Leathered Life: Sandra B- 'Leather Coat, Leather Jeans & Boots'

Source:Leathered Life- Sandra B for Leathered Life.

Source:The Daily Press

"SandraB Leather Model"

Source:Leathered Life- Sandra B for Leathered Life.

From Fred Fiorino

Short, but sweet video of Sandra one of the leather models at the website Leathered Life. Which I'm not sure is even still in business or not. I haven't seen many videos or anything from them lately. But they were pretty hot in early 2009 when I got on YouTube and I checked out a lot of their videos when I got on YouTube. And a few of them are already on this blog and this will be another one. Lena is probably the only model that I really like there. 

Sandra seems pretty sweet with a nice body, but Lena has everything including beauty and baby-face adorable looks. And a body that seems to be built for skinny jeans. Both denim and leather jeans with great curves. The woman in the video looks good with the leather jeans and boots and certainly worth checking out. Which is why I'm posting this and her outfit is certainly sexy. But I've rather of seen a leather jacket like a biker jacket to go with the jeans and boots. Instead of a long coat.

Real Time: Bill Maher and Panel- Talking About the U.S. Constitution

Source: Real Time With Bill Maher- Republican political strategist Michelle Caruso-Cabrera.

Source:The Daily Press 

"Bill and his roundtable guests (Matt Taibbi, Kevin Smith, Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, John Heilemann & Tavis Smiley), answer fan questions." 

From Real Time With Bill Maher

Unless you’re a real Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian or perhaps even Independent, chances are you generally like the U.S. Constitution. If you’re a so-called Progressive ( Socialist, really ) today Christian-Nationalist or Christian-Theocrat, chances are you don’t like the U.S. Constitution. Because it constricts you from doing what you want the Federal Government to do and make it bigger.

Today’s Progressives ( Socialists in actuality ) would like to see the Federal Government get so big to the point, that it would provide a lot of the services that the private sector and state and local government’s currently provide. The 10th Amendment and property rights, makes that a lot more difficult for them to do that. As FDR found out during the New Deal back in the 1930s.

So today’s so-called Progressives who are really European Social Democrats, they would like to rewrite the U.S. Constitution to give the Federal Government more power. Including taking out some Constitutional Amendments, like the 2nd Amendment the Right to Self-Defense. And perhaps even amend the First Amendment when it comes to the media. They would like to see a public media, not a corporate Media ( as they would call it ) . And even be able to regulate hate speech in America.

As the Bush Administration found out, the U.S .Constitution got in their way when it came to indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. Christian-Nationalists would also like to amend the First Amendment so that it would only cover Freedom of Religion for Christians and political speech. Well, that it is political speech, as long as the people are saying things they agree with. And would like to eliminate the Right of Privacy, the Fourth Amendment and perhaps a few others.

The Christian-Right people I call Theocrats or better yet a religious cult, people who see marijuana as immoral, but have religious and political views that seem so out of space like they are on Fantasy Island and seem high on something illegal: basically view people who don’t live their lives as they do, they are immoral and should be in jail or something and would love to amend the First Amendment to outlaw adult entertainment.

So the Christian-Right can censor certain forms of entertainment they don’t like. Ban non-Christian religions and turn America into a Christian theocracy. Where life especially for women would become very restrictive with dress codes and that sort of thing. No more Right to Privacy, because now adultery and pre-marital sex, kids out-of-wedlock would be illegal. Pornography obviously illegal, alcohol and perhaps certain forms of dancing would be illegal.

It would be like living in Iran but a Theocracy like this, would make Iran look like a liberal democracy. That only 1960s Hippies could dream up in one of their pipe dreams. So converted so-called Progressives and ex-Libertarians like Bill Maher, should think twice about calling for a new U.S. Constitution, because he probably wouldn’t like the results of it. If Socialists want America to become like Scandinavia or Canada, then they need a new U.S. Constitution to achieve that.

Today’s so-called Progressives would need a new Constitution to establish all the democratic socialism. And to give the Federal Government all the power over us that they want to establish. If Christian-Nationalists  want to make America like Russia, then they should move there or get into power and establish Martial Law, which is what happened in Egypt fifty years ago.

If Theocrats want to make America like Iran, well they should move to Iran, because they aren’t getting to the White House in America. No presidential candidate in America runs as a Theocrat and gets elected President. But for Liberals, Conservatives and Libertarians, we just need to defend, promote and speak up for the U.S. Constitution. To bring even more individual liberty than we already have.

Leathered Life: Topmodel Larissa in Miss Sixty Leather Jeans

Source:The New Democrat

Beautiful sexy women in a leather jacket, boots and yes Miss Sixty leather jeans. And showing herself off in this outfit. I'm an Agnostic because I obviously don't know if there is a God or multiple Gods or not, otherwise I wouldn't be an Agnostic. But if there is a God, thank God for women like this and I hope he just continues to produce women like this. So guys such as myself can continue to check them out and blog about them and get the word out about them.

Videos like this would what the Christian Right and so-called Moral Majority would say are "immoral and should be banned and taken down by government". Radical feminists would say "these videos are an example of women being abused and forced into pleasing the man and another example of male sexist power", or something. The rest of us would say whether we like the video or not, here's a professional model doing her job and the more people that see her, the better she does and the more power to her. That is where I am not only as a man, but as a Liberal who believes in free choice and expression.

History Comes to Life: Wendell Willkie

Source:FRS FreeState

When you hear the term classical liberal, it’s generally used to talk about Libertarians today. Even though Libertarians are right-wing, center-right depending on what type of Libertarian they are. And Liberals are left-wing, the center-left on the American political spectrum. And then there are people who are called modern liberals and these people are supposed to be the Liberals of today. Even though in Canada or Europe they would be described as Social Democrats or Democratic Socialists or Progressives. 

Because that's  what so-called Modern Liberals are. It’s Social Democrats who have built their philosophy around the state. And what the state can do for the people and tend to be skeptical about what the people can do for themselves. And want a big state to be there to take care of everyone so no one get’s left behind. But these people in America tend to be called Modern Liberals, or even Liberals when they actually have more of a socialist mindset than a liberal mindset. Liberalism or classical liberalism is not about the state and is not against the state. 

Liberalism is in favor of the individual and empowering people to be able to do everything that they can for themselves and is against big government. Big government being government that tries to do too much for the individual. Or trying to run their life and even protecting people from themselves. Which is why Liberals tend to be against prohibition whether it comes from the Right or Left. Prohibition is a statist idea, a progressive idea that "the people aren’t smart enough to make some decisions for themselves and we need government to do that for them even if that means locking people up". 

Even criminally punishing people when they make unhealthy decisions with their own lives. Liberals and I’m one of them believe that the individual should be able to live their own life as they see fit. As long as they aren’t hurting innocent people with what they are doing. Because we know ourselves and our own lives better than government. And have to do deal with the consequences of our own decisions. Liberals believe in both economic and personal freedom that one is not worth much without the other. 

Today we now have Progressives who are paternalists who not only believe in the welfare state, but prohibition as well. As we see with these bans on soft drinks to use as examples. To go along with tobacco and other products. These people aren’t Liberals even in a modern sense and perhaps not even Progressives. But paternalists who believe they know better how individuals should live their own lives and they have a right to believe that, but they aren’t Liberals. 

Wendell Willkie was a true Liberal Democrat before the New Deal and left to become a Republican. Because he believed that President Roosevelt was moving the Democratic Party and the country in a more socialist direction. But Willkie wasn’t against government, but believed that government should be there to serve us not run our lives. Do for us what we can’t do for ourselves, that government get’s it’s power from us, not that it decides what we can do with our own lives.

When I think of Liberals, I think of Wendell Willkie, John Kennedy and today people like John Kerry, Bill Clinton and Dick Durbin. People who believe in both economic and personal freedom and that these things should be for everyone. That we are all entitled to have a shot at living a successful life and living in freedom. And that’s where government comes in, but not creating a government to take care of everyone and show us how to live. Which is what separates liberalism from today's progressivism and libertarianism. One philosophy being all about government and the other philosophy being almost completely against government.

Leathered Life: Sexy Women in Leather Jeans

Source:Leathered Life- Baby Lena, from Leathered Life. 

Source:The New Democrat

"Many girls in leather pants." Originally from Leathered Life, but the video has since been deleted or blocked on YouTube.

Love Lena, the beautiful baby-face adorable curvy brunette in this video. To me at least she's the top model at this web site, I guess called Leathered Life. Sarah, very beautiful and cute, but sort of has an average body and none of the other models in this video got much of my attention. But Lena is pretty special and a goddess in black leather jeans and looks great in those jeans with boots as well. And I just wish this was more footage of her and that she did other projects.

Leather jeans at least on women, are a lot more popular in Europe than in America. American women love skinny denim jeans and even skin-tight skinny denim jeans. But if they wear leather pants at all, they tend to be like dress slacks or leggings.

Leather jeans outside of biker and hard rock culture, are not that popular in America. Leathered Life and the company Miss Sixty that makes leather and denim jeans are the exception to that. But leather jeans for men and women are pretty popular in Europe.

Evan Sayet: 'How Modern Liberals Think'

Source:FRS FreeState

As an actual Liberal myself and not someone who just calls myself a Liberal, but someone who actually understands liberalism and not someone whose called a Liberal by people who couldn’t tell the difference between liberalism and communism, which a lot of partisan right-wingers aren’t able to do today, as if they couldn’t tell the difference a whale and an ant, I go out of my when I can to explain the differences between liberalism classical or modern and socialism or Anarchism.  

Because todays so-called ‘Modern-Liberals’ which is a term that I do not like. Its is mixed in socialism as it relates to the economy, with anarchism as it relates to law enforcement, national security crime and punishment, terrorism etc. And paternalism when it comes to personal choice issues. Like how we can communicate with each other, political correctness, what we can eat and so forth. But only tend to be actually Liberals when it comes to civil liberties, but that "government has a protective role, prohibition even". And they’ve added tobacco, junk food, soft drinks to their list of things that they would like to be outlawed, or seriously regulated and taxed in the United States.

The people who I described as ‘Modern-Liberals’, are not actually Liberals. But perhaps European Social Democrats would probably the be most correct way to describe them. Even though they tend to like to be called Progressives. But they are way to the Left of Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt. Harry Truman, perhaps even Henry Wallace and certainly Lyndon Johnson. All of these men all had a healthy skepticism about the role of government in our lives and understood the limits of what government could do for us.  

Today’s Progressives (I call them that for now until I find a better term) do not seem to have a healthy skepticism about what government can do for people. Except as it relates to civil liberties and perhaps the War on Drugs. And the men I described believe in the role of authority, not to run our lives, but to protect us from people who would do us harm. Criminals, foreign invaders, terrorists to use as examples. This seems to be the only area that todays Progressives seem to be skeptical about governmental power in our lives and that it should be limited.

The easiest way to probably label me politically would probably be to call me a Classical-Liberal. But unless that means you are talking about someone like a Wendell Willkie who was a Liberal Democrat up until the New Deal came around in the 1930s and then saw the Democratic Party moving in more of a socialist direction and then left the Democratic Party to run for President as a Republican in 1940. Or Jack Kennedy, I do not like the term Classical Liberal to describe my politics. Because the term classical-Liberal tends to be used to describe Libertarians. 

And I’m not a Libertarian, I’m not anti-government, just anti-big government both as it relates to economic policy, but also personal issues. And I do not want government trying to run our lives for us. So I just prefer the term Liberal or Liberal Democrat even, which I Certainly am to describe my politics. Not in the classical or modern sense, but in the real sense. As someone who believes in Liberal-Democracy, individual freedom both economic and personal. To go with individual responsibility.

The basic difference between Liberals and todays Progressives has to do with the role of government . Todays Progressives simply want a lot more of it especially at the Federal level and want less personal choice. Because they tend to see it as dangerous and that "people with a lot of freedom will make more mistakes". Where Liberals again believe in individual freedom both economic and personal to go with a quality education and opportunity for all. To be successful in life and then be held personally responsible for what we do with our own lives.

Mal Partisan: O.A.R.: Liberalism- The Philosophy of Individual Rights & Freedom

Source:Mal Partisan- Dr. Martin L. King.

Source:The New Democrat 

I’m a Liberal and when I hear the term ‘Modern Liberal’ today it makes me a little angry. Because today’s so-called ‘Modern Liberals’ would be called Socialists in any other country. Because they have a collectivist view of society and believe that government should always be looking out for the society as a whole, even protecting people from themselves. Both an economic and personal point of view, instead of allowing the individual to make their own decisions. Today’s so-called ‘Modern Liberals’ are really collectivists or Democratic Statists if that makes any sense. Instead of Liberals or even Progressives.

When people hear the term Classical Liberal and they are pretty familiar with American politics, they tend to think of Libertarians, but the problem with that is that Libertarians tend to be anti-state and anti-government really all together. Liberals aren’t anti-government or even anti-Federal Government, but we are anti-big-government. We don’t want government trying to manage our own lives for us and invading our privacy. We want government doing the things that we can’t do for ourselves. And that isn’t practically everything for us and it is not practically nothing either.

If you read the Far-Left or what are called progressive blogs and publications today and I read them online everyday, they have a role for government to do practically everything for us. They come short as far as nationalizing the entire economy, but would nationalize some industries and nationalize some things that state and local governments do as well. But liberalism or classical liberalism is not about a big state. But having a liberal amount of freedom as well as responsibility for the individual. 

Liberalism is a very pragmatic and mainstream political philosophy especially in America. Even though it would be viewed as pretty radical in most of the rest of the world. Canada, Germany and Switzerland would be exceptions. But it is about defending and expanding freedom for the individual and seeing that we all have freedom over our own lives until we hurt innocent people and that is when our freedom would be taken away. But that all of us have the opportunities that we need to live in freedom. Creating an opportunity society for everyone.
Source:Mal Partisan