Vanity Fair: Julie Miller- Is Reality TV To Blame For President Donald Trump? Yes!

Source: Vanity Fair– 1600 Pennsylvania at The White House Reality TV Show

Source: The New Democrat

You can’t blame reality TV for everything that is wrong with America, ( trust me, I’ve tried ) but without this facts don’t matter, everything is relative, what you can get away with to accomplish whatever your goals are celebrity culture that we’re living in, Donald Trump is the king of that. No one uses that lifestyle and culture to his advantage better than The Donald Trump.

Source: Vanity Fair– The Donald

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue at The White House, is the biggest reality TV show in the history of universe. It’s on 24 hours a day even when most people in country ( except for your addicted insomniacs are asleep ) and it’s like one of those TV’s that don’t have an off button and even a mute button and to get away from it you have to be in a different room on a different floor. You can’t turn it off, but simply try to get away with it. Like turning your i-phone off while in search for a life outside of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue at The White House.

Source: Vanity Fair– The Donald Trump

It’s not that we live in a reality TV universe, but that we live in Donald Trump’s reality TV universe. Where he’s the king of it and where they’re no rules at least that govern him. Where he never has to ever worry about being kicked off his own show ( unless Congressional Republicans grow a set off balls, or Democrats win back Congress ) because it is his own show. Unlike a reality TV show when the ratings start to slip and they believe that has to do with one character or several characters, those people are simply fired.

Firing the President of the United States, is about as easy as landing a 747 plane blindfolded without landing wheels, or pushing an elephant up the hill with just your arms and legs. Those things can only happen in extreme cases. And knowing this and the fact that The Donald has so little knowledge or respect for how American government works ( perhaps his father arranged for his son to not have to take social studies or American history in order to graduate ) The Donald views himself as a king or dictator even who can pretty much do whatever the hell he wants to without any real consequences.

Why not? He’s got a 90% approval rating inside of the so-called Republican Party and a Republican Congress that by enlarge doesn’t have the balls to hold him accountable for the most part, with a handful of Republicans Senators ( the last few Republicans who are actually still alive being the exception to this rule. Even though privately Congressional Republicans will tell you off the record that they know how irresponsible President Trump and his behavior is.

You can’t blame reality TV for anything and again I know because I’ve tried, but reality TV does has a lot to do with what’s wrong with America which is a subject for a future blog post. Personal responsibility with people taking the time to figure out the differences between what’s not reality TV but celebrity life TV where perception is more important than actual reality, has to be imaged here by every American especially the fans of celebrity life TV. But that’s the life that Donald Trump lives in and uses it to the max to advance his career goals like becoming President of the United States and being President. With 60 plus million Americans voting for him with about 90% of those voters still with him even with his low approval rating for a first term president.

Source: The Film Theorists: Film Theory- How Donald Trump is Winning With Reality TV– Donald Trump meet Uncle Sam

Read Full Post »

PBS NewsHour: Shields & Gerson On Ebola & 2014 Elections

Source:PBS NewsHour– left to right: Michael Gerson & Mark Shields.

Source:The New Democrat

“Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week’s news, including the response to Ebola in the U.S. and how it affects national politics, as well as the outlook for the midterm elections and the gubernatorial debate in Florida.”

From the PBS NewsHour

“The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is a North American public broadcaster and non-commercial,[1][2][3][4][5] free-to-air television network based in Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia.[6][7][8][9] PBS is a publicly funded nonprofit organization and the most prominent provider of educational programs to public television stations in the United States,[10][11][12][13] distributing shows such as Frontline, Nova, PBS NewsHour, Masterpiece, Sesame Street, and This Old House.[14]

PBS is funded by a combination of member station dues, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, pledge drives, and donations from both private foundations and individual citizens. All proposed funding for programming is subject to a set of standards to ensure the program is free of influence from the funding source.[15] PBS has over 350 member television stations, many owned by educational institutions, nonprofit groups both independent or affiliated with one particular local public school district or collegiate educational institution, or entities owned by or related to state government.[4]

As of 2020, PBS has nearly 350 member stations around the United States.”

From Wikipedia

Anyone who uses Ebola to gain political power (Right or Left) is unfit for office and perhaps should resign or give up their request to win the office that they are pursuing. This is a serious issue that affects millions of people who the U.S. Government and others have to deal with effectively, or millions of people could get hurt by it. And they need all the resources and people necessary to handle this problem as effectively as possible.

As far as the U.S. Senate elections: Mike Gerson might be right and maybe Senate Republicans are ahead in 8-11 elections right now. But I’m still seeing Kansas where Republican Senator Pat Roberts is in the fight for his Congressional career and is losing to Greg Orman. And I don’t think the debate this week helped Senator Roberts. And I’m seeing Georgia where Democratic Senate nominee Michelle Nunn has a small lead against David Perdue and they are competing for a Republican Senate seat.

In Kentucky, Allison Grimes has probably shot off too many of her own toes to win that election. You know a centrist or center-left Democrat not being able to admit that she voted for a Democratic President in Barack Obama, who is also center-left, shows she may not have the character and political knowledge as far as how much that could hurt her by not being able to admit the obvious, to win a U.S. Senate seat. Even against an unpopular Mitch McConnell who is also the Senate Minority Leader, Leader of the Senate Republicans.

Senate Democrats path to retaining the Senate even at 50-50 or 51-49, is to run the table and hold all the close Senate Democratic seats. They need to hold probably half of them and pick off a few Republican seats as well. Like Kansas and Georgia and they do that by holding North Carolina, where Senator Kay Hagan as a lead there. Holding South Dakota, which seemed impossible even a few months ago. Hold Colorado with Senator Mark Udall and somehow pull out Arkansas or Louisiana. And put Senate Republicans in a position where they have to run the table to even win a net of six seats, after dropping a couple of their own.

Read Full Post »

Taylor F: President Dwight Eisenhower on Little Rock Integration Plan

Source:Taylor F.– Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican, Texas) President of the United States (1953-61)

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

“This is for educational and personal purposes.
Executive Order – – Little Rock 1957 – – Dwight D. Eisenhower”

From Taylor F.

Dwight Eisenhower, America’s first civil rights president. Not Lyndon Johnson who was our third, after Jack Kennedy who got involved in it strongly late in his presidency. But President Eisenhower was our first because he took on segregation from the executive level before the 1960s and when the civil rights movement became strong.

By taking on civil rights at the federal and executive level, President Eisenhower immediately gave credibility to the movement. Especially by being in favor of it and against school desegregation, by essentially saying that:

“African-Americans have the same right to a quality education as Caucasian-Americans. And that government can’t force African-American kids to go to poor schools. When Caucasians are going to good public schools”.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on Blogger.

Read Full Post »

Market Ex: President Dwight Eisenhower- On the American Safety Net

Source:Market Ex– President Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican, Kansas) 1953-61

“Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.”

Source:Market EX

Dwight Eisenhower certainly wasn’t a Tea Party Republican economically or anything else. Whatever a Tea Party Republican is supposed to be, because there are many types.

But Ike was not a classical conservative economic libertarian Tea Party Republican. Not a Rand Paul Conservative Libertarian, which is what I’m getting at. But more like a Newt Gingrich Republican at least when it came to economic policy or what they use to call in Canada a Progressive Conservative.

Progressive Conservatives believe in the basic safety net for people who needed it, including the New Deal. But someone who also believed in freedom when it came to economics as well as personal freedom.

A Progressive Republican (not an Oxymoron) is someone who didn’t want a big welfare state for America. Someone who believed that Americans should have the freedom to be able to do as much for themselves as possible.

Progressive Republicans believe the safety net are for those people who needed it. Ike certainly wasn’t a Social Democrat or Democratic Socialist (which are very common in Europe) but someone who believed in using conservative principles to accomplish progressive goals. That you needed both freedom and a safety net for the country to be as strong as possible economically.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on Blogger.

Read Full Post »

President Dwight Eisenhower: ‘Farewell Address & Warning For America (1961)’

Source:C-SPAN– President Dwight D. Eisenhower (Democrat, Texas) 1961 farewell address.

“President Dwight Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the nation January 17, 1961”

From Some Off Stuff

So what’s so impressive about this speech is that it was given by the most distinguished and successful person to ever serve in the United States Military. And who was proud of his service and who loved the United States Military. Dwight Eisenhower was not some far-lefty who emerged in the 1960s or 70s who believes that authority and force are never the answer.

Ike didn’t believe that America is an evil country part of some evil-empire, that has nothing but capitalist greedy pigs. Or something holding the rest of the world down, the opposite was true. Because Dwight Eisenhower was a real American hero and American patriot. Who loved his country, but saw the American Military growing faster than he believed it needed to.

President Eisenhower believed the growth of our military industrial complex was a threat if it went unchecked. And gave civilians who never served in the military some feeling that our military could do anything and that “we have all the resources both economic and in weapons to police the world or something.” What President Eisenhower believed was that a strong military is a military that’s limited to only do what we should be doing and that there’s an actual limit to what it can do to secure our nation and be a force for peace in the world.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on Blogger.

Read Full Post »

The Film Archives-C-SPAN: 1997 White House Correspondents Dinner Featuring President Bill Clinton and Comedian Job Stewart

 

Source:The Film Archives– comedian and political satirist Jon Stewart.

“Bill Clinton & Jon Stewart: Stand-Up Comedy – White House Correspondents’ Dinner (1997) Although best known for his work on The Daily Show, Stewart has had roles in several films and television series. More Jon Stewart…

From The Film Archives

President Bill Clinton was the Comedian in Chief. Because, For one he has a great sense of humor and has always had that and if you live the life he has, the life of riding a roller coaster full-time. Having to stop to vomit because of all of those rides and going from being up one second to falling flat on your face (the clean version) the next second, you would have to have a great sense of humor and be able to make fun of yourself to keep your sanity.

But President Clinton was also Comedian in Chief because of the time he was president. Running and getting elected President of the United States at the birth of the internet. Email and websites already up by 1992 and of course those things having not been fully developed. Like they were in the mid and late 1990s, but they were already there. Cell phones already around by 1992 and the phones you saw then look like the phones you saw by 1995 when cell phones became popular and cool and almost universal.

The twenty-four hour news cycle was big by the early 1990s and just got bigger during the Clinton Administration. With cable news plus the internet to go along with television and radio news along with print media. With these news organizations being addicted to the twenty-four hour news cycle. Having to be the first to report on a story that five people care about. Otherwise it could cost them a tenth of one rating point, or an entire newspaper or magazine subscription.

President Clinton was also Comedian in Chief because of his hate squad, I mean opposition. Who actually turned out to be his best friends who saved him from himself. Because the American people had already decided they liked President Clinton and the job he was doing. And already accepted his flaws and decided they really didn’t like his opposition. Especially since these overly moral and extremely perfect people just also happened to be guilty of the same things that they were accusing President Clinton of. House Speaker Newt Gingrich comes to mind in a hot second. Who needs friends when you have enemies like this?

Once you become President of the United States, the number one sacrifice you give up and sacrifice is your privacy. The whole world is going to know about the same mistakes you and they make. Like having affairs when you are married with a daughter to a women half your age. Or raising money from other countries and you also have to know that your best friends, I mean opposition is going to accuse you of making the same mistakes and doing the same things they’ve done which is just the price of high power.

Read Full Post »

Reform Party USA: ‘Core Principles of the Reform Party’

Source:Reform Party USA– the official logo of RPUSA.

Source:The New Democrat

“We, the members of the Reform Party, commit ourselves to reform our political system. Together we will work to re-establish trust in our government by electing ethical officials, dedicated to fiscal responsibility and political accountability.”

From Reform Party USA

I hope the title of this post is long enough, otherwise the hell with it. But I agree with the notion of this blog post from the Reform Party that governing simply shouldn’t be about compromise. That even with a divided government with two parties that do not like each other (which is putting it very mildly) and certainly do not trust each other that both sides at the end of the business day still have a responsibility to not only govern, but to govern well.

And in divided government like today that means taking the best from both sides and putting into a package that works. And throwing out the garbage from both sides instead of just splitting the difference on each key issue. As if that is governing even when trying to go half way on each issue may not and in most cases does not result in a good end result.

There are plenty of examples going back to the early 1980s when the Federal Government became very partisan with a new Conservative President in Ronald Reagan, with a Conservative Republican Senate. To go with a Progressive Democratic House where they managed to govern very well with divided Congress’s.

It is not so much the art of the compromise that should try to be reached. But the art of the consensus. What do both sides want and on a lot of key issues both sides tend to have the same end goals. And after that has been established now where are both sides, what would each side do if they were completely in charge. In other words: what is the opening offer from both sides so we know where both side is. And after that has been established you look to the common ground.

You find that and you put that in the final package and then after that you look for victories from both sides. The good from each side and put their ideas alone on certain key issues. For example the 1996 Welfare to Work Law is a perfect example. Republicans wanted time limits and work requirements in the new Welfare system. Democrats wanted job training, education, and childcare for people on Welfare. What happened is both sides won and the final bill had job training, education, childcare, time limits and job requirements.

You take the good from both sides and throw out the things that probably wouldn’t work. Or that both sides simply can’t live with. Meaning both sides get their victories, but do not get everything they are looking for. Instead of just splitting the difference and running for the middle on the key issues. And that is how you get good government in a divided government.

Read Full Post »

The Fiscal Times: Nicholas Wapshott: ‘How The GOP Turned From Pragmatism to Tribalism’

Source:The Fiscal Times– from left to right: Speaker of the House John Boehner (Republican, Ohio) House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Republican, Virginia) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican, Kentucky)

“Once a happy band of no-nonsense, pro-business conservatives, cautious in everything from money to marriage — including their wary response to the onward march of 1960s liberal social values — they were prepared, within reason, to trim their policies to match the voters’ mood. After all, to achieve anything in government you first have to win elections.

But that was before the revival in fundamental conservatism that has turned the GOP from a pragmatic party to a collection of inward-looking ideological tribes. Republicans puzzled by the rise of dogma and division in their party can find answers in a new survey that explains how large the factions are and what they think. They will be surprised by the findings.

RELATED: MORE SHUTDOWN FALLOUT FOR THE GOP IN THE SENATE

The GOP has long been considered a three-legged stool: big business, Southern evangelical Christians and anti-government Westerners. But, largely since the world financial panic of 2008-9, these three have been joined by two new aggressive, popular movements: the Tea Party and the libertarians.”

From The Fiscal Times

Read Full Post »

The Fiscal Times: Eric Planin & Josh Boak- ‘Three Ways to End The Government Shutdown & Raise The Debt Ceiling’

Source:The Fiscal Times– the people you see here is all you need to know that elections do indeed have consequences.

“There is no doubt about it: Americans are ready for the White House and Republican leaders to hammer out a deal to end a preposterous, nine-day-old government shutdown and save the country from the potential financial ruin of a first-ever default on U.S. debt.

For all the bitter recriminations and political posturing, polls indicate that even a divided electorate wonders why a solution should be so hard at this point.

For the umpteenth time this week, President Obama declared on Wednesday that he refuses to negotiate with congressional Republican leaders over spending, the debt ceiling or Obamacare under duress. Instead, the president said House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and his caucus should reopen the government and extend the Treasury’s borrowing authority beyond next week without asking for any concessions.

Maybe three ways to end the government shutdown is not the best title for this blog. But hey I got it from The Fiscal Times so what do you want but these are the things I believe President Obama and Speaker Boehner in agreement with Leader Reid. Should do to end the government shutdown.

House Republicans, meanwhile, continued to pass rifle-shot measures to reopen portions of the government – but not others. Obama met with House Democrats Wednesday afternoon, but the closed-door conversation at the White House appeared to do little to break the public impasse. Senate Democrats, House Republicans and Senate Republicans will be asked to attend similar sessions in the coming days.

If Obama and Boehner are sincerely open to negotiations – but under the right circumstances – then there are obvious solutions at hand. Here are three possible approaches:

Pass a Stopgap Measure That’s Tied to Budget Talks. Republicans are demanding concessions before they approve a continuing resolution to end the government shutdown and raise the debt ceiling. But Obama says he won’t begin talks with a “gun to my head.”

One way to slice through this Gordian Knot is to pass a four-to-six-week stopgap measure – but tie it to holding budget negotiations. The National Review reported on Wednesday that GOP congressional leaders plan to bring a six-week debt ceiling extension to the floor to avoid default.

The president on Tuesday said Republicans could even specify which issues they want to discuss in the continuing resolution to end the shutdown. That was his answer to Boehner’s request that all he wanted was a “conversation.”

From The Fiscal Times

Short-term pass the Senate passed government clean funding bill in the House of Representatives that uses House Republican numbers not Senate Democratic. Big concession on Democrats part including President Obama who wanted roughly another two-hundred-billion-dollars more in spending. Make this extension go through let’s say January 2nd 2014 which would give Democratic and House negotiators roughly nine weeks to figure out the budget for 2014, that would fund the government until October 2014.

The House and Senate then agree to a Congressional budget conference chaired by. Senator Patty Murray and Representative Paul Ryan (the chairman of the Senate and House budget committees) with their ranking members, she other negotiators from both sides from both committees there as well. And have this conference meet everyday from when Congress passes the short-term government funding bill up until the January 2nd deadline.

Also, pass a ten week debt ceiling increase and with that comes another Congressional conference made up of members of the relevant committees in the House and Senate. With their chairman and ranking members from both the House and Senate there where they would workout the final debt ceiling agreement that would be a one year extension.

The final agreement wouldn’t be clean but it would be paid for with deficit and debt reduction that would come with entitlement and tax reform. Both spending cuts and revenue would be on the table. Debt ceiling extensions that are paid for have plenty of precedent going back to the mi 1980s. So this is nothing new and Democrats should be open to this since the Affordable Care Act would not be on the table.

These are big ifs but assuming Congress and President Obama workout long-term budget and debt ceiling agreements, Congress (both the House and Senate) with the Obama Administration would be represented here as well. Would have a summit with both political parties in both the House and Senate represented in a Congressional healthcare summit where everything would be on the table, including the Affordable Care Act in how to approve healthcare in America and how to make it more affordable. And give this group lets say six months or up until October before Congress goes home to run for reelection. And their job would be to come up with ways to reform and improve the Affordable Care Act but, repeal, defund or delay, would be off the table.

If I was a Democrat or Republican in leadership in either party this would be my proposal. Because both sides win big deals and give up big deal the ultimate compromise where both sides are not completely satisfied. But a good deal that would be workable where both sides could claim victory with credibility.

Read Full Post »

President Barack H. Obama: ‘End This Government Shutdown’

Source:The White House– President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) 44th President of the United States of America.

“Weekly Address: End the Government Shutdown

WASHINGTON, DC— In this week’s address, President Obama said that Republicans in the House of Representatives chose to shut down the government over a health care law they don’t like. He urged the Congress to pass a budget that funds our government, with no partisan strings attached. The President made clear he will work with anyone of either party on ways to grow this economy, create new jobs, and get our fiscal house in order for the long haul — but not under the shadow of these threats to our economy.”

From Dazzle Site

What Democrats should be doing especially the Democratic National Committee and the House Democratic Leadership, is pressuring vulnerable House Republicans in their districts and urging voters there to call their Republican Representatives and urging them to end this government shutdown by coming out in favor of the Senate passed government funding bill, that has House Republican budget numbers (not Democratic) but is a clean funding bill without outside language in it, like repealing or defunding the Affordable Care Act.

You get 20-30 House Republicans to come out in favor of this and even be in favor of a discharge petition to get the Senate funding bill on the House floor, Speaker Boehner would see he no longer has the votes to block the Senate bill and would call for a vote of it himself to avoid being embarrassed by it on the House floor. Or would stick with the House Tea Party Caucus in order to not lose his job. Either way, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi would be able to get the Senate bill to the House floor and the government shutdown would be over.

Read Full Post »