Emperor Tigerstar: Huey Long- 'The Dictator of Louisiana'

Source:Emperor Tigerstar- If the title fits.

Source:The New Democrat

"See the rise and fall of the Kingfish Governor of Louisiana. He's more than a Kaiserreich meme, and has left quite a lasting legacy."

 From Emperor Tigerstar

 I mentioned in my Huey Long piece last week that Huey Long had a lot in common with Senator Bernie Sanders today as it created to wealth redistribution and a socialist populism that was about high taxation on the wealthy to be used to help everyone else. And all of that is true, but as I also mentioned last week Huey and Bernie aren't ideological twins.

 Senator Sanders at least as far as how he speaks, what he proposes, and his political positions all suggest that he's a Democratic Socialist. Governor Long, you could call him a Democratic Socialist on economic policy, but even as the guy in this video admits to Governor Long was essentially the dictator of Louisiana as far as how he was able to centralize a lot of state power for himself, but then the guy in this video says that Governor Long used all of this state power to benefit the people of Louisiana, not himself necessarily.

 I'm going to argue that Huey Long wasn't a Communist even though he did have dictatorial socialist leanings as Governor. But only because he didn't close down private media organizations and churches, banks, that sort of thing where people can get to together and create their own private power. But he did centralize a lot of power within his own state to the point that if you tried to cross him, he could hurt your badly politically and professionally. And to work for his Administration in Louisiana, you have to donate part of your state salary to his political machine in Louisiana. At one point Huey, was both Governor of Louisiana and then U.S. Senator from Louisiana. Even when he was in Congress, he still had a lot of power in Louisiana.

 A better way to describe Huey Long is say that he was a crook, but with good intentions and as long as you didn't try to cross him, life could be very good for you in Louisiana. And again Huey wasn't a Communist, but he did have things in common with Communists and Socialist dictators around the world. People who come into power promising the populist that he alone can make their lives better if they just give him all of this power. ( Remind you of any current President today? )

 We saw this with Fidel Castro in Cuba, Hugo Chavez and now Nicholas Maduro in Venezuela. Men who have way too much self-confidence and probably couldn't look up or define words like modesty and humility even if they saw them in a dictionary. Which is dangerous for any society to have which are leaders who have so much faith in themselves, because they see themselves as invincible and that it's somehow treason for anyone to even try to question them. And when someone does that, they face cruel repercussions. That's the type of leader or Socialist that I see Huey Long as.

Senator Huey Long: Huey Long Collection- Share Our Wealth Societies: 2/23/1934

Source:Share The Wealth- Governor Huey Long, D, Louisiana: the Bernie Sanders of his era?

Source:The New Democrat

"Huey Long speaking with John A Simpson, President of the National Farmer's Union, in 1934.

FORMER LOUISIANA GOVERNOR HUEY LONG, CALLED "THE KINGFISH", SPEAKING WITH JOHN A. SIMPSON, PRESIDENT NATIONAL FARMER'S UNION, ON SHARE THE WEALTH MOVEMENT"

From Senator Huey Long

Governor Huey Long's Share The Wealth Proposal

Source:Wikipedia

1. "No person would be allowed to accumulate a personal net worth of more than 300 times the average family fortune, which would limit personal assets to between $5 million and $8 million. A graduated capital levy tax would be assessed on all persons with a net worth exceeding $1 million.[citation needed]

2. Annual incomes would be limited to $1 million and inheritances would be capped at $5.1 million.[citation needed]

3. Every family was to be furnished with a homestead allowance of not less than one-third the average family wealth of the country. Every family was to be guaranteed an annual family income of at least $2,000 to $2,500, or not less than one-third of the average annual family income in the United States. Yearly income, however, cannot exceed more than 300 times the size of the average family income.[citation needed]

4. An old-age pension would be made available for all persons over 60.[citation needed]

To balance agricultural production, the government would preserve/store surplus goods, abolishing the practice of destroying surplus food and other necessities due to lack of purchasing power.[citation needed]

5. Veterans would be paid what they were owed (a pension and healthcare benefits).[citation needed]

Free education and training for all students to have equal opportunities in all schools, colleges, universities, and other institutions for training in the professions and vocations of life.[citation needed]

6. The raising of revenue and taxes for the support of this program was to come from the reduction of swollen fortunes from the top, as well as for the support of public works to give employment whenever there may be any slackening necessary in private enterprise."

I'm not saying that Huey Long both as Governor Long and then later Senator Long was the George McGovern, or take it up today and call him the Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren of his era, but only because Huey Long wasn't so much a Democratic Socialist as he was just just purely a Socialist: someone who mixed both democratic and authoritarian views into his own politics. He was more like a Nicholas Maduro ( the President of Venezuela ) than Neville Chamberlain ( Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in the 1930s ) as someone who believed in democratic socialism economically, but had authoritarian views when it came to how he governed.

Governor Huey Long, was as close to a dictator that we've ever had in this country when he was Governor of Louisiana and had so much power over the government there and didn't believe in checks and balances and separation of powers. But on economic policy he was someone who had strong populist tendencies and someone who wasn't a big city leftist or populist, but someone who could appeal to rural voters in the deep South, because of how poor they were and that he spoke about their poverty and promised to get them out of it with his economic populism that we would call democratic socialism today. Which is what he has in common with Senator Bernie Sanders today.

What Governor Long has in common with Senator Sanders is what again what was called economic populism in the 1930s that we call democratic socialism today:  Bernie, doesn't call his economic agenda Share The Wealth, but that's probably more for political reasons than ideological. He's already a self-described Democratic Socialist and one of just a few in Congress today and doesn't want to be confused with Socialists who are even to the Left of him. But ideologically Bernie's vision of democratic socialism is very similar to Huey's when it comes to money and wealth. They would both essentially outlaw wealth in this country and use that money for their social welfare agenda.

Huey Long in the 1930s, was talking about old age pensions and what we call today a national basic income where every American would be given a financial allowance in this country to make sure that they don't have to live in poverty. Bernie Sanders, believes that every single American has a right to go to college and get health insurance and health care provide to them from the government. And that the wealthy should be forced to pay for all of these services for everyone else. What Huey and Bernie have in common politically, is that they're both anti-wealth and economic independence. And see it as the role of the U.S. Government to guarantee every single America and basically national income and quality living in this country.

Vanity Fair: Alison Klayman- 'How Steve Bannon Manipulates His Followers'

Source:Vanity Fair- "How Steve Bannon manipulates his followers"

Source:The New Democrat

"Director Alison Klayman spent 13 months documenting former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon for her documentary The Brink. Alison explains the ways he manipulates his followers by spreading conspiracies and sowing doubt in the media. Watch The Brink, out in theaters March 29th."

 From Vanity Fair

 I think Steve Bannon might say himself that he's not a Conservative, but a Nationalist. It's not conservative values that Bannon represents at least in the sense that he believes in the U.S. Constitution and everything that it represents and even conservative values in a cultural sense, but it's his nationalist, tribalist, and cultural values that he represents which trump's everything ( no pun intended ) including character, morality and his personal values. Steve Bannon is about himself and his tribe versus everyone and everything else and as long as you're on his team and part of his political and cultural tribe, everything else be dammed just as long as you play ball with him and his allies.

 Alison Klayman, in her piece mentioned Judge Roy Moore who was an Alabama judge who ran for U.S. Senate from Alabama in 2017 in that special election and lost essentially because of his lack of character and his immorality and the credible sexual harassment allegations that were made against him. And said that Steve Bannon is not a stupid man ( as if anyone thinks that he is ) and she suggested that he probably believed the allegations that were made against Judge Moore, but stuck with Moore because Moore was part of his team and the broader Trump movement in America. Donald Trump's presidential campaign from 2015-16 is another great example of that. President Trump's base has stuck with the President even with everything that he's done and said that no other Republican President and mainstream Republican in Congress would every consider doing and saying, because Donald Trump is part of their team.

When you become so partisan and even so hyper-partisan and angry in politics where the other party is not longer your opponents, but your enemies to the point that you don't even see them as Americans, but traitors and invaders, everything is about winning and protecting your side. And you put no limits onto what you'll do to win and protect your team, because you're so fearful of the other team winning, coming in, and taking your power away from you. Which is what Steve Bannon and these other hyper-partisan hard-core Nationalists on the Far-Right in America represent. The great Green Bay Packers head coach Vince Lombardi had the great quote: "winning isn't everything, but it's the only thing" the New-Right have taken that line way out of context and put it over everything else in society like morality, character, and honesty.

David Niewart: Glenn Beck's: 'Leftist Fascism Hour: The Newspeak Version of History'

Source:David Niewart- Glenn Beck's Fox News show. 

Source:The New Democrat

"Glenn Beck's Leftist Fascism Hour': The Newspeak version of history"

Source:Thread Reader- Jonah Goldberg, on Glenn Beck's Fox News show 

From David Neiwart

What Jonah Goldberg and I guess Glenn Beck call Liberal Fascism ( which is at least a borderline Oxymoron ) and what I change to Leftist Fascism, are far-leftists both in America and around the world.

Socialists and in some cases even democratic, as well as Communists who believe they know what's best for everyone and anyone who disagrees with them are not worthy of even being heard. You oppose their government or their way of thinking, you must be either corrupt or a bigot or both. According to their lack of thinking and logic.

You go to America and we now have a young generation of Americans who not only believe that free speech is dangerous, but question freedom and whether we should even have freedom. Who question whether people should be allowed to create their own personal wealth, but also make their own personal decisions.

We now have a generation of Millennials who look up to people like Che Guevara and Fidel Castro revolutionary Communists from Cuba and South America and look down at people like John Kennedy and Thomas Jefferson, men who believed in individualism and individual rights, even property rights as well as free speech and personal freedom.

The reason why I said Liberal Fascism is a borderline Oxymoron, because liberalism is based off of liberal democracy.

According to Wikipedia

"Liberal democracy is a liberal political ideology and a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of classical liberalism. Also called western democracy, it is characterised by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either formally written or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world."

My personal politics is liberal democratic, not meaning I'm a Liberal and a Democrat both ideologically and my political party, but as someone who believes in liberal democracy as a Liberal.

We now have a young generation of Millennial's an and older generation of Americans people who are late Baby Boomers and even older who question liberal democracy and see it as threats to their way of life . That if you allow all Americans regardless of race, ethnicity, culture, politics, etc the same individual freedom as what they would call the real Americans and the true American Patriots, that weakens their America and their way of life and that can't be tolerated according to the nationalistic tribalist's on the Right.

And on the other fringe you have a young generation who not only question liberal democracy, but seem to believe that socialism and communism, are legitimate alternatives to liberal democracy.

So to label both Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini as not only as Liberals but as Fascists, well you would be half right. Socialists and Fascists for sure, but Liberal of course not. You can't be both illiberal and liberal, it's one or the other. It would be like someone who calls them self both a Socialist and a Conservative. The two political movements go against each other like cars driving on the opposite side of the street.

Other than maybe Joe Stalin, it's hard to find another person who has ever lived anywhere in the world who is more illiberal ( not liberal ) than Adolf Hitler who sought out to murder people simply because of their ethnicity and that they weren't ethnic Germans, Nazi Germany attempted to murder every single European Jew.

I want to correct Glenn Beck and his Fox News Tea Party panel about one other thing: the word Progressive, is used as a substitute for not just Liberal, but every other political faction on the Left and even Right, when the fact is Progressive is a real political term and has real meaning.

You can be Progressive and Liberal just like someone can be tall and strong or tall and fat, but tall is not another word for strong or fat, they're different physical conditions and attributes.

Progressive, is different from both Liberal and Socialist. You can be a Liberal who believes in progress through government action which is what a Progressive is which is someone who believes in progress through government action. Someone like a Theodore Roosevelt. But you can be a Conservative who believes in progress through government action and be a Right-Progressive, someone like Nelson Rockefeller.

I respect Glenn Beck sometimes. I had more respect for him about a year ago when he was one of the strongest never-trumpers around, but then when I guess he saw that was hurting his bottomline his criticism of President Donald Trump and his Nationalist movement is now far away and infrequent. But he and his Tea Party crew are just dead wrong about Liberals and liberalism.

You can't be a Liberal and also believe that people should be murdered simply because of their race and ethnicity. And you can't be a Liberal if you believe that people who disagree with you don't have a right to be heard. Those aren't liberal values, but illiberal values whether they come from the Right or the Left.

David Stockman: ‘Today’s Pathetic GOP: Talks Like Barry Goldwater, Spends Like LBJ’

Source:The New Democrat- Mr. Conservative U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater (Republican, Arizona)

Source:The New Democrat

“Here is the portrait of a dysfunctional party: On Tuesday, the House Republicans unveiled a budget that set a goal of spending cuts totaling $6,454 billion. On Wednesday, Senate Republicans defeated legislation to cut spending by $1 billion. On Thursday, House Republicans voted to renew $20 billion per year in farm subsidies.

The 2018 GOP talks like Barry Goldwater and spends like Lyndon Johnson.”

"Former Budget Director under President Reagan David Stockman plays the word association game on "Bloomberg ‹GO›." 

From David Stockman

Source:Bloomberg News- David Stockman was President Ronald W. Reagan's Budget Director in the early 1980s.

From Bloomberg News 

"Reaganomics (/reɪɡəˈnɒmɪks/; a portmanteau of Reagan and economics attributed to Paul Harvey),[1] or Reaganism, were the neoliberal[2][3][4] economic policies promoted by U.S. President Ronald Reagan during the 1980s. These policies are characterized as supply-side economics, trickle-down economics, or "voodoo economics" by opponents,[5] while Reagan and his advocates preferred to call it free-market economics.

The pillars of Reagan's economic policy included increasing defense spending, balancing the federal budget and slowing the growth of government spending, reducing the federal income tax and capital gains tax, reducing government regulation, and tightening the money supply in order to reduce inflation.[6]

The results of Reaganomics are still debated. Supporters point to the end of stagflation, stronger GDP growth, and an entrepreneurial revolution in the decades that followed.[7][8] Critics point to the widening income gap, what they described as an atmosphere of greed, reduced economic mobility, and the national debt tripling in eight years which ultimately reversed the post-World War II trend of a shrinking national debt as percentage of GDP."

Source:Wikipedia- Ronald W. Reagan (Republican, California) 40th President of the United States.

From Wikipedia 

David Stockman as he told Bloomberg News, which is linked on this post, said Reaganomics in 1981 was, cutting taxes across the board deeply, while at the same decreasing government spending overall, while increasing the defense budget to win the Cold War against Russia, and deregulating American industry across the board. 

But the reason why Stockman told Bloomberg News that Reaganomics would've worked, if tried, because all the Reagan Administration did in the 1980s was cut taxes deeply across the board and increase defense spending. But the U.S. Government, as well as deficits and the national debt, ballooned under President Reagan in the 1980s. They inherited a 40 billion dollar deficit from President Jimmy Carter in 1981 and gave incoming President George H.W. Bush a 200 billion dollar deficit, when the Reagan's left office in 1989. 

It wasn't just defense spending that ballooned during the Reagan Administration. The Department of Justice to deal with the Reagan expansion of the War On Drugs in the 1980s, rising crime rates, as well as immigration. 

The overall Federal budget ballooned during the Reagan years and so did the deficit and debt. So much for fiscal conservatism, even if you want to Ronald Reagan an economic Conservative, which he was.

Glenn Beck: 'Here's Why ANTIFA is Anti-Trump, Anti-Right, and Anti-Liberal?'

Source:Glenn Beck- And Communist ANTIFA. 

Source:The New Democrat 

"Antifa" or "anti-fascist" groups first appeared on the scene in post-World War I Europe to battle growing fascist regimes, primarily in Germany, Italy, and Spain. When fascism dwindled after World War II, antifa followed suit, but reemerged in the ’70s and ’80s to rally against the era’s "neo-Nazi" movement. Since that time, anti-fascist activity has intermittently waxed and waned — that is, until President Donald Trump took office. These days, Antifa has expanded their definition of "fascism" to include just about anything they consider to be oppressive, as in "the system," the law (i.e. the police,) the "right," and perhaps most of all: Donald J. Trump.

So how did the so-called anti-fascists, an organization that originally opposed genocidal dictators like Hitler, Mussolini and Franco, decide to target Donald J. Trump?" 

From Glenn Beck 

"Glen Beck - 11/13/2017 Glen Beck Daily Show - Antifa"  

Source:Glenn Beck- talking about pro-Communist ANTIFA.

From Glenn Beck

The key term from Glenn Beck's speech is here is that ANTIFA are anti-liberal. Which is what illiberal means and a lot of the people in so-called mainstream media haven't even heard of the word illiberal, let alone knows what it means. 

An illiberal is someone who opposes liberal values,  especially liberal democratic values. Things like free speech, free assembly, free press, right to privacy, property rights, self-defense (To use as examples) Individualism really in all forms. That everything should be equal and the same for everybody even if people are different and even more productive. (According to illiberal's) And that this so-called equality should be forced on everyone even through force and the government.

ANTIFA calls themselves anti-fascists because they oppose racism and bigotry towards minorities. And yet they use fascist tactics like violence in an attempt to eliminate right-wing fascism and bigotry. Which is hypocritical to put it mildly. It would be like an obese person who goes out-of-their-way to prevent their kids from eating junk food and drinking soft drinks. Because this person says those things aren't good for you which is why you shouldn't eat and drink those products. Someone who is actually and anti-fascist, is actually an anti-fascist. Just like someone who is a Progressive, is actually a Progressive.

You can't say you're an anti-fascist on one hand, while you support fascism on the other hand. Even if you support some fascism because you believe the polices behind it. If you're going to call yourself an anti-fascist, then you better oppose all fascism otherwise you'll loose credibility with anyone who doesn't already support you. Which is what this so-called ANTIFA movement is all about. They're not anti-fascists, but instead oppose right-wing fascism. So at best they're anti-right-wing fascists.

ANTIFA are not even progressive, because they have regressive tendencies and want to go backwards and say people who don't agree with them don't have the same free speech rights as the so-called ANTIFA activists. They're illiberal people on the Far-Right like with the Christian-Theocrats and Christian-Nationalists, and Neo-Nazis, who back Donald Trump. The so-called ANTIFA movement represents fascists illiberal's on the Far-Left. 

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.

CBS News: Longines Chronoscope- U.S. Senator Richard Russell (1952)

Source:CBS News Bradford Hewitt & Paul Martin.

Source:The New Democrat

"LONGINES CHRONOSCOPE WITH RICHARD B. RUSSELL - National Archives and Records Administration   - ARC Identifier 95749 / Local Identifier LW-LW-80 - Interview with Richard Russell. DVD copied by IASL Master Scanner Katie Filbert." 

From Public Resource

Senator Richard Russell, was one of the leading Dixiecrats in Congress for almost forty-years. He was the Chairman of Southern Caucus in Congress and led the opposition to every civil rights bill in Congress in the 1950s and 1960s. To be honest with you, as a Liberal Democrat, I’m glad he would a Republican today and that he is a big reason why Senate cloture rule was changed in 1975. So that instead of needing 67 votes to end debate, now the Senate needed 60. Because Senator Russell, was in Congress at the height of the civil rights battles in the 1950s and 60s. And those laws could have been passed faster without Russell and the Dixiecrats in Congress.

What is a Dixiecrat? They’re almost gone and out of the Democratic Party now if not gone all together. But today Dixiecrats are Southern right-wing Republicans. Both conservative libertarian, like with Representative Walter Jones from North Carolina and a whole host of so-called Religious-Conservatives in Congress, in the House and Senate. Senator Jeff Sessions, from Alabama, would be an example of a Religious-Conservative Republican in Congress. But from the end of the American Civil War, if not farther back, Dixiecrats were right-wing Democrats. Who believed in states rights and were strong Federalists, as am I. But they believed federalism gave the states the right to deny their residents access based on race. I do not.

In 1952, when this interview was done, the civil rights movement was really just under way. Even though it had already won a big battle in the 1940s with President Harry Truman desegregating the U.S. Armed Forces. Senator Russell, ran for president in 1952 and was a Dixiecrat. And a true Federalist and part of his federalism was that the states could handle their own domestic issues entirely. And even force their residents to be separated by race and allow for business owners to deny people access to their business based on race. And force African-Americans to sit in the back of the bus and go to rotten schools and you can go down the line. So the Dick Russell you see in 1952, is the same Dick Russell that fought against the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act. And other civil rights laws and help for poor people of all races from the Federal Government.

Paul J. Watson: 'Absolute Proof Liberalism is a Mental Disorder'

Source:Paul J. Watson- playing an escaped mental patient who was kidnapped by right-wing Nationalists and forced to lie about liberalism. Actually, I don't even know if he's lying here. I mean if he's an escaped mental patient, he might simply not know what he's talking about, because he's not only an escaped mental patient, but he escaped reality as well.

Source:The New Democrat 

“If you want a glimpse of what happens to countries when they embrace the mental disorder of extreme liberalism, look no further than Sweden." 

From Paul J. Watson, who could be the Minister of Miss-Information for Info Wars.

Keep in mind, Paul J. Watson is a spokesman for Info Wars, which is the right-wing populist version of The Onion, except they report fewer facts than The Onion and don’t sell themselves as satirists, but truth tellers. And if you can keep that in mind, then you should find a lot of what Alex Jones and PJ Watson very entertaining and even humorous, even if they’re not trying to make you laugh intentionally.

Actually, Info Wars or Prison Planet Live, the group I guess that Paul Joseph Watson works for, Alex Jones’s clan, is another way of saying The Onion. The difference being, that The Onion has a better record as far as reporting things that are actually true.

Actually, Fox News reports more real news than Prison Planet Live and Info Wars combined. And if it wasn’t America’s liberal First Amendment, which is our Freedom of Speech for all you out there who don’t know what the First Amendment is, (God help you) PPL and Info Wars wouldn’t be allowed on the air.

Richard Remembers Joe Pyne: Joe Pyne Interviews Governor Lester Maddox (1968)

Source:Richard Remember Joe Pyne- Governor Lester Maddox (Democrat, Georgia) talking to Joe Pyne in 1968.

Source:The New Democrat 

"GOVERNOR LESTER MADDOX, Governor of Georgia, argues with Joe Pyne about the current state of the nation and his role; after about 25 minutes of acrimonious dialogue, Governor Maddox stalks off the set and refuses to return." is the description on the film can, courtesy of Hartwest Productions, Inc.  Filmed/broadcast date circa November 1968. Joe Pyne."  

From Richard Remembers Joe Pyne

Joe Pyne to the left of Lester Maddux in this interview. Which just goes to show you that there's a certain point for smart right-wingers as far as how they'll go even when it comes to how we treat criminals and convicted inmates when they say: "Enough is enough, these people are people to and deserve to be treated like human beings. Criminals and inmates sure, but that doesn't mean treating people even inmates like animals, but people in prison that deserve the respect of being treated like a human being".

Guy John: Governor Lester Maddox Says It's Not About Race

Source:The Daily Beast- Governor Lester Maddox (Democrat, Georgia)

"Gov. Lester Maddox explains that he does not serve those who feel he must serve them, whether white, black, red-headed, or bald."

Source:Guy John 

H.L. Mencken: "When someone says it's not about the money, it's about the money." When Governor Lester Maddox said it's not about race, referring to why he wouldn't let African-Americans have access to Caucasian own businesses in Georgia, of course it was about race. He saw African-Americans as second-class citizens in America, pure and simple.

Lester Maddux who unless I'm mistaken was Governor of Georgia at one point, but him saying that denying African-Americans service to his business "is not about race", reminds me of the famous bank robber Willy Sutton saying that robbing banks "is not about the money". Who are they trying to fool? 

Of course the racial discrimination that came about in the form of denying African-Americans service was about race. And it was also about skin-color as well. The Anglo-Saxon South lost the ability to treat Africans as property thanks to them losing the Civil War in the 1860s. Their response was that "if we can't treat them like property, we'll do the next best things. Separating the Africans from the Caucasians. And denying them the same quality of service that we give ourselves and for the ability for African-Americans to achieve any type of education in life that will allow for them to be successful in America". 

The Neo-Confederate South lost all of the civil rights battles and losing the ability to deny service to African-Americans, I guess was Lester Maddux's last straw.

Steven Lahoe: Megyn Kelly Interviews Bill Ayers - A Leader of the Weather Underground

Source:The New Democrat

Bill Ayers was part of the antiwar movement in the mid and late 1960s protesting the Vietnam War and perhaps other United States national security policies. Which was also part of what became the New Left in the late 1960s that was a socialist anarchist movement. That believed the center-left in America wasn't moving fast enough the Democratic Party especially to address inequality, racial injustices, poverty the Military Industrial Complex. And this movement wanted to takeover the Democratic Party and move the country in a much different direction even through using violence.

Politico: Dylan Byers: No Mas Sarah Palin

Source:The New Democrat

Take Sarah Palin completely out of the American political scene and you would see riots from hundreds of thousands of political comedians and satirists. Because she pays their bills and is always supplying people information to write about her to show the rest of the world how dumb Americans can truly be. She wants to talk about all sorts of abuses by President Obama and why now he needs to be impeached. Yet she couldn't name any on her own and would need an earpiece in her ear giving things to say about the President during an interview.

Crisis on the Mexican-American border? She's an expert on that because she can see Mexico from her backyard? Oh wait my bad she's an expert on foreign policy because she can see Russia from her backyard. Yeah I know that line is six years old now and just one example why John McCain isn't President right now. But again she is the gift that keeps on giving for comedians and satirists and why the older ones never seem to retire.

Besides this is about immigration policy not foreign policy and what makes Sarah Palin and expert on immigration policy three-thousand miles or so from the American-Mexican border. I know she knows about Russians immigrating to Alaska from Siberia, Russia. Or Canadians immigrating illegally to Alaska from British Columbia, Canada. Because she can see them from her backyard because she can see both Russia and Canada from there.

The fastest ticket to a united Democratic Congress next year both the Senate and House is for House Republicans to go off on an impeachment rant following Sarah Palin's lead. The next fastest ticket to a united Democratic Congress next year is for House Republicans to focus on what they call 'illegal Mexicans' on the Southern border invading America. Because either one of them would get Democrats and Independents behind President Obama similar to impeachment 1998 with President Clinton. So as a Democrat I hope they do this, but as an American I hope they would just shut up, or grow up whatever comes first.

Piers Morgan Tonight: Abby Martin Standing Up Against Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Source:The New Democrat

Someone is finally stepping up to the fascist neoconservative Putin in and saying he is wrong to invade Ukraine. As far as Abby Martin taking on corporate media, guess what Russia Today is.  It is owned by the Russian Government, which could at any time pull people for disagreeing with them or, in Russia, arrest them for disagreeing with them.  Very little independent media in the Russian Federation!

Secular Talk: The O'Reilly Factor: Representative Michelle Bachmann's Stupidity Baffles Bill O'Reilly

Source:The New Democrat

Forget about what the guy with the big mouth doing the commentary in the video. The O’Reilly-Bachmann exchange represents exactly what is wrong with the Republican Party right now. And Bill gave Representative Michelle Bachmann all the opportunity possible in about four minutes. When the asshole wasn’t speaking to make it clear that the GOP is the NMP right now the No Message Party. Because they do not have a unifying message because they are the opposition party. Without a clear frontrunner for 2016 so they got these tribes who really just speak for themselves instead.

I almost fell asleep listening to Cathy McMorris-Rodgers response to President Obama at the State of the Union a couple of weeks ago. And keep in mind I’m an insomniac and I don’t fall asleep very often. But at least there was some point to her message. Someone coming from middle class small town roots to the big time as member of the Republican Leadership in the House of Representatives. But with Michelle it is two minutes of what that she’s pro-American, apple pie and motherhood and so-forth.

Michelle Bachmann represents exactly why IQ tests should be required for anyone in Congress to serve on the House or Senate Intelligence committees. And thank God she only serves on one of them. Because give her one topic and you get competing messages on the same topic. As well as her volunteering other topics to talk about in a span of two minutes. And I wish this Congress could only end tomorrow so she is no longer in the House which she is retiring from at the end of this Congress.

The Film Archives: U.S. Representative Bob Dornan: 'Gets His Words in a One-Minute Speech Stricken Down in 1995'

Source:The Film Archives- U.S. Representative Bob Dornan (Republican, California) they didn't call Bob Dornan B-One Bob for nothing: he was a right-wing bomb thrower.

"Robert Kenneth "Bob" Dornan (born April 3, 1933) is a Republican and former member of the United States House of Representatives from California and a vocal advocate of pro-life and social conservative causes.

A boisterous former actor and television talk show host, Dornan had a flair for the dramatic that drew him supporters and detractors well beyond his congressional districts. Though never a major power in Washington, he became one of the most well-known members of the House of Representatives and has been described as "one of the leading firebrands among American politicians."

In 1995, he received a minor reprimand from the House for stating in a floor speech that President Bill Clinton had "given aid and comfort to the enemy" during the Vietnam War. In 1996, Dornan ran for President of the United States, using his campaign primarily as a vehicle to continue to criticize Clinton. In a GOP debate in Iowa on January 13, Dornan called Clinton a "criminal" and a "pathological liar." When asked why voters should choose Dornan over his Republican rivals to challenge Clinton in the general election, he argued that he had more children and grandchildren than the others, with only Richard Lugar coming anywhere near him on that score... 

From The Film Archives

Representative Bob Dornan wasn’t called ‘B One Bob’ for nothing" he had a tendency to say nutty things and throw a lot of partisan bombs out there without a lot of thought. 

Another way to describe Bob Dornan would The Blind Bomber, or Kamikaze Bomber,  because again he had a tendency to say things blindly without much though put into his comments at least as far as the consequences for saying some of the things that he did. 

B-One Bob also had an overly partisan nature and the district that he represented in California, this overly partisan approach cost him his House seat in 1996 to Loretta Sanchez. Whose still in the House today and has been there since 1997. 

Bob Dornan’s approach is very well-suited to talk radio and perhaps cable talk TV, not well-suited for Congress, even in the House of Representatives, where there are rules in place for how members address each other and how they address the President of the United States.

Black Blog: 'Robert Byrd- Former Terrorist'

Source:Black Blog- A younger Robert Byrd? 

Source:The Daily Times 

"Video about Robert Byrd and his ties to the terrorist organization the Ku Klux Klan." 

From Black Blog

The Ku Klux Klan, of course is a terrorist organization, that Robert Byrd was a member of this organization while he was still Congress up until I believe the 1970s when he became a Leader of the Senate Democrats. First serving as Assistant Leader in the mid 1970s and then became Leader of the Senate in 1977. And served as Democratic Leader until 1989.

But to be a member of a terrorist organization and actually be directly involved in terrorist operations, are two different things. And there hasn’t been any evidence reported that Bob Byrd was directly involved in KKK terrorist activities. As a member of that organization. 

What we know, is that Byrd was dues paying member of the KKK even while in Congress in the 1950s and 1960s and went to Klan meetings. But that is different from being involved in terrorist activities. Like blowing up African-American churches and murdering African-Americans simply because of their race.

Bob Byrd, was against the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. And just didn’t vote against the civil rights laws that Congress passed in the 1950s and 60s, but was one of the leading filibusters in the Senate. Along with Senator Strom Thurmond, Jim Eastland, Dick Russell and several other Southern Democrats or Dixiecrats in Congress. 

Senator Byrd's opposition to the civil rights movement are very big stains on otherwise a very good Congressional career that Senator Byrd put together both in the House and Senate. But that is different from actually being a terrorist.

Townhall: Jonah Golberg- 'CPAC Unwise To Snub Chris Christie, Gays'

Source:The Week- Governor Chris Christie (Republican, New Jersey) too big to fit into CPAC. Or maybe there's another reason why he wasn't invited.

"What can you do with a man like Chris Christie?

The answer, according to many with the conservative movement: Throw him overboard. And while we're at it, let's toss the gays over the side too.

The popular governor of New Jersey has certainly angered many conservatives, including this humble scribe. During the crucial final days of the presidential election, Christie didn't merely embrace President Obama, he all but endorsed him." 

From Townhall 

"Seemingly everybody to the right of Jon Huntsman has been invited to speak at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference — including formerly moderate Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R). There's one name, though, that's conspicuously absent on the list of invitees: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R). CPAC spokeswoman Laura Rigas says that, officially, the conference "schedule is still being finalized, with several more announcements pending over the next three weeks." But multiple news organizations are reporting that Christie won't make the list." 

From The Week

Its not often that I agree with Jonah Goldberg (to state the obvious) he's a Conservative and I'm a Liberal. But you would think that an organization that calls itself the Conservative Political Action Conference, would want one of the most popular governors in America (who also happens to be a Republican) at their annual meeting. 

Governor Chris Christie (if he doesn't eat himself to death) is also a solid possible Republican presidential candidate in 2016. He's big state governor, in a deeply blue state. If he can win statewide in New Jersey and perhaps win there again in 2013, maybe he can do it again in 2016. Just throwing some thoughts out there. 

You would also think that an organization that proud's itself on being big believers in individual freedom and free choice (like CPAC) wouldn't kick people out of their organization for simply being gay. But we're talking about the modern Republican Party that still believe its 1955 and that gays and homosexuality doesn't exist anymore or is perhaps still locked in the closet. 

I'm a big believer in truth, honesty and reason, and because of those values I believe that for political labels to mean anything in America, people who self-describe to those labels should actually have to own the philosophy of those labels before I take them seriously about their self-description. 

For CPAC to call themselves Conservatives (even though neither Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan could win the Republican Party presidential nomination today) they actually have to be Conservatives. And kicking people out of your organization for simply being gay, even though gay Republicans are about as conservative as Republicans get fiscally, economically, and constitutionally, seems to me to be as anti-conservative that an organization can get. 

When the Republican Party whether it's CPAC or some other so-called conservative group tells minorities, Muslims, gays, women, and immigrants, that they're not welcome at their dance, simply because of who they are physically or who they're attracted too physically and not because of what their political national values are, they're no longer conserving as a political organization, but contracting. 

So maybe CPAC should stand for the Contracted Political Action Committee, or even the Confederate Political Action Committee, since they don't seem to like two of the greatest American values that we have which is pluralism and diversity. 

Info Wars: Larry Elder- 'Democrats: The True Racists'

Source:Info Wars- right-wing radio talk show host Larry Elder, calling Democrats the true racists.

"Democrats, The True Racists - HD" Originally from Info Wars, but I guess this video was deleted when YouTube deleted Alex Jones's and company YouTube channels. 

Larry Elder was apparently referring to the Southern Democrats (the Dixiecrats) who were Neo-Confederates (right-wing Southern Nationalists) the whole time that they were in the Democratic Party, up until the point that they left the Democratic Party in the 1970s and 1980s, in opposition of the Democratic Party now being in favor of civil and constitutional right for all Americans. Not just for Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, rural men, who've been in country ever since their ancestors left Britain in the 1600s or so. 

What the Larry Elder''s of the world never mention (probably intentionally) is that the Dixiecrats of the 1950s and 60s, who overwhelmingly opposed the civil rights legislation of that era, are Far-Right Republicans today. 

Strom Thurmond and many others who were Far-Right Democrats in the 1960s and 60s, late became Far-Right Republicans. Senator Thurmond (for example) left the Democratic Party in 1964, over his opposition to the civil rights legislation of that decade, for the Republican Party and died as a Republican in 2002. And there are many other examples like that. 

Lou Dobbs: 'The Dobbs Forum on Immigration Reform'

Source:Lou Dobbs- forum on immigration.

"Not only did President Obama demand quick implementation of immigration reform rather than thoughtful, practical, and thorough policy changes, but his claims of a more secure border do not align with the facts."

From Lou Dobbs

This photo is also from Lou Dobbs program about President Obama’s 2nd term. But the video that this photo is from, is not currently available online right now.

Source:Lou Dobbs- FBN talk show host & pundit, Lou Dobbs.

Funny photo and funny caption. The problem is that Lou Dobbs is a right-wing, populist, nationalist, mouthpiece right now. Sort of the Pat Buchanan with his own TV show and that’s now what CNN is currently interested in.

Source:The Daily Times- more like Lou Dobbs getting kicked out at CNN.

And as far as the bogus (to put it nicely) amnesty figure that the Far-Right likes to throw out there: amnesty would be if we granted all 10-15M illegal immigrants in this country American citizenship or legal residency, just for being in the country. Which no one serious in this debate is suggesting should be offered.

Under comprehensive immigration reform, the illegal immigrants would have to pay a fine for living in the country illegally, based on how long they've lived in this country, illegally. And have to pay back taxes for any back taxes they may owe at the Federal, state and local levels. And would be probational residents in this country for at least ten years and have to meet certain standards. Just to stay and live in the country, like holding a job, paying their taxes, not committing felonies, etc. And payoff the fine that they owe. 

So unless you don't understand the word amnesty or are simply using it to score political points, you can't seriously call this plan amnesty in a credible way. Because you're calling it something that it isn't either through ignorance or being dishonest. And trying to make the case that these illegal immigrants shouldn't be in the country anyway. Whether they came to the country legally or not. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

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

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