TYT Shows: The Panel: Al Gore, Breathable Booze and Shade Balls

Source: TYT Shows: The Panel: Al Gore, Breathable Booze and Shade Balls

Al Gore for president? Why, would be my question about that. A simple one word question about that. “Vote for Al Gore for president, again and I”ll do”, what exactly? Al Gore, the man who lost the presidency to a college frat brat, who thought he was still at Yale and perhaps failed his freshmen year 22 years in a row and suddenly wakes up at the age of 40 and realizes he now has kids, is married and needs a full-time job that will support his family. Who gets into politics, because his father is George H.W. Bush. And I’m speaking about George W. Bush of course.

Al Gore, is not Dick Nixon, or even Bill Clinton. He’s someone whose more than capable of being happy in the private sector and making a lot of money and speaking about issues that he cares about and writing about them. He wanted to be president in the 1980s and 1990s, which is why he runs in 2000 and as Vice President to a very popular President Clinton and with almost no opposition in the party to him, he had the perfect opportunity to be President of the United States, but he blew it. It took him about six months to figure out what type of presidential campaign he was going to run in 2000.

If Al Gore, wants to be Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Interior, Secretary of State, National Security Director, by all means he’s qualified for any of those positions and would serve the next Democratic president very well. But run again for president when the avenue to get there is not clear unlike in 2000 when you were a heavy favorite to beat Joe Average who lives on Main street in Smithville, whose a swell kind of guy and everything and everyone’s favorite drinking partner at the local tavern and hardest worker at the factory, when he’s sober and I’m thinking of George W. Bush obviously as far as what G.W. brought to that campaign as far as qualifications, doesn’t make sense to me.

Read Full Post »

The Young Turks: Ana Kasparian & Cenk Uygur- ‘Jerry Seinfeld Caught By The Sensitivity Police’

Source:The Young Turks – Jerry Seinfeld: “What’s The Deal With The Sensitivity Police?” LOL

Source:The New Democrat 

“Apparently, the bar for racial insensitivity has now been lowered so much that one can be branded with the scarlet “R” for insisting that racial and gender identity issues should be irrelevant in certain circumstances. Merely asserting that merit, and not demographic identifiers which result from accidents of birth, should carry more weight is enough to offend those for whom racial and gender-based grievances suffice for a raison d’être.

Take, for example, Gawker’s Kyle Chayka, who objected to comedic legend Jerry Seinfeld’s response to a question the performer was asked about his web series, Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, primarily featuring young, white men.

“It really pisses me off,” Seinfeld said of the logic behind that question.

“People think that it’s the census or something,” he observed of comedy in general. “It’s gotta represent the actual pie chart of America. Who cares?””* The Young Turks hosts Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian break it down.

Read more here from Noah Rothman at:Mediate.”

From The Young Turks

Damn! I actually agree with both Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur on the same show, about the same topic. They both just scored a touchdown and converted a two-point conversion in the liberal column for me. Maybe they aren’t as radical and socialist as I give them credit, or blame for. Depending on your perspective.

It would be one thing if Jerry Seinfeld was just talking to comedians of one race, (in this case Caucasian) because that is the only people he wants to talk to. But that is not what this is about. He interviews people he thinks are funny. And in this case the recent comedians he spoke to, all happened to be Caucasian.

It would be one thing if Jerry said (and I can call him Jerry since I’m his German nephew whose not a Nazi) it would be one thing if Jerry said: “Those African-Americans, (or something else) always bitching about how life is tough in America. They can’t take a joke. I’ve seen Marxist dictators with bigger sense of humors. I know this since I interviewed them. If they think they got it so bad in America, why don’t they go back to Africa.”

But Jerry didn’t say anything like that and is not talking to people based on race, or ethnicity. He simply wants to talk to people who make him laugh. This current group he found just happen to all be from the same race.

And oh by the way: if lets say Chris Rock was doing a show and he only interviewed African-American male comedians, no one would be making an issue of this. Well maybe Breitbart, or Fox News. This same argument could be made against affirmative action. Why not just go where the talent is and just judge people as individuals and let the most qualified people regardless of race, ethnicity, or gender, get the best jobs. And leave whatever is left for the wannabes of all races, ethnicities, male, female, who gives a damn!

There are times when one group of people, (fill in the blank which group that is) looks a little better than other groups as far as having their members being part of what’s happening in America. That is the way freedom and private enterprise works.

Cenk Uygur made another great point and its the boy who cried wolf analogy. That real racism, is racism. When people are being denied access in life and given harsher treatment simply because of their race, that’s racism. But when you try to apply that label to anything you can think of to try to make people especially who aren’t minorities in this country, look like bigots and have no real evidence of the charge that you’re making, you become the boy, or girl who cries wolf. You end up looking worst than real bigots and sure as hell than the person that you want to look like a bigot.

Crying wolf is like swinging for the fences, (to use a baseball analogy) when you’re a 150 pound shortstop who has never a hit a home run in your life, even in Little League. And every part of the outfield is at least 400 feet away: it doesn’t work.

Read Full Post »

The Young Turks: Video: Facial Hair Transplants, The Latest Hipster Rage

.
This post was originally posted at The New Democrat on Blogger

People who claim to not care about what others think of them and how they look are sure as hell spending a lot of money to look a certain way. And of course they have the right to do that and I don’t believe anyone is saying they don’t, because it is their money and they can do whatever the hell they want to themselves as long as they are held responsible for their own decisions. But it’s definitely a big contradiction, the smoking gun if you will, that hipsters are just as superficial about how they look as what I call valley people, who follow valley culture and live its lifestyle.

Read Full Post »

The Young Turks: ‘Martin Luther King Was a Republican?’

Source:The Young Turks– Dr. Martin L. King was a Republican. Also in the news: Reverend’s Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, have both come out in favor of same-sex marriage. And have announced they’ve been in love with each other for years. LOL

Source:FreeState MD

“Many people talk about the “fact” that King was a Republican. It is asserted incessantly by conservatives on Twitter and elsewhere on the internet, especially in the lead up to today’s 50th anniversary of the March on Washington. The claim is most prominently advanced by King’s niece, Republican activist Alveda King. Over the years, conservative groups have purchased billboards making the claim. Second, Martin Luther King Jr. was not a Republican. Or a Democrat. King was not a partisan and never endorsed any political candidate…”.* Cenk Uygur, Ana Kasparian, John Iadarola (host of TYT University and Common Room), and Dave Rubin (host of The Rubin Report) break it down on The Young Turks.”

From The Young Turks

Pre-1964 or so I could see why Martin King was a Republican. Lets face it, the GOP was home to an overwhelming amount of African-Americans. Because of the Civil War, the freeing of the African slaves, Abraham Lincoln, etc. And then go up to the 1950s and 60s, which party is the civil rights party? The Republican Party and their Northern Progressives, especially in Congress. Who without the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the 1968 Fair Housing Law doesn’t pass. Those laws would’ve not of passed in the House and Senate without Northern and Midwestern Progressive and Conservative Republicans. Like Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen.

Ideologically except for civil rights, its hard to imagine how MLK would’ve fit into the Republican Party. They did have a progressive faction, but that was about civil rights, infrastructure, environmental protection and to a certain extent the safety net for people who truly needed it. But MLK was much more social democratic in nature, especially economically and when it came to civil rights and racial equality in general. And he was a dove and non-interventionist when it came to foreign policy and national security. And consistently spoke out against the size of the American defense budget and our involvement oversees. But without putting down American serviceman and women. Unlike the New Left of the late 1960s.

I can’t imagine Dr. King as a Republican or Democrat back then and perhaps not today. Today I could see him putting down Democrats as giving up on the poor and less-fortunate over things like Welfare to Work. And not doing enough to address the income gap and eliminate what he and others see as the Military Industrial Complex and Prison Industrial Complex. If Dr. King were a Democrat today, he would’ve been a member of the Progressive Caucus and perhaps one of the leaders of Occupy Wall Street, or creating his own social democratic movement. Or perhaps not a Democrat at all and a member of the Green Party or Democratic Socialists USA. He was very Left on economic policy and when it came to national security as well, for a lot of center-left Democrats.

Read Full Post »

The Young Turks: Ana Kasparian & Cenk Uygur- ‘Liberal Bias? CNN Anchor Soledad O’Brien Accused by Right-Wing’

Source:The Young Turks– CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien and Mitt Romney 2012 adviser John Sununu.

Source:The Daily Journal

“CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien struck back at critics who objected to her reading from a document printed from what they called a liberal website — yet not citing her source — while interviewing an operative for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on the topic of Medicare. O’Brien was substitute-hosting on Anderson Cooper 360 on Monday when she was seen flipping through a story from the website Talking Points Memo during a segment with Romney campaign adviser Barbara Comstock. Conservative media, most notably Rush Limbaugh, mocked the news anchor for what they perceived to be a journalistic transgression…

From The Young Turks

If you’ve followed the career of CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien who’s also worked at NBC News and I’m sure other places and you don’t look at it from left, or right, but you judge her career instead, especially if you look at her documentaries and panel discussions, its, pretty clear she comes at her job from a political viewpoint.

The whole series Black and Brown in America is a good example of that. I’m not saying she’s not qualified, or doesn’t do a good job, but she approaches issues from the left and would probably be better suited for being on MSNBC than CNN.

Soledad, could be the Bill O’Reilly of NBC News, who takes on people in power from both sides, but also has an ideological viewpoint. That she’s not afraid to make public, but goes after people on both sides.

To give you an example of Bill O’Reilly: back in the summer of 2003, when it was discovered that there wasn’t any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we went to war there, based on bogus evidence (to put it nicely) O’Reilly announced he was done with President Bush.O’Reilly announced he was done with President Bush and was no longer going to carry his water for him. He goes after people on both sides, but is definitely a right-winger himself, but not a puppet.

Well Soledad O’Brien could be that watchdog for the left and even take on leftists. When she feels she should, which I’m sure he has in the past. She could be Mike Wallace, or Ted Koppel of CNN. Someone who goes after people in power. Not to bring people down, but to hold them accountable and make them back up their argument and policies, or pay a price for it.

As far as Soledad O’Brien’s interview with John Sununu Sr. President H.W. Bush’s Chief of Staff, as well as former Governor of New Hampshire, I think she did a good job. Politicians don’t like to be asked anything that could put them on the defensive and get them off of their talking points. When they do interviews like this, they see their role as speaking up for the candidates they support and speaking out against the candidates they oppose. And anything that’s a tough question which is what anchors get paid to do if they are news anchors which is what Soledad is.

Good anchors put politicians on the defensive when they feel they need to, so what they do instead of answering the questions, is to respond by taking it out on the anchor. For example: “how can you ask me that question, when we should be talking about Joe Jones horrible foreign policy and my candidate’s great record at creating jobs and balancing budgets?” Or whatever.’ Soledad was quoting off of Mitt Romney’s website and wanted a response from Governor Sununu about it.

Is there a leftist bias in the media whether it’s liberal or leftist, of course there is. Just like there’s a rightist bias in the media as well coming from the Tea Party, which is why people who are interested in the news, shouldn’t put all of their eggs in one basket (so to speak) when it comes to gathering their news. And if you are a regular viewer of MSNBC or FNC, I suggest you checkout other news networks, so you can get all the truth, instead of part of it.

Read Full Post »

The Young Turks: Ana Kasparian & Cenk Uygur- Freakin Ridiculous Fine For Swearing

Source: The Young Turks – TYT Baby Girl, Ana Kasparian: freakin ticked off about the Middleborough fine for swearing. LOL

Source:The Daily Journal 

“If you swear in public in Middleborough Massachusetts you can expect to be fined. Is cussing protected under free speech? Should the ACLU get involved? Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur discuss this bullshit on The Young Turks.”

From The Young Turks

Warning! To all of you sensitive viewers who are offended by cussing, you may want to close your eyes as you attempt to read this blog. Because it may have language inappropriate for your sensitive eyes and brain.

If fining people for what they say in public and I’m talking about what people say to each other, we obviously don’t have a constitutional right to threaten people, but that’s not what this is about, but what people say in public that’s not threatening especially when they are angry and have a right to be or are inpatient, if fining people for blowing off steam (to put it mildly) is not a violation of the First Amendment, the constitutional right to free speech, then the First Amendment is useless. And should be thrown out and we no longer live in a liberal democracy, but a police state.

Which perhaps some Americans would like us to be so we can become what we say we are against and get on other countries for being. Fines for foul language, perhaps they make sense on TV, especially for kids who don’t understand that language yet. And we don’t want them cussing out their parents and teachers and that sort of thing and hopefully vice-versa, all right. I can go along with that, but fining people for what they say on the streets, even when they aren’t cussing at anyone in particular, is fucking bullshit. And I already put out the warning so don’t get on me for that now.

For someone in my age range and generation, I don’t cuss very often. People now judge other people for how much they cuss. You’ll have a hard time finding a comedian under fifty today who doesn’t fucking cuss their ass off when performing and in general. They do it to sound cool and to be funny. For a lot of people cussing is a way of communication, that’s how they talk, you won’t find a hit fictional show on cable (and not just HBO) that doesn’t have a tone of cussing. A shit load even, (if you prefer) because they want their shows to sound cool.

And that’s how you communicate to young people today. For me cussing is a form of expression, I cuss to express anger, or amazement. Like: “holy shit that building is huge!” Or that guy is fat to use as examples. But I’m not one whose blown away by things like that very often and a pretty even-tempered guy and will say what the hell, or get the hell out of here, that sort of thing, instead of what the fuck. So when I do drop F or S Bombs, you know I meant it and not just trying to sound cool.

But just because I don’t fucking cuss my ass off on a regular basis, doesn’t mean I believe others should be fined when they do. Because that’s just plain God Damn fucking stupid! Is your life so fucking boring that you have to regulate what comes out of other people’s mouths, when they aren’t threatening, or libeling people, or yelling fire in a crowded place? Is your thumb so far of your fucking ass, you don’t have anything better to do with your time? And that pretty much sums up how I feel about this Massachusetts so-called public decency law.

Read Full Post »