Real Time With Bill Maher: Christopher Hitchens- in 2010

Source:Daily Hitchens- Columnist Christopher Hitchens, on Real Time With Bill Maher, in 2010.

Source:The Daily Review

"For more videos, updates and info on Christopher Hitchens. Please visit us at:Daily Hitchens." 

From the Daily Hitchens 

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher- interviewing Christopher Hitchens.

The way I look at Catholics and Christians in general when it comes to terrorists and other bad apples like child molesters, is the way I look at Muslims in this sense. There are roughly two-billion Muslims in the world, maybe a hundred-thousand of them are terrorists. You could do a lot with a military of a hundred-thousand especially if you're a mid-size country. But out of two-billon people that is not much of an army when it comes to percentages.

The overwhelmingly majority of Muslims in the world are peaceful people. Who may have far-right cultural views, but not to the point they're willing to kill themselves and others to express those views.

I'm not Catholic, even though a lot of Germans Americans and otherwise are Catholic or Lutheran, but most Catholics are good moral people. The sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church in the early and mid two-thousands, was a horrible scandal with a lot of people hurt badly. But if that scandal represented Catholicism in general, we would see a lot more people come forward and share their abuse stories at the hands of Catholic priests and other Catholic leaders.

Chris Hitchens and to a certain extent Bill Maher, are guilty of over-generalizing here.

Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher: Discussing 9/11 in 2001

Source:Bitcoin Faucets- Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher. 

Source:The Daily Review

To blame Bill Clinton for 9/11 after the Clinton national security team warned the Bush Administration about Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden before the Bush team came into office, is like blaming the Pittsburgh Steelers for the lack of success that the Cleveland Browns have had in the last twenty years. "Hey, if only the Steelers hadn't been so good and beat us over and over, maybe the we the Browns wouldn't have had lost so much. It's all Pittsburgh's fault for our lack of success." The Clinton Administration went after Osama Bin Laden, at least since 1996 when Al-Qaeda attacked one of our ships in the Middle East. America was at peace when the Clinton Administration came into power in 1993 and we were still at peace when they left office in January, 2001. The economy was still booming and the Bush's inherited a budget surplus of two-hundred-billion-dollars and twenty-three-million net jobs.

Before 9/11, the Bush Administration was focused on trying to jump start the economy was starting to slow and worrying about what to do with the record budget surplus they just inherited and thinking they could be allies with Vladimir Putin's Russia and education reform. Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, wasn't a huge priority for them. It wasn't until 9/11 that they became neoconservative defense hawks, thinking that our civil liberties and constitutional rights, might be threatening our national security. And coming up with indefinite detention without arrest, the Patriot Act, that spies on who Americans associate with and what we read even. Where we could become potential suspects and even detained, for what we might read or who we might know. The Bush Administration, didn't have much of a national security or foreign policy, pre-911. The so-called War on Terror, wasn't part of our national language yet.

Did Bill Clinton eliminate Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as President, of course not. But to say they weren't paying attention to him and not trying to do that when they actually tried to assassinate him both in Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998, is nonsense. George W. Bush and company, obviously didn't eliminate Osama and Al-Qaeda as well. But President Barack Obama, had Osama assassinated in his third year in office in 2011. And the Obama Administration has come damn close to eliminating Al-Qaeda the last eight years. And have destroyed a lot of ISIS in Syria and Iraq in the last two years. George W. Bush, obviously didn't create Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda either, but they got off to a late start to the threat of that organization. Especially since the previous administration were already going after them. And that the Clinton national security team warned the incoming Bush Administration about the threat in late 2000. According to Clinton counter-terrorism director Richard Clark.
Bitcoin Faucets: Politically Incorrect With Bill Maher- Christopher Hitchens

C-SPAN: Christopher Hitchens and Patrick Buchanan, on Bill Clinton in 1993

Source:CSPAN- Left-Wing political writer, Christopher Hitchens.

Source:The New Democrat 

"Mr. Hitchens and Mr. Buchanan spoke on current events in Washington politics, including the performance of the Clinton administration to date, and the reaction of Western countries toward the civil war in Bosnia. The correspondents responded to callers' comments criticizing the Clinton administration. Credit to CSPAN." 

From CSPAN 

"Mr. Hitchens and Mr. Buchanan spoke on current events in Washington politics, including the performance of the Clinton administration to date, and the reaction of Western countries toward the civil war in Bosnia. The correspondents responded to callers' comments criticizing the Clinton administration." 

Source:CSPAN- Pat Buchanan and Chris Hitchens, on CSPAN in 1993.

From CSPAN

This is certainly an interesting combo to have Chris Hitchens and Pat Buchanan, on the same show. 

Hitchens, a self-described Democratic Socialist and Pat Buchanan, would be what's called today an Alt-Rightist: someone who tends to be against free trade, multiculturalism, non-European immigration and perhaps immigration in general. Anti-internationalism when it comes to foreign policy and not believing that America should be involved in other countries human rights crisis's and civil wars. 

And then you have Socialist Chris Hitchens, who believes that the big central government, should decide what people need to live well. And that the central government should be responsible for a lot of those services. But tends to break away from Socialists when it came to foreign policy and did believe America and Europe, could play a positive role in seeing that people who live under authoritarian regimes, can break away from authoritarianism and even use military force to break those authoritarian regimes. 

Hitchens was in favor of America and Europe, being involved in the Balkans in the 1990s. Buchanan was against that. They weren't two men that even though one was clearly on the Left, Far-Left even and the other was on the Far-Right, that you could assume that either would automatically take a certain position on a certain issue.

Reform Party USA: 'Official Interview With National Secretary Nicholas Hensley'

Source:Reform Party USA- Ross Perot's creation. 

SourceThe New Democrat 

"The National Reform Party Secretary, Nicholas Hensley, has been making the rounds. His recent interviews have been highly rated by his peers, and were well received by anti-establishment activists. After some consideration, we have decided to post a sample interview on the National Website.

What is the Reform Party?

The Reform Party is a moderate, centrist and populist party that is neither liberal nor conservative. It sits in the middle of the political spectrum as opposition to the Democrats and Republicans. It was formed in 1995 by followers of Ross Perot. Perot won 19 percent of the vote in the 1992 election.

It was founded on the basis that the political establishment was corrupt. It seeks to reform government by getting special interest money out of politics, and limiting the power of lobbyists. We also want to ending the practice of gerrymandering, and open ballots for third parties and independents. As far as ethics reform, we want to force lawmakers to adhere to a set of laws – not just a set of rules.

Before the Republicans passed their Contract with America, the Reform Party already proposed a balanced budget amendment. We want to reform the government’s accounting system, stop the practice of keeping some items off the books, and create a plan to get America back into the black in the next four years.

Economically we want to reform trade deals, so that the manufacturing sector becomes a job creator for the working and middle classes. Even though we advocate for tax and regulatory reform on the manufacturing sector, those issues are minor compared to the need for stop trade by reforming NAFTA, CAFTA and the WTO." 

From the Reform Party

When I was growing up in the 1980s and early 1990s, the Democratic Party was supposed to be the left of center progressive party in America and the Republican Party was supposed to be the right of center party in America. The Democrats and Republicans have always had their fringes, but not to the point where they could decide who the party nominates, especially for governor, Senate, and certainly not President. Perhaps in gerrymandered U.S. House districts, but not where someone would have to run statewide or nationally, in competitive, diverse states. 

The reason why we have a Reform Party USA, is pretty much the same reason why we have a Libertarian Party. The Democrats moved left in the mid and late 1990s and especially 2000s. The Republicans have been moving right at least since the late 1960s, but by time the mid 90s comes around, the Christian-Rights was no longer a fringe part of the party, but a core portion of it's base. Which meant Center-Right, more fiscally and economically minded, conservative voters, who aren't interested in the culture wars, were left without a major political party. 

Reform Party USA might call itself a centrist populist party, but that's not Ross Perot's movement. That's really no one's movement. American voters regardless of political philosophy, like to know where the candidates and politicians stand on the issues, even the controversial ones, before deciding who to vote for. And if you are a so-called Reformer, but you don't know what you think and your position is: "Elect me, because I'll do what's best for the country and figure out what the right policies are once I'm elected." you are going to put the voters asleep into a deep coma before they even have a chance to vote for you. 

Ross Perot was a pretty conservative guy, at least economically and fiscally, and even when it came to national security. Most of the people who voted for him in 1992 were either Republicans or were once Center-Right Republicans. Not mushy-middle centrists, who didn't know what they believed on the issues. 

With the Republican Party as far to the right as it is today, the center-right in the country is a great place for the Reform Party to be and for real Conservative Republicans to make their new home, especially the Never-Trumpers who've left the Republican Party because of Donald Trump and his movement.

Association VAA: Laura Ingraham- Speech At RNC: July 20, 2016

Source: Association VAA- Right-wing talk show host Laura Ingraham, speaking at the 2016 RNC.

"Laura Ingraham. Syndicate radio host. Full Speech at Republican National Convention  July 20, 2016  RNC 2016  Cleveland, Ohio.
FULL SPEECH: WOW! Laura Ingraham brings down the house. Laura Ingraham Makes Remarks At 2016 RNC. Laura Ingraham just showed us how Trumpism will survive after Trump. Laura Ingraham Elects to Ignore That Nazi Salute She Did. Laura Ingraham just showed us how Trumpism will survive after Trump. WATCH: Laura Ingraham Speech at RNC. Laura Ingraham just showed us how Trumpism will survive after Trump. Laura Ingraham 'Nazi Salute': The Tweets You Need to Read. Laura Ingraham courageously attacks man buns at RNC. Laura Ingraham Delivers a Speech for The Ages at The GOP.

From Association VAA

What would this new so called southern strategy be, attempting to deny people from voting literally because of their race or ethnicity, maybe even both, trying to pass laws that try to argue that states have such laws and are entitled to prevent people from voting if the government believes they represent some danger to the state and trying to argue even that states have the right to decide who can and can't vote?

Maybe even trying to pass some law and arguing that would raise the voting age and arguing that the states have the right to do that, perhaps 30-35 thinking by then adults would have lost their leftist leanings and woken up to the real world and decide they are now right wingers?  One so-called voter ID law was already thrown out by the U.S. Supreme Court, ruled as unconstitutional and I bet several others are headed in that direction, especially with the elections being over and you may see the Federal Government move to speed up voting so we don't see the long lines to vote that we saw last Tuesday.

Barry Goldwater and Ron Reagan's appeal to so many Americans was about individual freedom, economic and social freedom. It was a classical conservative message: "we are going to keep taxes and spending down and let you live your own lives, not interfere with what you do with your private affairs."

And then the GOP thanks to Richard Nixon and others brought in Christian-Conservatives, telling them they also believe in what they call traditional America. As well to keep them from going to some far -right party that could challenge Republicans especially in close elections they would tell them that without ever doing anything for them for the most part when it came to policy. Ron Reagan as Governor of California signed a liberal abortion law and I believe a liberal civil rights law as President. He could do this and tell  Christian-Conservatives he's really with then and once he brought them in, they really didn't have anywhere else to go.

There's that old phrase: once you're in a hole, stop digging. The GOP is currently at a cliff and about to be pushed off by young people and minorities that see them as intolerant and now prefer Democrats by 70%. And with Caucasians dying off and shrinking as a percentage of the electorate today's GOP simply can't survive as is but if they get back to Goldwater/Reagan they can bring in the new voters. That they need to remain relevant in American politics.

CNN: The Situation Room- Michele Bachmann Debates Bernie Sanders

Source:CNN- U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (Republican, Minnesota) debating U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (Democratic Socialist, Socialist Republic of Vermont) on CNN.

Source:The New Democrat 

"MONEY ECONOMY JOBS POOR POLITICS WASHINGTON INCOME INEQUALITY." 

From CNN

Hell must be going through a deep freeze right now, because I actually agree with Representative Michele Bachmann on something. 

The reason why Scandinavia has almost no poverty there, is because they are deeply rich in natural energy resources like oil and gas. Two energy resources that Senator Bernie Sanders supporters would probably like to ban in America and Scandinavia uses that energy revenue to pay for their social welfare states. And they also have small populations. So they have lots of energy for an area of only 25 million people.

I hate to break it to Senator Sanders and every other American Socialist (in and out of Congress) but that everything that government does, comes with a price for anyone who receives those services, one way or another.

Carl Rutan & Pat Buchanan: Back to The 1950s & 1980s (1988)

Source:Remember This-

Source:The New Democrat

The world that Pat Buchanan was talking about and advocating for in this 1988 interview, simply doesn't exist anymore and we were moving away from it in 1988 if not only escaped from there by then. Gays, no longer live in the closet. African-Americans, have just as much right to vote and are treated the same as Caucasian-Americans now. Women, now work and hold very responsible jobs, making good money, running and managing their own business's. The music is much different and much more open about life. Americans, now have the freedom and feel the freedom to be themselves. Which is Americans and individuals and we live our lives the way we want to. Not how Pat Buchanan and other Christian-Conservatives feel we should live.

The 1950s, was great for America in many ways. We were not just the economic superpower of the world, but became the number one military and diplomatic power in the world. This was post-World War II where our economy boomed and our infrastructure system boomed as a result. But the problem with this era was that many Americans didn't benefit from these American advances. Not because of anything that they did, but because of how they were born. Their complexion, their race, their ethnicity, their religion, their gender. Not because they were, or could be any less productive than Anglo-Saxon Protestant men. What the 1960s and the 1980s brought to America, was true individual freedom. Both from a personal and economic standpoint.

If you watch this video,  think you see Pat Buchanan, essentially acknowledging what I'm arguing here. That the America that he grew up with in the 1950s simply no longer exists. And when he was asked, "do you want to use government to bring that America back?" He answered truthfully and honestly and said he doesn't believe that, because its simply not possible. Which is a very practical answer and the correct answer. As far as the 1988 presidential election, you had Vice President George H.W. Bush, for the Republican Party. Who represented President Ronald Reagan and his policies in that election. Going up against Governor Michael Dukakis, who represented the New America and the direction that America has been moving to ever since.