Newsweek: Katie Couric- Sarah Palin’s: Five Biggest Gaffes

47551
Source:MSN– The photo says everything

Source:The Daily Review

Similar to Michele Bachmann who said things like America should be less socialist like China, ( an actual Michele Bachmann quote ) it’s hard to pick the five biggest gaffes that Sarah Palin has ever given. To use a sports analogy, she really is the classic case of not ready for prime time. It would be like a high baseball player even a star who gets drafted by an MLB club and is promoted to the Major Leagues the day he graduates from high school.

95459
Source:Ranker– Bill O’Reilly, trying to help our Sarah Palin in 2010

Before Senator John McCain ( may he always rest in piece ) nominated her for Vice President when he ran for President in 2008, she was a mayor of a very small town in Alaska and Governor of Alaska for a 18 months. And before that she worked for a very small paper in Alaska. That’s a huge leap to take coming from that rural, small town background into a race for the most important office not just in America, but in the world when you’re talking about the President of the United States. Ten years ago, she wasn’t ready for the spotlight and ten years later, she still isn’t and probably no longer wants it given how quiet she’s been even with her dream candidate Donald Trump ( another political reality TV star ) as President.

68429
Source:Ranker– Governor Sarah Palin in 2008

But if Newsweek can put together the five biggest gaffes that Sarah Palin has ever given, I can certainly comment on some of them.

Sarah Palin: “I can see Russia from my backyard.”

When she said that to Katie Couric who was then the anchor of the CBS Evening News back in 2008, Katie asked her something like what makes qualified to handle foreign policy and what experience to you have there. With Governor Palin saying that she can see Russia from her backyard. Which would be like me saying I’m qualified to do home construction because I can see a lot other homes in my neighborhood. Or saying I know my next door neighbors very well, simply because live next door to them. Governor Palin, obviously wasn’t prepared for that question by her staff or she ignored their advice.

Governor Sarah Palin, getting caught looking at the palm of her hands for answers like a high school sophomore gets caught cheating on a test that he didn’t study for and looked at a cheat sheet. Again, where is the preparation that could come from having a staff who at the very least is smart enough to know that their candidate needs to know what she’s talking about before she gives an interview, but also know their candidate well enough to know that she actually might be dumb and immature enough to try to pull a stupid play like that.

Calling Joe Biden, who was her opponent for the Vice Presidency old in 2008, sort of speaks for itself. Especially since her running mate John McCain ( again, always rest in peace ) was not just 72 at the time, but 6 years older than Senator Biden. Perhaps Governor Palin, hadn’t had the pleasure of meeting the man who appointed her to be his Vice President, before she called Senator Biden old. I doubt that, but I just thought I would throw that out.

Sarah Palin, represents to me at least the classic case of not ready for prime time when it comes to American politics. She should’ve never been in that position in the first place. She was the classic Hail Mary pick by a presidential candidate in John McCain ( once again, always rest in peace ) who was not just losing the election to Barack Obama, but was probably going to lose anyway and perhaps figured if he was going to lose the election he would go out with all his bullets being shot ( except for birtherism ) and nominate a VP candidate that the Far-Right of the Republican Party would approve of.

Newsweek: Katie Couric- Sarah Palin’s: Five Biggest Gaffes

Advertisements

TIME Magazine: Chris Bailey- ‘Why Being Lazy is Actually Good For You’

Calm woman meditating at desk
Source:TIME Magazine– The good lazy?

Source:TIME Magazine: Chris Bailey- ‘Why Being Lazy is Actually Good For You’

I see the point that Chris Bailey is making here. He’s not arguing that people should sit on their asses and do nothing all day expect to pick up their I-Phone to order pizza or other takeout, including groceries and then sit on the couch and watch TV all day. And then after we do that for a few months, we’re now sitting on our fat lazy asses unless we run out of money and decide to become productive again and go back to work. If he was arguing that, I would have no respect for that argument.

IMG-0018
Source:TIME Magazine– Overworked?

What Bailey is arguing here is that of course people should work and productive with their day and their time, but that we shouldn’t be consumed with those activities and make time to just chill-ax. There’s time for work and then there’s free time to do nothing that’s work and substantive. When you’re sitting on your couch watching a movie or just watching the tube, you should just be doing that. Perhaps eating as well and hanging out with your wife or husband, girlfriend or boyfriend or friends, family, but not hanging with just yourself or your people while also working, flipping through your iPhone or computer. That there’s work time and then there’s free time and that you shouldn’t combine the two.

584B3FCD-453E-448B-A275-F982FBC6E73A
Source:Now Let’s Going– From Chris Bailey 

I’m sort of the opposite of Chris Bailey on this, but I think I’m getting better. I work at home in my office and I write one blog article a week, but when I’m not doing that I’, doing other things that are related to my blog. Like looking for other things to blog about for the next coming weeks. updating older posts, doing research for future posts, talking to other people about what I’ve written and what I’m going to write about in the future. And as I’m doing this I got the news on as I’m working in my office to keep up with what’s going on during the day and seeing if there is anything else I should be commenting on for that day.

And then when I’m done for the day which now is around 9PM sometimes 7 nights a week, but as I said earlier I’m getting better at this and no longer working pass 11 five nights a week, I’m ready for dinner and just sitting back and watching the tube. Which is generally the news and hearing about what happened that day and what’s the most important stories for that day. What I’m working on now is once my workday is over and I’m ready for dinner is to turn off the news all together and just watch movies or classic TV, documentaries and sports that have nothing to do with what I’m working on or about to start working on. What I’m trying to do is completely separate my workday from my free nights and time in general and leave the news for the rest of the world and get back into it when I’m back at my desk the next day.

As great as new technology has been without how convenient it makes life for so many people, to also has at least two negative affects. It makes people obsessed with new technology because of how cool it is and how tied it has become to pop culture. The more you’re into new technology and the more knowledgeable you are about new tech, the cooler you are and since we have so many people obsessed with pop culture and being seen as cool and we have so many faddists in America now, we also have a lot more lazy people in the bad sense, because we have so many people that don’t think for themselves. Who are experts on the superficial like who their favorite celebrity is dating, what rehab they’re at, or why they’re in jail, what’s the latest i-Phone, when it’s coming out, what you have to do to be one of the first 5 people to purchase it so you can share that on Facebook, like you just won the lottery or something.

And because of this we have a lot of lazy people in the bad sense that they don’t think for themselves, because they’re so into to what’s the latest fad and being seen doing whatever the latest fad is and right now one of those fads is not just having the latest i-Phone, but being on it all the time. People don’t even watch football games or movies anymore without staring at their i-Phone while they’re doing that. Because they feel the need to respond to every single text when as soon as they get it, or someone else’s Facebook update or tweet, or responding to what someone else to said on their favorite social network. We have so many people who simply can’t relax, because they’re mind is always focused on several different things at one point. Even when they’re just watching a ballgame or movie, having out at their coffee house, they got multiple things going on with them at the same time.

Myself, I would like to work 8-10 hours a day or even more, but when work is over it’s really over and I don’t even feel the need to tweet a photo or plus it on Google+, or Facebook about what I’m doing after work. I would like to give up my social network habit even on my phone once I’m done with work during the day and just eat a good meal and enjoy a good movie or documentary, classic TV before I need to go to bed and be ready for the next day. It would be nice to take Saturday and Sunday completely off and not doing anything work related then, but even when I’m on vacation I actually need to be doing some work because I’m a blogger and get a lot of email. That’s just the life of a blogger and perhaps anyone who works in the media at all. But during the day, bike ride, work, and then be free at night and live the good lazy life. Not the the life of a lazy ass, which is different.

92523
Source:Seeker: Julian Huguet- ‘Why Laziness Can Be A Good Thing’– Bad lazy?

New York Magazine: Michael McKeever- Watch a Private Eye Fact-Check Detective Movies

37037
Source:Vulture– NYC private detective Michael McKeever and Humphrey Bogart in The Big Sleep 

Source:The Daily Review

This video gets off to a perfect start for me at least in the first few seconds with a clip from The Big Sleep with Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart. Because you have Slim and Bogie together in the same movie, but when I think of great movie detectives I start with The Big Sleep with Bogie playing private eye Phil Marlowe in that great film noir movie.

7594
Source:Gifer– Slim and Bogie in The Big Sleep 

Bogie plays a guy who is simply out to do his job and solve the case that he’s working on and doesn’t play the saint or devil in that movie, but a guy who is a lot more complicated than that who plays a no nonsense ( except for the great quips and wisecracks ) detective who is working on a case. And of course Lauren Bacall, is Lauren Bacall I would watch her driving a bus in a movie simply to watch her because she’s Lauren Bacall and a chance to see her gorgeous, adorable, sharp witty self doing anything.

And I think Michael McKeever is right where he says that you can’t assume the truth and that people are telling you the truth that what private eye and police detectives have in common is that they have to know what’s going in the case and know about the important players and the key evidence, simply because it’s their job. The detective profession is the last of the romantics and idealists where you would find people who are always looking for the best out of everyone and everything they see. Similar to reporters it’s their job to know exactly what’s going and make the best possible case about the case that they’re working on and then to report to who they’re working for whether it’s a private citizen or organization or a detective lieutenant or sergeant exactly what they found out.

When I think of great movie detectives I think of Humphrey Bogart and James Caan who both played Phil Marlowe, but in different movies. Bogie, played Marlowe in The Big Sleep and Caan played Marlowe in a not nearly as famous movie Poodle Springs from 1998. Where they both play guys who are simply out to do their jobs and aren’t looking to change the world and are very unromantic with who they go about their business.

The great TV and movie private detectives go about their business and do their jobs. This is their assignment, this is the important facts and evidence, these are the important players in the case. And it’s their job to find out what happened and how it happened and then report what they found out and turned up back to the people they’re working for. My two favorite TV detectives are Joe Mannix ( from Mannix ) and Jim Rockford ( The Rockford Files ) for the exact same reasons.

I think the main problem with current TV private eye shows and movies is what Michael McKeever ( New York City real-life private detective ) is talking about which gets to realism. When you’re talking about Hollywood they have TV shows and movies to sell and for them to do that they have to be popular and for them to be popular they have to be cool or awesome. And for that to happen their characters have to be cool or awesome with a lot of young viewers.

And for that to happen that means their shows and movies might have to look unrealistic with heavy usage of new technology, expensive style and taste, a lot of violence, the detective physically getting involved with one of the key players in the case, heavy focus on their perusal lives, etc or young hipsters won’t be into the show or movie. Back in the day these shows and movies were less fashionable, but better simply because they were more believable and the actors and material was also much better.

New York Magazine: Michael McKeever- Watch a Private Eye Fact-Check Detective Movies

Lauren Bacall: On Hollywood Marriages

a10a7dee-d3bb-4b64-9da9-3fb061a86f86
Source: Lauren Bacall– Hollywood Goddess Lauren Bacall, on Hollywood marriages

Source: The Daily Review

Lauren Bacall’s quote about marriage, pretty much sums up what Hollywood marriages ( which isn’t the same thing as marriage ) are really about which is that they tend to be business arraignments and investments. That are done to promote the two people’s involved career. “If Sally marries Joe or vice-versa, it could help their career and lead to bigger parts and be great publicity for them. Even if Sally and Joe met yesterday and perhaps have never heard of each other.”

Which is a little extreme and I’m not implying that Hollywood marriages are Saudi marriages and prearranged and that the two people involved don’t actually know each other ( at least a day in advance ) before they marry each other, but they do get advice from their handlers something to affect that if they’re seen with a certain actor or actress that could help their careers. Or you’ll see actors and actresses marrying directors, writers, producers, Hollywood execs in an attempt to build their careers and look better in public than they normally do.

There are marriages and romances that don’t seem like Hollywood and are actually real. Kurt Russell with Goldie Hawn, is a perfect example of that. Kate Hudson, ( the daughter of Goldie Hawn ) has always seen Kurt Russell as her father and not her biological father, because Russell is the man who raised her and has been with her most of her life and they love each other. Jeff Bridges marriage to Susan Geston, they’ve been married since 1977.

If you see a Hollywood marriage reach double figures in years even 10, you could win an award for that perhaps end up in some museum as being part of one of the longest lasting marriages in Hollywood history. Hollywood marriages generally aren’t built to last because they’re not built on love and built by people who are married to just be married in many cases and there not built on love in many cases as well. And are told that if they marry this person that could lead to bigger roles in their career.

But these are just some examples of why Hollywood marriages don’t tend to work out and why America has a 50% divorce rate with Hollywood being a big reason for it, but not the only one. Divorce is common in any industry where stress is a big part of that life and where the people in it value their careers really over anything else. The law profession is a perfect example of that, pro sports would be another one, politics obviously. Not just Hollywood but the entertainment industry in general like with music is another good example of that.

But also because married life can seem boring for people who are use to being seen all the time and are use to going out and not accustomed to being home even if that have kids. And are use to being around multiple men and women and ar really just interested in having a good time. Married life can also hurt one’s career in Hollywood especially if they’re seen as somewhat wild. And also because actors and actresses build their own brands and reputations and play characters that are very close to who they are in real life and feel the need to keep that reputation and play their Hollywood parts in real life and not just be who they are on TV and in the movies. So Lauren Bacall’s quote about divorce being about who gets the most publicity afterwords is spot on as far as what Hollywood marriages tend to actually be about.

81433
Source: The Ultimate Fashion Industry: 20th Century Style Icons Lauren Bacall– Hollywood Goddess Lauren Bacall 

 

Marmar: The South Bank Show- Elizabeth Taylor: 1981 Interview

92973
Source: Marmar– Hollywood Goddess Dame Elizabeth Taylor in 1981

Source: The Daily Review

The term genius gets thrown out a lot and generally thrown badly and for a lot of incomplete passes ( to use a football analogy ) and gets thrown around by a lot of people who certainly aren’t geniuses and if anything are lazy mentally. And they use it to talk about people who impress them and these people tend to get impressed easily. The word is misused a lot similar to how the word awesome is misused today and done for pop culture reasons. But Elizabeth Taylor’s case, I believe genius fits her perfectly and not just because she’s a great actress, but because of every other characteristic that comes with being a genius.

According to Cambridge Dictionary

a genius is someone who is very great and possesses rare natural ability or skill especially in a particular area such as science or art. That’s a paraphrase but it’s pretty close. But we all know or know of people that could be accurately labeled as geniuses who are different and standout in other areas and perhaps not as well as they do with their craft.

Anyone who is familiar with the filmmaker and aviator Howard Hughes knows that he was great at his business, but struggled to get close to anyone emotionally and preferred to be left alone. Richard Nixon, in a lot of ways was a brilliant man when it came to public policy especially as it related to foreign affairs and national security, but struggled to socialize with people and didn’t like even shaking hands with other people.

Liz Taylor, was a genius in another way as an actress. Someone who was great at playing her parts so well that she made you believe that she was exactly the person that she was playing, but struggled in other areas of her personal life and could even come off as an idiot as far as how she lived her personal life. All the marriages and the different men in her life, the obesity, followed by alcoholism.

Liz, was great at doing the things that made her famous in life which was her ability to act and had a very sharp intelligent wit and could sum up things very well and accurately and do it in a humorous way, but struggled to make deep connections with people and relate to them positively and keep relationships with people she cared about and loved. Things that normal people, ( not to be insulting ) but people who aren’t geniuses, but otherwise intelligent and talented do well in their everyday lives everyday.

Marmar: The South Bank Show- Elizabeth Taylor: 1981 Interview

Angela Mary: Dallas- E True Hollywood Story

57878
Source: Angela Mary– The women of Dallas: Victoria Principal, Linda Gray & Charlene Tilton

Source: The Daily Review

There have been a lot of great soap operas both in the movies and on TV. The big ones of course today are The Young And The Restless, General Hospital, Days of Our Lives, but back in the day you had great prime time soap operas like Melrose Place, Dynasty, One Life To Live, Guiding Light, and movies that were soaps like Where Love Has Gone with Susan Hayward and Mike Connors, Love Has Many Faces with Lana Turner and Cliff Robertson, Strangers When We Meet with Kirk Douglas and Kim Novak. But if I had to choose one over every other I have to choose Dallas because it represents soap opera at it’s best, which is what I’m going to explain.

When I think of great soaps I think of dramatic comedy at it’s best where you have really serious scenes and situations, but people and characters who are exactly that who do crazy things and seem somewhat out of control and yet always seem to know what they’re doing. Like the JR Ewing character ( played by Larry Hagman ) on Dallas. Where you have serious situations with serious people, but doing crazy funny things. Like two adult women getting into cat fights and throwing pillows at each other. Happened multiple times between Linda Evans and Joan Collins on Dynasty.

Or two grown men getting into a fist fight at a restaurant because they’re interested in the same woman, with one of them saying, “look, we’re both adults here no need to fight for her.” Even though that’s exactly what happens two guys getting into a fist fight over a girl the kind of thing that happens in high school, but on Dallas or on another great soap opera it happens between two middle age men in public at a popular restaurant. Dallas, wasn’t a drama or a comedy, it was both because it was a soap opera. You had a lot of serious situations and serious people, but with crazy immature people doing a lot and saying a lot of funny crazy things. Like with Larry Hagman on the show, who was like an evil bastard, except he was so good at it and funny at it you almost had to like him or at least respect him because he was so good at being a bastard.

The 1980s was a decade of excess where Americans had a lot of money and seemed to be in a hurry to spend as much of it as they possibly could as if they’re was a national money going out of business sale and you have to spend all of your money before it becomes worthless. And Dallas perfectly represented the 1980s with the actors and characters that they had, as well as the writers. Similar to how Easy Rider perfectly represented the 1960s. It also represented a time when network TV was not only great, but relevant as well and where people wanted to watch CBS, ABC, and NBC every night and not just for sports and movies, but for programs as well. And almost 30 years later after Dallas finally went off the air after 13 seasons Dallas is still the best soap opera ever.

Angela Mary: Dallas- True Hollywood Story

The Rubin Report: Dave Rubin & Scott Adams- Donald Trump’s Persuasion and Presidency

Attachment-1-1473
Source: The Rubin Report

Source: This piece was originally posted at The Daily Review

Is Donald Trump the best salesman we’ve ever seen in American politics as far as getting people to by what he’s selling regardless of the quality of products that he’s selling, or is he the best conman we’ve ever seen in American politics? If you look at his agenda and how unpopular it is and his lack of success in getting anything that he ran on 2016 passed in Congress, he’s not a very good salesman.

Running for president and even getting elected President, is obviously a hell of a lot different than doing the job and getting people to support what you’re doing. A 33-35% approval rating out of 100% by the way, is not a very good record as far as selling your presidency and your agenda. So in this sense at least he’s the worst salesman perhaps we’ve ever seen in American politics, at least to this point, because only a third of the country is buying what he’s doing right now.

Donald Trump literally operates in a fact free world. Its not what the truth actually is that concerns him, because the truth is generally bad about him. Its what he can literally get away with that concerns him. This is why I mentioned the conman part because if the conman literally operated from the truth and told people he has all of this junk to sell you or this scam you should invest in and give the conman most of the money that the customer would never see a dime on and would lose a lot of money instead, the conman would never be successful, obviously. Donald Trump operates in the same fact free world that a conman operates from. Its not the truth thats important, but what he can get away with and what he can get people to believe.

One thing I’ll give Donald Trump credit for is that he’s a master salesman/conman at getting people who now hate American politics (thanks to the Republican Party and Democratic Party) to buy what he’s selling. He’s great with labeling people and situations and great with political catch phrases. “Make America great again.” Well, if you get past the small point that most Americans including myself already think America is great and thought America was great back in 2008-09 when George W. Bush was still President, who could possibly disagree with that catch phrase. Who doesn’t (except for Socialists and Communists) want America to be great?

I agree with Scott Adams on one thing. But I would have one qualifier to that. I believe a popular inspirational well-funded Democrat would have beaten Donald Trump in 2016 just because Trump s Trump and the campaign he ran. Hillary Clinton lost Pennsylvania and Michigan because Democrats there voted for Trump. Imagine someone with Hillary’s personal and professional qualifications, but without the baggage. Who was likable and viewed generally as fairly honest at least. Barack Obama if hr were eligible to run for a third term as President in 2016, I believe beats Trump going away.

What Donald Trump had going for him if that even though America finally broke away from the Great Recession and the economy was firmly strong again, you had millions of blue-collar Caucasian-American voters in the Midwest who weren’t feeling the economic recovery. And if anything were worst off than they were ten years ago. Who saw immigration and perhaps even Latinos and Middle Easterners, as a threat to their way of life. Which is the base of voters that Donald Trump spoke to and claimed to represent. Even though just 6-8 years ago Donald Trump was a damn Yankee from New York City and even a Liberal Democrat (in the real sense, not stereotypical sense) who was friends with Bill and Hillary Clinton and who liked The Kennedy’s.

To go back to the conman part of Donald Trump. Trump was able to sell bag of goods that had probably already expired years ago and was able to sell these people that he represented them and was going to fight for them. And ran this tribalist nationalist campaign of us against them. What they would call the real Americans, against people who hated America, as they would argue. And when you have a section of the country who believes their America is disappearing and your opponent is Hillary Clinton or someone as unpopular as she is and a Democratic Party that rather not vote at all, than to vote for either Hillary or The Donald, a presidential campaign that Trump run can be effective and even win.

The Rubin Report: Dave Rubin and Scott Adams- Donald Trump’s Persuasion and Presidency

AlterNet: Opinion- Liz Posner: ‘8 Things That Are Probably True About You if You Identify As Spiritual But Not Religious’

Attachment-1-1393
Source: AlterNet

Source: This piece was originally posted at The Daily Review

When I hear someone tell me that they’re spiritual, but not religious, my first reaction if I’m not smirking is something generally like, “really?”

Someone who is religious believes in a God who is a superhuman controlling power and a belief in something greater than them self.

Someone who is self-described as spiritual, but not religious is someone who believes in the quality of being concerned with the human spirit or soul, as opposed to material or physical things. Sort of sounds like the definition of a Socialist, but that might be for a different discussion. According to Wikipedia the term spirituality originally developed within early Christianity.

Someone who is religious is also spiritual. I mean, what do you think houses of worship are for. You could be someone who practices a certain religion but doesn’t believe in God or is simply neutral when it comes to God like an Agnostic and be spiritual in that way. There’s this growing movement with young people (meaning Millennial’s) who don’t want to be religious or at least seen as religious with people they hangout with or respect, because they believe those people will think they’re not cool or something, but they also don’t want to be identified as Atheists either. So they try to thread the needle (so to speak) and self-identify as spiritual.

Spirituality is very common and popular with hipsters especially in Hollywood who believe religion is not cool, or at least their followers believe religion is not cool, but they’re not comfortable identifying themselves as Atheists, because they come from religious families or perhaps just don’t want to be known as an Atheist. In case it isn’t obvious, Hollywood is about perception and not reality. Style over substance, which is something that they have in common with politicians.

If someone tells me they’re an Atheist, I can respect that. I mean really, who can honestly actually say they’ve seen God before, let alone met the man. I mean, we don’t see any sightings of Jesus Christ, or Moses, or Allah, except maybe around Halloween.

Its the fundamentalist Atheists who I have a problem with who look down upon people who are religious simply because they’re religious. Or the faux Atheists who claim to be Atheists, but only critique Christianity especially fundamentalist Protestant Christianity because of hard-core stances that Evangelicals take on social issues and bigotry that they show against gays and other religions, women’s place in the world, but never critique other religions that have similar, if not identical stances on the same issues.

Or so-called Atheists who label people as bigots even when they accurately critique Muslims for their regressive views on the same social issues that Evangelicals are known for having. And of course I’m talking about how the so-called politically correct Far-Left went after Bill Maher a few years ago for his stances against Islam. Bill Maher is a real Atheist and doesn’t just call himself to sound cool with hipsters.

I’m an Agnostic myself simply because I don’t know if there is a God or not. As a Liberal I base all my political beliefs as well as non-political beliefs on reason, evidence, and facts. Instead of having faith in some so-called higher being who supposedly always has my best interest at heart. Even though I never met this supposed person. And I’m someone who tends to not have faith in things or people, unless there’s good reason and evidence to have faith. But just because you don’t know that there is a God, doesn’t mean you know there isn’t a God. Which is where I separate from Atheists.

A big problem with America especially with young people (I know I sound like a grandfather now) is faddism. This need to be seen following whatever the current trend is especially with whatever fad young cool people are following. If walking down the street or showing up to work wearing nothing but a t-shirt, underwear, and cowboy boots, became a regular thing with whoever the current hot celebrities are supposed to be, you would see thousands if not millions of young Americans doing the same thing. And we would probably see a spike in the unemployment rate as a result, at least with young adults, because those people would get fired right on the spot for completely breaking the company dress code. Spirituality along with Scientology, is a Hollywood hipster fad and when its no longer seen as cool is when it will disappear. But not a movement that I respect or even take seriously.

Attachment-1-1392
Source:

The Rubin Report: Dave Rubin Interviewing Laura Kipnis- Feminism Has Been Hijacked by Melodrama

Attachment-1-1284
Source: The Rubin Report

Source: This piece was originally posted at The Daily Review

At risk of sounding flip here (which I risk almost all the time) I don’t consider myself a Feminist, because I’m a man. I don’t believe you have to be a Feminist to believe that men and women should be treated equally under law and in the private sector and not be punished or rewarded simply because of their gender. I don’t believe you have to be a Feminist to believe in equal rights or equal opportunity. Being a Liberal or just a good intelligent person, is all you have to be to believe in equal opportunity. I’m a Liberal, I believe in liberty and equal rights for all. Men and women, of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. So feminism and equal opportunity to me, aren’t controversial, but commonsense.

Feminism is not controversial, but what’s called radical feminism or what I prefer to call feminine supremacy, this idea that women are simply better than men and therefor women shouldn’t be treated worst or equal than men, but better than men and if you don’t believe in this you’re a women-hating Fascist, this philosophy on the Far-Left in America is obviously very controversial. This idea that men, (well, straight men) are over masculine animals simply looking to conquer women. And that masculinity in itself is a bad thing (unless you’re a man-hating dyke Lesbian, or just a Lesbian) and the reason for all the problems in America and in the world, are because of men and especially Caucasian men especially in America.

So-called radical feminists or what I call feminine supremacists, hate everything that is masculine. They see straight men and straight activities like football, (just to use as an example) as promoting violence in America especially against women. What feminine supremacists don’t seem to understand (and this is just one example) is that maybe 1/2 American football fans are women. You watch an NFL or college football game on TV or go to one and just about every other fan there and some games are women. So I guess a lot of women in America and probably most of them believe in feminism, (not including Ann Coulter) again that men and women should be treated equally, but most American women missed the last train on feminine supremacy and don’t view men and masculinity in general, as some dangerous narcotic that must be wiped out in order to save society.

I know this is a Hollywood movie and everything, but if you are familiar with the 1970 social satire comedy Myra Breckinridge, Raquel Welch plays Myra a former queen Gay man who becomes a woman and not just a women, but what would be called today a radical feminist or what I call a feminine supremacist that saw her job as eliminating everything that is straight and masculine about men. Other than maybe the physical romantic relationships between straight men and women. Myra Breckinridge bombed as badly as a heavy metal concert in Harlem, or a country music festival in Compton, (not that it was a bad movie) but that movie perhaps has served for the 3-5 feminist supremacists who saw the movie as an inspiration for their feminist-supremacist movement in America.

Laura Kinpis described her politics as back in the day at least as a Marxist-Feminist. Well, that makes sense if you look at what’s called radical feminism and what I call feminine-supremacy today. You’re either totally in agreement with them, or you’re part of the enemy and deserved to be destroyed. And have someone on Twitter who stalks you and has a nasty reply to everything that you tweet. Maybe if someone of these female-supremacists got a job and went to work, they would have less time for Twitter and our unemployment rate would go down even further.

Apparently Laura Kinpis has moderated from Marxist to just being a mainstream Socialist-Feminist, who believes in equality and complete redistribution, but not supremacy. Which goes to show you that there’s hope for all radicals in America. If they just cut back on their caffeine intake, try to find hobbies outside of social media and looking at every radical article that is published and do this old fashion thing of thinking for yourself and looking at the world for how it really is and what people really believe. Instead of what the latest hot political celebrity is telling them as some type of God and viewing every word that person says as the golden truth who can never be wrong about anything.

The Rubin Report: Dave Rubin Interviewing Laura Kipnis- Feminism Has Been Hijacked by Melodrama

TruthDig: Robert Scheer Interviewing Norman Lear- Bleeding Heart Conservative

Attachment-1-1194
Source: TruthDig

Source: This piece was originally posted at The Daily Review

As as Liberal myself I hate the term bleeding heart liberal, because someone who cares about others and people who are suffering regardless of their politics could be labeled bleeding hearts. Now, these different political factions will have their own ideas and approaches in how to help people who are suffering. But to care about the suffering of others all you have to be is a caring person.

But thats not my only problem with the term bleeding heart liberal. Because then there also the stereotypes that come with that term. Liberals all the time even though I believe that is finally starting to change with Socialists in America like the Bernie Sanders democratic socialist movement and the ANTIFA more communist or anarchist socialist movement on the radical Far-Left and not just Far-Left, but Liberals in the past at least have been labeled as soft, to put it lightly.

I would add the term pussies, because so-called Liberals seem to believe that criminals shouldn’t be put in prison, even if they’re violent. As non-aggressive pacifists that even if the country was under attacked we shouldn’t fight back and instead extend out hands to the people who are trying to literally destroy us.

Imagine if Dennis Kucinich was President of the United States during the Cold War and Russia literally attacked us and bombed Florida or some other big place in America. President Kucinich, “if we just talk to Moscow, maybe they won’t bomb all of Florida and we’ll only lose Miami. If we fight back, maybe they won’t bomb Georgia as well.”

There’s nothing liberal or bleeding heart about pacifism about when your country is under attack and you choose not to defend yourself. No political label goes with that amount of irresponsibility and softness. Even Socialists have defended themselves and fought for their countries. And just like you don’t have to be a Conservative or someone further to the Right to believe in self-defense and patriotism, you don’t have to be a Liberal or someone further left to care about the suffering of others.

I guess this article is supposed to have something to do with the great Norman Lear. Perhaps the title of the piece has something to do with that suggesting that he’s a bleeding heart Conservative. Norman Lear describes his politics as conservative because he believes in conserving the Bill of Rights and U.S. Constitution. Which is what true Conservative is and actually believes. Not someone who believes in sending law enforcement agents to break into private homes to break up extra marital or homosexual affairs affairs, because the so-called Conservative believes that adultery and homosexuality, are not only immoral, but should be illegal.

Imagine if Alabama U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore ever becomes President of the United States and his able to get appoint and get confirm 3-4 Christian-Conservatives who are actually Christian-Theocrats, to the U.S. Supreme Court , then maybe adultery and homosexuality would get outlawed in America. If they were somehow able to get those laws passed out of Congress regardless if with party or party’s are in control of the House and Senate.

But someone who is so fundamentalist with their religious beliefs to the point that they believe should be appointed Minister of the United States and be able legally punish people who disagree with them and have different moral values, is not a Conservative, but a theocrat which is different. Norman Lear’s conservative politics represents conservatism, pure and simple. Roy Moore’s politics represents Christian-Theocracy, which is very different, because Moore’s politics aren’t about the U.S. Constitution, but a very strict fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible.

Norman Lear’s writing and producing of comedy in America, is so cutting edge and his belief in the First Amendment is so fundamentalist (not that there’s anything wrong with that) that I don’t believe he could be writing and producing comedy today. Because people in and outside of Hollywood are so dominated by political correctness that if Lear created a modern Archie Bunker (perhaps played by Donald Trump) maybe Jon Voight, or Phil Robertson (from Duck Dynasty) you would see the Political Correctness Police and Army, marching the streets complaining about how bigoted the new Archie Bunker, All in The Family, and even Norman Lear is. Of course they would be wrong, but these protests and boycotts would have a big enough affect to keep that type of First Amendment comedy and programming from making it on the air or into the theaters.

Attachment-1-1193
Source: The Young Turks: Norman Lear on NFL Protests, Donald Trump’s America