Real Time With Bill Maher: ‘New Rule, How The Left Was Lost’

Source:Real Time With Bill Maher– telling the Far-Left in America to grow up.

Source:The New Democrat 

“Bill slams this ridiculous new era of mind-numbing partisanship, where simply speaking truth to your own party can make you an instant hero to the other side.”

From Real Time With Bill Maher

Because of America’s crazy and outdated two-party system, you have two, large, political parties in America, that have two crazy factions in it. Which means you have a Democratic Party that believes in both liberal democracy, quality of opportunity, equal rights, and equal justice, as well as personal freedom is dangerous, capitalism is racist, free speech is bigoted, minorities and women should be treated better than the majority population and Caucasian men. Because the Democratic Party has a Center-Right and Center-Left, that believes in liberal values that I mentioned before and a Far-Left that believes in the crazy values that I just mentioned.

So America has a Democratic Party that looks and acts like the adults in the room, but only because they are the adults in the room. Who tend to run the Democratic Party and don’t need a gerrymandered district to get elected to anything, who can not just get elected statewide in swing states, but who can get elected statewide in Democratic states. (Where Far-left Democrats can’t, like in California) And a Far-Left that really should be in the Green Party (when they’re not occupying mental institutions) who can’t get elected anywhere, to anything, that doesn’t just have an overwhelmingly Democratic population, but left-wing Democratic population.

I’m not saying America should have a parliamentary political system, because that would make me a crazy leftist as well. But the two-party system is why America has a Democratic Party that has two political factions that simply don’t agree on much, because the Far-Left has nowhere else to go, because they represent such a small percentage of the country. And the Green Party is simply to small for them to get elected to anything, that’s worth anything in America.

Read Full Post »

The Onion: Socialism Vs. Capitalism: How About Democratic Socialism vs. Objectivism

href=”http://thedailyreview1975.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-onion-socialism-vs-capitalism-how.html”>The Onion: Socialism Vs. Capitalism: How About Democratic Socialism vs. Objectivism

Just to be serious for a minute or so and risk losing viewers who are expecting nothing but laughs from me and for me to be an asshole. Socialism vs capitalism, is not a real debate. Socialism, is a broad collectivist political philosophy. Capitalism, is an individualist economic system that every developed country in the world has a version of including social democracies. Britain, France, Denmark, Sweden, go down the line. The amount of major countries in the world that don’t have a capitalist system, you can now count on one hand and perhaps not need a second finger. Just chop off the other four, or save yourself from some extreme pain and point out North Korea and perhaps Syria. While you hold your other fingers down. This should really be capitalism vs Marxism, or capitalism, vs Communism.

So let’s try it this way and compare democratic socialism and use perhaps Bernie Sanders as the elected leader and not Marxist dictator. Versus what I at least call Randism, that I personally named after Ayn Rand and name Ayn their leader. You should’ve seen the ceremony, because it was beautiful. No one forced Ayn to show up, because she’s an objectivist and showed up voluntarily.

You have Democratic Socialists who say that the state or society as a whole is the most important thing. And because of that you can’t let people to be free and as individualist as they want. Because some people are just better and more productive than others, which will make the poor and ignorant look even worst and hurt their self-esteem. They say what we should do is have a big central state and not even have states and localities with much power over their own affairs either. Because if they’re free to do well than others will be free to struggle. And one part of country will be doing very well, because they know how to educate, how to build, how to regulate, how to tax and everything else. While other parts of the country will have central planners who don’t do much else than planning screw ups. And their people will suffer as a result. So you need a big central state to run things from government central to take care of the nation.

And then you have Randian’s or Libertarians, or Objectivists. Who say, “what’s mine is all mine! And anything that government take is a form of theft! And any type of regulation is a form of imprisonment.” So in a Randian system, government doesn’t tax or regulate. Just arrests criminals and imprisons them. (I guess after a fair trial) And protects the country when it’s under attack. How they even pay for that? Your guess is as good as mine. They would say tariffs, but Randian’s also believe in free trade and part of free trade is low tariffs. In a Randian system, instead of government trying to do practically everything for everybody, short of running business’s, government does practically nothing for no one. Except when a someone becomes a victim of a predator.

So you have Democratic Socialists who say that the collective is more important than the individual. They say you can’t have people living for themselves and showing everybody how much smarter, more productive and cooler they are than Joe and Jane Average, as well as Tom and Mary Below Average, and John and Susan Moron. They say what instead society should do in a Democratic Socialist’s mind is say that at the very least Bob and Anne Rich, should take care of the Average’s, the Below Average’s and the Moron’s, because they can afford to. That if you encourage people to become independent of the state as far as trying to succeed financially, then that is exactly what will happen. So you need big government to step in and prevent that from happening so everyone is taken care of.

With the Randian’s saying, “of course we want to be free on their own! And is someone falls down, people especially Bob and Anne Rich and other Rich’s, will step in and take care of the people who fall on hard times.’ Democratic socialism, is not the ultimate of collectivist economic systems. But only Marxism beats it when it comes to collectivism. Randism, is not the most individualist of economic systems, but anarchism beats it. But Democratic socialism and Randism, are at the opposite ends of the political spectrum. Democratic socialism, has at least one thing on Randism, it has been tried and still in use in the world with success. Randism, well there might be more Randians than Marxists right now, but a squirrel is bigger than a mouse, so what. I’m not a fan of either, but they’re both fascinating to follow.

Read Full Post »

Matthew Hormann: The Hollywood Ten, 1950

Gary Cooper

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

I don’t want to sound overly partisan here, but this was one of the ugliest anti-American, anti-liberal democratic, illiberal periods in American history. Where Americans were judged by who they associated with and political causes they supported and political candidates they may have endorsed in the past. Instead of being judged by their character and how they conduct themselves and the jobs that they do and what they contribute to America. And this period of the late 1940s early 1950s look like how elements of today’s so-called Tea Party treat Americans that don’t believe the way they do and share their culture and political values.

This period between 1947 or so when Republicans won back Congress both the House and Senate up until Senator Joe McCarthy’s so-called investigation of supposed Communists in the U.S. Government is Ann Coulter/Rush Limbaugh or Mike Savage Neoconservative Utopia. They accused Americans of supporting things that they claim that they don’t. Which is fascism and telling Americans that they disagree with politically that they are Un-American simply for exercising their constitutional rights of Freedom of Assembly, Speech and Thought. As well as privacy which has never been popular with the Far-Right in America anyway.

People in Hollywood were simply denied jobs and the ability to earn a living simply because of who they may have associated with in the past and political candidates they may have endorsed. Not because of movies that they made or roles that they played and how they played them and how they made movies. But what they did in their personal and free time. Endorsing political candidates that members of Congress both in the Republican Party and Democratic Party and executives in Hollywood saw as dangerous. And this is one of the ugliest periods in American history both in Hollywood and in the U.S. Congress.

Read Full Post »

Real Time With Bill Maher: Bernie Sanders Standing Up For Socialist Values

Source:The New Democrat

At risk of sounding simplistic, there’s a reason why we live on a planet with somewhere around a hundred-eighty countries or so and not live on a planet with no countries, but with one huge central authority in charge. Because we have different populations, people’s, cultures, values and everything else all over the planet. And what works in one country or even in a block of countries, might not work somewhere else with a completely different economy, with different resources, responsibilities, threats, populations and everything else.

My point is that U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders and his supporters, the social democratic-left in America lets say, have a tendency to say, “this is how it’s done in Europe with government doing so much for their people and everything else. It seems to work there and their people love it. Which is why should adopt that economic system here and do it the European way”. Apparently unaware, or ignoring the obvious facts that Europe and the states there are completely different societies. That for one thing don’t even have to worry about their own national defense, because America is responsible for it.

Americans tend to be rugged, individualist, free, wanting to be able to make their own decisions and live their own lives. And in many cases hate to have to take any public or even private charity. And when they do, they tend to see that as some type of failure and have let themselves and their families down. Europe is the complete opposite of that and if anything love taking public assistance from their government and would riot if the government were to cut their public assistance. And freak out about having to pay for their own childcare out of their pocket and not taxes and actually have to take responsibility for themselves. And this is just an example of the culture differences.

Americans figured out a long time ago, well most of us did, our Socialists are still late to this dance, or still at the door, or not even there yet, perhaps sitting out the dance that there’s a limit to what we want government to do for us. That instead we want to be free as possible to take care of us as much as possible. And then if we run into financial trouble, like being out of a job and just lost our savings as part of that result, then we would want to be able to take public assistance in the short-term until we can get ourselves back on our feet. With a good job that gives us the freedom to do those things.

That’s the main difference from a liberal democracy, a liberal society the free society that the American Founding Fathers, the Founding Liberals wanted to create for America. And in the last two-hundred plus years we’ve worked as a country to improve our society so as many Americans as possible have that freedom to manage their own lives and Europe. Which is the opposite of that where they want to be taxed to the point where no one is completely free to take care of themselves. Because they believe when they move as a national unit, they move better with no one being too rich or poor and moving together.

So when Bernie Sanders Social Democrats say that, “Europe does it this way, so should we”, they are comparing Massachusetts with Texas. What is done in Massachusetts, is not wanted in Texas and vice-versa. Both states have figured out an economic system and government that works for them. But that doesn’t mean it will work for everyone in the country. Americans like being able to have the freedom to make their own decisions and you need your money in order to do that. Europeans at least in a lot of cases see that as selfish or materialistic and would freak out and even riot if their government’s forced them to take responsibility over their own lives. Just some of the differences between America and Europe.

HBO: Real Time With Bill Maher- Bernie Sanders Standing Up For Socialist Values

Read Full Post »

Real Time With Bill Maher: Occupy Wall Street

Source:The Daily Press

Bill Maher has this idea that since there’s a Democrat in the White House, that President Obama should govern like Dennis Kucinich. What he doesn’t seem to understand, is that President Obama and Representative Kucinich come from two different factions of the party. Barack Obama comes from the adult realist faction of the party. Progressives and Liberals that see the world for what it is and try to make it the best that they can, with what’s available to do so.

Dennis Kucinich comes from the dreamer utopian faction of the party, Socialist Hippies from the 1960s, and early 70s and today that haven’t grown up. And see the World that they want to create apparently not realizing what’s possible, but believe everything that they want is possible. And its possible now to turn America into Europe to create their Socialist Utopia. And you got these two competing factions, the adults with the power in the party that see the world for what it is and try to make it the best that they can, against the Hippies that want to see the world that they want now.

And if you support any policy that’s different from what the Hippies want, you’re some type of corporate sellout to the Republican Party or something. President Obama is like a father with his only real life family, as well as his kids in the Democratic Party. That help him run the party, plus with millions of adopted children that complain about not being able to have cake for dinner. And throw temper tantrums when they can’t have cake for dinner or have to eat salad with their meat. And tell their parents they hate them when they can’t stay up all night on a school night.

The Socialist Hippies (the Democratic children) in the party that doesn’t have a great grasp on reality, that want everything now and doesn’t understand what Hubert Humphrey called the “Art of the Possible”. So the state of the Democratic Party right now a political party that I’m proud to be a member of is basically two parties and I believe within ten years could become officially two political parties. Which I believe would be good for both American liberalism and progressivism, as well as socialism giving each political movement their own voice.

You have the Liberal Democrats led by the President and the Congressional Democratic Leadership and the DNC. And then you have the Hippie Socialists again from the 1960s and early 70s. And want to bring that movement about today and create their own Socialist Utopia a perfect world. Where there’s no wealthy or poor people, no violence, no war, give peace a chance. Everybody is equal, sounds like a decent Hollywood film or Hollywood fantasy. No bigotry, but the only problem that they have, is that they don’t have a damn clue how to bring those things about. They tell the Leadership “this is what we want now go out there and accomplish that”. Without having any idea of how to bring that about.

Hippy Democrats are like a head coach who wants to have the best team in the league. But doesn’t know what type of system he wants on offense and defense, or what type of players he wants. Or how to write a game plan or run a practice, that these things are just details, right. Sounds more like a great fan than a successful head coach. And then leave it up to the Liberal Democrats the adults in the room to get the job done.

And when the Hippies accomplish some of those goals that the whole party supports, what’s the thanks for the Democratic Leadership, they get called sellouts by their kids the Hippies. Who weren’t even invited to the party because they probably would’ve thrown food or gotten into a fight. Its like giving your kid a corvette as their graduation present. But then getting called as asshole because you didn’t give your son a Porsche. Thats why the Liberal Democrats run the Democratic Party because they are the adults in the room.

Read Full Post »

Socialist Francois Hollande Defeats Conservative Nicholas Sarkozy in French Election: The Socialists Are Coming!

Source:Associated Press– democracy in action in France.

Source:The Daily Press

“Socialist candidate Francois Hollande defeated conservative Nicolas Sarkozy to become France’s next president, heralding a change in how Europe tackles its debt crisis and how France flexes its diplomatic muscle around the world.”

From the Associated Press

“François Hollande’s victory in France offered a stiff rebuke to Germany’s austerity regime, but the new president faces challenges in delivering on his campaign’s pro-growth rhetoric.

French president-elect Francois Hollande reacts to supporters with his companion Valerie Trierweiler while celebrating his election victory in Bastille Square in Paris, France, Sunday, May 6, 2012. France handed the presidency Sunday to leftist Hollande, a champion of government stimulus programs who says the state should protect the downtrodden – a victory that could deal a death blow to the drive for austerity that has been the hallmark of Europe in recent years.

Speaking from the Bastille last night, Hollande gave a clear sense of how he sees his victory: It signaled, he said, a “fresh start for Europe”- an indication that austerity is not be the continent’s destiny. The new French president has set off tremors in Berlin by arguing for stimulus spending to revive Europe’s ailing economy and calling for eurobonds to finance large infrastructure projects. Hollande has also pledged to veto the German-inspired fiscal compact, which would bind its 25 signatories to stringent budgetary rules, unless it is complemented by measures to promote growth and employment.

All this will doubtless be on the table when Hollande meets Angela Merkel after being sworn in on May 15 or 16. Merkel worked closely with Sarkozy in tackling (or failing to) the European debt crisis and openly supported him against his socialist challenger. As leader of Europe’s economic powerhouse and its reluctant financial rescuer, she has proved a stubborn player. Her government’s commitment to austerity and structural reform as the only medicine for the eurozone’s ills has been adamantine-it will be hard for Hollande to find ways to crack her. On the other hand, he has invested too heavily in his credentials as an anti-austerity champion (on a pan-European level) to yield easily; he is mindful, among other things, of past instances in which French political candidates promised a change of course only to quickly bow to Berlin once elected. Parliamentary elections on June 10 and 17, in which Hollande hopes the socialists will earn an absolute majority, will also contribute to a robust negotiating stance.”

Source:The American Prospect– Francois Hollande, the next Socialist President of the French Republic.

From The American Prospect

The Socialists are coming! The Socialists are coming! Everyone hide your wallets and mattress’s and bank accounts, Swiss bank accounts while they’re still available! Quick, hurry before you see the Socialists take what’s ever left of your personal finances.

Well, this is France, so the French are use to having Socialists in power, perhaps even like it. They pay high taxes with smiles on their faces and then complain when they are only taxed 50, 60 or 70%. And say: “No, I can give you more, I’m not completely broke yet. Quick, take the rest of my money, before I do something with it like pay the rent, buy groceries or actually enjoy life.”

This is France with a lot of opportunities to do that, most of them legal by the way. If Socialists came to power in America or someone who is not a Socialist, but where there are millions of Americans dumb enough to believe he is a Socialist, ( are you getting warmer, have you figured out who I’m talking about yet ) there would be riots in the streets.

If there were actually real Socialists coming to power in America, let’s say the so-called Progressive Caucus (another way of saying Democratic Socialists of America, to me more accurate ) came to power in Congress and one of their members gets elected President and if we are going to imagine this, (let’s also imagine a July blizzard in Phoenix, Arizona about the same odds) there would not only be riots in the streets but people fleeing to other countries. And to them a foreign country would be Hawaii or Puerto Rico. And then they would be shocked that the people there speak English.

Americans, go out-of-their-way to not pay taxes, wouldn’t surprise me if most of the Swiss bank accounts are owned by Americans. With Americans shoving the Swiss out-of-the-way to get a Swiss bank account. We cry for days after filing our tax returns, going: “If only I had that money that Uncle Sam took from me, what I could’ve spent it on.” Just some of the differences between France and America.

When Socialists come to power in France, it’s a cause of celebration. When Conservatives come to power in France, the people there freak out and complain about the Populist Party trying to transform France into America. And freak out about having to make more decisions about their lives. “Oh no, more freedom! What am I going to, I can’t take this! I need the Federal Government telling me what to do!” Just some of the differences between the two countries.

Read Full Post »