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 »

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

Source: This piece was originally posted at 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 »

Radical Films: U.S. House Un-American Activities- Looking For Communists in Hollywood

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat

The House Un-American Activities Committee and then later the Joe McCarthy Government Oversight Committee in the Senate were classic cases of guilt by association. Because they assumed some Americans were Un-American and not deserving of being Americans simply because of people they may have associated with and political positions they may have held. Not because of any illegal activities they have been involved in. Which is how we are supposed to judge people’s involvement in criminal activity.

The United States a liberal democracy where Americans have the right to believe what they believe. And say what they want to say with a few exceptions. Like encouraging violence or libeling people without any basis in fact. Yelling fire in tight public spaces. But for the most part our own politics is our own business. And we are free to either express our own political opinions, or opinions about any other subjects or not. And not be held criminally libel because of what we believe.

But what we got instead from these Congressional communist investigative committees was guilt by association that ruined a lot of good productive Americans lives. And for what, so people on the far-right and people simply just looking for political advancement, Senator Joe McCarthy comes to mind, could have a big issue and use it to advance their own political careers. No matter who they may hurt along the way which is about as Un-American as it gets.

Read Full Post »

AP: Warren Levinson- ‘Occupy Wall Street: One Year Later’

Source:Associated Press– Pete Dutro use to be one of the organizers of Occupy Wall Street.
Source:FRS FreeState

“To mark the one-year-anniversary of the Occupy movement on September 17th , current and former members talk to the Associated Press about the changes they see in the organization.”

From the Associated Press

Occupy Wall Street started off as a I guess left-wing social democratic (even though there are Communists who part of OWS) movement a year ago, that was pissed off at Wall Street and corporate America as a whole. And seeing them get bail outs while they saw the rest of the country as they put it got austerity and decided that they were: “Mad as Hell and weren’t going to take it anymore.” Or perhaps even stronger language than that)

OWS was a very focused and fairly disciplined movement, especially for Socialists who aren’t known for discipline or even believing in it. And that’s how they were successful in its first few months: “This is what’s bad, we have the people with us and we need to stop this.”

And then OWS could go about fixing the problems, instead of making them worst and were successful in not only getting attention from the national media, but getting people behind them as well. Even Democrats not so much the leadership, but some Congressional Democrats in both the House and Senate who are so far to the Left as they are and also have a hard time seeing the center and perhaps center-left with a telescope, such as OWS. And they even managed to not only communicate what they believe is wrong with the country, as far as the economy, but we’re able to start to put together their own social democratic agenda.

OWS moves from talking about what they don’t like about capitalism and corporate America, to preserving social insurance programs, especially Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. But what they would do about the “too big to fail banks”, breaking them up or nationalizing them. As well as things like universal higher education, protecting organize labor and debt forgiveness for students and other things.

But now OWS seems to be about complaining about ever society ill that the country seems to be going through. Jump from one problem to another without any real focus or discipline and living up to one of the negative stereotypes that Socialists have. They’ve become like kids who when they get a new toy, they see something else that they want and now have lost all interest in their first toy. They’ve become like children.

That’s how Occupy Wall Street started out, but by the late spring and summer they had already lost whatever momentum they were able to build up from the fall and winter of 2011-12 and started looking more like rioters or anarchists and with all the arrests they started piling up. They were like fireworks that are lighted on July Fourth, that burn out with in minutes. And started piling up arrests at their rallies and events. And once a movement gets to that point, its hard for Americans who unless they are die-hard supporters of you, to take you seriously: “Why should I pay attention to them. They are just some whacked-out fringe: why should I take them seriously.”

And because of this, the Democratic Leadership, has never really gotten behind them. Because unlike Republicans, Democrats understand that there’s a certain responsibility to being part of a major political party. That you can’t afford to look like you are part of a fringe movement, because you are supposed to be the adults in the room.

Right now in America again unless you are a big supporter of Occupy Wall Street, they look like some whacked-out Far-Left socialist party, that are champions of big government and high taxes, which hasn’t played well in this country for a long time.

And even worst, OWS looks like anarchists people who are so out of their minds they aren’t capable of having an adult conversation, which is why they are struggling to be taken seriously.Even fringe movements need ties and have a base with reality and how the world works, so they can be as successful as possible. Even if it comes off as stale or old school to their supporters.

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 »

The Daily Caller: Real Time With Bill Maher- ‘Why Can’t America be More Like Canada?’

Source:The Daily Caller– comedian Martin Short, on Real Time With Bill Maher, in 2011.

Source:The Daily Press

“Canada is a country that has health care and not a lot of gun violence. And we’ve become just a more war-like mean, cramped conservative country”

From The Daily Caller

Why can’t Canada be more like Canada? Well, because America is America and Canada. (To be as overly simplistic as possible) Canadians are a very collectivist and a very welfare-centric country. America likes their individual freedom and individualism, their personal freedom, the ability to make their own decisions without Big Government trying to tax them to death because Uncle Sam believes it’s more qualified to spend Americans money better than them.

With Canadians, I think they don’t mind Big Government spending a lot of their money for them, just as long as the services that they get are good and their money is spent well. The political cultures in both countries are just very different.

Read Full Post »