PBS NewsHour: Shields & Brooks On Pipeline Politics & Chris Christie Scandal

Source:The New Democrat

The Keystone Pipeline is something that President Obama almost has to do for the economy. And I believe he and Secretary of State John Kerry who are going to have to sign off on this. Because of the jobs in the energy sector that will come to the United States. And also the biggest thing that President Obama can do for the economy to create good jobs by himself. So if he’s getting environmental reports that say there isn’t much of an environmental impact to this, he almost has to sign off on it. For the jobs and economic growth that is needed in this country.

As far as Governor Chris Christie, wow those Dick Nixon comparisons from a few weeks ago might have looked extreme then, but are now looking real and credible. About someone who probably knows more about a bad story than he wants to admit to, but if he gives too much out right away it could hurt him politically. But the problem being for him that he can’t control the story. Which is what happened to President Nixon in 1973-74 with the Watergate scandal.

State of the Union, I would give President Obama a B perhaps even a B+, but certainly not a great speech. It was strong in the areas that he wants to move the country forward especially economically. And that he’ll do whatever in his power to make that happen. But I don’t believe there was anything in it that will bring people who weren’t already behind him to him. “And say we need to get Congress especially the Republican House of Representatives to work with President Obama.”

Chicago Tonight- John Callaway Interviewing Senator George McGovern (1978)

Source: WTTV-TV- John Calloway, interviewing Senator George McGovern in 1978. 

Source:The New Democrat 

If George McGovern was a loser, than America needs a lot more losers just like him. When it comes to knowledge, experience and judgement, because he is one of the finest people America has ever produced. And we are lucky to have a man like him. Because here’s a distinguished teacher, historian, U.S. Representative, U.S. Senator and again historian, as well as U.N. Ambassador for Food and Agriculture. Who was always about two things. Public service and public progress.

When it comes to Senator McGovern’s politics. We probably do not agree on much at least as it related to economic policy. He was a real Henry Wallace Social-Democrat and the real thing unlike some of these so-called Progressives today. That I’ll talk more about later, but he and I are probably pretty close as it relates to things like civil liberties and personal freedom. So on those issues Senator McGovern was probably to the Left of President Franklin Roosevelt.

Another thing I would say about Senator McGovern was that he was a real Henry Wallace Fair Deal Social-Democrat, as it related to economic policy, foreign policy and national security. Who wasn’t anti-military, or anti-law enforcement. Unlike a lot of his supporters who helped cost him the 1972 presidential election. But he was someone who had a real respect for limited smart power. And not just as it related to economic policy, unlike a lot of the so-called Progressives today. Who sound more like Socialists and even Anarchists at times.
Source:WTTW-TV

The National: Liberal Party Leader Justin Trudeau on Senate Reform

Source:The New Democrat

Perfect example of how the Canadian Senate is different from the American Senate. In America the Chairman of the National Party Democratic or Republican Party can’t order their party members to do anything. And neither can the President of the United States and even if we had an official leader of the opposition, which we don’t and I wish we did, that person wouldn’t be able to order their members of the Senate or House of Representatives to do anything. Especially kicking members out of their caucus. Because we have checks and balances and different branches of government.

In the Federal Government of Canada the official party leaders basically have complete control over their own parties. And can even make decisions about who can stay and who can go even in political bodies they aren’t members of. The Leader of the Opposition in Canada is a member House of Commons and not the Senate. In the United States Congress only the party leaders in both chambers can decide who can and cannot be members of their caucus. And they probably need majority support of their caucus to do so.

I’m not a Canadian, but an American of course and it seems to me Canada should make a decision about their Senate. Which right now is technically their upper chamber in their Parliament. And that is to either have a real Senate with real authority only accountable to their constituents and not the Prime Minster or Leader of the Opposition, or get rid of the Senate. And have a unicameral Parliament or just call it the House of Commons. Because their Senate is a joke. And this story with Leader Trudeau is a pretty good example of that.

Paul Ibbetson: Larry Schweikart: 'A Patriot's History of The Modern World'

Source:Paul Ibbetson- Kansas right-wing radio talk show host Paul Ibbetson.

Source:The New Democrat

"This is an Interview with New York Times bestselling author Larry Schweikart talking about his new book,  "A Patriot's History of the Modern World Part 1."

From Paul Ibbetson

I love the United States Constitution. The whole document and not parts of it like the Far-Right and Far-Left like to pick off and say this what is great about the Constitution as they try to destroy other parts of it. I like the whole document and every amendment to it including the First Amendment that includes Freedom of Religion and I’m in favor of that even as an Agnostic whose in a small minority when it comes to religion.

But our constitutional rights do not come from God whether it its a Christian God or anyone else. Our constitutional rights come from the U.S. Constitution itself. Our constitutional rights come from our Founding Fathers who founded our Federal Republic and liberal democracy. Who wrote our U.S. Constitution. Not from God, Christian or otherwise. 

I get the fact that if the Tea Party and the broader populist-fundamentalist-right, was in charge back in the late 1700s or if the Unites States of America was being created today, along with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, America would look a helluva lot different. Maybe it would based on their fundamentalist, Anglo-Saxon-Protestant views. But America is obviously a lot more diverse than that. Not just politically, but ethnically, racially, religiously, culturally, and it's for all of us, not just the first Europeans to America.

The McLaughlin Group: The State of The Union, Economic Mobility, Syria, Liberal vs Progressive

Source:The McLaughlin Group- John McLaughlin-

Source:The New Democrat 

As far as the State of the Union. If I’m President Obama or he could hear my advice for him, I would say use this speech to kickoff the 2014 Campaign to Save Congressional Democrats. Keeping the Senate majority and keeping the House Democratic Caucus at about where it is right now.

“And this is how we are going to do that by making 2014 all about the economy and the liberal democratic vision to move the country forward economically.” If he’s successful in doing that, he could take sixty percent of the country with him who tend to like Democrats more on these issues than Republicans.

Economic mobility is about making 2014 about the economy. Again the liberal democratic vision.

1. Extend Unemployment Insurance so people struggling so hard just to go back to work at least have some income while they are doing that. And what we are also going to do is expand job training for these unemployed workers, but also for low-income low-skilled workers. So they can get the skills they need to either go back to work at a good job, or get an even better job from what low-income low-skilled workers are doing right now.

2. Create going to create a ten-dollar an hour minimum wage to make work pay more than not working. And so these workers can purchase more which will help drive consumer spending and economic growth.

3. Going to create a National Infrastructure System and actually add to that. With a national public/private corporation or National Infrastructure Bank with the simple task of prioritizing infrastructure projects that either have to be rebuilt or built. That would reward contracts to private construction companies to do the work and bring in private investors to pay for the projects.

What President Obama could say to Congress that is the Republican House that isn’t really interested in doing anything that may need Democratic support to pass. And a Democratic Senate that has a Republican minority that is only interested in winning back the Senate. “I’m offering my hand and if you want to be my partner in helping to put Americans back to work and jumpstart the economy. You can either work with me on this, or I’m going to do as much as this by myself as I can. In case you try to stonewall me with the Republican House not doing anything. Or Senate Republicans trying to block anything that the Senate Leader Harry Reid brings to the floor to address these issues.”

As far as Syria the United States lost whatever opportunity it had a year ago or two years ago to knock out the Assad Regime. And at least give the Syrian Opposition a fighting chance to not only defend themselves, but to try to do the job themselves. And now as a result we are at a point where we are trying to prevent the worst from happening with Bashar Al-Assad still as President of Syria. And both sides already know this.

Liberal vs. Progressive or even Social Democrat (as I prefer to call so-called modern Progressives) Is really about the two Democratic economic visions coming from the Left. Liberals want to empower Americans who need it to be able to create their own freedom for themselves. Which is why President Obama is going to focus so much on education, job training and infrastructure. Today’s so-called Progressives are essentially saying that, “the wealthy have too much and what we really need to do is take a lot of money from them so the Federal Government has enough money to take care of everyone else.”
Source:The McLaughlin Group

PBS NewsHour: Shields & Brooks On Bob McDonnell, Income Inequality & Hillary Clinton

Source:The New Democrat

The so-called income inequality issue or what I prefer to call it the education gap that leads to the income gap, has to do with professional skills or the lack of them. People at the top or even upper middle class tend to be well-educated and the people at the bottom not so much. I would love to see an official statistic about the percentage of minimum wage or low-wage workers who even have high school diplomas. And I bet it is much lower than people even making fifty-thousand dollars a year who are not collecting public assistance at all.

The Bob McDonnell story is funny in a way just because of how stupid Governor McDonnell was. Just to be involved in something like this. He was the governor of one of the biggest states in the union that both parties try to win during the presidential election. A successful governor who was on course to a promising national political career. One of maybe two Republicans who has both the respect of the Far-Right and the mainstream economically oriented Center-Right. And that is all gone for him even if he doesn’t end up in prison.

Hillary Clinton will get a challenge from at least one Center-Left Democrat in 2016. The party wants that and quite frankly she needs that to get her out of this, “I’m going to be the first female President of the United States and I’m the most electable Democrat. Therefore I don’t have to offer a national agenda for the country and have strong positions on any of the key issues mode.” Which is where she is right now and that won’t get her to the White House. If the GOP puts up a real challenger.

The Big Picture With Thom Hartmann: Louis Michael Seidman: Should We Give Up on The Constitution?

Source:Russia Today talking to author Louis Michael Seidman.

Source:The New Democrat 

Just from the outset, this is a pipe dream of the Far-Left who want to make the Federal Government a hell of a lot bigger so they can transform the country into a socialist collectivist society. Where they can decide what is good for us. Or what a majority can decide what is good for us like in a real majoritarian social democracy. Where big issues tend to be decided based on referendum. This will never happen because as a country we have never had so much faith in our government especially at the federal level. Where we would be willing to give them the keys to the national car. And say, “we now leave everything up to you without anything to stop you.”

I have some questions that are really targeting to let’s say 85-90 percent of the country who thinks this is a crazy idea.

1. Do we really want a country where free speech and assembly are not guaranteed?

2. Do we really want a country where we no longer have a constitutional right to defend ourselves?

3. Do we really want a country where our privacy and property rights aren’t guaranteed? Where government essentially owns everything and could come into our homes at will?

4. Do we really want a country without an Equal Protection Clause? Where we could be discriminated against based on race or ethnicity just to use as a couple of examples?

These are just some of the things that our United States Constitution guarantees us under law. The problem with our country is not our Constitution, but big government politicians on the Far-left and Far-Right who do not agree with it. So they do not enforce it. Which would be legal for them if you throw out the Constitution. And they would be able to write laws as they see fit. Without a Constitution to at least slow them down when they go too far, or just plain stop them.
Source:The Big Picture With Thom Hartmann