Kire Schneider Online

Liberal Democrat

Liberal Democrat
Father of American Liberalism

Sunday, May 31, 2015

CNN: Video: U.S. Senator Rand Raul: The Right to be Left Alone is The Most Precious


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

First of all, the Patriot Act is going to expire at midnight in less than two hours from the time this piece is posted, because of Senate Leader Mitch McConnell and his Neoconservatives in his caucus. They could’ve spent the last two weeks on either the USA Freedom Act. That was passed by the House with 388 votes. A huge bipartisan majority of Conservative Republicans and Liberal Democrats in the House.

Or, McConnell could’ve brought the version of the Patriot Act that he expires to the Senate floor. Opened it up to amendments from both sides. Including from Senator Rand Paul and Senator Ron Wyden and several other civil liberty minded Senators from both parties. Mike Lee, Pat Leahy, Jon Tester, Ron Johnson, Mark Heinrich and many others. What the Leader did instead, was to bring the Patriot Act up, knowing that he didn’t have sixty votes for it. And when that became reality, he decided to bring up an extension of the Patriot Act. To buy more time for the Senate to finally pass the bill. Translation, so he could lean on his own members to vote for a long-term bill. To keep the Patriot Act in place indefinitely.

McConnell, knows that if he opens up this debate to amendments, several of them will pass with bipartisan support. Civil liberties, is now a bipartisan issue in Congress. As we saw with the passage of the USA Freedom Act in the House and now with Senate Democrats and Republicans refusing to vote on the old Patriot Act. Because it doesn’t have those civil liberty protections when it comes to warrants. Under the Patriot Act, the government doesn’t need warrants to search people they see as suspicious. They don’t even need evidence, or at least share that evidence with a third-party. Senator Paul, Conservative Libertarian Republican and Senate Wyden, Liberal Democrat, both want the government to have to get warrants before they can search suspects. Which is really what the Fourth Amendment is all about. The protection from unreasonable searches and seizures.

The USA Freedom Act, certainly not perfect, but certainly an improvement over the original Patriot Act. And the Senate, could’ve spent the past two weeks debating the bill and voting on amendments and improving it. So the U.S. Government could protect both our liberty and our security. So the innocent are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. And government could investigate and prosecute real criminals and terrorists. Under the U.S. Constitution for one and the USA Freedom Act. But no! Thats not good enough for Leader Mitch McConnell. Give him a two-week extension of the old Patriot Act, that the House Republican Leadership has already said they won’t pass. Or give him the original Patriot Act without the new civil liberties protections. Which won’t pass the House, or Senate either.

Saturday, May 30, 2015

The Film Archives: Video: Kevin Phillips: The Triumph of Anglo-America: Religion, Politics & Civil Warfare


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

From this topic, I’m more interested in the founding of the American Federal Republic and American Liberal Democracy. Thanks to the American Founding Fathers, our Founding Liberals and the liberal democracy that they built-in America. After they won the American Revolutionary War against the United Kingdom and the British Monarchy.

The Founding Fathers, wanted to break away from the British Monarchy, the British King and build a free society in America. The U.K., obviously had a problem with that, since the American Colonies were still part of Britain. The Founding Fathers, wanted their own free society and no longer live under dictatorial authoritarian rule under the United Kingdom. Where there was a state religion from the U.K. Where they were taxed heavily for services that they didn’t receive. And build their own country and created a Federal Republic that was going to be a free society.

The Founding Fathers, our Founding Liberals, were very brilliant. Yes, they didn’t want this liberal democracy, liberal free society to be for everyone. At the time, just Anglo-American men who owned property. And they owned African slaves and treated the American-Indians like second-class citizens. But what they put on paper applies to everyone as far as our constitutional individual rights. And not just Anglos and Caucasians in general. And not just for men and men who are property owners. But the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, applies to all Americans. Regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or property status. And they created a brilliant form of government and free society, that is our Federal Republic and Liberal Democracy.

Thursday, May 21, 2015

Independent Institute: The Beacon: Randall Holcombe: Progressivism: Rhetoric Versus Reality

Independent Institute: The Beacon: Randall Holcombe: Progressivism: Rhetoric versus Reality

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

What people need to understand about progressivism, is that it isn’t socialism. Sure, they are both about big centralized government, but progressivism isn’t completely about government. And doesn’t think individualism and individual initiative is necessarily a bad thing. Or that freedom isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Progressives, unlike Socialists in many cases, believe in all of those things. A true Progressive, doesn’t believe that government can and should do practically everything if not everything for the people. Socialists, don’t seem to have a problem that a new tax increase and government program can’t solve and do something new for the people.

Progressivism, was basically born in the late 1890s and early 1900s, under people like Teddy Roosevelt and later Woodrow Wilson and many others, as part of the so-called Progressive Era. These people who might have seem radical then, but today they would be mainstream Center-Left Progressive Democrats. And thanks to the Great Depression and with Franklin Roosevelt coming to power as President in 1933 with an overwhelming Democratic Congress in both the House and Senate, the New Deal was born. The American safety net and social insurance system. To help people in need help themselves and get themselves back on their feet.

The originally Welfare system was badly designed. Because it didn’t require people on Welfare to finish their education and even look for work. Unlike Unemployment Insurance where people have to look for work and even get help from the program looking for work. But the basic idea of progressivism is that government can help people when they are down get on their feet. And protect the innocent from predators. Either in the economy with the regulatory state. And put criminals way when they hurt the innocent physically and otherwise with the law enforcement state. And protect the country from foreign invaders with the national security state.

If you look at the economic options of the 1930s, the progressive economic approach was actually the middle ground. Which might sound strange even for that period. But think about it, you had Conservatives and Libertarians on the Right, saying that government shouldn’t do anything to help people who are down and stay out of the economy all together. To Democratic Socialists and Communists on the Far-Left, saying that private enterprise and capitalism is the problem. And that government should take over a lot of these sectors in the economy to serve the people. Progressivism, is not socialism, but a very mainstream American ideology.


Wednesday, May 20, 2015

RAND: Publications: Paul Sorenson: Mileage-Based User Fees For Transportation Funding

RAND: Publications: Paul Sorenson: Mileage-Based User Fees for Transportation Funding

This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

Mileage-based user fees to help fund new roads, might be worth looking at to fund and repair infrastructure in America. The more you drive, you more you pay for roads, bridges and everything else. The more you fly the more you pay for airports. My issue would be that workers who perhaps aren’t poor, but have to drive a lot either on the job or to and from work everyday and perhaps qualify for public assistance, or make just over that, could get stuck with large transportation bills every week. If there would be some relief for low and moderate income drivers and workers, I would be open to that idea.

What I think our infrastructure system needs is a short and long-term financing system for our infrastructure. One, to keep up with current infrastructure investments in America, but also to further invest in this country and build new infrastructure. And we need new funding to accomplish a short and long-term funding system for our infrastructure. Short-term, would be a long-term infrastructure bill passed by Congress and singed by the President. The current gas tax, is simply not adequate enough, especially with autos now running on other energy resources. So you need to look at other potential sources to fund our infrastructure.

A short-term infrastructure bill, could be funded through perhaps user fees and fees for using roads, bridges and everything else. But we could also tax things that people simply don’t need and bring health costs in America to pay for our infrastructure. Things like sugar, salt, tobacco, alcohol, to use as examples. As well as encouraging private companies to invest in our infrastructure, that they would get back by people simply using it. Driving and flying to use as examples. And that is where something like a National Infrastructure Bank would come in.

A National Infrastructure Bank, would be a separate independent non-profit public company, that would be in charge of prioritizing infrastructure in the country. By working with people around the country to figure out what infrastructure projects need to be worked on and built. And then go to the private sector to get the funding to pay for the projects. That they would invest voluntarily and get their money back and then some based on how often people use the infrastructure that they invested in. That would be my long-term solution to fund infrastructure in America and it would create hundreds of thousands of good construction and engineering jobs every year.


Sunday, May 17, 2015

Prison Planet Live: Video: Paul Joseph Watson: "Absolute Proof Liberalism is a Mental Disorder": Now What Liberalism Actually Is


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

Actually, Info Wars or Prison Planet Live, the group I guess that Paul Joseph Watson works for, Alex Jones’s clan, is another way of saying The Onion. The difference being, that The Onion has a better record as far as reporting things that are actually true. Actually, Fox News reports more real news than Prison Planet Live and Info Wars combined. And if it wasn’t America’s liberal First Amendment, which is our Freedom of Speech for all you out there who don’t know what the First Amendment is, (God help you) PPL and Info Wars wouldn’t be allowed on the air.

They wouldn’t be on the radio or allowed to blog or anything. Because they have such a bad habit intentionally or just from being escaped mental patients of saying and reporting things that are simply not true. If they were operating in a much further left social democracy like Sweden, Canada, Britain or Australia, they would be put of business for reporting so many things that aren’t true. So they need to get down on their hands and knees and thank God for American liberalism. Because thanks to our liberal Constitution, they’re allowed to stay in business.

PJ Watson, or Paul, or Joe, or whatever the hell he goes by, talked about Sweden as this example of extreme liberalism. Where they take away a lot of someone else’s money to take care of people who simply aren’t productive enough and produce enough to take care of themselves. Another example of where he is wrong about liberalism. What this character is talking about and perhaps is not smart enough to be aware of it, is called socialism and a democratic form of it. Again, Sweden social democracy where the central government is expected to take care of the people. Perhaps the most socialist of any developed country in the world. And yes, they are a developed country.

Liberalism, is simply about freedom being available to everyone. Both personal and economic. That everyone has the opportunity to live in freedom and to be able to manage their own affairs in life. That it’s not the job of government to take care of everyone. But to protect freedom for the people who already have it. And expand freedom for people who don’t have it, but need and deserve it. Public social insurance and a safety net is part of that. But to empower people in need to get on their own two feet, while helping them pay their short-term bills to be able to survive in the short-term. Not taking from the successful to take care of the poor indefinitely.

Friday, May 8, 2015

My Vintage Video: The Capital Gang, March 27, 1993- Foreign Policy and The Clinton Budget


Source: My Vintage Video- CNN's Al Hunt-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

President Boris Yeltsin who certainly has his issues as President of Russia, looks like a good guy if not a saint, at least compared with Vladimir Putin today. It would’ve been nice had Russia been able to transition away from President Yeltsin and to someone like him. And continued with the economic and political reforms in Russia. And not of moved in a neoconservative if not Far-Right direction. That they’ve been on ever since Putin became President of the Russian Federation in the late 1990s.

As far as the Clinton 1993 budget, I agree with then Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole. Who then was not only highest ranking Republican in Congress, but in the U.S. Government at least, when he said that President Clinton shouldn’t get that much credit for getting his budget plan through. Because he had an overwhelming Democratic Congress back then. Of something like 257 seats in the House and 57 in the Senate. And where the Senate Minority can’t block the budget and require sixty votes to pass it. Leaders shouldn’t get extra credit for simply doing what they are able to do and should do.
My Vintage Video: The Capital Gang, March 27th, 1993- Foreign Policy & The Clinton Budget

Thursday, May 7, 2015

My Vintage Video: The Capital Gang- February 20, 1993: The Clinton Deficit Reduction Plan

Source: My Vintage Video-CNN's The Capital Gang-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

This whole show was about the 1993 Deficit Reduction Act. That was offered by President Bill Clinton, which was his first major economic bill as President. That was passed by a Democratic Congress by a total of two votes. One vote majority in the House and a one vote majority in the Senate. With only Congressional Democrats voting for the DRA. With not a single House or Senate Republican voting for it. You can make a case that the DRA cost Democrats Congress in 1994. But the plan worked with the budget almost balanced by 1996. With most of the new revenue to the Federal budget coming from the new revenue and tax hikes from the 1993 plan. Which was a combination of spending cuts both in defense and non-defense and a tax hike on the wealthy. And reversing some of the tax cuts from the Reagan Administration from the 1980s. The plan was costly politically, but it worked.
My Vintage Video: That Capital Gang- February 20, 1993: The Clinton Deficit Reduction Plan

Monday, May 4, 2015

Movie Clips: I Want To Live! 1958: The Story of Barbara Graham


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

I saw this movie today in preparation for this blog. Thank you TCM! This movie is about the adult life and criminal career of Barbara Graham. And this movie gives perhaps the most positive light possible of a career criminal Barbara Graham. Who before she was convicted of murder, the most serious crime she was ever convicted as far as actually hurting another person was check forgery. Not to put down check forgery and to make it look anything other than what it is which is, a serious economic crime. That has to be treated seriously with serious consequences for offenders who commit this crime. But Graham, was an economic criminal, not a terrorist, or violent criminal. But she did hang out with people like that.

If I knew nothing about this case before I saw this very good movie with the gorgeous and adorable great actress Susan Hayward as the lead in the movie playing Barbara Graham, I would say that Graham didn’t deserve the death penalty. And if I was a judge on this case or the Governor of California back when the case was going on, I would’ve commuted her sentence to life without, or life with the possibility of parole after twenty-five years. I think there is actual doubt in whether Graham is guilty of this murder, but I haven’t seen anything that suggests that she’s innocent either. But even if I believed she was guilty, I would still give her life without or second degree murder.

Barbara Graham, was no angel. She just looked like one and was a career criminal, but a small time economic criminal at worst. Someone who wrote bad checks, prostitution, doing and perhaps using illegal narcotics. But she wasn’t again violent criminal, at least in the sense that she made a career out of physically hurting people. Even if she did commit the murder that she was convicted of. Life without parole or twenty-five to life would’ve given everyone involved the opportunity to prove one way or another where Graham was guilty or not. And again we’re talking about one murder, which is bad enough, but she wasn’t likely to murder again. At least based on her personality and past. And was someone who society could’ve worked with and even gotten something out of.

Sunday, May 3, 2015

Warner Brothers: The Last of Sheila 1973- Raquel Welch & Dyan Cannon


Source: Warner Brothers- Raquel Welch & Dyan Cannon-
Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

Raquel Welch and Dyan Cannon, here are two Hollywood goddess’, who truly are Hollywood goddess’ and have stand the test of time. They are both now in their seventies and in Dyan’s case will turn 80 in two years. And Raquel, at best now as far as youth in years, would be an aging Baby Boomer, depending on how you define the Baby Boom Generation. But if you look at her she looks 10-20 years younger than her seventy-four years. And looks better than women today not only young enough to be her daughter, but in some cases young enough to be her granddaughter.

And Dyan, still looks great as well and here’s a movie where Raquel is not the cutest women in it. Because Dyan Cannon at least in my opinion is cuter than Raquel. When I think of sexy babies, women who are at lets say beautiful at the very least, but with a nice body and personality and are also baby-faced adorable. Both Raquel and Dyan are sexy babies, but Dyan is in that first group of baby-faced adorable goddess’. She’s up there with Angie Dickinson, Kim Novak, Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, Diana Dors and perhaps a few others. And she’s also a hell of an actress and very funny actress, as you see in this movie. With her famous adorable and funny laugh and smile. Raquel, is just a step behind Dyan when it comes to adorability, at least in my opinion.

Perhaps I should say something about this scene. As far as the women in it, Joan Hackett by most standards is pretty attractive women as well. But she’s in the same movie with two of top goddess’ that Hollywood has ever produced. In Raquel Welch and Dyan Cannon and simply gets overshadowed if not blacked out in it. You have Raquel and Dyan in the same scene, sunbathing on a yacht in bikini’s. Talking to each other, with Dyan joking around in it. With the Joan Hackett character looking and perhaps feeling somewhat left out in it. At least until Raquel walks away, because her character I guess is tired of the Dyan character. And the two remaining women played by Dyan Cannon and Joan Hackett telling each other why they are there.

Saturday, May 2, 2015

Warner Archive: Video: Back to Eternity 1956: Complete Strangers Surviving in The South American Jungle


This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on WordPress

This is one of the best soap opera/airplane disaster movies that I at least have ever seen. They set up very well as far as what the crew and passengers are about and why they’re on the plane and what they’re trying to accomplish. You have a couple that wants to get married, trying to get South America. You have men simply trying to get there to open and be at a new casino there. You have a Nordic goddess, played by the great Anita Ekberg, whose former boyfriend a mobster, is simply trying to get rid of her. And sends her to South America with a lot of money. She essentially has to go, or risk being killed by this mobster. You have a hotshot pilot played by Robert Ryan, who is probably a bit too cocky and doesn’t take all the precautions that she should. And is a reason why the plane crashes.

You have a condemned convicted murderer, who is being extradited to some South American country to be executed, played by the great Rod Steiger. Whose character gets to decide who leaves the jungle and goes back home on the plane once it is fixed and who stays and has to take their chances. Simply because he has the gun and the power. But he knows he’s rotten, or garbage, perhaps you have another word you prefer. And decided the people who are the most unselfish and the people who are the best in the group will leave on the plane. And people who are closest to him as far as goodness, I guess and character, will stay with him.

Anita Ekberg, is a goddess and was a goddess in this movie. And she was hot, sexy and really adorable in this movie. But she also plays a big important role as the person who essentially takes over as the parent or guardian of the lone kid on the plane. Whose mobster father has sent him away. She also serves as inspiration for the Captain and Co-Pilot, who aren’t sure they can pull this off and get the back and running. The first seventy-minutes or so of this plane, are really good and interesting. The last twenty other than the killer deciding who gets to stay and go, slows down somewhat. But this is still a very exciting and interesting movie.