The Daily Beast: John Avalon, Michelle Goldberg & Phillip Sherwell: 'Todd Akin's Views On Abortion Are Bad; The GOP Platform is Worse'

Source:The Daily Beast- John Avalon & Michelle Goldberg. Maybe you can figure for yourself who is who. If so, congratulate yourself with a glass of water, tap water.

"There's no exception for rape in Todd Akin's pro-life philosophy, but neither is there one in the platform of the Republican party. On today's NewsBeast, John Avlon, Michelle Goldberg, and Philip Sherwell discuss the politics of the GOP's position." 

From The Daily Beast

I think anytime that a Liberal (meaning me) and a leftist (meaning Michelle Goldberg) can agree on what time it is, what day it is, the weather outside when just happen to be in the same room, let alone on a political issue and discussion, I think we should go down to New Orleans together and celebrate like the world is about to blow up or something. Because this is as rare as seeing snow in Los Angeles, at anytime during the year, let alone during the summer. 

I agree with Michelle Goldberg that the Christian-Right and the Far-Right in general in America is horribly bad and why. I don't like the Far-Left either, which is where Michelle Goldberg tends to come down ideologically, but that's for a different discussion.

ABC Evening News: ‘George McGovern and Ed Muskie 1972 Presidential Election’

Source:ABC News- covering U.S. Senator George McGovern (Democrat, South Dakota) 

Source:The Daily Journal

"George McGovern and Ed Muskie Election Wall, For more presidential election videos." 

From Election Wall

Edmund Muskie reminds me a little bit of John Kerry. Just thought I throw that in there.

The Democrats didn't have anyone who could beat Richard Nixon in 1972. They also didn't have a united party that could do that as well. One of the reasons why Senator George McGovern as leader of the party for that fall campaign reformed the rules for how delegates were assigned at conventions was to bring in more Americans to the party.

The party was transitioning from a Southern based party with Northeastern ties to a party that by the 1980s was heavily dependent on the Northeast and West Coast to win. As well as big cities in the Midwest. Because Senator McGovern brought in African-Americans, Latinos, Jews and Asians to the party from these big cities in the country.

George McGovern, whatever you think of his politics was a very bright man. And served South Dakota very well in Congress both in the House and later in the Senate. And I'm sure at the very least knew that even if he did win the Democratic nomination for president he had not an uphill  battle against President Nixon in the fall. But more like a swimmer trying to swim upstream with one arm, one leg and one eye.

But what McGovern did in 1972 as far as changing the voting rules in the party paid off really well for Democrats in 1976 with Jimmy Carter. And perhaps helped Democrats hold onto the House of Representatives for another 22 years after 72 with all of the new voters that came to the party. But 1972 was not a year that Democrats were prepared to win back the presidency. They were in transition and way too divided. 

David Pakman: 'Pregnant Girl Dies After Abortion Ban Prevents Chemotherapy'

Source:David Pakman- talking about abortion in Dominican.

"Pregnant teen dies after an abortion ban delays her chemotherapy treatment for leukemia" 

From David Pakman

Since I couldn't find an official definition of what it means to be pro-life, that's not related to abortion, then I'll just have to give you my own. 

Someone who is pro-life, supports the right of every innocent American (or whatever the nationality) to live and exist and not be murdered. And yes, that can apply to abortion, but only if you believe that fetuses are people, or at the very least have the same right to life and exist as people, meaning someone who has already been born. 

From My Options: "Being pro-choice means supporting the notion that people are able to have agency over their lives, bodies, and choices. Having a child is a significant life event - and it is in everyone’s best interests that a potential parent is emotionally, financially, and physically prepared to do so." 

Yes, being pro-choice on abortion, also qualifies as being pro-choice. But if you are only pro-choice on abortion, you are only pro-choice on abortion. (Hopefully that's obvious enough) And even if you are also pro-choice on women's health care in general, but perhaps nothing else, then you are just pro-choice on women's rights as a whole. If you are pro-choice on women's health care, period, as well as all forms of sexuality, so now you are pro-choice on women's health care and sexuality. 

My point is, to be pro-choice, you have to be pro-choice. (Again, hopefully this is obvious enough) A lot of people, especially on the left-wing, who say they're pro-choice, are really just pro-choice on women's health care, including abortion and perhaps homosexuality, but are pro-state on so many other issues, including marijuana, just look at the Obama Administration. But are also pro-state on issues like gambling, pornography, education, and I''m sure other issues dealing with free speech in America. 

To get back to this abortion issue in Dominican: they do not have a pro-life bill on abortion in their country. They have an antiabortion bill instead. It's not just that the fetus died thanks to this bill, but the fetus's mother as well. So one innocent life for sure that was lost, as well as potential life that wasn't even given an opportunity to be born. 

This post was updated 6/15/2023.

ABC Evening News: ‘A Few Days Before The 1972 Democratic Convention’

Source:ABC News- covering the 1972 Democratic National Convention in Miami, Florida.

Source:The Daily Journal

“In this rare clip from 1972, George Wallace campaigns for the first time since he was shot, Ed Muskie was considered a mystery, and the National Guard is called in to stop riots.

Also talked about is the trial of the man who shot Wallace, and some Vietnam news.” 

From EFAN

Here’s a reason to watch ABC Now, if you are a political junky.

There was simply no way that the Democratic Party was going to win the 1972 presidential election. Even if you could get past the facts that President Richard Nixon was ending the Vietnam War, that his policies to talk too and work with Russia and China were paying off and that the American economy was still relatively healthy. But the state of the Democratic Party was the main issues for Democrats in 72.

The emerging that I at least would call Socialist New-Left that backed Senator George McGovern for president who went out his way to have this fringe political faction behind him, combined with what was left of the Southern right-wing base in the party that backed Governor George Wallace, and the traditional New Deal/Great Society progressive coalition that was behind Senator Hubert Humphrey, gave the Democratic Party that was only willing to vote for their preferred candidate for President and no one else.

Democrats and Senator George McGovern were so desperate to get attention and support behind their campaign that they tried to make Watergate an issue in the summer and fall of 72. Even though most of the country hadn’t even heard of the Watergate Hotel yet, let alone the burglary there.

Landslides tend to happen at least at the presidential level when you have a fairly popular president which is what Richard Nixon was for most of 1972, with a large percentage of the country believing things are going well, facing a divided opposition party like the Democratic Party in 72. That couldn’t decide who their presidential nominee was going to be and which faction of the party would get it until they got to the convention itself. Opposition parties need to be united behind a leader in order to defeat the President of the United States. Which is not what the Democrats were in 72.

Salon: Willa Paskin- Interviewing Anna Gunn: 'Skyler Might Kill Walt'

Source:Salon Magazine- Breaking Bad's Bryan Cranston.

Source:The Daily Journal

“Things are pretty bleak for “Breaking Bad’s” Skyler White, played by Anna Gunn. Trapped in her marriage to Walt, her increasingly malevolent, manipulative meth-lord husband, she’s terrified for the safety or her children, but unable to see a way out. With just two episodes left in the first half of “Breaking Bad’s” fifth season, it is simultaneously hard to imagine how things could get much worse for Skyler, and even more difficult to think that they could get better.

Gunn spoke to Salon about Skyler, her predicament, her depression and the possibility of her killing Walter White.

I’m extremely worried about Skyler. It’s getting really stressful to watch her. Was it stressful to be her?

It was. It really was. There were days on set where it was like, “Wow, it’s hard to live in this place.” And thank God for Bryan Cranston being so hilarious and great, and pretty much our whole cast and crew, so we have a lot of levity. But I had to dig deep into some pretty black stuff this year. As an actor you wait for this kind of material, but it can also be very emotionally exhausting.” 

From Salon Magazine 

“A memorable clip from Breaking Bad – Season 5: Episode 14, ‘Ozymandias'” 

Source:Sony Pictures- Walt vs Skylar.

From Sony Pictures 

One of the cutest mommies you’ll ever see. Skyler White (played by the beautiful and adorable Anna Gunn) comes off at least what I believe as a ‘babe in the woods’ (great Goodfellas line) in Breaking Bad, at least in the first season. I didn’t become a regular viewer of this show until the third or fourth season.

Walter White (played by Bryan Cranston) doesn’t start off as a criminal. He’s someone who get into the meth business to save his life and get the treatment that he needs for his cancer, as well as to support his family. He’s a woefully underpaid middle-age science teacher in New Mexico. And goes into the meth business to again save his life and support his family. Skyler, his wife starts off this series as a homemaker, who other than her husband’s cancer believes he’s a good honest man, living a normal life.

As the first season moves along the White Family (Walter, Skyler, and their son) is essentially broke. Walt, is bringing in the only income to the family. Forty-thousand-dollars a year as a high school science teacher. 2008-09, the start of the Great Recession and when it was at its worst, no economic or job growth, even with Baby Boomers retiring.

Skyler goes back to work as an accountant. She’s an accountant, not some former stripper bimbo married to one her former clients that she fell in love with. She’s an educated an intelligent person and knows her family is going to need money and a lot of it. Especially with her husband in the hospital on a regular basis getting treatment. The accountant part is key here, because she figures out her husband has extra money here. Which is where this series gets very interesting.

This is when Walt is getting is meth business going and becoming successful with his high school dropout partner. She figures out that he’s in the drug business, but doesn’t turn him in. Maybe she’s worried about what will happen to her if she does that. Maybe she’s worried about what will happen to the father of her son who has cancer. Maybe she doesn’t want to lose his income from his business, because again they need the money.

The White Family which was pretty normal pre-cancer, now becomes very stressful and Skyler and Walt, now are arguing on a regular basis and even separate, but never actually divorce. This is really a great and funny crime drama with all sorts of great characters. And Skyler White played by Anna Gunn, is a huge part of that. 

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

Source:The Young Turks- Soledad O'Brien & 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.

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 post. 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) 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.

A police state seems to be what some Americans (Left & Right) 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.

Cussing is 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: "Holy shit! 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! (Hopefully that's as repetitive as I can get) 

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? 

That pretty much sums up how I feel about this Massachusetts so-called public decency law.