as long as people aren’t hurting innocent people. People being those of us who’ve been born and not waiting to be born. Now I do not want to be forced to pay for someone else’s abortions and I’m not in favor of public funding of abortion. We do not have a constitutional right to that. But we do have the right to privacy and the freedom to live our own lives and govern ourselves. Not other people, but govern ourselves which is why this Texas abortion law will be ruled unconstitutional as inconsistent with Roe V. Wade.

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

AP: Raw Video: Egypt's Army Tightens Grip

This post was originally posted at FRS FreeState on WordPress

Political satirist George Carlin had this phrase that voters get who they vote for. So in Egypt’s case they elected with less than a majority a weak President and that’s what they got was a weak President who was unable to take on the military establishment and bring civilian rule to the country. Not as a dictator, but as democratically elected leader. And of course the question would’ve been how democratic would someone who represents the Muslim Brotherhood in a country without any democratic tradition would’ve been.  


But the good news is that Egypt will have another chance and hopefully elect for President someone with stronger democratic credentials who’ll assume power and govern Egypt in a responsible way. Which I believe should be the number one goal there with a real Parliament there and a real Constitution to hold the President and his administration accountable in a country of eighty million people with a lot of potential for growth. But I say that hopefully because Egypt doesn’t have much of a track record that indicates they are capable of moving forward.

Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Liberal Democracy