Lewis Black: In God We Rust

Source:The Daily Press

If you want to know what demagoguery, paranoia, exaggeration is, or what being obsess is, then just watch the Glen Beck Show or whatever he calls it now. Just don't ask me to help you spell those things. Because there you have it unless you're severely learning disabled, blind and death you'll get an excellent idea of what all of those things are. Glen Beck has a habit of taking minor things and making them look like tragedy's or crisis's, the exact type of person who shouldn't be President of the United States.

Glen Beck shouldn't be an executive in any other type of government because he lacks an even keel, the ability to see things as they are and not freak out about them. Like with the health care reform debate in 2009-10, where Glen Beck accused President Obama of hating Caucasian people because he wanted to tax tanning salons which I'm guessing is something that Mr. Beck doesn't use very often. Or may not even know where one is.

Which is like saying people who believe the Palestinians deserve their own state must mean that they hate the Jewish people which is nonsense .You need more to go on then just that. I've never taken Beck seriously and have chosen not to. I prefer to see him as a libertarian comedian which he is rather than some intelligent political analyst. I just prefer to do that before I label someone ignorant as a sack of bricks. Or has an IQ below freezing, makes both George W. Bush and Sarah Palin look like genius's. You can add Sarah Palin to that list with Rick Perry towards the top as far as new applicants.

I don't listen to Glen Beck very often except for on YouTube, I've made that decision. Because even though I find him to be funny, my level of tolerance for nonsense is very low. I have that same policy for a lot of the Republican Party right now except for their leadership and presidential candidates. Because as a blogger I feel the need to keep up to date with them. I've made the decision not to listen to a lot of these people, because the amount of what they don't know is enough to fill up the Rose Bowl in Pasadena a Stadium with 100K Seats. For all you non-sports fans like my mother.

Or as Ronald Reagan said, but about the Democrats, "they know so much that is not true". I do listen to what Beck has to say about progressivism and socialism, because he's funny when he goes off on them. And his facts tend to be pretty good, its just when he relates the entire Democratic Party with these politics he loses me like Chris Rock cracking a redneck joke at a KKK rally. Because again it gets back to his demagoguery and hyperbolic rants. When he speaks about things like that, he tends to be as off the mark as an auto mechanic giving a lecture on brain surgery. He tends to speak out of his ass which makes him funny because of how ignorant he is.

A lot of times when I hear Glen Beck speak, I think about George Carlin when he says that we can't blame our politicians. Because they are us, they come from the same places that we do. Schools churches, neighborhoods etc. He's as ignorant as a lot of people that send our politicians back to office. Or I think damn our education system really has fallen to have people like Glen Beck speaking about key issues and attracting followers.

Video Activist Network: The Best Man (1964) Some Things Never Change

Source:The Daily Press

I saw The Best Man the 1964 version for the first time in late 2008, during that presidential election between Barack Obama and John McCain on Turner Classic Movies which was doing a special where they showed political movies all night one night a week in October. The Best Man is about essentially a divided party and they aren't sure who they should nominate for President. 

One candidate from the liberal or progressive wing of the party Henry Fonda and the other candidate played by Cliff Robertson coming from the more conservative wing of the party. It reminds me of political battles that the Democratic Party had back in the 1960s, 50s and 40s where a more progressive candidates like Adali Stevenson, John Kennedy or Hubert Humphrey going up against someone like Strom Thurmond when he was unfortunately a Democrat or George Wallace someone like that and of course the Progressive would always win at least going back to Woodrow Wilson.

And the progressive would always win because the Democratic Party going back to the 1920s or so has always been the liberal party in America, even though for a long time they've had a right-wing faction from the South and this movie was very realistic because it was an example of how presidential nomination battles were in the past up until the 1970s or so, where you didn't know for the most part who the party would nominate. And these things would be decided at the convention because the convention delegates could then vote for whoever they wanted.

The Best Man was a movie about looking in to what presidential politics looked like at least into the primary process of what presidential candidates go through and have to do in getting nominated for president even the dirty politics of it where both candidates know that the convention is split. And that they both need an extra edge to put them on top and they both find potential scandals in the others past. With the Henry Fonda character, his scandal was about him seeing shrinks or being on medication for depression.

With Cliff Robertson who was the right-winger a big believer in traditional values. His potential scandal was pretty ironic because apparently he had a homosexual affair when he was in the military and both candidates knew that if their scandal got out that their chance of winning the presidential nomination were over right there. So it became a question of who would leak the story about the other first or not leak the story and they spend a lot of the movie, trying to scare the other one and get them to drop out of the race, the Cliff Robertson character even offers the vice presidential nomination to the Henry Fonda character if he drops out. 

To me the The Best Man represents presidential nomination contests the way they used to be and should be when conventions actually meant something and they were worth watching. Especially if you're a political junky like myself, because you didn't know who the convention was going to nominate for president until they held vote and I wish we got back to that type of convention for both parties. Today political conventions are more of a formality and realty TV more than anything else, the presidential nominee already has wrapped up the nomination now by March or April.

John Kramer: SNL Politics Reviewed: The Republican Presidential Candidates

Source:The Daily Press

I can sum up the Republican presidential debates in several paragraphs or less, so I will. Mitt Romney- "vote for me because I can win" and his other slogan being, "if you're for it so am I". Newt Gingrich who I do take seriously as an intellectual until he says something thats provocative. But then realizes its unpopular and tries to get away from it. As long as he doesn't preach about moral values, "don't do because I've done it and I know from personal experience.

That some of these activities in life, well take adultery to use as an example are simply personally wrong. Its wrong which is why you shouldn't do it. (Even though I had a great time doing like having an affair with one of my staffers as Speaker of the House) When I was preaching about the moral decay of President Clinton". Newt Gingrich won't be up for Sainthood anytime soon, unless he pays to get in. And he is also unqualified to be a Monk, which may be why he's stopped preaching about moral values.

You have a classical Libertarian in Ron Paul, who apparently walked into a Republican Party one day, thinking he was at a Libertarian Convention. And hasn't found his way out of the Republican Party and is probably also unaware that he's at a party thats dominated by the Christian Right and Neoconservatives. And the Tea Party that at least part of them are in bed with the Religious Right and Neoconservatives. And are so warm there, that they can't get out of bed. Then there's John Huntsman and Gary Johnson who have no shot at the Republican nomination because they would both make excellent Liberal Democrats and they are both sane and that just aint going to cut it in today's GOP.

I would mention Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann, but like I said I could sum up the Republican presidential debates in a few paragraphs or less. And since I'm not a politician or running for public office, I can stick with positions I've already made. Other to say that they are both American citizens, born in America and 35 or older. (At least as far as I know) And besides I have nothing to say nice about either of them. Other than maybe Senator Santorum who I'll admit he's one of the most honest politicians I know of. And that is a complement in todays politics, its just that he knows so much that isn't true and actually believes in it.

Which would make Rick scary as a President and Michelle Bachmann just proves that even mental patients, even escaped mental patients are apparently qualified to run for President of the United States, or at least until they are recaptured. Rick Perry well when he decides what he believes and what his plans are for the country, I'll take a look at his presidential campaign. The man keeps teleprompter's in business by himself and with Herman Cain. Well his presidential campaign got suspended so now I would just be piling on. So what the hell, the man is not even qualified to pass a course on sexual harassment awareness. I'm not sure what the exact name for the course, I've never had to take it myself, let alone be President of the United States.

Thats the Republican presidential field of 2011-12, I know I'm thinking the same thing, "is that it". Where's Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, Dick Nixon, Gerry Ford, Ron Reagan Bob Dole. The problem is those people don't exist in the Republican Party anymore and wouldn't get the nomination for President in today's GOP. Because they wouldn't be trusted by Religious or Neo Right which is the problem for Mitt Romney. Who twenty years ago would've fit in perfectly in the GOP but because of the new GOP he has to say things just to please to them and say different things to different audiences.

Warner Vod: Video: Advise and Consent (1962)

Source:The Daily Press

Advise and Consent was a movie about the presidential nomination process in the U.S. Senate and what presidential appointments are put through by senators both in the opposition, but also from senators who are at least inclined to vote for the nominee. Whether the nominee comes from their party or not. In this movie the party in power also has a majority of the Senate. But if you are familiar with American politics back in the 1960s, the parties back then weren't always united ideologically. Which is one of the reasons why Henry Fonda who played the nominee for Secretary of State faced such a tough time. 

This movie came out in 1962 and was based on current times and back then the Democratic Party controlled Congress as well as the White House, but had what was called a Southern Caucus made up of right-wing senators who didn't vote with their Leadership on everything to put it mildly and would even vote with Senate Republicans to block legislation as well as presidential nominations from their own Leadership and this movie portrays that with Charles Laughton playing this Southern senator who was a right-winger and against his own President's nomination for Secretary of State. Charles Laughton playing a character that reminds me of former Sen. Dick Russell of Georgia who was the Leader of the Southern Caucus in the 1960s.

Back in the early 1960s of course there wasn't any cable TV or C-SPAN and Congress didn't allow for broadcast media to broadcast what was going on in the House or Senate so a lot of Americans weren't aware of even what the House and Senate looked like inside so this movie sort of opened that up for a lot of Americans. But Advise and Consent wasn't just about the Senate nominating process as far as the Senate debating nominations there was a lot of inside Washington aspects of this movie of course, with the President played by Franchot Tote calling the Leader of the Senate played by Walter Pidgeon and then the Leader calling the Senate Minority Leader. To get and idea of how many Senate Republicans would vote for the nomination.

But there was also a look at what happened in Washington on the party scene, where members of Congress in both parties would get together, there was a playboy senator in the movie played by Peter Lawford who reminds me of Senator Jack Kennedy. There was a somewhat bored and lonely Vice President with not enough work to do, so he would spend his time actually presiding over the Senate played by Lew Ayers. Back then Vice President's weren't very powerful or important, of course that changed a long time ago where today they are basically the Chief Counsel of the Administration. 

Advise and Consent was one of the first looks that Americans got to see in how the U.S. Senate operates and how they deal with the White House and how each caucus deals with each other and how the majority party deals with its own members and how the Senate Leader finds ways to get enough votes for the President's nominations, as well as how Washington works. And is a very good movie, especially if you're a political junky like myself, but an entertaining movie especially if you like dramas with great writing, cast and clever humor like myself as well. 

Marilyn Monroe: 'It's My Life'

Source:Inspiration Boost-

Source:The New Democrat

Marilyn Monroe is not known for saying a lot of intelligent things. Not saying she was dumb or anything because I believe the opposite is true but how she presented herself in a lot of ways gave a lot of people the impression that she was a less than an intelligent person. Who may of had more than just depression issues, but she did have the ability to put things exactly as they should be put. Like when it came to life and her point in this photo is poetic and perfect.

That your life is your life and only yours and of course we all have people who care about us and want the best for us and all of that and that none of us live in a vacuum. But at the end of the day our lives are exactly that and we and only we are responsible for all of the decisions that we make and have to live with all of the consequences of all of the decisions that we make and if we only live our lives to fit and be cool. And not to stand out and never live as individuals and always as members of groups, then we aren't living our lives, but we are living in order to please others and just to fit in.

I wrote a couple of blogs last week talking about that I believe that people have the right to make their own beds in life and then are responsible for living in their own beds that they make for themselves. And I meant a lot of that from a liberal political point of view and I meant every word of that. But this can also be used as a way of looking at life as well that we all have the right to make our own beds. So the beds we make for ourselves better be beds that are comfortable for us and beds that make us happy.

Doing what we want to do even if others do not approve of the beds that we make for ourselves. People shouldn't be afraid to standout in life especially if they are happy and are productive with what. They are doing and are good caring people and so forth. Just because how they live, think or speak may be different from whatever the so-called popular will. At the time thinks different of how we are living our own lives.

Life has followers and leaders, people who follow the leaders and people who lead the followers. And that is generally how life works out with people who set trends. People who follow trends and people who may seem different but aren't necessarily bad people. Or unproductive people, but good successful people who are simply different from how the establishment lives, speaks and thinks. But at the end of the day the followers, leaders, rebels and establishment all have at least one thing in common. That they all are responsible for their own decisions in life and are held accountable for them. 

William Shanley: The Made-For-TV Election Starring Martin Sheen

Source:The New Democrat

Comparing the presidential election of 1980 to the presidential election of 2012 is like comparing today's culture and lifestyles of that of the 1950s. Or NFL football from the 1970s to the NFL of today, two completely different eras. And even though TV and especially TV news is no longer as dominant medium as it was back in the late 1970s and 1980, it is still crucial today and politicians still need to do well on it to be successful. Especially is they hope to be President of the United States.

TV and videos we can see off the internet either off of YouTube or even videos we upload ourselves from our own laptops are the closest thing that we have to seeing someone in person. You can see what someone looks like and how they are feeling and doing simply by how they present themselves on TV. And even though the internet and even social networks are a huge factor in how we get our news, TV is still critical in how we are presented as people.

David Von Pein: Meet The Press: U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy (October, 1960)

Source:The New Democrat

The early 1960s was one of the hottest periods of the Cold War (no pun intended) and spending the first ten minutes of Meet The Press talking about China and other communist activities in Asia should be no surprise to anyone familiar with this period. Senator Kennedy who is a political hero of mine and perhaps my number one political hero and a big reason why I am a New Democrat. But he sounded on the defensive on the issue of Asia and China's influence in Southeast Asia. And seem to want to move past that issue by saying that "Richard Nixon and I agree on this issue".