Kire Schneider Online

Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Father of American Liberalism

Monday, April 29, 2013

Pop User: Conservative Roundtable- Howard Phillips Welcomes U.S. Representative Ron Paul: In 1997

Source: Pop User-
Source: Pop User: Conservative Roundtable- Howard Phillips Welcomes U.S. Representative Ron Paul: In 1997

What I personally respect about Ron Paul is that the Ron Paul you see back in the late 1990s in 1997, is the same Ron Paul today and fighting and believing in the same things. In what he views as a constitutional government and that the Federal Government is grown way too big and it must be limited back to where it was pre-New Deal of the 1930s and so-forth. And that we need more individual freedom both economic and personal and eliminate prohibition all together.

What I like about Ron Paul as a Liberal myself and not a Libertarian in Ron Paul's case, is the whole idea of individual freedom both economic and personal as well, as personal responsibility. But even though I believe the Federal Government is too big and more power needs to be sent down to the states and people themselves, we disagree about how much smaller the Federal Government should be. But where Ron Paul was sixteen years ago is the Ron Paul that we see today and is one politician that you can count on. At least to the extent that you know what he believes and that he won't change his politics when the politics change.

Saturday, April 27, 2013 Video: C-Span: White House Correspondents Dinner: Barack Obama is Not Who You Think He is

This just in Barack Obama is not the young strapping Muslim-Socialist that he use to be. It must be true because the humble Barack Obama admitted that himself. The press and the President have different jobs to do which is as true and obvious as Barack Obama is an American-citizen. And the job of the President is run his administration and the press's job is to report what they believe will sell the most. Or in CNN's case report every side of the story hoping that one of them is true. And I believe it's a good idea that President Obama is reaching out with Congressional Republicans, especially Senate Republicans who never seem. Ready to vote yes or no on any of the President's proposals and keep wanting to talk about his policies instead. Another words filibuster for the 99.9% of the population who aren't political-junkies By the way President Obama proposed to reach out to Senate Republicans but they filibustered that as well. Oh by the way people you non political-junkies have no idea what the you guys are missing, you must have lives or. Something but at least President Obama is reaching out to the press and Republicans when he can.

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

John Krysko: Video: CBC Sports: CFL 1974-Grey Cup-Montreal Alouettes vs. Edmonton Eskimos: Full Game

This post was originally posted at FRS Daily Times on WordPress

An interesting year for the CFL, at least in the sense that only one team won ten games the entire year. The Edmonton Eskimos, who finished 10-5 in the regular season. Which would be like having only one team in the NFL only winning 10 games, which is rarely if ever has happened. At least since the 1960s or so. Or only have one team in the NHL or NBA only winning 50 games, which may of never of happened, at least yet. At least in the NFL and I imagine the CFL as well since both leagues play 16 and 18 games respectfully, a ten win season for a team means they are a good team and had a good year. So when you only have one team in the entire league accomplish that, it means there weren’t a lot of real good teams. Unless you’re a big fan of parity or something where everyone is fairly equal.

Welby Ainsworth: Prison Diaries- Till Death Do Us Part

Source: This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Times Plus

Just because I’m not a complete cynic, I tend to be willing to give prison inmates the benefit of the doubt. When they say they are sorry for what they did that landed them in prison and sorry for the crime they committed. Of course not knowing whether they are truly sorry, or not especially. If they are up for parole, or have a shot at one day being released from prison. I have this forgive, but not forget aspect about me. But we have a prison system in America and I imagine in other countries have prison systems for this reason as well.

That we hold people accountable for the decisions that they make in life for good and bad. And that if you make good decisions in life, chances are you will be rewarded for those decisions. But if they make bad decisions in life, like hurting innocent people, you’ll also be held accountable for those decisions as well. And as it turns out, we tend to hold people more accountable for their bad decisions than their good decisions.

The prison system is filled with people who’ve made a lot of bad decisions in life. And we also have a lot of people who are in prison for making bad decisions, but who didn’t hurt people. And have never been a threat to anyone in society and aren’t now except to themselves perhaps. But generally speaking, we have a lot of people in prison because they’ve hurt other people either intentionally, or unintentionally. But they are there for hurting people and are being held accountable for what they’ve done.

And this represents a perfect example of why prisons are a place which of course aren’t perfect, but that place where we hold people accountable for making bad decisions and hurting other people. And that’s what they should be for holding people accountable for hurting other people. Generally physically, but economically as well. And they shouldn’t be for people who hurt themselves. We have too many people in prison for that. And there are better ways we can be dealing with addiction than prison.

Prisons are full of people who’ve made a lot of bad decisions as you can see in this video. And these people just of made better decisions with their lives starting as adolescents. And then moving on as adults, which is why they are probably not in prison today. Which tells me at least that people need to think before acting. And not act off of anger, or emotion, but take the time to think about what they are doing and what’s the best course to take from there.
Welby Ainsworth: Prison Diaries- To Death Do Us Part

Friday, April 19, 2013

HBO: Real Time With Bill Maher- The Paul Ryan Budget

HBO- Former New York Governor Elliot Spitzer-
Source: HBO: Real Time With Bill Maher- The Paul Ryan Budget

What Representative Paul Ryan Chairman of the Budget Committee tried to do in the last Congress and so far in this Congress in writing the House Republican budget plan and then passing it in the Republican House in the last Congress and in this Congress that the Democratic Senate rejected in the last Congress and in this Congress last month, was an attempt at least on paper to balance the Federal budget. By only concentrating on around 15-20% of the Federal budget.

And most of those cuts coming from non-Social Security and Medicare social-insurance programs. And if you saw Bill Maher in this video someone who I normally disagree with layout, Chairman Ryan attempts to balance the budget by going after the small appetizers or side dishes. Imagine a meal consisting of steak, mashed potatoes and lets say a caesar salad, good meal right, instead of targeting the meat of the meal or even the potatoes the stuff that fills people up in the meal normally, what Chairman Ryan goes after a couple of leafs in the meal. “Big meal with too much food, we are going to take away a couple of leafs and call it fat reduction instead of deficit reduction.”

The meat and potatoes in the United States Government’s budget is defense, Social Security, Medicare and to a certain extent Medicaid. And then there are a bunch of public assistance programs of around one trillion dollars or so that aid workers who do not make enough money. Or are unemployed. Which is why I believe Paul Ryan and his followers are as interested in deficit reduction, as the typical career politician lets say House or Senate is interested in raising taxes or cutting Social Security during an election year when they are up for reelection. Another words not at all.

That if they were serious about deficit reduction, then they would write and pass a plan that solves the problem by going at the meat of the Federal budget. And not just picking away at salad leaves in it. Chairman Ryan is right I believe about the seriousness of the debt and deficit, but is not ready to solve the problems. If I’m starving and its late at night and I haven’t had anything to eat all day, I don’t snack on a couple of crackers thinking my hunger will go away. I make myself a meal or buy one. The same thing with deficit reduction, that if you are serious about the budget you go where the meat is. Or in this case the money and you cut back in areas where you can afford to save money. That will help you solve the problem.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Independent Political Report: Opinion- Sasha Brookner- From Blue to Green: "Why I Left the Democratic Party"

Source: Fox News-
Source: Independent Political Report: Opinion- Sasha Brookner- From Blue To Green: Why I Left The Democratic Party

I get the disappointment on the Left from Liberals in President Obama when it comes to the War on Drugs and civil liberties. Why is that, because I share the same disappointments as a Liberal myself and believe we would be moving in a different direction on these issues with a liberal democratic President. But what has happened is that the Obama Administration has made these things worst instead.

I do not get the disappointment in President Obama on lets say the Far-Left Social Democrats in the Democratic Party and outside of the Democratic Party for President Obama not being progressive or socialist enough. Because then candidate Obama never ran as a McGovern Democrat, but a JFK or RFK Democrat especially on foreign policy. Not someone who was running to create a new New Deal or Great Society. Social Democrats already had their opportunity to vote for those candidates in Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader and Jill Stein. What candiate Obama wanted to do was to make the current safety net programs work better, not expand them. And put more people to work and making it on their own in America.

This whole deal about why Sasha Brookner left the Democratic Party for the Green Party, is a perfect example of why we need to blowup the two-party system in America. And get a political system that represents the entire country ideologically. And so where Social Democrats who still see the Democratic Party as that George McGovern Social Democratic Party of the 1960s and 70s, which we aren't now, would have their own Social Democratic Party to go to. Whether it's the Green Party or a Democratic Socialist Party and where they could elect their own socialist pacifist non-aggression anti-authority candidates. Except when it comes to the economy of course candidates to political office or at least vote for them and know about them and see them debate and so- forth. And on the ballot, because people whoever saw Barack Obama as that type of Democrat. Probably do not fit in very well in the Democratic Party anymore.

If you put the entire progressive lets call them (to be nice) but really the entire New-Left social democratic movement that was created in the 1960s that today spans over several different parties in America and put them all in one party, you might have a political party that represents 10-15% of the country and wouldn't be seen as outsiders in their own party. But part of the mainstream which is where Social-Democrats should be headed whether it's the Green Party or Democratic Socialist Party. But one united party they would call home.
Independent Greens: Green Party USA 2013 National Convention

Universal Newsreels: President Eisenhower & President Khrushchev- New Diplomacy: 8/03/1959

Source: Universal Newsreels-
Source: Universal Newsreel: President Eisenhower & President Khrushchev- New Diplomacy: 8/03/1959

Just another example of why Dwight Eisenhower was such a qualified and effective Cold War President, because he was such a high ranking general during World War II leading Allied Forces in Europe and being in charge of defeating Nazism and other fascists ideologies in Europe during World War II. So when he became President of the United States in 1953. he was more than well prepared to take on another form of fascism which was communism and the leader of communism in the world at the time being the Soviet Union of Russia. 

So when President Nikita Khrushchev comes to America in 1959 to visit President Eisenhower to talk and even negotiate with the United States, Dwight Eisenhower because of his World War II and Cold War background, was more than capable and credible to discuss issues with Communist Russia. Because you could never accuse Dwight Eisenhower of having Far-Left or other communist leniencies and respect for the Soviet Union. Because he was a man who just didn't hate communism publicly, but someone who fought against Nazism and fascism in the 1940s in Europe leading Allied Forces. President Eisenhower's credibility against communism, was fairly similar to the record that Richard Nixon had against communist first in Congress, but later as Vice President.

Saturday, April 13, 2013

C-SPAN: George Carlin- Lying Politicians & Words

Source: C-SPAN-
Source: C-SPAN: George Carlin- Lying Politicians & Words

I never blame, well I should say I never put the most blame (and I'm already sounding like a politician in this piece) politicians who may be very good politicians, but aren't very good public servants, because how did they get their jobs.

Well, its simple they were voted into office, receiving at least one more vote than their opponent in the last election. Election being a key word because the people vote for the politicians they get. So when I hear someone complaining about their Representative or Senator, I want to ask them did they vote for that person or not. And if they say yes, then I say you voted for who you have now. And if they respond well I didn't know this person would be like that in office. Well then I would say you didn't do your homework and you got who you voted for.

Thats the thing about democracy as former U.K. Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said. "Democracy is the worst form of government in the world except for all of the rest." And that when you leave it up to the people to decide we'll have people who'll make bad decisions because they don't know any better.

I'm not blaming democracy for the bad public servants that we get but I'm blaming the people who vote for the bad politicians. That we get because we as a country have to deal with the bad decisions that these bad public servants make at least at the Federal level. That its not so much democracy that we need but what we really need is a smart liberal democracy.

People who just don't vote but people who know how to vote and vote for the right people who'll protect our freedoms and not try run our lives for us by trying to pass new restrictions on how we should live our own lives. That what we really need is a smart democracy with smart people voting for good smart people who actually know what the hell they are doing. And what public service is about which is about representing the people and not the small interest groups who bankrolled their campaigns for them.

Even though I'm a Liberal I really do believe in that old fashioned value of personal responsibility. That we get what we pay for and must deal with the consequences of our own decisions. So when it gets to voting that means we get who we voted for and if you don't like who you voted for, then don't vote for that person in the future. And vote for a good person instead or don't vote at all but don't repeat your own past mistakes.

Friday, April 12, 2013

The Fiscal Times: Opinion- Liz Peak- A Dependent Society Will Fail: How Margaret Thatcher Modernize Britain Economically and Politically

Source: The Fiscal Times-Maggie & Ronnie-
Source: This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Times Plus
The biggest thing that Margaret Thatcher did to the United Kingdom and her biggest legacy in a positive sense, is that she moved a socialist state both politically and economically and from a country where the government was expected to take care of everyone and meet its basic needs and even run a lot of its companies and industries for them, to a country where people were expected to take care of themselves. Call it Welfare Reform of the 1980s, UK style. Where people who are physically and mentally able, but were collecting public assistance (as Americans call it) to financially support themselves and weren’t working at all, now were expected and required to work. And at least working for welfare benefits that they were receiving.

Britain became a country where people learned how to take care of themselves and how to meet their basic needs. Where everyone had access to a quality education so they would have the skills that they would need so they could take care of themselves. And not have to need public assistance just in order to survive and pay their bills. Transforming a dependent society with a welfare state that’s there to take care of everyone. To a British Opportunity Society and Free Society (in their terms) where Brits were expected to finish school and get a good job. So they could support themselves and their families. And not just live off of the welfare state simply, because they lost their job, or lacked the skills to get themselves a good job.

Margaret Thatcher wanted to create a freer society where the people would have the freedom to take care of themselves, because they would have the opportunity to get themselves the skills in order to do so. And have a good job that allows for them to be able to pay their own bills and not be so dependent on government to take care of them. Unlike the Socialists who were in power before in Britain. Under the Socialist State of the Labour Party, people weren’t expected to work and too many cases even run businesses and create business’s. Because the national government ran so much of the British economy. And people who were unemployed, or perhaps didn’t have any real work experience weren’t expected to do much if anything for themselves. Because the welfare state would take care of them.

Thursday, April 11, 2013

NPR News: Carrie Johnson: Some Public Defenders Warn: 'We Have Nothing Left To Cut': How to Make American Justice Affordable For Everyone

Some Public Defenders Warn: 'We Have Nothing Left To Cut' : NPR

We have all sorts of economic insurances in America that we can collect from when we need them. Like health-insurance, auto-insurance, homeowners-insurance to use as examples but we do not have an. Insurance-system that in some case is just as much about life death as health-insurance. Which is our justice-system and when we are involved in, either under criminal-trial or being sued or wanting to sue. Someone else for some miss justice that we believe has been committed against us. And when we are in the justice-system either in a criminal or civil sense we have to pay for those services out of pocket for. The most part unless we have a very good lawyer with a lot of resources that pays for our defense or representation in court on their own. And if we are not someone of means, either of average means who can't come up with tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills or even more then that. Or we are even poor, we are looking at purchasing a second mortgage on our home or we are out of luck perhaps stuck. With legal aid which are made up of fine qualified hardworking people but who tend to be overworked.

For people without means when it comes to criminal-justice or civil-justice, they are left with legal aid or the public defenders office. Offices that are way underfunded and overworked that do not pay for themselves because they tend to represent clients without means. And the money they do get has to come out of general tax-revenue and in tough economic and budget times like today. That means they can expect to not be cut but get slashed and the people who need those services are left without. Anywhere else to go to get legal-assistance when they need it and in a country that champions justice as much as we do. And speaks in such high praise of it, that should be unacceptable and we should be looking to create a justice-system thats affordable for everyone. As we are currently attempting to do with our healthcare-system.

What I'm calling for is a justice insurance system that would be available to everyone that we would all pay into. And then collect from it when we need it like all other insurance-systems. And wouldn't have to go to the public defenders office or legal aid when they need legal representation. But could use those resources to get any lawyer that they could afford with that money and any lawyer that would take them. As well as allowing for lawyers who either work for legal aid or the public defenders office voluntarily. To deduct the money they otherwise would've made from their taxes so American-justice could be for everyone and not just the people who can afford it.

Saturday, April 6, 2013

Firing Line Videos: Firing Line with William F. Buckley Jr. :"The Wallace Crusade"

The Wallace Crusade if you want to call it that at its best and at its best not saying this was all of it. But at its best the Wallace Crusade was a Federalist movement that was about local control and states rights. Not saying I agree with the movement but at its best thats what it was. A movement that was about states-rights and local-control, that state and local governments no best how to govern their communities. And do not need the Federal Government interfering with how they govern their communities. Now at its worst the Wallace Crusade was a majority over the minority movement as it related to race-relations. There are more of us then you, that is more Caucasian-Americans then there are African-Americans in Alabama. And we the majority are going to get to decide what the minority are going to have as it relates to freedom. Constitutional-rights and so fourth and we'll even keep you away from us and let you have what's left. If we decide to do so.

Friday, April 5, 2013

Mike Gardner: Video: CBS News: Campaign 1970: Alabama's Governor's Race

The 1970 political campaign for George Wallace running once again to be Governor of Alabama. So he would have a podium to stay in the news and continue to run for President of the United States. Which was really what this political campaign was about. Was different for George Wallace because the new South as its called was not there yet but emerging even in Alabama perhaps the reddest. State in the union was moving past racism in the sense that Anglo-Southerners were moving past the point. Where they wanted a racist Governor, whether it was because they were moving past racism themselves. Or because they no longer wanted a Governor who was so flamboyant who brought so much attention to it a lot of it negative. Plus African-Americans were becoming a bigger force in this state and voting more. And as a voting block needed to be taken seriously by more Progressive candidates.