Senate Democrats: Majority Leader Reid: 'Democratic Principles For The 113th Congress'

Source:Senate Democrats- welcome to the U.S. Senate, where you are more likely to see the Super Bowl of absolutely nothing, then to see and hear a real debate or any legislation passed.

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spoke on the Senate floor regarding compromise and Democrats' legislative priorities for the 113th Congress." 

From the Senate Democrats

Foreign Affairs: Fareed Zakaria: 'Can America Be Fixed?'

Source:Foreign Affairs- President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) apparently looking at a potential infrastructure project.

"In November, the American electorate, deeply unhappy with Washington and its political gridlock, voted to maintain precisely the same distribution of power—returning President Barack Obama for a second term and restoring a Democratic Senate and a Republican House of Representatives. With at least the electoral uncertainty out of the way, attention quickly turned to how the country's lawmakers would address the immediate crisis known as the fiscal cliff—the impending end-of-year tax increases and government spending cuts mandated by earlier legislation.

As the United States continues its slow but steady recovery from the depths of the financial crisis, nobody

This...

Source:Foreign Affairs

"Speech by Fareed Zakaria during the panel discussion on "The Future of Freedom and Democracy" at the 14th Forum 2000 Conference entitled "The World We Want to Live In".

The conference took place in Prague on October 10-12, 2010. Nearly 100 global leaders from business, politics, academia, religion and civil society participated in discussions and debates on key issues facing our civilization." 

Source:Forum 2000- Fareed Zakaria at Forum 2000.

From Forum 2000

"The crisis of democracy identified in the 1970s never really went away; it was just papered over with temporary solutions and obscured by a series of lucky breaks. Today, the problems have mounted, and yet American democracy is more dysfunctional than ever -- and it has fewer levers to pull in a globalized economy. This time, the pessimists might be right./p"

At risk of sounding partisan as a Democrat but factual, America under the leadership of President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, was already on course to not only finish the 1990s as not only the only superpower in the world but becoming a more powerful superpower. Not just militarily but economically as well, with a booming economy, low unemployment, budget surplus and a national debt that was actually declining, a military that could not only defend the United States but play a useful source in building and sustaining peace in the world and help those who need and deserve it to be able to fight for their own freedom. And prevent ethnic genocide especially in Europe.

We moved away from that in the last decade under President Bush and decided that if America should do or want something we should just do it and worry about the costs of it later if at all. Well we are worrying about the costs of two unfunded trillion-dollar wars, a 700B$ Medicare Advantage plan and two unpaid for tax cuts of a trillion dollars each. And stop investing in things like infrastructure and didn't do a thing to reform and strengthen our entitlements and broader social insurance system.

Because of what America did as a government in the last decade by not not progressing, (I don't mean that in ideological terms) countries like China, Russia, Brazil and India were moving forward, America was moving backwards. And instead of being the leader, we ended borrowing from the countries that are emerging as superpowers and if anything would like to surpass us as the number one superpower in the world. And as we were running up debt, our living standards started declining, moving forward in these directions.

So as a result we now have more people unemployed, more people in poverty and infrastructure system thats crumbling as we've seen with broken bridges and hurricane Katrina and other disasters. So this is where we are as a country, but it doesn't have to be where we end up if we simply start moving forward as a country and not just try to hang on.

As I see it America needs to concentrate and work on five key areas and do them correctly to move forward again as a country.

Infrastructure investment- According to the Core of Engineers we have a 1T$ or more deficit in this area. We need to make that investment and pay for that by not borrowing over a 5-10 year period.

We need a national energy policy that moves this country towards energy independence with a menu of natural resources that are all produced in this country. Including oil and gas but also nuclear, wind, solar and so-forth. We need to fully utilize all of these resources which would create new American jobs and American companies.

We need comprehensive immigration reform that encourages high-skilled workers to immigrate to this country legally. And address the 10-15 illegal immigrants by moving them into the mainstream and have them pay a fine for the amount of time they've lived in this country illegally plus whatever back taxes they may owe. And secure the border by clamping down on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

We need to get the national debt and deficit under control to the point that it's no longer growing faster than our economy and back to 40% of GDP rather than 100% and do this over ten years. And to do that we need to get back to 18-20% of GDP that the Federal Government spends instead of 24-25%. That means getting the military budget back to FY 2001 levels and using the drawdowns from Iraq and Afghanistan to pay for deficit reduction or most of those savings, not back to the defense budget. And spending more on defense as it relates to counter terrorism and intelligence so we can prevent future attacks rather than trying to police the world and having developed nations defend themselves. Rather than America being responsible for the national security of Europe, Saudi Arabia, Japan and Korea at our expense.

And reforming both our entitlement and broader social insurance system. Making our entitlements more effective and more affordable and having our public assistance system be an empowerment system thats designed to empower people to get themselves out of poverty. And not just take care of them while they live in poverty.

We need comprehensive reform with our public education system where students go to the school thats best for them. Not based on where they live, where schools are funded based on what they need to do a good job. Not based on where they are located. Where teachers are paid based on how much their students learn, not based on how long they've been teaching. Where we essentially has universal higher education.

One of the few things I've agreed with Occupy Wall Street on as far as goals they've pushed, where all qualified high school students in this country would have access to an affordable higher education and not just the students who come from wealthy families or have scholarships. These are areas that the Federal Government can help in with the financing, but they shouldn't be running the public education in this country, but instead setting basic standards for the whole country to meet with the resources to accomplish them and is something the Feds can do.

America doesn't so much need austerity as much as it needs to be be reformed, especially the Federal Government. And cut back in areas where we are over committed both in the military and in social insurance. But we need to be investing more in some areas like in infrastructure and education and reforming in other areas like in public assistance and public education so we have more people working and making a good living on their own. Because we all as a country have access to a quality education wether we are still in school or have been out of school but lack the skills to move forward.

The New Republic: Noam Scheiber: 'He Was Always a Liberal, But Now He's Defending Liberalism'

Source:The New Republic- President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) 44th President of the United States.

"Much of the reaction to the president’s speech so far has taken the form: He used to be obsessed with process—with driving the rancor and cynicism out of politics—whereas today he set aside the procedural mumbo-jumbo and tipped his ideological hand. As James Fallows put it: “[I]t's almost as if he … knows he will never have to run again and hears the clock ticking on his last chance to say what he cares about.” 

There’s no question that Obama spent most of his 2,100 words today laying out what he cares about. But I don’t think that’s what makes it such a departure for him. Obama has laid out his worldview in a variety of settings, even in big thematic speeches like this one. It would be hard to read, say, his June 2008 victory speech without a sneaking suspicion the guy is a liberal. The key difference is that Obama actively defended his worldview this time, which is not something we’ve see him do on these stages. 

At the start of his first term, Obama was of the naïve if admirable view that most people don’t really disagree about the objectives of public policy, or even about the policies themselves. The problem in his mind was that our political system had become an impediment to doing what most people want done, rather than the means for accomplishing it. 

In his early speeches, Obama would assert the existence of this consensus rather than make the case for the policies it encompassed. Here, for example, is a typical riff from his 2004 Senate campaign:

[T]he American people at their core are a decent people. And they get confused sometimes. They watch Fox News, they listen to Rush Limbaugh. Or they read President Bush's press releases. … But if you sit down with them and you ask, “What do you expect out of your government, and what do you expect out of life,” it turns out their expectations are extraordinarily modest. They know they've got to work hard, to raise their families. They know that nobody's going to do it for them. But what they do expect is, if they're able and willing, they should be able to find a job that pays a living wage. That they shouldn't be bankrupt when they get sick. They should be able to send their child to a school that is comparably funded, and when that child is old enough, and they've done the work, they should be able to go to college, even if they don't come from a wealthy family, and they expect that every senior citizen should be able to retire with some dignity and respect. That's it. That's not a lot. 

And when you tell them that we could be delivering those things, just with a slight change in priorities … then people respond. 

Put simply: We basically agree on the need for good jobs, reliable health care, quality education, and a dignified retirement, and for a role for government in all of the above. The only reason it’s not happening is that people sometimes get distracted by the bloodsport that is politics. Just end the bloodsport, and the problems would very nearly solve themselves. Or as Obama put it in his first inaugural: “[W]e come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.”

Source:The New Republic

Deri Cizmeleri: 'Outfit of The Day -Black Leather Jeans & Patent Boots'

Source:Deri Cizmeleri- OOTD: leather jeans & boots.

Source:The Daily Press

"OOTD - Black Leather Pants & Patent Boots." 

From Deri Cizmeleri

The second model I believe is a model from Leathered Life, because I've seen her on social media with that page. Beautiful, sexy, brunette, in the black leather suit, with the jacket, jeans, and boots.

Source:Leathered Life model all leathered up with the jacket, jeans, and boots.

I love jeans and boots on sexy women. That is women with bodies who aren’t skinny or fat, but well-built and put together. Healthy looking women who don’t vomit even at the sight of food, or don’t stiff their faces in every plate of food that they see. Except when that plate of food is a salad, of course.

Jeans and boots whether they’re denim jeans and boots, which is by far the most common jeans and boots look, even in Europe, or leather jeans and boots which is more common in Europe and America, like french fries or fried potatoes with cheeseburgers. Kareem and Magic, Jordan and Pippen, ( to use sports analogies ) the perfect combination. Cherry pie with vanilla ice cream, would be another good one. Because you take a sexy stylish pant like skinny denim or leather jeans and then combine them with style footwear.

The boots and jeans look, is not too formal and yet adult so you don’t look a high school kid who only wears jeans and sneakers even when they go out at night. Or have dinner with the family. It’s a sexy, adult, stylish, way, for women to dress, especially with a stylish top. Which is why jeans and boots and to a certain extent leather jeans and boots when they’re dressed up, are common at the office now.

CBS News: ‘President John F. Kennedy’s Inaugural Address’

Source:CBS News- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) giving his 1961 inaugural address in front of a joint session of Congress,

“On January 20, 1961, President John F. Kennedy was sworn into office and delivered one of the most famous inaugural addresses in U.S. history.”

From CBS News

Inaugural address’ are interesting at least for this reason and depending on who the President at the time says can be interesting for that reason as well, but they are at least interesting because it gives the President the opportunity to layout for the country the situation that the country is in and where he wants to take the country in the next four years.

And if the President is reelected an opportunity to layout where the country was four years earlier. The progress that has been made and the challenges that still lay ahead.

But inaugural address’ aren’t partisan in the sense that the President will hammer the opposition party, but to layout their own political and governmental philosophy which will be different from the opposition party.

These addresses are also for the President to layout what he  believes the role of government is. And based on that where he wants to take his administration and what direction he wants to lead the country. And that’s the opportunity that President Obama will have tomorrow: “This is where we were, this is the progress we’ve made and this is where I want to lead the country based on my thinking and the facts on the ground.”

As a Liberal Democrat I would like to hear Barack Obama tomorrow speak in the spirit of Jack Kennedy. Not to quote him exactly, but speak in his spirit of terms like: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

I would like to hear President Obama speak in terms of Bill Clinton’s opportunity society: “There’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be cured with what’s right with America. That we’ll expand freedom and opportunity for all as well as demand responsibility for all.” Speak in terms of individual freedom for all. Especially for Americans that don’t have it and are still struggling.

President Obama should speak in terms of how government can empower those who don’t have the individual freedom to take care of themselves to have the same freedom and opportunity that the rest of the country has and how we as Americans ourselves can build the best America. Rather than what government can do for us. Which is different from a speech by Franklin Roosevelt. (To use as an example) The difference between a liberal democratic speech and a social democratic speech.

To be honest, I’ll be surprised if President Obama speaks in these terms tomorrow and probably will give a somewhat safe speech. And go out of his way not to offend anyone and not leave much to be remembered. Or give a speech that’s full of great words and phrases that few other people can do as well. But not have a lot of meaning to them. A speech that sounds good, but with not a lot of meat to it.

But tomorrow is an opportunity for President Obama to not only layout for the country where he wants to take America, but where he wants to lead the Democratic Party and I hope he takes advantage of it. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Leathered Life: Sandra B- In Tight Leather Jeans and Boots

Source:Leathered Life- Sandra B from Leathered Life, in tight leather jeans in boots.

Source:The Daily Press

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

Who says blonde women don't have curves? Sure! I've seen blonde women who look like rail-thin valley girls and many times are rail-thin valley girls. Moderate height to tall, but with no body and perhaps consider eating meat as animal cruelty and freak out about picking up an ounce of fat and even layoff potato chips.

But there very sexy Nordic and Northern Slavic blonde women, American and otherwise who are tall, but are filled out. Because they eat right and workout and take care of themselves. Especially in the upper Midwest where curvy women of all ethnic backgrounds, are very common. Just because of the climate, culture lifestyle and to a certain extent ethnicity. Where you have a lot of German and Slavic women in those communities who tend to be curvy. Again because of the food and culture they grew up on. Take Illinois and Wisconsin, to use as examples. Western Pennsylvania, would be another hot spot for curvy women and even curvy blonde women.

And that is what you see in this video. A blonde woman with a tight well-built body, looking great in skin-tight leather jeans. Who fills out those pants perfectly.

ODN: 'Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky Scandal: Former US President's Denial, Grand Jury, and Admittance'

Source:ODN- President William J. Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."

Source:The Daily Press

"Bill Clinton's presidency was rocked by the Monica Lewinsky scandal. We revisit the affair that dogged his terms in office. Monica Lewinsky, the onetime White House intern whose 1990s affair with Bill Clinton nearly brought down his presidency, broke a long silence on Tuesday, saying she regretted what happened. Writing in Vanity Fair magazine, the 40-year-old said she was made a "scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position." Ms Lewinsky added, "I, myself, deeply regret what happened between me and President Clinton. Let me say it again: I. Myself. Deeply. Regret. What. Happened." Report by Ashley Fudge."

From ODN

The person I blame most for the Monica Lewinsky White House intern scandal and perhaps the only person I blame, is President Bill Clinton for acting as irresponsible as he did, for getting involved romantically at all with an intern. Doesn't mean I believe he should've been impeached for it and definitely not convicted which the Senate didn't do. Independent Prosecutor Ken Starr and the House Republicans if anything acted more irresponsible than President Clinton. But the fact is this scandal doesn't happen without Bill Clinton.

And Clinton, gave the meat to the Confederate Republicans (that I now call them, not all Republicans, but the far-right in the party) who've been looking to kick Bill Clinton out of office since he became President back in 1993. And if anything were looking to kick Clinton out of the Governorship in Arkansas when he was Governor there in the 1980s. Clinton was a Baby Boom Liberal Democrat from the 1960s, who believed in things like civil rights, equal opportunity, reducing poverty. But who also believed in things like fiscal responsibility. And not someone they could label as a tax and spend Socialist and beat in an election. So the path for them to defeat Bill Clinton was much harder.

Bill Clinton, I believed scared the hell out of the Far-Right in America, because he reminded most of the country of John F. Kennedy. And someone who was part of the New Democratic Liberal coalition in the party. That had moved past the Roosevelt-LBJ Progressive Era. And someone who could communicate to a wide ray of Americans and had moved past the 1950s culturally. And understood that it was no longer the 1950s and that the country was becoming more diverse. Ethnically, racially, culturally, regionally. And Confederate Republicans hadn't moved past the 1950s yet. And we're still in that little box and weren't ready to see Americans that most of the country wasn't familiar with in the 1950s.

The Far-Right, or New-Right, isn't ready for a country that was becoming more liberal and libertarian culturally and socially. As well as economically and they saw Bill Clinton as a threat to their way of life and what they saw as Traditional America. And someone who had to be stopped. 

Without President Clinton's irresponsible behavior, this scandal and grand jury testimony never happens. President Clinton's behavior was the red meat that Confederate Republicans thought they needed to kick him out of office. Since the rest of the country wouldn't do it for them and they betted that the country with fall inline with them. To oust President Clinton from office, which of course didn't happen.