Joshua Waimberg: 'Schenck v. United States: Defining The Limits of Free Speech'

Source: U.S. Constitution Center- U.S. Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Source:The New Democrat

"Note: Landmark Cases, a C-SPAN series on historic Supreme Court decisions—produced in cooperation with the National Constitution Center—continues on Monday, Nov. 2 at 9pm ET. This week’s show features Schenck v. United States.

In a case that would define the limits of the First Amendment’s right to free speech, the Supreme Court decided the early 20th-century case of Schenck v. United States.

The case began, as many do, with an act of Congress. Shortly after the United States entered into World War I, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917. It was passed with the goals of prohibiting interference with military operations or recruitment, preventing insubordination in the military, and preventing the support of hostile enemies during wartime." 

You can read the rest of this article at the National Constitution Center. 

"Do you have an absolute right to free speech? The Supreme Court gives it 1919 answer.

 Learn the basics about the must-know US History Supreme Court Case challenging the constitutionality of the Espionage Act. If you are in a US History course you best be knowing this case. Trust me." 

Source:Keith Hughes- on, well perhaps you can figure out the rest yourself.

From Keith Hughes

I’m not a lawyer, which is probably as obvious as Ayn Rand wasn’t a Socialist, but I bet a good lawyer who is sane, sober and awake at the time, could make a damn good case that the military draft is unconstitutional. 

Forcing Americans to fight for causes they not only don’t believe in, but didn’t voluntarily sign up for, looks unconstitutional to me, at least from the outside looking in as a non-lawyer. It is one thing if you decide to join the military and get an assignment to do a mission you don’t believe in. But it is completely another to force people to not only be part of the military, fight for the military and then fight for causes they don’t believe in.

Of course you have to complete missions once you’re already in the military because you signed up for that. And soldiers, marines, sailors, and airmen, can’t pick and choose what missions they accept, or not. The military couldn’t function properly that way. But to force someone to not only give up their personal and even economic freedom, (at least to a certain extent) and then yank them away from their family and community, force them to fight for you and fight for a cause they don’t believe in, sounds like a violation of an American’s personal freedom and constitutional rights there.

As far as this case here: Charles Schenck, was a noted Socialist in the United States in the early 20th Century. The Leader of the Socialist Party in America and a solid anti-war activist, which Democratic Socialists at least tend to be. And what he was doing in this case was protesting strongly against a war that he didn’t believe in as someone who wasn’t a member of the U.S. Military. It would be one thing if he was in the military and he was actively and publicly protesting against a war that he agreed to be part of by signing up for the Military. But he was a private citizen here protesting against the World War I draft and the war itself.

Charles Schenck actively and publicly opposing the World War I draft, would tell people what he thought about it and the war and encourage Americans to oppose the draft as well. This looks like a clear First Amendment case here with an American opposing a war that he was obviously against and had every right to do so. 

The U.S. Supreme Court, has made plenty of bad rulings over the years and this one is probably not in the top ten. Especially when you’re talking about cases that involved Japanese, German and Italian-Americans, being held in deferment camps during World War II, simply because of their ethnicity. But this is one of their worst First Amendment rulings.

Reelz Channel: The Kennedys- The Story Behind the Story

Source:Reelz Channel- Greg Kinnear as JFK.

Source:The Daily Review

It is Joe Kennedy Sr. who made The Kennedy Family the political family and political dynasty that it was and to a certain extent still today. He came from nothing being a son of poor Irish immigrants. Who worked his way up and became very successful on Wall Street and decided that he wanted to get involved in government and even at some point become President of the United States. And got as far up as United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom and when he his career as a future presidential candidate came to an end at the start of World War II with his comments about Germany and that he didn’t see Nazi Germany as a threat. It’s then that he decides that one of his sons is going to accomplish what he couldn’t for him. Which was to become President of the United States. Which started with his son Joe and got up to Ted in the 1960s.

Joe Kennedy, made the Kennedy Family what it was politically with his money. And that he had three really smart and charming sons who all liked politics once they got in them, but perhaps do not get in them and certainly not as far had their father not pushed them the way he did. Jack, Bob and Ted. Joe Sr., originally wanted his son Joe to be the first presidential candidate and serve in Congress and government and everything else, but he died during World War II. So the next inline who also served in World War II, but survived the war was Jack and Joe pushed Jack to get into politics almost as soon as he got back from the war in 1945. JFK, is first elected to Congress in the House of Representatives in 1946 and then elected to the Senate in 1952. And writes a best-selling book Profiles in Courage which is what puts him on the national scene in the Democratic Party.

Joe Sr., is the key player in the Kennedy Family. The general manager and perhaps even president of a great political franchise, The Kennedy’s. But his son Jack is the one that is able to give his father what he wants. And Irish-Catholic President of the United States. Because he was such a handsome charming likable intelligent guy, who gave great speeches, great sense of humor. A great Center-Left Liberal who wanted to win the Cold War, free millions of Americans from poverty, by expanding economic freedom. Free millions of African-Americans from government sponsored racial discrimination, have the first man on the Moon be an American and everything else. And we have seen a national Democratic politician at least, this great since. As far as how many Americans loved the man. And the Kennedy mini-series I believe does a great job of showing all these aspects about this family in their series.
Source:Reelz Channel

Third Way: Ready For The New Economy

Source:Third Way-

Source:The New Democrat

The Democratic economic agenda for 2016 needs to be both different and better than the Republican economic agenda. (assuming either party offers one) For Democrats to retain the presidency and do well in Congress. Which means at the very least picking up a bunch of seats in the House with high Democratic voter turnout and winning back the Senate. 24-34 Senate seats that will be up next year will all be Republican seats. Democrats might be able to put twelve of those in play. A good Republican year in the Senate will be to have a small Senate majority in the next Congress, even if its 51-49. The economy, especially jobs and economic growth, will be the number one issue next year. Republicans, will probably want to talk about national security, especially the Middle East though. Democrats, would be smart to make it all about the economy and how they can help create good jobs.

Democrats, shouldn’t go soft on the economy with some mushy-middle approach that tries to please everyone at the same time, but instead pisses everyone off. And instead gives people the message that they’re saying different things to different voters. (Speaking out of two mouths with one face) They shouldn’t sound Republican light and primarily just concentrate on taxes and regulations. They shouldn’t sound like Democratic Socialists (no offense Bernie Sanders) and offer a new Federal program to solve everyone’s problems for them. Or an expansion of new Federal programs. And claiming that all the government services will be free, when of course they won’t be. And either middle class taxpayers will get stuck with the bills in new taxes, or higher interest rates in new debt.

This is where both Hillary Clinton and Martin O’Malley (they would make a hell of a Democratic national ticket) can step up and go straight to Middle-America and middle class Americans and Americans struggling to get to the middle class with an economic agenda for them.

By empowering small business’s to increase their business’s and higher more workers. Empower people who are struggling financially to further their education and create their own new small business. With an expansion of the small business loans and higher education tax credits, childcare vouchers, especially for low-income, low-skilled workers with kids.

A new national infrastructure plan, like a National Infrastructure Bank, that would be a new independent corporation that would be self-financed, because it would prioritize new infrastructure projects and bring in private sector investors to invest in them. As well as new national energy independence plan that invests in all of our national energy resources so we can get off of foreign oil all together and perhaps within twenty years get off of oil and gas all together, foreign, or domestic. That would create millions of new jobs along with the infrastructure investment.

Comprehensive immigration reform, that brings new high-skilled workers and low-skilled workers to do the jobs that Americans won’t do. That brings the 10-15 millions illegal immigrants out of the shadows and makes income taxpayers out of them. Which would help bring down the budget deficits of all levels of government. Along with the fines and back taxes they would have to pay for coming to America illegally. New trade agreements that get more American products in foreign countries with low tariffs, so we can see Ford’s, GM’s, Chrysler’s, in Europe and Japan and other American products. In exchange low tariffs on foreign products here that would create good American jobs.

I hate this idea, that even the so-called Third Way pushes that if you’re on the Left and you’re liberal or progressive and if you’re on the Right and you’re conservative, that somehow you’re a radical, or something. And that all the good ideas are in the mushy-middle. Its called the mushy-middle for a good reason, Centrists tend to sound like mush. People who aren’t sure what they believe and tend to combine ideas from both sides in one package and talk out of two mouths with one face. When Liberal and Progressives, talk about positive government and smart government, which is what Governor Martin O’Malley is all about and using government to empower people who are struggling like with the ideas that I already put down, Democrats win. Because Americans tend to believe in the same things. When we sound like Soft Republicans, or tax and spend Socialists, we lose. Because Americans tend not to be that Far-Left and would rather have Real Republicans over Soft Republicans.

History: Marilyn Monroe Is Found Dead (8/05/1962)

Source:History- Hollywood Babydoll Marilyn Monroe (1926-62)

Source:The Daily Review 

"On August 5, 1962, movie actress Marilyn Monroe is found dead in her home in Los Angeles. She was discovered lying nude on her bed, face down, with a telephone in one hand. Empty bottles of pills, prescribed to treat her depression, were littered around the room. After a brief investigation, Los Angeles police concluded that her death was “caused by a self-administered overdose of sedative drugs and that the mode of death is probable suicide.” 

From History 

"How did a star whose persona seemed to be all about childlike joy and eternally vibrant sexuality die, single and childless, at the age of 36? In fact, the circumstances of Marilyn Monroe’s death are confusing and disputed. In this episode we will explore the last five years of her life, including the demise of her relationship with Arthur Miller, the troubled making of The Misfits, and Marilyn’s aborted final film, and try to sort out the various facts and conspiracy theories surrounding her death." 

Source:You Must Remember This- Hollywood Babydoll Marilyn Monroe

From You Must Remember This

Source:The Daily Review- Hollywood Babydoll Marilyn Monroe (1926-62)

This might sound disrespectful and I don't mean it to be, but I've always seen Marilyn Monroe as a teenage girl, if not younger. As an overly adorable and not just baby-faced adorable, but with a voice and face to match. 

Beautiful teenage girls, have a tendency to lack self-confidence, because they see beautiful women in Hollywood and think they are not as good as those women, so they must not be good enough. And deal with depression and self-confidence issues and perhaps mess around with drugs.

I just described Marilyn Monroe as a thirty-six year old early middle-aged woman who had now been an adult for almost twenty-years. I think if she had just bothered to grow up personally and perhaps got constructive help for her self-esteem issues, she could definitely be alive today. And probably at least makes it to her eighties. 

Marilyn was a woman was thirty-six when she died, who probably had another 20-25 years as a gorgeous and even baby-faced goddess with a great body. Barbara Eden, now 81, is still gorgeous and cute as a baby. Raquel Welch, 75, still too cute a hot to play a bad girl.

Healthy, responsible, mature women, who know who they are and at least like themselves, because they know what they have and that they have real value, don't drink themselves to sleep every and spend night after night alone and consume all of the medication that Marilyn Monroe consumed in the last few years of their lives. Especially if they're in the entertainment business, because their career means so much to them and love to entertain and to work and that success affords them to live the great lifestyle that they do.

We're not talking about the incredible short life of Marilyn Monroe, had she simply lived a responsible life. And could see what blind people could see. That she was this hot,  sexy, goddess, who was also one of the best entertainers of her generation. And she lived a normal life in years, would have been one of the best entertainer of all-time. Someone who might have still been entertaining her eighties. Which is what Ellen Burstyn at 82 is still doing today. But we were all denied that opportunity to see that.

Lana Ulrich: The Federalist Papers Are Published

Source:National Constitution Center- left to right: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay.

Source:The New Democrat

I believe the American Federal Republic with our Constitution, individual rights and federalist system, is really what separates the United States from every other country in the world and why millions of people even from developed countries emigrate here every year. Along with the opportunity to create a better life for themselves. Our federalist system, is really something that real Liberals, in the classic and realist sense, same thing with Conservatives and people who call themselves Libertarians, can all be proud of. And something we in many ways have built our political philosophies around. While Progressives and Social Democrats, lets say, tend to I believe view the Constitution as an annoyance. Because they put so much faith in the Federal Government to take care of everyone. Even though the Constitution puts strict restrictions on what the Federal Government and even state and local government’s, can do.

We almost had to go with the federalist route all along, or the Colony of New York, wouldn’t have joined America as a state. But not only that, because we’re founded by people who would be called Liberals and Libertarians today, who wanted to break away from the authoritarian and unitarian British State. And create a country where power was decentralized and people have personal and economic freedom over their own lives. But not only that, but because how big we have become as a country that stretches from one huge ocean to another, that is physically the size of a continent even without Alaska and Hawaii, that now has a population of three-hundred-fifteen-million people, that has had fifty states since the late 1950s and could add another one perhaps in ten years in Puerto Rico. Could you imagine the Feds in Washington telling Florida, California, Texas and any other state, how to educate their kids, build their roads, run their prisons, etc?

A social democratic unitarian government, would never work in Modern America. Because we’re so damn big and tend not to trust big centralized authorities that want to handle our affairs for us. Especially if they can be handled at the state, or local levels, or even individually, or through the private sector. We broke away from the United Kingdom to get away from that big centralized unitarian government. And create a country where a lot of power was with the people and with a more bottomed up form of government. And we had to do that, or the United States of America is never formed. Perhaps the colonies come together to fight off the British and then go their separate ways after the Revolutionary War. And form much smaller countries and perhaps even unions. But the thirteen British Colonies, wouldn’t have become the United States.

Progressives and Social Democrats, I’m sure say that the big centralized unitarian form of government works well in Britain and Scandinavia and perhaps other places in Europe. A few problems there. One, those countries are a hell of a lot smaller than America. And operate more like big states in America than large countries. California and Texas by themselves, both have more people than all of Scandinavia. California, has forty-million people and Britain has sixty-million people and their economies are roughly the same size. These small European states, especially Scandinavia, don’t have the history of rebellion with people wanting to break away from a big centralized authoritarian country.

And also, because of the ethnic diversity of Britain, where you have four states inside of the United Kingdom that all have their own major dominant ethnic group, they’re looking to break away from Britain and create their own independent countries. Which is why Britain is now looking at a federalist system to replace their unitarian system. But if you go to the big states in Europe and look at Germany, France and Italy, they are all federal republics with autonomous states that all have real responsibilities over their own state affairs. The Federal Republic of Germany, perfect example. A country of over eighty-million people and without their federal system, you might not have a United Germany today. But instead several ethnic-German republics and not just an East and a West.

Our Founding Fathers, (The Founding Liberals of America) were real smart and knew exactly what they wanted and why they wanted to break way from and the type of country they wanted to create. Break away from unitarianism and create the first liberal democratic federal republic. Where power would be decentralized from the Federal Government, down to the states, localities and people, to be able to govern themselves. Which is what we call self-governance. While maintaining a Federal Government powerful and responsible enough not to control us and the other levels of government, but to manage national affairs for us. Interstate crime and commerce, foreign policy, national security, national infrastructure, to use as examples, but not to try to run every state and local government and part of the country from the federal level. And they did a great job and we were lucky to have them.

Arthur Kent's History's Mysteries: The Death Of Marilyn Monroe

Source:History Channel- Hollywood Babydoll Marilyn Monroe.

Source:The Daily Review

I’ll be the first to admit as a Marilyn Monroe fan of hers both as an entertainer and the physical goddess that she was, that the way she died was really sad and even worst than being murdered. Because the best evidence available back then over fifty years ago and today suggesting if not simply saying that she killed herself. Either accidentally, or even worst by killing herself. And I understand that fans of her having such a hard time accepting that their hero killed herself that way, or even killed herself at all. The same way that John Kennedy fans, can’t accept that a born loser shot and killed him. But the whole point of evidence and facts is to tell us what we know and what we should believe based on the best available facts and evidence. Not to make us feel better, which is very different.

But over fifty years later no one has put any real evidence that Marilyn could have died any other way. They say someone murdered her. Based on what? What evidence is there that someone was there when Marilyn died and killed her? And who is this supposed person? No evidence suggesting that someone was there and who could it possibly be. We know that Marilyn tried to kill herself at least four other times before she died. We know her career wasn’t going very well with her having trouble at work and no showing up and leaving early. We know she was a heavy drug user who suffered from depression, which is why she was under so much medication and had tried to kill herself before. We know about the pill bottles and the alcohol that was by her when she died.

All the evidence suggest that she killed herself one way or other. Again either by accident, or by suicide. She wasn’t happy, she wasn’t living in a very nice place, especially for a women who was as big as a star as she was. A beautiful, hot, summer, Los Angeles night and this hot, sexy baby-faced adorable goddess, with a great voice and personality and she’s all alone. Other than her housekeeper who was asleep down the hall when Marilyn died. She was not a women who was in a healthy state of mind, to say the least. Even if you grant the story that Marilyn had a book and a lot of information that she was going to release about Jack and Bob Kennedy, where’s the evidence that either of them had anything to do with the actual death of Marilyn? No one has been able to put either one of them there yet. Or suggest anything that could say they had a role in planning her death.

As the old cliché goes, “facts are a stubborn thing.” Meaning you can’t argue with them in an intelligent way where an intelligent person who knows better and is in a right state of mind would say, ‘wait! I was wrong all along! Water really is dry and fire is cold!” Or whatever example you want to use. All the best and perhaps only evidence suggests that the only person involved in the death of Marilyn Monroe, is Marilyn herself. Which tells the people close to her, including her housekeeper and she had a lot of other friends, didn’t know her well enough. And saw that she really wasn’t doing well and that was in the need of professional help. What she got instead was people abandoning her. Including the Kennedy’s and her studio and perhaps personal friends. Which is just more evidence of how sad her death really was.

CNN: Marilyn Monroe in The Kennedys

SourceCNN- left to right: Robert F. Kennedy, Marilyn Monroe, John F. Kennedy.

Source:The Daily Review

John F. Kennedy, is my number one political hero, but as great as a politician as he was and in many ways a great man, he never becomes President of the United States if the media back then bothered to report on the personal lives of politicians. Only tabloids did that and as most people know tabloids aren’t taken seriously especially when it comes to politicians. At least by intelligent people. Because Jack Kennedy, is simply one of the most irresponsible politicians we’ve ever had at least as far as how he lived his personal life. He had personal and even friendly relationships with gangsters and friends of gangsters. And even had an affair as a married man with the girlfriend of a gangster in Judy Campbell. The girlfriend of Italian gangster Sam Giacana.

Marilyn Monroe, is an example of the recklessness of Jack Kennedy. Not that Marilyn was a bad person, because the opposite is true there, but she was a very immature baby-faced adorable women, whose personality and maturity didn’t seem much older. Who was mentally unstable and had Hollywood fantasies that Jack would divorce his wife Jackie and that Marilyn would become next First Lady of the United States. All Jack wanted from Marilyn was her body, sex and a good time. Which might sound really rude, if not crude, but he never saw Marilyn as long-term romance material and not marriage material. But to be completely honest, I don’t believe he ever saw any women as marriage material. In the sense he would settle down with her and give up all of his affairs.

Jack, officially broke it off with Marilyn in 1962 and of course didn’t have the decency and wasn’t man enough to personally tell her that himself. And had his brother and most trusted aid Bobby do that for him. But that is as far as it goes with how Marilyn was after she got the news and how they effected her. There’s no real evidence if any evidence, of anyone being in the house other than Marilyn and her housekeeper the night that she died at home. The most loyal of Marilyn fans will never except that a women this sexy, beautiful and adorable, with the great personality, sense of humor, talent and everything else, and entertainer who was headed to Hollywood Hall of Fame has she lived in normal live in years, that she killed herself. Accidentally, or otherwise and that is why these conspiracy theories that someone murdered her exist.