2 February 2017

Donald Trump Has Just Been Hit Up in The Song Titled "Illegitimate President" From Del FunkBoy Music

by
Donald Trump Has Just Been Hit Up in The Song Titled "Illegitimate President"
On Wednesday, February 1, 2017, the most controversial song since Tupac's Hit'em Up, 'Illegitimate President' was released worldwide by Platinum-selling and award winning music artist, Delray of Del FunkBoy Music, LLC. 

The song calls into question Donald Trump's legitimacy as president. Within its lyrics, Delray has cleverly woven a tale of Donald Trump's hypocrisies.  
From Trump's lack of military service to his claim of voter fraud, this song embodies everything that is wrong with Trump being the President of the United States:

Thank you, thank you for your applause, 
We got a illegitimate president y'all…. 
….he like to grab women by their vagina 
Without their permission, please just listen… 
Liar liar pants on fire Mr. Birther of fake news but now it's coming for you… 
"Illegitimate President"

"When he got drafted he was scared to fight
He said he had a splint heel(coward)
but got the nerve to talk about soldiers who suffered for real 
from post traumatic stress syndrome…
he even said that the system was rigged 
but now that he's president, 
forget about that please
Corruption-ruption what's your function he
got some new tricks and we love those nude pics… 
He even encouraged the Russians to hack his own government 
and stood behind the podium lovin it…
"Illegitimate President"


With a hip beat and a sound that can rock a club, the words have the most impact.  This song is well worth a listen to, as it stands for truth and what is wrong with Donald Trump.  Whether a supporter or not, Delray's song is well researched and cannot be denied.  

While so much current music has no message, nor does it make us to think intellectually, this song will definitely strike a chord in everyone. 


Delray has been named co-writer next to some of the biggest names in hip-hop history like Tupac, Eminem, Dr. Dre, 50 CentMelle Mel and The Game.

The Video:


SOURCE: Del FunkBoy Music, LLC


More Donald Trump Related Stories
Click here for more Donald Trump related stories...

1 February 2017

Actor Morgan Freeman Receives AARP's Movies For Grownups Career Achievement Award

by
Morgan Freeman on the Cover of AARP The Magazine's February/March Issue
At age 79, Morgan Freeman continues to draw the attention of audiences around the world with his radiant voice, gifted performances and unparalleled talent.  In an exclusive interview with AARP The Magazine (ATM), Freeman offers a pictorial history of some of his life's most intimate moments while discussing his early life, his career, and the people and places he's encountered along the way. 
Freeman's success in film came relatively late in life, at age 50, with his Oscar-nominated role in Street Smart and a critically acclaimed performance in the off-Broadway production of Driving Miss DaisyUntil then, Freeman had begun to fear that his career was stagnating after portraying characters like Easy Reader in 700 episodes of The Electric Company.  But soon, he'd land his second Oscar nomination for the film version of Daisy, and go on to be nominated twice more, winning the Academy Award for his supporting role in Million Dollar Baby  
He's played God and the President of the United States, and his performances in films such as The Shawshank Redemption, The Bucket List, and Invictus have landed him a place among the most respected figures in modern cinema. His movies have collectively grossed more than $4 billion, ranking him the third-highest-grossing actor of all time. 
On February 6, 2017Morgan Freeman will receive Movies for Grownups highest honor – AARP's 2017 Movies for Grownups Career Achievement Award.
The following are excerpts from AARP The Magazine's February/March 2017 cover story featuring Morgan Freeman, available in homes starting February and available online now at aarp.org/magazine

Selections from Morgan Freeman AARP The Magazine February/March Issue
On his stint in the United States Air Force
"I went into the Air Force with the idea of being a fighter pilot, but they made me a radar mechanic. I'm about as mechanical as a doorknob, and my test scores qualified me to be an electronic countermeasures operator, but they weren't having that. As I understand it, General Curtis LeMay didn't want anybody black in there. Eventually, I decided my attraction to being a fighter pilot was all movie stuff, so I said 'Never mind.'"


On his early work studying dance
"I came out to Los Angeles and started taking classes at L.A. City College. A teacher said, 'You move very well, so you should really study dance, because actors who sing and dance are what they call triple threats.' This was 1962, and I danced until about 1967. I was in a production of West Side Story. I danced at the 1964 World's Fair. With dance, you have to be all in. On The Electric Company, in the mid-'70s, they wanted me to do some ballet move and I almost wrecked myself. You can't just throw your legs up in the air."


On The Electric Company 
"I did more than 700 episodes of The Electric Company over five years. This was Season 1, because Bill Cosby did only the first season, and, yeah, I was as shocked as everyone by the recent news about him. We all got along great, but by the third year, I began to hate myself for not having the gumption to quit. I was on my way to becoming Captain Kangaroo. No, no, no.  I'd come home and my wife would hand me a glass full of scotch and water. One day, she said, 'You need to quit this."


On his relationship with his mother
"Mama was born in Itta Bena, Mississippi. She had four boys and one girl. Mama was a rolling stone. She liked to go. She had a very strong moral streak: 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' I'm a mama's boy, but I got in trouble with her a lot, usually for doing something neglectful. I remember we were living close to the bone in this Chicago tenement, and she made banana pudding. I lit the oven and never took the pie out. Let's just say I can still hear her hollering."


On breaking into Hollywood
"I'm 50 years old, playing off-Broadway opposite the incredible Dana IveyDriving Miss Daisy changed everything. We heard Warner Bros. was making the movie, but they never hire New York actors. When the movie's director, Bruce Beresford, came backstage, I said, 'So, do I get the job?' he said, 'You're kinda young.' He wanted Sidney Poitier. But when they went to Sidney, Sidney said, 'Go with the kid."


On playing POTUS
"Some people thought Hollywood wasn't ready for a black president, but I didn't consider it.  I'm not a professional black actor; I'm a professional actor. I can remember only once in the movies playing black, and that was Driving Miss Daisy."


On the current political landscape
"As for politics today, I supported Hillary in the election, and now it feels like we are jumping off a cliff. We just have to find out how we land. I'm not scared, though. I'm holding out hope that Donald Trump has to be a good president. He can't not be. What I see is a guy who will not lose."


On that Oscar win
"The truth? It was anticlimactic. I was up for best actor three times. The Oscar for Million Dollar Baby was for best supporting. I keep the statue at home in a little room in Mississippi that has tchotchkes in it, and all of the high-end awards are there: the Screen Actors Guild, the People's Choice, Golden Globe. I've stopped waiting for the best actor Oscar, because you get to a point where it's better to be nominated over and over. It's more fun that way. You get to stay in that crowd."


On the comforts of home 
"… I own this blues club called Ground Zero in Clarksdale, Mississippi, where I live. We needed good music there because the place has everything else: It's beautiful. It's quiet. It's green. I started going to Mississippi in the 1970s, after my folks moved back there. I couldn't do New York anymore – living in a cave, concrete everywhere. I get to have a normal life in Mississippi. Nobody bothers me. I stay home. I golf with friends. I go have dinner. I survived inner-city South Side of Chicago, which was a hellhole, and worked hard over the years. I figure I owe it to myself to have some peace at this point in life."


On Nelson Mandela
"I'd been trying to make a movie about Madiba [Nelson Mandela] for 15 years. When his book Long Walk to Freedom was published and someone asked who should play him in the movies, he called me out. So we got in touch and stayed in touch. I went to his house in Johannesburg. I said, 'If I'm going to do this, I need to get to know you. I need to be able to touch you.' I would go and watch him and listen to him until I could capture that Madiba spirit. One day, his assistant, Zelda, came to the Invictus set. She said, 'How did he get here before me?' She thought I was Mandela. What did I take away from him? Well, yes, he's a hero, but he's also just a guy. He has all this courage, and that's what it takes to be Mandela. You can do anything with enough kindness and compassion."


On his AARP Movies For Grownups Career Achievement Award
"At a certain point in life, if you've had some success, awards start to fall from the sky. But the Movies for Grownups® Achievement Award really means something. I started my movie career at the age of 50, and some of the best years have happened since then. I get a lot of pats on the back – they're all over the place – but this one's more than fun. It's priceless."


About AARP The Magazine 
With more than 37 million readers, AARP The Magazine is the world's largest circulation magazine and the definitive lifestyle publication for Americans 50+. AARP The Magazine delivers comprehensive content through health and fitness features, financial guidance, consumer interest information and tips, celebrity interviews, and book and movie reviews. 
AARP The Magazine was founded in 1958 and is published bimonthly in print and continually online.. 

SOURCE: AARP


31 January 2017

How Tolstoy’s 'War and Peace' Can Inspire Those Who Fear Trump’s America

by
A Soviet-era stamp depicts a scene from Leo Tolstoy’s ‘War and Peace.’ Wikimedia Commons
By Ani Kokobobo, University of Kansas

As a professor of Russian literature, I couldn’t help but notice that comedian Aziz Ansari was inadvertently channeling novelist Leo Tolstoy when he claimed thatchange doesn’t come from presidents” but from “large groups of angry people.”

In one of his greatest novels, “War and Peace” (1869), Tolstoy insists that history is propelled forward not by the actions of individual leaders but by the random alignment of events and communities of people.

The unexpected electoral victory of Donald Trump last November was a political surprise of seismic proportions, shocking pollsters and pundits alike. Myriad explanations have been provided. Few are conclusive. But for those who disagree with his policies and feel powerless as this uncertain moment unfolds, Tolstoy’s epic novel can offer a helpful perspective.

The illusory power of an egomaniacal invader
Set between 1805 and 1817 – during Napoleon’s invasion of Russia and its immediate aftermath – “War and Peace” depicts a nation in crisis. As Napoleon invades Russia, massive casualties are accompanied by social and institutional breakdown. But readers also see everyday Russian life, with its romances, basic joys and anxieties.

Tolstoy looks at events from a historical distance, exploring the motivations of the destructive invasion – and for Russia’s eventual victory, despite Napoleon’s superior military strength.

Tolstoy clearly loathes Napoleon. He presents the great emperor as an egomaniacal, petulant child who views himself as the center of the world and a conqueror of nations. Out of touch with reality, Napoleon is so certain of his personal greatness that he assumes everyone must either be a supporter or take pleasure in his victories. In one of the novel’s most satisfying moments, the narcissistic emperor enters the gates of conquered Moscow expecting a royal welcome, only to discover that the inhabitants have fled and refuse to pledge allegiance.

Meanwhile, the heart of a novel about one of Russia’s greatest military victories does not rest with Napoleon, Tsar Alexander I or the army commander, General Kutuzov. Instead, it rests with a simple, loving peasant named Platon Karataev who is sent to fight the French against his will.

But even though Platon has little control over his situation, he has a greater ability to touch others than the authoritarian Napoleon, who only sets a pernicious example. For example, Platon offers the motherless hero, Pierre Bezukhov, an almost feminine and maternal kindness and shows him that the answer to his spiritual searching lies not in glory and blistering speeches but in human connection and our inherent connectivity. Pierre soon has a dream about a globe, in which every person represents a tiny droplet temporarily detached from a larger sphere of water. Signifying our shared essence, it hints at the extent to which Tolstoy believed we are all connected.

The case of Platon and his spiritual power is only one example of the grassroots power of individuals in “War and Peace.” At other times, Tolstoy shows how individual soldiers can make more of a difference in the battlefield by reacting quickly to the circumstances than generals or emperors. Events are decided in the heat of the moment. By the time couriers return to Napoleon – and he boldly reasserts his conquering vision – the chaos of battle has already shifted in a new direction. He is too removed from the real lives of soldiers – and, implicitly, people – to really drive the course of history.

In depicting Napoleon’s campaign this way, Tolstoy seems to reject Thomas Carlyle’s Great Man” theory of history – the idea that events are driven by the will of extraordinary leaders. Tolstoy, in contrast, insists that when privileging extraordinary figures, we ignore the vast, grassroots strength of ordinary individuals.

In a sense, this vision of history is appropriate for a novelist. Novels often focus on ordinary people who don’t make it into the history books. Nonetheless, to the novelist, their lives and dreams possess a power and value equal to those of “great men.” In this dynamic, there are no conquerors, heroes or saviors; there are simply people with the power to save themselves, or not.

So in Tolstoy’s view, it is not Napoleon who determines the course of history; rather, it’s the elusive spirit of the people, that moment when individuals almost inadvertently come together in shared purpose. On the other hand, kings are slaves to history, only powerful when they’re able to channel this sort of collective spirit. Napoleon often thinks he is issuing bold orders, but Tolstoy shows the emperor is merely engaging in the performance of power.

A united, public opposition
All of these ideas are relevant today, when many who did not vote for President Trump are concerned about how his campaign rhetoric is shaping his presidency and the country.
Obviously, the president of the United States has tremendous power. But here is where “War and Peace” can provide some perspective, helping to demystify this power and sort out its more performative aspects.

There’s quite a bit of action coming from the White House, with President Trump furiously signing one executive order after another before the cameras. It’s hard to say how many of these executive orders can go into immediate effect right away. Many – like the recent ban on immigrants from seven Muslim majority countries – are certainly affecting lives. But others will also require legislative and institutional support. We hear every day about government workers and departments, mayors and governors vowing not to follow President Trump’s orders.

While those who oppose Trump might not have philosopher peasants like Platon Karataev at their disposal, mass marches and protests broadcast united opposition – as do all the petitions, safety pins, pink pussy hats and rogue tweets. Some of this might be derided as #slacktivism. But collectively they map out tenuous networks of connections among individuals.

Thinking in essentialist terms, Tolstoy felt that Napoleon failed to destroy Russia because the collective interests of Russian people aligned against him: a majority of people – wittingly or unwittingly – acted to undermine his agenda. Is it possible that we will see a similar alignment of grassroots interests now? Could men, women, people of color, immigrants and LGBTQIA individuals make their voices heard against some of President Trump’s executive actions, which may threaten many on a personal level?

I can’t see Tolstoy wearing a pink pussy hat. But always a voice of defiance, he would have certainly approved of resistance.

The Conversation
About Today's Contributor:
Ani Kokobobo, Assistant Professor of Russian Literature, University of Kansas

This article was originally published on The Conversation




More Donald Trump Related Stories
Click here for more Donald Trump related stories...

30 January 2017

Why Trump's Immigration Order Is Bad Foreign Policy

by
A rally against President Donald Trump’s order that restricts travel to the U.S. AP Photo/Steven Senne
By David FitzGerald, University of California, San Diego and David Cook MartĆ­n, Grinnell College

President Donald Trump banned the entry of people from seven majority Muslim countries last week. Leaders as far apart ideologically as former Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. Bernie Sanders warned the ban could become a recruitment tool for terrorists.

In addition, the U.S. risks straining or losing important diplomatic ties and fragile relationships. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and even Theresa May have warned about the geopolitical effects of a ban on immigrants and refugees from predominantly Muslim countries. Iran has already promised to take “reciprocal measures after Trump’s immigration order, although the exact measures remain to be specified.


Just last December, the al-Qaida affiliate in East Africa, Al-Shabab, used footage of Trump’s call for a ban on the entry of Muslims as part of a recruitment film.

Banning immigration from seven majority Muslim countries and selectively admitting Christians is a bad idea for many moral and legal reasons. A long history shows such policies also threaten national security. Our research for the book “Culling the Masses: The Democratic Origins of Racist Immigration Policies in the Americas” shows the perils of policies targeting particular nationalities.

Losing hearts and minds
From the 19th century to 1965, the United States discriminated against various groups. In the 1920s, the U.S. established national origins quotas that set the number of immigrants who were allowed to enter the U.S. from certain countries. These quotas were designed to restrict the entrance of southern and eastern Europeans because nativists like famed eugenecist Harry Laughlin and Senator Henry Cabot Lodge feared the newcomers were likely to be criminals, and even anarchist or Bolshevik terrorists. Anti-Catholic sentiment played a role as well.

The laws kept out Asians altogether on grounds that “no alien ineligible for citizenship shall be admitted to the United States” (43 Stat. 153. Sec. 13 (c)). Asians were ineligible for citizenship because of their race. The quotas gave 51,227 of the 164,667 annual spots for immigration to Germans, 3,845 to Italians and zero to Japanese.

Bipartisan coalitions ended this discrimination in large part because it hurt U.S. national security at key moments during World War II and the Cold War.

A presidential commission after World War II found that U.S. exclusion of Japanese immigrants had contributed directly to the growth of Japanese militarism and helped motivate Japan’s attack on the United States in 1941. When the quotas ending Japanese immigration passed in 1924, the press in Japan declared a “National Humiliation Day” to protest the law. Seventeen years later, as the Japanese navy steamed toward Pearl Harbor, Commander Kikuichi Fujita wrote in his diary that it was time to teach the United States a lesson for its behavior, including the exclusion of Japanese immigrants.

During World War II, China became a major ally of the United States. Japan tried to drive a wedge between the Chinese and the Americans by portraying Japan as the defender of Asians against U.S. racism. The fact that the United States had banned Chinese immigration since 1882 through the Chinese Exclusion Act helped make the case. Japanese media in occupied China pointed to the hypocrisy of the Americans, who presented the United States as a friend of the Chinese while banning their entry.

A broad U.S. coalition called for Congress to end Chinese exclusion. President Franklin Roosevelt argued that repeal would “silence the distorted Japanese propaganda” and be “important in the cause of winning the war and of establishing a secure peace.” Congress halted the ban on Chinese naturalization in 1943 and allowed a symbolic annual quota. China remained the key U.S. ally in Asia during the war.

During the Cold War, the quota system posed a new national security problem. The Soviet Union and United States were competing to win the hearts and minds of Asians in battlegrounds like Korea and Vietnam. Radio Moscow’s broadcasts to Asia pointed out that U.S. law continued to treat Asians as inferiors. How could Asians take the side of a country that shunned them?

During the Korean War, Sen. William Benton of Arkansas highlighted the folly of spending billions of dollars and suffering 100,000 U.S. casualties while continuing to restrict the entrance of Koreans. In 1952 he told the Senate:
We can totally destroy that investment, and can ruthlessly and stupidly destroy faith and respect in our great principles, by enacting laws that, in effect, say to the peoples of the world: ‘We love you, but we love you from afar. We want you but, for God’s sake, stay where you are.’”
By 1956, the Republican and Democratic party platforms both endorsed ending the national origins quotas. Congress finally ended the system in 1965.

Post-9/11
Americans saw the challenge of singling out nationalities again after the 2001 terrorist attacks. The National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) required male citizens of 25 countries who were in the United States on nonimmigrant visas to register with the government. With the exception of North Korea, all of the countries were predominantly Arab or Muslim. More than 1,000 immigrants were detained. None was convicted of terrorism.

Governments in the Middle East and South Asia that had been working with the United States to counter terror were outraged by the harassment of their citizens. It’s hard to work together when one part of the team feels denigrated by the other. The NSEERS program was suspended in 2011 by the Obama administration. Officials concluded that NSEERS had fueled the impression that the United States was hostile to Muslims without stopping criminal acts.

History shows that humiliating national or religious groups on the world stage by restricting their entry makes it harder to keep our allies. It can create new enemies. This ban may put the United States at risk.

The Conversation
About Today's Contributors:
David FitzGerald, Theodore E. Gildred Chair in U.S.-Mexican Relations, Professor of Sociology, and Co-Director of the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies, University of California, San Diego and David Cook MartĆ­n, Professor of Sociology and Assistant Vice President of Global Education, Grinnell College


This article was originally published on The Conversation




More Donald Trump Related Stories
Click here for more Donald Trump related stories...

29 January 2017

UK: Bring Back Bottle Deposits To Stop Plastic Pollution In Our Oceans [Petition]

by
Image via 38degrees.org
The following is an email I've recently received from the peeps at 38Degrees.org... It's about an interesting idea on how to reduce the marine plastic pollution. Worth a read (even if you don't live in the UK). 

Those of you who live in the UK are (obviously) very welcome to read that email and sign the petition. Thanks in advance :-)

Stay safe!

Loup Dargent


The Email:
"Dear Loup,

Plastic bottles are littering our high streets, parks and beaches. They don’t rot, so they end up clogging up landfill sites and the sea. [1]

Right now, the government is drawing up a plan to tackle litter in Britain. [2] And there’s a simple solution. They’re considering starting a bottle deposit scheme: 10p is added to the price of a drink and if you return the bottle you get the money back. It would mean that millions of bottles would get recycled.

But they haven’t made up their mind yet, and sugary drinks company lobbyists are pushing hard to get them to drop the idea. [3] A huge petition would prove to the government the public supports it, and could convince them to introduce the scheme.

Surfers Against Sewage ’ are an environmental charity - and they’ve started a petition on the 38 Degrees website. [4] Can you add your name now? It takes less than a minute:

SIGN THE PETITION

Plastic pollution is a huge problem, and a bottle exchange might feel like a small step. But from the 5p plastic bag charge to persuading supermarkets to switch to paper cotton buds, these little changes are adding up. It means we’re turning the tide on plastic litter and pollution. [5]

Other countries are already using bottle deposits to tackle plastic pollution. In Norway, 96% of bottles are returned by people for recycling. [5] We can clean up Britain’s towns, cities and beaches too. But first, we need to show the government that thousands of us want a bottle deposit scheme. 

Can you add your name to the petition now? 


Thanks for all you do

Lorna, Trish, Robin and the 38 Degrees team"


NOTES:
[1] BBC: Plastic bottle litter on beaches up 43%, conservationists say:
[2] The Telegraph:Plastic bottle 'tax' could be introduced to tackle waste:
[3] You can read the Greenpeace investigation here:
[4] You can find about more about Surfers Against Sewage here:
[5] The Guardian: England plastic bag usage drops 85% since 5p charge introduced:
The Guardian: Tesco and Sainsbury’s ban plastic cotton buds:
[6] Sky News: Sky Ocean Rescue: How bottle deposit scheme boosts recycling:

28 January 2017

Stop the Dakota Access Pipeline! [Petition]

by

The following is an email I've received earlier from Change.org, regarding Trump's executive action advancing the Dakota Access Pipeline... Feel free to read it (or/and watch the video) and act accordingly.

Stay safe!

Loup Dargent

Image via rezpectourwater.com
The Email:
"Loup – There's a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we think you might be interested in signing it.

Petitioning U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Stop the Dakota Access Pipeline

Petition by Anna Lee, Bobbi Jean & the Oceti Sakowin Youth
Fort Yates, North Dakota


I’m 13 years-old and as an enrolled member of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, I’ve lived my whole life by the Missouri River. It runs by my home in Fort Yates North Dakota and my great grandparents original home was along the Missouri River in Cannon Ball. The river is a crucial part of our lives here on the Standing Rock Reservation.

But now a private oil company wants to build a pipeline that would cross the Missouri River less than a mile away from the Standing Rock Reservation and if we don’t stop it, it will poison our river and threaten the health of my community when it leaks.

My friends and I have played in the river since we were little; my great grandparents raised chickens and horses along it. When the pipeline leaks, it will wipe out plants and animals, ruin our drinking water, and poison the center of community life for the Standing Rock Sioux.

In Dakota/Lakota we say “mni Wiconi.” Water is life. Native American people know that water is the first medicine not just for us, but for all human beings living on this earth.

The proposed Dakota Access Pipeline would transport 570,000 barrels of crude oil per day, across four states. Oil companies keep telling us that this is perfectly safe, but we’ve learned that that’s a lie: from 2012-2013 alone, there were 300 oil pipeline breaks in the state of North Dakota.

With such a high chance that this pipeline will leak, I can only guess that the oil industry keeps pushing for it because they don’t care about our health and safety. It’s like they think our lives are more expendable than others’.

So we, the Standing Rock Youth, are taking a stand to be the voice for our community, for our great grandparents, and for Mother Earth. Join us, and sign to ask the Army Corps of Engineers to stop the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Sincerely,

Anna and the Standing Rock Youth


Learn more about our campaign at rezpectourwater.com."



The Video:




More Donald Trump Related Stories
Click here for more Donald Trump related stories...

You Might Also Like