Barbara Walters Interviews of a Lifetime: Raquel Welch (1985)

Source:Drew David- Hollywood Goddess Raquel Welch.

Source:The Daily Review

Raquel Welch by 1985, was not the big star in Hollywood that she was in the early and mid 1970s, but she was still a big star. Who could find work easily and didn't have much if any trouble staying busy. She was 44-45 at this point and as you can see you still looked great. Even with the short hair, but take it up twenty-five years later to 2010 the year she turned 70, she was still red-hot and baby-faced adorable as a seventy-year old women who was collecting Medicare and Social Security. But that is Raquel Welch. She's said several times before that she sees part of her job to look great all the time. To take care of herself which is what she's been doing ever since she came to Hollywood in the 1960s.

Raquel, isn't a Hollywood goddess because she was born with a great face and body and hair. Those things are obviously part of it, but the real reason is because she's a true professional. She takes care of herself and does projects that makes her look great. And by the mid and late 1970s I believe we finally got to see Raquel as the actress and entertainer, doing roles that showcased her talents as a singer and as a comedian. Myra Breckinridge, whatever you think of the movie and I love the film, she was great and very funny in it, but go up to 1977 with Mother Jugs and Speed, where she uses all of the sexual talk about her and plays off of it and throws it back in those guys face. To show them how they sound, you see the great comedic timing, ability and improvisation of her as well.

Raquel Welch, is a true Hollywood goddess, because yes she's physically a goddess, but you need more than that otherwise you're going to burn out at a certain point when you're no longer considered fresh. The reason why Raquel stands up from lets say Hollywood playmates and even bimbos, because she has real talent as an actress and entertainer. She's a Golden Globe winner and has worked on Seinfeld and done other TV roles mostly in comedy. And has done more TV in her seventies as well. You don't last this long in Hollywood if you can't do the job. Play the parts that are given you, or even have the ability to create parts for yourself if you don't like what's coming your way. Raquel Welch, is built to last and when she turns 80, she'll probably still be seen as a Hollywood goddess.

Paul Richards: The Free Speech Movement- Civil Disobedience in Berkeley (1964)

Source:Paul Richards-

Source:The Daily Review

I hate as a Liberal hearing California being called a liberal state and some bastion of liberalism. And just go back to the 1960s and how they came down on students who were simply looking to express their free speech rights on campus and get involved in politics. If you go to the last ten years or so and they were one of the first states to pass a same-sex marriage ban and I believe they had at one time a ban on homosexuality, at least as it relates to sex. Ronald Reagan, was Governor of California there and served two terms from 1967-75. They recalled a moderate Democratic Governor in Gray Davis in 2003 and replaced him with a modern Republican in Arnold Schwarzenegger.

California, even with their individualistic hippie movement in the 1960s that was based in Northern California and a certain extent Southern California, was at the heart in support of the political correctness movement, but coming from the right-wing in America. Especially at the state level in the California State Government. And trying to ban students from protesting and speaking out against the political issues of the day. Now they're reversed course and still support political correctness, but do it from the Far-Left instead of the Far-Right. And will deny right-wing speakers from speaking on their campus's and even left-wing speakers like Bill Maher, if they don't like what he has to say. His views on Islam in late 2014, is an excellent example of that.

What the free speech movement of the 1960s especially the mid 60s starting around 1963 and going through 64 and 65 and through the Vietnam War, was about was free speech. The right for American citizens who happen to be in college to express themselves on the issues. Protest in favor of equal and civil rights for all Americans and protest against the Vietnam War. The political correctness warriors back then, were on the Right. Who still believed it was 1956 or something and that all Americans looked at America and American culture and the world the same way and if there was anyone who didn't share those cultural and political views. they needed to be shut up. Which is how the New-Left in America reacts when people disagree with them on cultural issues today.

The free speech movement back then and I at least believe still does today when you look at Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins, to use as examples and you have Conservative Libertarians on the Right as well, but back then at least the free speech movement came from the Left. From people who loved being Americans and America, but especially loved the rights, freedom and responsibility that came with being an American. Like Freedom of Speech and choice, the right for Americans to be themselves. And not have to either by legal, or cultural force to live life the way that the so-called establishment believes that they should. Which is what the hippie movement and the free speech movement, gay right and so-forth. The right for Americans to be Americans which are individuals. And not clones of the establishment.
Source:Paul Richards

Constitution Daily: 'Happy Days Are Here Again: The 21st Amendment Repeals Prohibition'

Source:National Constitution Center- "Let's break out the champagne: it's time to party!"

Source:The New Democrat

"The 21st Amendment to the Constitution was certainly popular on this day in 1933, when it was ratified and ended the long national experiment known as Prohibition. Here is what the text actually says."

Read the rest at National Constitution Center

"A short video detailing the unintended consequences of prohibition, the repeal of the 18th Amendment, and the approval of the 21st Amendment."

From Reading Through History

Source:Reading Through History- Americans protesting against the 21st Amendment.

If you think the so-called War on Drugs in America goes back to 1971 which is way too long for a failed bogus war to go back to, you would think that at some point the boy genius’ in Washington would get the memo that something is not working and a change of course is needed, you would be wrong about the year the WOD started. The first American War on Drugs started in January, 1920, but back then it only took the genius’ in Washington thirteen-years to figure that something is rotten in Denmark and a change of course is now needed.

Imagine if the genius’ in Washington figured out by 1984 that the second War on Drugs known as the Controlled Substance Act, was a total failure (and I’m being nice) and decided to repeal it then, or even in 1985: how many lives would have been saved as a result in prison spaces, prison cells, new prisons all together if we were instead sending drug users and addicts to drug rehab at their expense instead of prison, or even jail. And getting them off of their addiction so they could move on with their lives. Halfway houses, night school, job training, vocational training, etc. How much in precious tax dollars would we have saved by then? As well as legalizing with taxation and regulation of marijuana.

Alcohol, by the way is a drug for anyone sober enough to understand that as well as remember what its like to be drunk. Which is a form of a high and when you prohibit alcohol like you’re prohibiting lets say marijuana, which has similar side-effects as alcohol, you’re adding to the War on Drugs. Because alcohol is a drug. Alcohol prohibition, didn’t work, because the overwhelming majority of Americans back then over eighty-years ago and today, like to drink alcohol. Even if that meant going to jail for it. And Americans tend to be smart enough to know what alcohol can do to them, so they’re not going to abuse it. Which can also be said about marijuana.

So this idea that just you make something illegal simply because you don’t like it and because it comes with dangerous consequences like people being stupid and deciding to drive and so-forth while intoxicated, doesn’t mean people will stop drinking what they enjoy drinking. Just means they may end up in jail for it. And for what, because they drank something that wasn’t good for them and nothing else. Good thing Americans don’t like heroin, cocaine and meth and even tobacco as much as alcohol. Or we would have to take out loans from China and Saudi Arabia to pay for all of our government expenses. Because most of the country would either be too high, or in jail, but not working and paying taxes for that work.

The War on Drugs, whether it was alcohol prohibition in the 1920s and 30s, or marijuana, cocaine, heroin and meth in the 1970s, all the way up till today, doesn’t work. Because again good people even who don’t normally hurt people and go out of their way not to hurt innocent people, will smoke a joint and get high if they really want to, especially if they think they can get away with it. Or don’t think they could be arrested simply for consuming a product that is not hurting anyone else and perhaps not even them as well.

Even big government, is too small and not smart enough to be the national parents of a country of three-hundred and twenty-million people who is three-thousand miles long and two-thousand miles wide. At some point government has to prioritize at all levels and layout exactly what it should do based on what it is capable of doing. What they have the resources to pay for based on what their taxpayers are willing to pay for. Instead of trying to micro-manage everyone’s life for them. And instead focus on how people interact with each other. Not to run our lives, but to prevent and punish people when we actually hurt others. But short of that just leave us the hell alone and let free adults be exactly that.

Associated Press: Lynne Hollander-Savio: 'Berkley's Campus Free Speech Movement at 50'

Source:Associated Press- Back when Berkeley believed in free speech and the First Amendment.

Source:The Daily Review

"Lynne Hollander Savio, a former student activist and wife of the late Mario Savio, remembers the 1964 Free Speech Movement that launched a wave of student activism at the University of California, Berkeley and college campuses across the country. (Dec. 2)"

From the Associated Press

The Millennial's today who are still in college, the so-called Social Justice Warriors who want to establish their form of political correctness on the entire country who believe that minority Americans, are entitled to never having to hear anything that offends them, could learn so much from the Baby Boomers of the 1960s. The Hippies, who weren't fighting for collectivism and censorship, political correctness, but instead were fighting for individual freedom and Freedom of Speech. The right for Free Americans to express exactly how they feel about issues. On and off campus.

The Hippies, the long beards of the 1960s, the Baby Boomers, were fighting against the right-wing establishment who believe America was still in the 1950s. When individualism and individuality, were still not common and if anything looked down upon. Where people were told how to think, instead of taught how to learn and then base their own views on what they just learned. Where individual freedom and free speech were only tolerated if people were doing, saying and believing what the establishment approved of.

Again, free speech is exactly that. Take it for what its worth, because it by itself is not designed to make you feel good or bad, but to express how someone feels and when done right inform people as well. 'This is where you're doing well and this is where you need improvement. This is what you should do less of if not stop all together. This is what you should be doing more of.' And these are just some examples of what free speech is. Which is something the long beards of today, the Millennial's who are in college simply don't understand and approve of.

It means that you have the constitutional right to express how you feel about someone, or some group, or something, but that person next to you and everyone else not only have the constitutional right to not only tell you what they think about what you have to say, but express their own views on the same subject, or any other subject that they want to talk about. And you have the same constitutional right to express how you feel about what they have to say about whatever they're talking about as well.

Just because America has a history of racial and ethnic discrimination, which is the worst part of our national history, doesn't protect ethnic, racial and religious minorities from having to hear anything critical about themselves or their group in the future. Especially when the criticism is accurate. There's nothing bigoted about the truth and even when someone delivers half-truths about people perhaps to make partisan points and even racial or ethnic points to make a group seem worst than they actually are, you can always present the rest of the story and point out whatever hypocrisy the commentator is making.

There's nothing bigoted about saying that women and gays are treated like second-class citizens and slaves, or risk death if they try to convert from Islam in the Arab and broader Muslim World, since those things are actually true. Just like gays and women are treated like second-class citizens in the Bible Belt in America. Free speech, is free and facts don't lie and when someone is actually offended by the truth, then they have a real problem with dealing with reality. And have real self-improvement issues to deal with beyond whatever negative facts that have already come out about them. But that is no reason from censoring the truth and free speech. Especially in a liberal democracy like America.

National Constitution Center: Debating Affirmative Action

Source:National Constitution Center-

Source:The New Democrat

As a Liberal, I’m against racial preferences regardless of who they’re tended to favor over any other race and in favor of equal rights and protection, civil rights and civil liberties and the 1964 Civil Rights Act, not because I’m not a Liberal, but because I am. Because I got this wild Martin L. King notion that everyone all Americans should be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. Which really is about as liberal of a notion and value as liberalism gets. Liberals, truly believe in racial tolerance. Not just for minorities, but for all people regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexuality.

The same reasons why I argue in favor of free speech whether I agree with the speech or not, because I’m a Liberal and not because I’m not. When you have racial preferences even if they’re designed to help minorities over the majority, you’re still approving a form of racial discrimination. You’re saying that certain races of people should get special treatment under law over another, because of their race and circumstances. Just because one race of Americans and in this case European-Americans or Caucasians, have benefited from special treatment in the past, doesn’t mean other Americans are now entitled to special treatment for themselves. It was wrong for Caucasians to benefit because of their race in the past and its wrong for anyone else to benefit because of their race today.

The problem with government in many cases and why it tends to be ineffective and not trusted, is because they like to live under their own laws while they enforce other laws for everyone else. They say we can’t practice racial, ethnic and gender discrimination against other Americans, when that is exactly what they do with racial preferences under so-called affirmative action. If government wants Americans to not judge people for good and bad because of race, ethnicity and gender, then they can’t do those things and expect to be trusted and respected.

Americans, might not be the sharpest tools in the shed as a people, but we know hypocrisy when we see it and we see it everyday. Racial preferences under so-called affirmative action, days are numbered, because we’re finally starting to become that MLK dream of a country. We’re becoming that country that doesn’t like it when Americans benefit from, or are denied access in this country because of our race and ethnicity. And that is because of the Millennial’s. The same generation that says minorities are entitled to never have to hear anything that they find offensive. Also believes in Equal Protection Under The Law and oppose racial and ethnic discrimination.

When the U.S. Supreme Court most likely kills racial preferences under so-called affirmative action in America perhaps as early as next year, it will give America a great opportunity to develop a real affirmative action policy in this country. That won’t be built off of racial discrimination and preferences, but on empowering Americans who have been left behind in this country including because of their race and ethnicity. But instead empowers Americans who come from underdeveloped communities to be able to make a quality life for themselves. And even be able to stay in their community that now has quality schools, infrastructure and new economic development.

What we should do instead as a country is build on the 1964 Civil Rights Act and expanding it to include gays and having a real education, infrastructure and economic system, that’s built off of economic development that says all Americans regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender, and economic background, are entitled to a real shot at achieving their own American dream. Of living in economic and personal freedom based on what they’re created for themselves form their own skills and production. Not because of their race, or ethnicity, or father’s income level.

You don’t achieve a racial and color-blind society with big government saying, “it’s only okay when we do it.” You do that by saying it’s not okay at all and when you do it there are heavy economic prices to pay for it. To encourage you not to do it at all and to never do it again if you do it in the first place. That is what the 1964 CRA should be about. Not to expand the criminal justice system in America which is way over capacity to begin with. But to say racial and ethnic discrimination is wrong period and is illegal and have real strong enforcement. To encourage victims of racial discrimination to come out and report even if they think they can’t win their case, or can’t afford a good attorney.

Because good civil rights attorneys, would take their case anyway and their would be a criminal case to prosecute as well. And the victims would be entitled to financial compensation if the court finds that they’re victims of racial discrimination in the workplace, or in college, to use as examples. But we don’t create a society where Americans aren’t judged by their race and ethnicity with government not practicing what it preaches. That is what I mean by racial and color blindness, a society where Americans aren’t judged by their race, color, or ethnicity. Not a society that pretends its blind and can’t see race and ethnicity, but where we don’t judge people by those things.

The Week in Review: December 2015

Source:The Daily Review-

Source:The Daily Review

A slow week on this blog as far as activity. This blog hasn’t posted anything since Wednesday night, because I had a crazy week. I had to get my bike to the bike shop, making plans for the holiday season including getting together with friends who are coming to town who I haven’t seen in a while, as well as friends who live in town that I haven’t seen in a while before I head out to the West Coast, Seattle to be precise on the 23rd. Returning calls yesterday that I missed, because my phone was dead and didn’t get it get back until Saturday afternoon.

Speaking of that, I have a friend from high school and we go back to early 1991 our freshmen year in high school. My birthday was last Tuesday and he finally called me, because he was finally able to get my phone number and manage to hang on to it. At least long enough to call me. He’s been messaging me on Facebook every time he’s wanted to talk to me, really since 2011, because he now lives on the West Coast where he’s been since he graduated from college in the early 2000s. He’s lost my cell number and I only have a cell number, every year at least since 2011. And I told him the last time he Facebook messaged me, “that if you want to talk to me, you’re going to have to get my number and call me.”

We only talk about once a year anyway, because we’ve drifted apart the last 10-15 years and don’t have much in common anymore. And talk and get together during the holiday season because he comes back in town every year to see his family for the holidays. And we generally get together for the holidays. Anyway he finally managed to get my number from a mutual friend and he called me on birthday last Tuesday night. We talked for about an hour, caught up, talked about what we might do together as well get together with mutual friends and all hanging out together in a big group. It was a good chat and the phone number issue never came up.

My I-Phone dies on Wednesday and I mean just died absolutely no life whatsoever in the phone. Didn’t even respond to my charger. I make a call with it on Wednesday afternoon and it’s probably at 80-90% power at that point. I go take a shower, come back about twenty-minutes later and the phone is simply dead and non-responsive. The call I made was to the bike shop, I was just returning their call, because they wanted to ask me questions about the bike. The call was maybe ten-minutes and the battery on my phone is pretty strong to begin with. Tried a couple different chargers on it as well as calling the I-Phone with a portable phone and the phone didn’t respond to any of that. So I knew I had a problem and I was going to have to get the phone looked at.

I called the Apple Store in Bethesda, Maryland to make an appointment. Great store and very customer friendly and responsive. You can see why they have sold out football stadium crowds of business everyday and why people have to camp out the night before outside of the store people trying to buy the latest, well I-Phone or computer, just to get service there while they’re still young. But that’s the problem, because they’re so popular and efficient, at least in Bethesda, its hard to get timely service there. I made an appointment on Thursday to get my phone looked at and was able to get the appointment yesterday. They’re not called bar genius’ for nothing and I’m not talking about making drinks.

The guy who worked with me at the store, tried a couple a different chargers as well as scanning the phone with another device and opening the phone up to see what might be the problem. He finally got the phone to reboot and was able to get life back in the phone. And probably had the phone fixed about ten-minutes later after he saw me. And told me, “sometimes these phones just crash and shut off and perhaps just need a break and a chance to reboot and come back.” I’m paraphrasing, but that is pretty close and he told me what I can do to fix the phone myself the next time it simply dies on me and doesn’t respond to the charger.

There was plenty on my plate that I wanted to blog about last week, but I was borderline mentally exhausted by Wednesday. Really just dealing with my bike which is how I get around for the most part as far as running day-to-day errands, not having a phone for three days and getting word out that if you need to contact me, you’re going to have to email, or send me a private message on one of these social networks that I’m on. Dealing with what I might be doing the week of Christmas with hanging out with friends and then heading out-of-town a week from this coming Wednesday. This week should be pretty active on the blog and I’m looking forward to really my last active week on the blog before I go out-of-town and before the new year.
Source:Rascal Flatts Vevo

Constitution Daily: 'The First Amendment Speech Debate on College Campuses'

Source:Constitution Center- this should be a great place where the battlefield of ideas and debate goes on everyday. Where people are required to think and learn, especially about things that they don't understand or agree with.

Source:The Daily Review 

"Jeffrey Rosen: [00:00:00] I'm Jeffrey Rosen president and CEO of the national Constitution Center and welcome to We the People, a weekly show of constitutional debate. The national Constitution Center is the only institution in America chartered by Congress to increase awareness and understanding of the Constitution among the American people on a nonpartisan basis. Recently President Trump announced that he will soon sign an executive order that requires colleges and universities to "support Free Speech if they want Federal research dollars." On today's episode of we the people we ask, would the order be a good idea? What would the consequences be and would it be consistent with the Constitution? Joining us to debate the Constitutional and legal merits of the proposed executive order are two great friends of the national Constitution Center and two of America's leading experts on campus free speech. Sitting with me here at the NCC studio is Sigal Ben-Porath who is a professor of Education, philosophy and political science at the University of Pennsylvania. Her work focuses on citizenship education and political philosophy. And she's the author of the recent book free speech on campus. Sigal thank you so much for braving the cold and joining us here today in studio." 

From the National Constitution Center 

"As part of Uncomfortable Learning at Williams College, Greg Lukianoff spoke at Williams College about how colleges suppress free speech. Greg talked about the challenges that students have faced, such as students being arrested for handing out copies of the Constitution or Drexel's rule against derogatory laughter. He also addressed what students can do to encourage debate and free speech at colleges." 

Source:Uncomfortable Learning- Greg Lukianoff, talking about free speech on college campuses.

From Uncomfortable Learning

This point has been made several times before and I am one of those bloggers who has made this point over and over, but college is about learning new ideas, thoughts and expressions. If it's censorship that you want, then perhaps you need to create time machine or something that will take you back to the 1950s when the words damn and hell were essentially forbidden in public. Well, at least on TV and in the movies. 

And if it’s just a nice polite world that you’re looking for (well, for minorities that is, leaving majorities subjected to whatever everyone else wants to say about them for good and bad) then perhaps you need to create your own country. Perhaps Paradise Island or someplace in the Pacific or Caribbean where there isn’t any hate or bigotry. (At least towards minorities, that is) 

To paraphrase President Andrew Shepard from The American President: America, is not easy. You have to want it bad in order live and make it here. Because we’re a country where you can essentially say whatever the hell you want to short of inciting violence, falsely accusing people, or harassing people. 

Americans, have the constitutional right to be enlightened, but we also have a constitutional right to be assholes. We also have the constitutional to be truth tellers even if what we have to say may tend to offend people who we are talking about.

That is called America, that is called liberal democracy, that is called the land of the free. This is what a liberal society and free society is about. The right for people to be free and live freely even if what we’re doing and what we have to say may tend to offend people who are oversensitive, or have much more culturally conservative perspective on life. 

America is not a good place for tight asses and people who can’t take a joke and who always find the one cloud on a beautiful sunny day. America, is about freedom and individuality and free expression. Even if that may tend to offend people who can’t ether take a joke and even understand criticism, let alone take it.

I’m almost to the point that I believe everyone who attends college in America should be required to pass a class on both the U.S. Constitution and First Amendment and Bill of Rights in general. Because apparently they didn’t bother to learn those things in high school. I had to take and pass a government course in high school in Maryland in the early nineties just to graduate from high school. When most of these students weren’t even born yet. Gives you a little idea how old I am. And I’m glad I did do that, because it’s a reason why I’m a political junky and blogger today.

But I guess today’s students were too busy texting the student who sits right next to them, or listening to their I-Pod in class, or googling what shoes Khloe Kardashian wore with her new bag when she went shopping in Beverly Hills last weekend. Or whatever else they might have done when they should have been paying attention to their teacher’s lecture on American history and social studies. 

You want to know why Americans get stereotyped as stupid? I’ll tell you anyway: because we now have a generation of Americans who don’t understand their country’s history and form of government and their own constitutional rights, like Freedom of Speech.

And when these kids finally get to college after finally completing summer school, it suddenly occurred to them that some Americans say some rough things about other Americans including minority Americans and some of those negative things are negative facts. And they’ve decided they’re going to try to force their sense of decency on the rest of the country. But America simply doesn’t work that way. 

America, again is that gigantic melting pot of a country. The largest, the most diverse, most beautiful, the freest melting pot in the world. Where all sorts of people have the right to express their own views. And they can’t be shut up for telling the truth. Or because people can’t take a joke, or simply don’t like what someone has to say.