Kire Schneider Online

Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Father of American Liberalism

Friday, May 18, 2018

Warner Brothers: Honeysuckle Rose 1980- Featuring Willie Nelson & Dyan Cannon

Source: Alamy Stock Photo- Dyan Cannon & Willie Nelson-
Source: Action

Take Dyan Cannon out of Honeysuckle Rose and I have absolutely no interest in this movie. And maybe that's just because I'm not a fan of country music or rural culture in general, except of course for country girls and cowgirls. I do like them for obvious reasons. Dyan is an example of a woman who is so attractive and so much fun to look at and be around, that she can bring guys at least to the movie or to watch the movie all by herself. She's so funny, so adorable, gorgeous at any age in her life and still baby-face adorable as well and sexy. Talking about a woman in Dyan Cannon her late seventies was still wearing skinny denim jeans in boots, as if she was half her age or stealing from her granddaughter's wardrobe or something.

Source: Warner Brothers- Hollywood Goddess Dyan Cannon 
There are a few funny scenes in like early in the movie where it's Willie Nelson's first night back from his last road trip and they're in the kitchen together with their son about to have desert and Dyan is about to serve whatever they're eating and Willie takes some of it and rubs it on Dyan's blouse and the kid starts laughing and Willie throws some of the stuff on him and then Dyan gets into the act and rubs whatever they're supposed to be eating on both Willie and the kid and it turns into a food fight.

Another scene where Willie is just getting back and they're checking each other out in their skin-tight jeans and saying things like those pants are really tight, but you fit so well into them. And they're on the bed together as this is going on and start wrestling. Another scene where Dyan is doing sit-ups in their living room again in her skin-tight jeans and western boots. There cute funny moments like that, but a lot of this movie is really about Willie having an affair with the new female backup singer ( played by Amy Irving ) in his band a woman perhaps young enough to be Dyan's daughter, but the new girl is not as attractive as his wife in the movie. Not as sexy, not as pretty, not as cute even, just 15-20 years younger than Dyan Cannon. Perhaps Willie has some other connection with her that wasn't sexual.

There moments like that which is just laid out that give the movie maybe 40 solid minutes of time. Along with Willie and Dyan singing together in the movie. They both have great voices and chemistry in the movie. But for the most part the only reasons why I'm watching it is to see Dyan Cannon in it. To observe and listen to her. All her adorable facial expressions and her Hollywood Hall of Fame laugh and great body.
Source: Warner Brothers: Honeysuckle Rose 1980- Trailer- Hollywood Goddess Dyan Cannon



Friday, May 11, 2018

Vanity Fair: Bryan Burrough- The Miranda Obsession: The Story of Miranda Grosvenor

Source: Vanity Fair- Male friends of Miranda Grosvenor?
Source: The New Democrat

The only people who know who Miranda Grosvenor actually is, would be whoever Miranda is in real-life, the people who know her and perhaps Bryan Burrough himself, assuming she's been honest and forthcoming with her. To the rest of the world she's just Miranda Grosvenor and had I not been watching YouTube on my TV ( which you can do if you have Verizon FIOS ) looking at videos there doing research for future blog posts, I would have have no idea who she is either, because I would've never had heard of her.

Source: The Advocate- Miranda Grosvenor?
She's not a woman that even men who've had let's say phone relationships with her ( for lack of a better term ) how else do you describe people who only communicate through phone calls who never actually physically meet her, know who she really is and have I guess until Bryan Burrough did this story for Vanity Fair and Vanity Fair in conjunction did this documentary about the last days of actress Natalie Wood with a segment about this Miranda Grosvenor woman, no one else would know who she possibly is either, because she hasn't made it public who she is and the men she spoke to famous entertainment and in some cases political celebrities like Senator Ted Kennedy, haven't made there conversations public either. And have said they've spoken to this woman either.

I believe it was actor/comedian Buck Henry who said that probably every man wants to talk to a Miranda Grosvenor at some point. Someone who sounds sweet, sexy, intelligent, and interesting, with literally no strings attached. Married men could communicate this way with her because they're literally not cheating by doing this. All these guys were doing was sharing their personal thoughts and being entertained by a woman whose name they don't even know and have never even seen before even through photographs, let alone actually met. Where they're literally just free to be themselves and have nothing to lose, because they're probably never going to make these conversations public and Miranda or whoever she really is, doesn't want the conversations to be made public either.

I have some experience with online dating so I have some idea what these guys were going through talking to woman online and even over the phone, knowing they may never actually physically meet who they're talking to. I did have one advantage though which was I got to at least see photos of the women that I talked to. But I can see why guys would be intrigued by this especially if they're not married and currently single and perhaps looking for something different when it comes to romance and dating, perhaps coming off of a bad divorce or breakup. And perhaps thinking they might actually meet the woman they're talking to in person. Which is what at least one guy that she talked to wanted to do.
Source: Carrie Heffernan: Vanity Fair- The Miranda Obsession- Christopher Walken & Natalie Wood

Friday, May 4, 2018

Politics and Prose: Timothy Snyder- The Road To Unfreedom

Source: Politics and Prose- Author Timothy Snyder-
Source: The New Democrat

Timothy Snyder seems to be arguing that the reasons why voters in America and in Europe, have turned to nationalist-authoritarianism instead of liberal democracy, has to do with what's called inequality. That people who are voting for what's called strongmen or at least people with strongmen authoritarian leanings ( like Donald Trump ) is because they've seen their incomes decline while their taxes have gone up and then they see someone come in and essentially say that if you give them all of this power, they'll fix your problems for you.
Source: Writers Bloc Presents- Author Timothy Snyder
Left-wing socialist and communist authoritarians, make these promises all the time. We saw that with Hugo Chavez and now Nicholas Maduro in Venezuela and we're now seeing that with Vladimir Putin in Russia and seeing it in Poland and Hungary today, and Donald Trump in America. Right-wing nationalist authoritarians coming into power and saying that if you give them all this power and don't question them, your lives will improve.

Which tells me that when people's lives seem so dark and without hope and they just can't seem to get ahead and their bills start piling, they become so desperate that they're willing to try anything to improve their lives. Including authoritarianism whether it's right-wing or left-wing authoritarianism.
Politics and Prose: Timothy Snyder- The Road To Unfreedom

Friday, April 27, 2018

The Wawg Blog: Andy Hailey- 'How We Go Into The DJT Political Swamp: It Has Little To Do With Russia'

Source: Wall Stats- Yep, that pretty much sums it up-
Source: The New Democrat Plus

Andy Hailey seems to making the argument that Washington lobbyists became a problem, when our tax rates became lower. That since we’ve cut taxes both in 1981 under President Reagan and again in the 1990s multiple times under President Clinton and again under President Bush in the 2000s and President Obama in 2009, that is when lobbyists became a problem in Washington. And that after we made lobbying easier in Washington that is when lobbyists became a problem as well.

Source: Steemit- Deep State Fantasy 
I have a different take. Economics Professor Classical Liberal Milton Friedman, who I didn’t agree with on everything mostly having to do with regulations of the economy where I tend to be in favor of them, if they’re commonsense and not intended to run private businesses, argued that the problem with money in Washington, has to do with power and money in Washington meaning the Federal Government. That the reasons why lobbyists lobby so much in Washington is the same reasons why bank robbers rob banks, because that’s where the money is. Since 1964 the Federal Government has only gotten bigger, with few exceptions in the 1990s. And since that time even if you want to go up to 1970 from 1964, we’ve also only seem more lobbyists in Washington.

My other take on this has to do with American voters themselves. One good definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. You continue to vote for the same people to serve in Congress and vote for members that are corrupt or if you prefer bought and expect their behavior to change, you’re acting insane. U.S. Representatives and Senators, are not lifetime appointments. They go up for reelection every 2 and 6 years which gives their constituents the opportunity every 2 or 6 years to evaluate them and decide if they’re doing a good job or not. Are they of strong character and have strong qualifications to serve in the House or Senate, or are they lazy, vote against their constituents interests, and are corrupt or bought by the people who write them checks and finance their political campaigns.

So if you want to better politicians in America, you have to have better voters. And voters who stop voting for politicians because they like the smartphone the person uses, or because the politician is up to date on pop culture references, catch phrases, and entertainment in general, but who can be bought for a 100 bucks to vote this way or that way. And instead vote for candidates and incumbents who will do the job that they’re elected to which is to represent their constituents especially the people who can’t afford too write big checks to political campaigns.

And to go back to the Milton Friedman argument. You want fewer lobbyists in Washington, a good way to do that is to get money out of the Federal Government and decentralize a lot if not all the social insurance programs and allow for the states and localities to run them, under basic Federal standards to make sure those programs for the people who truly need them are run the way they’re supposed to be. Stopping running budget deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars every year. And get the the country’s fiscal house in order.

A couple of things that Congress can do and the U.S. Supreme Court might do one of these things for Congress, since Congress probably won’t has to do with gerrymandering and full disclosure. Eliminate gerrymandering all together and you’ll make Congress at least in the House accountable. Because representatives will no longer be able to just run to a hyper-partisan faction in their district and instead will have to represent a district that is more balance politically and ideologically.

And the second one being which unfortunately qualifies for the good luck with that column, because it goes against current members of Congress own political interests , would be full disclosure off all political contributions in America, at least at the Federal level and force members and candidates, as well political action groups and lobbyists, to disclose how they’re funding their political campaigns. And let the voters decide if their politicians and candidates, are bought or not.

A lot of the so-called Washington swamp and lobbyists issue in Washington, goes to personal responsibility. Back to my definition of insanity about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, you keep voting for the same politicians and you’ll just get the same behavior and same policies. Which will probably be written by the lobbyists who make the biggest political contributions. But you vote for good qualified people instead and help them get elected and get them elected and you’ll get different policies that are designed to represent their constituents instead. And Congress if they decided to go against their current political interests, could be helpful here as well by eliminating all gerrymandering and passing full disclosure off all political contributions. But fixing Washington and Congress starts with the voters themselves.
Source: Fox News: Donald Trump- 'We're Going to Drain The Swamp'- In 2016

Friday, April 20, 2018

Julie Skyhigh Official: Julie Skyhigh- Pedal Pumping In Skinny Jeans in Brown Leather Gianmarco Lorenzi Boots

Source: AKA Videos- Julie Skyhigh's Boots- 
Source: Action

Julie Skyhigh is supposedly a porn actress online who works out of Belgium. But what I've seem from her online is that she looks more like a fashion model than anything else. A very good one at that and a very sexy one who does some sexy perhaps pornographic videos online playing sexy office secretary's who are overly sexual at work and that sort of thing. But we're not talking about a woman ( at least from what I've seen ) who is at least overly pornographic. Who shoves her bare chest in front of the camera and that sort of thing.

Source: Julie Skyhigh Official - Julie Skyhigh

Julie Skyhigh the sexy fashion model ( as I see her ) sexiest videos are her jeans in boots videos. She wears skin-tight skinny jeans in boots and tends to wear them with a leather or fur jacket. And will walk around downtown perhaps in Brussels in this type of outfit and you get to see let's say a five minute video of her in that outfit.Which is very sexy because you're talking about a beautiful adorable woman, who is tall with beautiful legs and as she's said herself with a denim jeans fetish. This woman loves denim jeans and loves boots and loves wearing them together. Loves leather and fur jackets and loves wearing those things together. Julie Skyhigh is no Stormy Daniels, she's more like a very attractive and sexual fashion model.

Source: Julie Skyhigh Official- Julie Skyhigh

Pedal pumping is an online fashion trend with pornographic hipsters. Where a woman will walk up to a car, get in and starting pumping the pedal with her feet. Generally doing it with boots, but sometimes doing with heels, and sometimes barefoot. And generally doing this wearing skinny jeans. Which is what you see with Julie Skyhigh in this video. And to go back to my original point about Julie Skyhigh, this doesn't look very pornographic to me, even though that is what she's supposed to be. And I'm not complaining because I love sexy fashion models especially with jeans and boots fetishes and actually prefer that over porn.
Julie Skyhigh Official: Julie Skyhigh- Pedal Pumping in Skinny Jeans in Gianmarco Lorenzi Boots

Friday, April 13, 2018

The Aspen Institute: David Brooks- On Conservative and Liberal Values

Source: The Aspen Institute- Columnist David Brooks-
Source: The New Democrat

If you just arrived on Planet Earth yesterday and were an adult and two of the first things you observed were supposed to be what it means to be a Conservative and Liberal and what conservatism and liberalism are supposed to be, you would probably think Conservatives are simply bigots who hate anyone who isn't of European especially Anglo-Saxon background, who isn't a Christian especially a Protestant and who isn't male. That conservatism is simply an authoritarian bigoted political philosophy that is about conserving everything in society for Europeans especially English-Europeans in America and especially Protestant males.

And that Liberals are simply statists. In some cases democratic, but in many other cases communist who believe European-Americans are all bigots, unless they come from the Northeast or West Coast and were educated there as well. Who hate European-Americans again unless they come from one of the coasts and were raised there. The Northeast and West Coast, that is and believe the role of government is to take care of non-Europeans in America and to punish Europeans for being successful.

That Liberals are supposed to be people who believe that anyone who doesn't look at the world as they do are basically idiots who need to be babysat by government. That freedom is dangerous and it only gives people the freedom to make mistakes. That free speech is only the freedom to offend non-Europeans. That capitalism and property rights are selfish. That even education and self-inprovent are dangerous things, because it means that people would be able to obtain the power and freedom to live independently and be able to think and act for themselves.

Now, I just gave you a pretty good idea about what conservatism and liberalism aren't. What it doesn't mean to a Conservative and what it doesn't mean to be a Liberal. The anti-conservative views when it comes to conservatism and the illiberal views when it comes to liberalism. Now, how about what it actually means to be a Conservative and what conservatism actually is and what it means to be a Liberal and what liberalism actually is.

I agree with David Brooks about one thing which seems to be a common theme when I hear him speak, at least about public policy and philosophy. That conservatism is about conserving tradition and a certain way of life in America. Which is different from saying that the role of government is force a way of life on the rest of the country and force everybody to basically live as straight fundamentalist Protestant Evangelicals. Which is what Christian-Conservatives who today are basically Christian-Nationalists believe, that the problem with the America is personal freedom and individualism and that Americans shouldn't have the freedom to live their own lives and have their own lifestyles.

My personal view of what it means to be a Conservative in the political sense, comes from Mr. Conservative Senator the late Barry Goldwater. Who said that he wanted big government out of our wallets, bedrooms, boardrooms, and classrooms. He wanted big government out of our personal and economic affairs. He believed in limited government and federalism and that the role of government was to protect Americans from predators both foreign and domestic, but not try to protect Americans from themselves and punish Americans for their own personal decisions. And that a big role of government was to conserve the U.S. Constitutional and our constitutional rights. Not conserve some fundamentalist Protestant Christian way of life and to force everybody to live under the same religious and cultural values.

For me as a Liberal, defining Liberal and liberalism is very easy for me. A Liberal is someone who believes in liberal democracy what some people might call classical liberalism, but what I just call liberalism and liberal democracy. That government should be limited and there to defend our constitutional rights and civil liberties, including our property rights. That everyone in America is the same at least in the sense that no one is better simply because of their race, ethnicity, or gender and that everyone has the same civil rights and are all entitled to the same equal and constitutional rights. Liberals believe in limited government, the U.S. Constitution, civil liberties, individual rights. A safety net for people who truly need it, but not having a government big enough to manage people's lives and to force everyone to live equally from an economic standpoint. Socialists believe in forcing equality on everyone. Liberals believes in quality opportunity for everyone, which is different.

Now, if you just watch Fox News and MSNBC, you might think Conservatives are from Mars and Liberals are from Saturn. Two completely different planets with very little if anything in common. Thousands if not millions of miles way ideologically. But if you look at the American political spectrum Conservatives are on the center-right and Liberals are on the center-left. Ideologically they're political opponents ( not enemies ) but have the most in common ideologically of any two political factions on the American political spectrum. With the Socialists ( both democratic and communist ) and the Christian-Nationalists, having the least in common. Conservatives and Liberals both believe in the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, our federal form of limited government. But differ when it comes to government's role in the economy and national security. But don't live in two on two different planets ideologically. As much as Fox News and MSNBC may disagree with this.
The Aspen Institute: David Brooks- On Conservative and Liberal Values

Friday, March 30, 2018

The Queen of The Prom: Anita Ekberg Tribute

Source: The Queen of The Prom- The Swedish Goddess-
Source: The New Democrat

As I mentioned last week, Anita Ekberg was like the other Hollywood bombshell Goddess's of the 1950s, like Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, Diana Dors, but like Angie Dickinson, Gena Rowlands, Kim Novak, and others she was better. Physically about as adorable as the first group of women that I just mentioned, as well as hot, tall with a great Nordic body, but she was better. She wasn't a 1950s actress, or a fad, flash in the pan, the hot celebrity of the moment like a lot of so-called entertainers today who are only famous in a lot of cases because they either look good in tight designer outfits, or have blunt filthy mouths and I'm thinking of what's called reality TV. Or they're married to a famous man with a famous personality.

To have a long successful career in Hollywood or Europe as an actor or actress, you actually have to be able to act. Which I know sounds foreign to people who are only familiar with movies and shows from the last 20 years or so. You have to know what you're doing, what you're good at, what roles fit you, what you do best, how to communicate with the media. If you look at Anita from the last 1950s and then go up 40 years, what's changed about her other than she's forty years older? She's still gorgeous, she's still very cute, she still has a beautiful body, she's still sharp, she still has that quick straightforward wit. And perhaps the most important thing that separates her from Marilyn and Jayne, she's still working. She grew up but it didn't take her several marriages and stints in rehab clinics to grow up. Unlike Marilyn and Jayne who never grew up personally and emotionally, Anita did that as a young woman.

I believe two great movies where you really see how good as an actress and not just a comedic or dramatic actress, but as an actress that Anita was, was The Inside Man and 4 For Texas.

The Inside Man where she plays a private detective in search of jewelry that she's believes is her's that was stolen from her.

Where the exchanges wisecracks with Jack Palance in that movie, as well as other things. 4 For Texas where she exchanges wisecracks with one of the best smart assess who has ever lived in Frank Sinatra.

Anita Ekberg was a Hollywood Goddess not just because of her Goddess appearance, that was certainly a big part of that. A woman with that body who is also that adorable with those hot baby face features with the eyes, the cheeks, the smile, the voice. But also and just as important she was a hell of an actress as well. I believe born for dramatic comedy and soap operas.
The Queen of The Prom: Anita Ekberg Tribute