Thursday, March 7, 2013

MSNBC: Representative Ron Paul: 'Entitlements Are Not Rights'


Source:MSNBC- U.S. Representative Ron Paul (Libertarian, Texas)
"During a debate hosted by NBC asked Paul: "In your opinion, what services are Americans entitled to expect to get from government?" 

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, the definition of entitlement is "a right to benefits specified especially by law or contract."


The word entitlements is use to describe Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, as well as Unemployment Insurance. When as progressive columnist Jonathan Alter pointed out in Monday in his column, that these programs are really social insurances that people collect when they need them. Just because we pay into Unemployment Insurance, doesn't mean we'll ever see a dime directly from it. (To use as an example) And hopefully we would never have to. Medicaid would be another example of that even though it doesn't have a direct revenue source to fund it. 

I actually agree with Ron Paul that constitutionally at least, we're not entitled to anything in America, other than our life and liberty. Everything that government provides or takes from us beyond securing our rights to liberty and life, has to pass the constitutional test and the will of the voters.

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

The Washington Post: John Wagner: 'Death Penalty Repeal Approved by Maryland Senate'

Source:The Washington Post- Governor Martin O'Malley (Democrat, Maryland)

"The Maryland Senate voted to repeal the death penalty Wednesday after four days of emotional debate, moving the state closer to becoming the sixth in as many years to abolish executions.

The 27 to 20 vote was widely seen as a key step in ending capital punishment in Maryland, which has not executed a death-row prisoner since 2005. The legislation now goes before the House of Delegates, where a vote could come as early as next week.

The House is expected to approve the measure, handing Gov. Martin O'Malley a long-sought legislative victory at a time when he is weighing a run for national office in 2016.

“It’s time to end this ineffective and expensive practice and put our efforts behind crime fighting strategies that work,” O’Malley (D) said in a statement.

Shari Silberstein, executive ­director of Equal Justice USA, a group that is working to end the death penalty, said that Maryland’s action is part of a national trend and that she envisions another half-dozen states adopting the policy in the next several years.

If I was a Maryland State Senator I probably would've voted against this being in favor of a limited use of the death penalty. But its easy to see why Marylanders would be against this with the death row inmates who've been found to be innocent... 

The Hill: Russell Berman: 'House GOP to Consider bill On Job-Training Programs'


Source:The Hill Newspaper.

"House Republicans will move off their relentless focus on spending cuts
next week to consider a bill aimed at improving and streamlining
federal worker training programs.

Republican leaders said Tuesday they would bring to the floor the Supporting Knowledge and Investing in Lifelong Skills (SKILLS) Act, which would reauthorize a Clinton-era workforce investment law while consolidating dozens of job-training programs.

{mosads}The bill would mark the first House vote on legislation highlighted as part of Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s “Making Life Work” agenda, a set of proposals unveiled in a speech last month designed to broaden the GOP’s fiscal focus and target measures to issues that more directly affect voters’ lives.

Policymakers in both parties have pointed to improved job training as a priority during the sluggish economic recovery, in which employers have complained that long-term unemployment and technological advancements have resulted in job openings that go unfilled because applicants don’t have the requisite skills.

“That is a bill that I think both sides can come together on,” Cantor (R-Va.) said Tuesday, “and to provide assistance for those who don’t have the right kind of training or skills so they can access the unfilled jobs that are out there in many of the industry sectors.”

In the months following the November election, Cantor and other Republican leaders have spoken of the need for the GOP to avoid being seen simply as the party of austerity by finding other appealing policy ideas that conservatives can rally around.

The ongoing budget wars have made that difficult, and party leaders found themselves once again holding a press conference in front of a banner touting spending cuts.

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) acknowledged, however, that like President Obama, the House GOP wanted to tackle other issues.

Obama has called for restructuring job-training programs, a push that has given the Republican legislation the imprimatur of bipartisanship.

Yet House Democrats and advocate groups are pushing separate legislation, and say the Republican bill goes too far in eliminating federal programs.

The opposition could make for a challenging vote next week for House GOP leaders, who did not bring the legislation to the floor in the last Congress.

They have struggled to unite their narrower majority in support of the Republican legislation so far this year.

“This is all related to public relations,” said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee, which will mark up the SKILLS Act on Wednesday.

“It’s not related to getting people back to work. It’s not related to getting people the training they need, and it’s not related to making sure that those people who need the most help get back into the economy and get taken care of. This is just part of the public relations campaign of Mr. Cantor’s speech.”

Miller predicted there would be “very little, if any” Democratic support.

“This just hasn’t been a bipartisan process at all,” he said. “They may get it off the floor, but it’s unacceptable in the Senate. So it’s unfortunate.”

The author of the Republican bill, Rep. Virginia Foxx (N.C.), dismissed Miller’s criticism, and argued that her proposal was closer to the reform that Obama had envisioned.

“The unfortunate thing is we’re doing what the president asked,” she said. “The president said, get rid of this maze of programs. Come up with a one-stop program. The Democrats’ bill adds two programs and does nothing to consolidate, so it’s about as far away from what the president said he wanted as could possibly be.

“So if they want to continue down that road, then that’s fine,” Foxx said of the Democrats, “but we’re doing what the American people want and what the president wants. That’s bipartisanship.”

A GOP leadership aide said “a significant portion of our members” support the SKILLS Act, but stopped short of guaranteeing its passage on the floor.

“We will have the votes on the committee to pass it, and I think we will have the votes in the conference,” Foxx said.

Rachel Gragg, federal policy director for the National Skills Coalition, praised the Democratic legislation and said the GOP bill went about streamlining training programs in the wrong way by combining them all into a single block grant.

“It’s almost like consolidating for consolidation’s sake,” she said.

Gragg also voiced concern that because the $6 billion authorization in the Republican bill is treated as a ceiling, it would leave the program vulnerable to future cuts, perhaps as soon as when the Republicans unveil their budget for fiscal 2014.

The Democratic bill, by contrast, “at a minimum maintains current funding and in some cases increases funding,” Gragg said." 

From The Hill

This is exactly the direction that the House GOP should be moving in whether this bill is good or not. But these are the things that they should be talking about instead of their whole message being about how do we just the size of the Federal Government, but also talk about how to make the Federal Government work better, so Americans who need public assistance, don't have to stay on it as long and can move to the workforce with a good job instead.

President John F. Kennedy: Cuban Missile Crisis Speech: 10/22/1962


Source:David Von Pein- President John F. Kennedy's 1962 speech on the Cuba Missile Crisis.
“This high-quality version of President Kennedy’s 10/22/62 Cuban Missile Crisis speech is somewhat rare, because it is complete and unedited. Usually only small bits and pieces of the speech are presented on television and in documentaries. But this is the entire 18-minute address from start to finish.”


What President Kennedy wanted to show during this crisis was that his National Security Council was on top of the situation from the beginning. And the question which was a huge question, was what to do about it to prevent missiles from being launched at the United States.

President Kennedy, obviously did not want to go to war with another superpower and risk destroying the world in the process. Which might have happened had the United States gone to war with the Soviet Union.

Trying to invade the Communist Republic of Cuba with Russian ships in the area was not going to happen without some war. Which meant that the Kennedy Administration, was going to need a negotiated settlement with Russia.

Russia, was literally able to stick their own nuclear weapons on the island of Cuba, just ninety miles from Miami, Florida. With enough power to eliminate the East Coast of the United States. So President Kennedy and his National Security Council knew they had to get those weapons out of Cuba. They also knew that going to war with a country the size and that was as powerful militarily as the Soviet Union, probably wasn’t an option at all. So they were going to have to work this out diplomatically to get the weapons out of Cuba, America was going to have to give Russia something they wanted as well.

What prevented World War III during the Cuba Missile Crisis was Russia agreeing to pull their weapons out of Cuba, in return for America pulling their weapons out of Turkey.

America, didn’t pass new economic sanctions on Russia hoping that Russia would eventually take the weapons out of Cuba. As well as hoping they would never use them, or give them to Cuba. And America didn’t go to war with Russia and try to settle it that way.

Both countries had something that the other wanted and wanted something that the other had. And both were smart and sane enough to settle the crisis diplomatically. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Tuesday, March 5, 2013

Council On Foreign Relations: The Meaning of Power in the 21st Century

Source:Council On Foreign Relations- Fareed Zakaria speaking.

"Moisés Naím and Fareed Zakaria discuss the transformation of power and what this means for U.S. primacy and how it conducts foreign policy.

Speakers:
Moisés Naím, Senior Associate, International Economics, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Author, "The End of Power: From Boardrooms to Battlefields and Churches to States, Why Being In Charge Isn't What It Used to Be"
Fareed Zakaria, Host, CNN; Editor-at-Large, "TIME"

Presider:
Daniel W. Drezner, Professor of International Politics, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University" 

Biography: Ted Bundy

Source:Biography of serial murderer Theodore R. Bundy.

Source:The Daily Press

“American serial killer and rapist Ted Bundy was one of the most notorious criminals of the late 20th century, known to have killed at least 20 women in the 1970s. He was executed in the electric chair in 1989.

Who Was Ted Bundy?

Ted Bundy was a 1970s serial murderer, rapist and necrophiliac. He was executed in Florida’s electric chair in 1989. His case has since inspired many novels and films about serial killers.” 

From Biography

“Serial killer Ted Bundy, who was added to the FBI’s Top Ten Fugitives list on February 10, 1978. On February 15, 1978, Bundy was arrested in Pensacola, Florida, by local police after he was stopped for speeding while driving a stolen vehicle.” 

Source:FBI- Theodore R. Bundy is one of the most wanted serial murderers by the FBI and other law enforcement agencies in American history.

From the FBI 

"In 1967, whilst a student at the University of Washington, he was to meet the girl who was to have the most profound effect on his life, fellow student Stephanie Brooks, who was from a wealthy family, and with whom he fell deeply in love. She didn't reciprocate with as much passion, however, and when she graduated in 1968 she ended their relationship abruptly." 
Source:Ramona Horstlich- One of Ted Bundy's murder victims.


Ted Bundy was a special serial murderer and I don’t mean that in a complementary way, but he was very successful at murdering people and even getting away with it up to a point. Because he had intelligence and an education level that murders or criminals in general simply don’t generally. To go along with possessing a certain amount of evil where he actually enjoyed raping and murdering women. And you put all of these characteristics together and you have a serial murderer whose able to rape and murder all the women he was able to.

I’m not saying that criminals in general are dumb and I’m not a professional criminal profiler. But what I do know about this is that the average career criminal who ends up spending at least a major percentage of their life in and outside of jail and prison, generally don’t have a very good education. And tend to get involved in crime early on and perhaps as a result don’t finish high school. Either drop out doing considerable time in juvenile hall. 

The average career criminal tends to be dumb in the sense that they’re not well-educated. They don’t have skills and knowledge that they can use to make a successful life for themselves outside of crime by the time they start doing hard time. And another thing that makes Bundy special is that he started his criminal career as a teenager as well.

Ted Bundy was a high school and college graduate who was studying to be a lawyer. Who defended himself in court and perhaps gave himself a better defense than the local public defender could have given him in Tallahassee where he was finally put way for good and given the death penalty. 

The average career criminal especially a serial murderer, doesn’t fit that profile. The average criminal that has Bundy’s criminal profile, is a screw up (to put it mildly) for the most part, whose done time for shoplifting and knocking off convenient stores and stealing fifty bucks and so-forth. That wasn’t Ted Bundy. Bundy was someone who if he didn’t have this murderous addiction (no pun intended) would have ended up as a lawyer. And perhaps a damn good one but had this horrible side that cost the lives of at least twenty women that we know of. 

Monday, March 4, 2013

Clinton Library: 'President Clinton's Speech at Mason Temple Church (1993)'

Source:Clinton Library- President William J. Clinton (Democrat, Arkansas) 42nd President of the United States (1993-2001) 

"This is video footage of President William Jefferson Clinton speaking at the Church of God in Christ's Annual Convocation at the Mason Temple Church in Memphis, Tennessee.  Mason Temple Church was the site of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's final sermon deliverance before being assassinated.  This footage is official public record produced by the White House Television (WHTV) crew, provided by the Clinton Presidential Library.

NOTE: MT01388 has minor frame damage at the top of the screen.

Date: November 13, 1993
Location: Mason Temple Church.  Memphis, TN." 

From the Clinton Library

President Bill Clinton at the Memphis Church of God in 1993. One of, if not the best speeches that President Clinton ever gave, at least in his first term, because it's so honest.

Source:Pics Bud- President William J. Clinton (Democrat, Arkansas) 42nd President of the United States (1993-2001) 
I saw this speech last week when I was watching a documentary about President Clinton and his Presidency. I might have seen this speech before, but I simply can't remember, but I already believe it's probably the best speech he's ever given at least as President of the United States. Even better than his first inaugural, or his 1992 or 2000 Democratic Convention speeches. 

All great speeches if you are not familiar with them, I suggest you watch or read them even if you don't like Bill Clinton, but someone who likes listening to good speeches. What made this speech great was the time that it was given, twenty five years after Martin Luther King was assassinated, not the anniversary of that assassination, this was November, 1993 MLK was murdered April, 1968, but twenty-five years after he was murdered. 

What else made this speech great was the simple honesty of it. He was attempting to speak for MLK, no one of course can do that we are simply talking about perhaps the greatest speaker this country has ever produced. What President Clinton was attempting to do was to layout what MLK would think of America Aad the African-American community twenty-five years later and the progress that it has made. But the challenges that still remain and what he died for and what he didn't die for. He said that fewer African-Americans as a percentage of the country lives in poverty and more live in the middle class. And are well-educated but still too many live in poverty and so-forth. 

The line in this speech that hit me the hardest not in a bad way, was when President Clinton said attempting to speak for Martin King: "I did not die to stop the violence from white people onto black people only to see black people killing other black people. I did not die to see that." And if you are an African-American I believe that's got to hit home that yes they've made progress, but we are still not at the mountaintop where Reverend King wanted African-Americans to join him.

Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Liberal Democracy