The Economist: 'What Happened When Portugal Decriminalized Drugs?'

Source:The Economist- The War on Marijuana, coming to an end?

Source:The New Democrat

"For 20 years The Economist has led calls for a rethink on drug prohibition. This film looks at new approaches to drugs policy, from Portugal to Colorado."

From The Economist

I believe what Portugal is saying with their drug decriminalization policy is that narcotics are bad for you, but is locking up people simply for illegal drug possession or illegal drug use is also not only bad for you, but bad for the society as well. That Portugal, is not endorsing the usage of cocaine, meth, or heroin, but they’re saying there are better and more cost-effective ways of dealing with narcotics in this country.

And instead of sending drug addicts and users to prison for simply using narcotics, they send those people to drug rehab. Which frees up jail and prison space for actual criminals. People who pose an actual threat to the security of Portugal.

And hopefully this works, because as bad as the War on Drugs might have been in Portugal, it isn’t a positive thing in any other country. Especially America.

US News: Eric Schnurer: 'Don't Look Back to Move Forward'

Source:US News- former Governor Martin O'Malley (Democrat, Maryland) announcing his 2016 presidential campaign.

Source:The New Democrat 

"I once had dinner with Martin O'Malley – who announced his presidential candidacy last weekend – at a National Governors Association meeting. From what I knew of him, I expected something similar to Olivia Nuzzi's recent description of him in The Daily Beast as "sociopathically charming." Instead, I found O'Malley, as both a speaker and a dinner companion, so earnestly mired in policy details as to be almost boring: In short, I liked him." 

From US News 

Martin O'Malley: "New Leadership" 

Source:Martin O'Malley- Governor Martin O'Malley (Democrat, Maryland) talking about his presidential campaign.

From Martin O'Malley 

I agree with Eric Schnurer, that Martin O’Malley is an old-school Liberal. But we differ on what it means to be an old-school Liberal. Schnurer, seems to think that an old-school Liberal is someone who believes that government has a program that can solve every problem that comes up. That big centralized government has all the answers. That we’re always one new tax increase, or new tax, new social program, or new investment in a current social program from solving all of our problems. And this type of political thinking does have a label for it, but it’s not Liberal. And liberalism is not that government and statist centric.

Jack Kennedy, when he ran for President in 1960, gave a speech at the New York Liberal Party convention and he defined liberalism and liberal there and I’m paraphrasing JFK, but he said that: “If liberal means someone whose soft on defense, irresponsible with tax dollars, believes in a superstate to solve everyone’s problems for them, then I’m not that Liberal.” Then Senator Kennedy went on to say: “But if a Liberal is someone who looks ahead and not behind, whose concern about the welfare of others, who believes we can always do better, then I’m that Liberal.” JFK, is Bill Clinton’s political hero and they think a lot alike when it comes to politics and policy.

Martin O’Malley, is not a Centrist and someone who is basically in the middle on most issues and perhaps leans left on social issues and leans right on fiscal issues. But he’s also not a Democratic Socialist, or perhaps even a New Deal Progressive. He’s someone who believes government can’t do everything, but can help people who especially need it move ahead, move forward and be able to live in freedom with the rest of the country. As his record as Mayor of Baltimore and then Governor of Maryland indicates. He’s someone who believes in making government work and making it efficient to serve as many people as possible. Not making government bigger, just to create more government jobs and spend more money.

Governor O’Malley, has been light on details as far as his presidential campaign so far. But I believe that is how he’s going to run for President. He’s not going to try to out Socialist the Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders, or get stuck in the middle with Hillary Clinton. But you’ll see the JFK New Democratic Liberal leanings in him and policies. As someone who wants to bring young voters with him and show them how government can work to help people improve their own lives. Not to try to take most of their money from them and try to run their lives for them. And I believe he’ll be able to bring a lot of Democrats with him with that type of campaign.

C-SPAN: Hillary Clinton’s FDR Park The Bargain Speech

Source:CSPAN with Hillary R. Clinton's (Democrat, New York) 2016 presidential campaign announcement speech.

Source:The New Democrat

Hillary Clinton, finally found her vision and theme for running for President. Which is to create and build an America where all Americans can succeed. Where everyone who plays by the rules, works hard and is productive can make it in America and live in freedom and security. Unlike Senator Elizabeth Warren, even though this speech did have some progressive populist themes in it, it was much more positive. And not talking about the rules are rigged just for the wealthy, or corporations and the rich are screwing the rest of America. But instead talking about an America where everyone can do well if they work hard and are productive.

By talking about how the wealthy have done so well, while the rest of the country is still struggling, but at the same time talking about an America where everyone did better and well, which was the 1990s, she offered a contrast and vision from the neoconservative trickle down supply side economic policy of the Republican Party right now. The theory supply side being that if you cut taxes and regulations for business’s and the wealthy, somehow that will benefit everyone else. That theory has never been proven to work, but that is still the main Republican economic policy. And she was able separate from the Sanders/Warren social democratic wing of the Democratic Party that wants more taxes and social programs for everyone to close the economic gap.

What Hillary did, was separate from both the Tea Party and Reagan Republican wing of the Republican Party and the Sanders/Warren social democratic wing of the Democratic Party. And carve about a big area where most of the rest of the country is in between. Not a centrist message, but a message and vision of her own. That says government can’t do everything for people, but it can’t do nothing. That it should focus on people who are struggling and empower them to be able to do well in America. Get them the tools to do well. With traditional Liberal Democratic policies of individual initiative, education, infrastructure and economic development. So everyone can do well in America and I think she hit out of the park.

Reelz: Marilyn Monroe’s Estate - Celebrity Legacies

Source:Reelz with a look at Hollywood Babydoll Marilyn Monroe's legacy.

Source:The New Democrat

The five-hundred-thousand figure, as far as what Marilyn Monroe was worth when she died, even if that is 1960s money and not today’s money, does seem a little surprising to me. Considering how famous and talented she was and all the work that she got as a result. From movies, modeling and even singing. Plus a lot of endorsement’s and performances that she gave. But she also did spend a lot of money and wasn’t all together mentally even when she was sober. And did spend a lot of money on herself and people she cared about. Like her biological mother and other people close to her.

But Marilyn Monroe is still one of those women and entertainers who fall in the category of, “what could’ve been”, or, “if only.” If only she took care of herself, or actually got the help that she needed. If someone stepped up and told her that she needs help. She’s drinking way too much and taking a lot of pills. If you do just one of those things, you’re really hurting yourself, but if you do them together, you can literally kill yourself by overdosing. Which is what I believe and a lot of other people believe is how Marilyn died. Taking pills and perhaps drunk when taking them and taking the wrong combination.

Marilyn, is part of what, “what if”, or, “what could’ve been” crowd, because she accomplished so much in such a short time. I mean, dying at thirty-six years old when you look like that. And you were as a good of an entertainer that she was. Actress, singer and even comedian, one of the funniest people in Hollywood at the time. People wanted to see even more from her and where expecting to, especially considering she was only thirty-six and probably had another fifteen years, or more to look forward to as far as getting big parts and roles in her career. Had she only just took care of herself.

The Washington Post: Katrina Vanden Heuvel: A New Definition of Freedom in America

Source:The Washington Post with an article about Hillary R. Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign.

Source:The New Democrat

It’s great to see Democrats talking about freedom again. This is something that Liberals and Progressives should be talking about anyway. Since we created freedom in America. With the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, the national infrastructure system, regulatory state and safety net. Liberals and Progressives, just tend to differ on what freedom is and means. Liberals, tend to be more interested in individual rights and opportunity. Tools that can be used to be able to live in freedom and build a good life for yourself and your family.

Progressives and Social Democrats, tend to be more interested in social welfare rights. The ability to not have to go without. That the basic necessities in life will always be guaranteed. To always be guaranteed education, housing, health care, income, food, health insurance and perhaps some others. That these rights would be guaranteed by the Federal Government, of course. All part of President Franklin Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms, especially Freedom From Want and his Economic Bill of Rights.

And freedom to me as a Liberal, is the ability for one to live their own life and be completely responsible for their own life. To make their own decisions and live with the consequences for good and bad. To not have government interfere with their economic, or personal affairs. As long as they aren’t hurting any innocent people. To have the knowledge and resources to be able to provide for themselves and have the freedom to make their own decisions. Freedom to me, is about tools and power. Where government comes in, is not to make sure everyone is taken care of. And not as FDR put to have the Freedom From Want, but the freedom to control their own destiny in life. Freedom of Self-Determination.

Hillary Clinton on Saturday, will give a huge presidential campaign speech at the FDR Four Freedoms Park in New York. And it will be about her vision for America and why she wants to be President of the United States. At least that is how its being built. And she’ll have the opportunity to start to bring me over to her side, if her speech covers the themes that I just talked about when it comes to what freedom means. And if she talks about she wants an America where all Americans can succeed and have the freedom to take care of themselves and their families and have both economic and personal security and not the freedom to not have to take responsibility for yourself and be taken care of by government, she’ll be able to impress me and bring her to her side.

Slate Magazine: Josh Voorhees: Lincoln Chafee Campaign Plan: Attack Hillary Clinton on Her 2002 Iraq War Vote

Source:Slate Magazine with a look at Lincoln Chafee's (Democrat, Rhode Island) 2016 presidential campaign.

Source:The New Democrat

Then Senator Hillary Clinton’s 2002 Iraq War vote, is just one example of why the Democratic frontrunner for president is not a lock, or slam dunk to win the Democratic nomination. That vote of hers back then when Congress was debating whether or not to give President Bush authorization to use military force in Iraq, is just one example of why she didn’t win the Democratic nomination in 2008. And seven years later that vote looks even worst. We’re still there, Iraq is still not able to defend and take care of themselves. ISIS, which was always there, but under different names, now occupies parts of Iraq.

Commander-in-Chief, is the number one responsibility and job of the President of the United States. The President, never gets a break from that and their judgement when it comes to foreign policy and national security issues is always tested. And when you’re on the record as being wrong about perhaps the biggest foreign policy blunder, perhaps since Vietnam, that is going to hurt you. Because it goes to your judgement and goes to your judgement and knowledge about the biggest role that a President, or presidential candidate will ever have. Your judgement and knowledge when it comes to being Commander-in-Chief as President of the United States.

Lincoln Chaffee, has his own issues running for President as a Democrat himself. Being a former Republican, is just one example of that. But he can say when Congress debated and voted on the 2002 authorization for the use of force in Iraq, he voted the right way. Which was no, as a Senator and he can also say that he was the only Senate Republican to vote no on the Iraq War. Instead of being in a position where he was for the Iraq War when he was a Republican. And now that he’s a Democrat, he’s against it.

We’ll never know the answer to this obviously, but had then Senator Clinton showed some real leadership back in 2002 and said, “we’re simply not ready to go to war in Iraq and we need further study. And Congress needs further information before it makes this decision.” And decided to vote no and had taken Barack Obama seriously in 2007 and bothered to of campaign in Iowa, instead of assuming she would automatically win it, she probably not only wins the Democratic nomination for president, but gets elected president in 2008 as well. But what you do with the ball when it is in your court is the test of leadership in politics and government. How you make the calls and what you decide to do. And when of her Iraq War vote, she didn’t make a very good decision. And it could come back to hurt her again.

Lifetime Network: The Secret Life Of Marilyn Monroe (2015)

Source:The New Democrat

I saw this movie when it came out last weekend and not to pat myself on the back or anything, but this movie lays out what I and others have already written about the life of Marilyn Monroe. That she wasn’t a blonde bimbo who only had these goddess features and personality going for her. That there was real substance and talent and even intelligence there. But that she was immature, irresponsible and I would add overly adorable. That even by the time she died at the age of thirty-six, still only looked and acted half her age.

Kelli Garner, who not only played Marilyn and was the official star of the movie, but she was the star of this movie in actuality as well. She had Marilyn down cold and looked and played the part so well, that only Marilyn could’ve played herself better. Jeffrey Dean Morgan, does a very good Joe DiMaggio and they do a very good job of showing the hot and cold on and off relationship and short-lived marriage between Marilyn and Joe D. And they do a very good job showing how Marilyn was raised. Never knowing her father and her father never being part of her life. Her mother, never being mentally capable of taking care of Marilyn. And spends her life in and out of institutions.

Marilyn, certainly had an interesting childhood. But she had family and people around her who cared about her and were always there for her. So I don’t think other than her biological mother not really being there for her for a lot of her childhood and her father being out of the picture the whole time, that you can blame how Marilyn was raised for how she turned out. As far as an immature young women, who mentally was a teenage girl, not in knowledge, or intelligence, but in maturity and responsibility. Because she did have an adopted mother who loved her and raised her pretty well.

If you like bio pics and are interested in Hollywood, especially from the past that you might not be as familiar with as you are with modern Hollywood and the entertainers from the past and you’re interested in and even a fan of Marilyn Monroe, as I am, this is a very good movie and worth seeing. Worth the three-hours without the commercials to spend watching this movie. Kelli Garner, has Marilyn down and they cover most if not Marilyn’s whole career and do a very good job of that. This is a very good movie.