USFL Forever: Small Potatoes: Who Killed The USFL

Source:The New Democrat

I could just write that Donald Trump by himself killed the old United States Football League that only lasted for three seasons from 1983-85 and I'm actually old enough to remember games from all three seasons. I could write that and it would be mostly true about Donald Trump. Because he was involved in the league owning the New Jersey Generals, but he was the Dan Snyder of the USFL. A great businessman outside of pro football with no business being involved in pro football.

But the whole story is that the USFL folded for multiple reasons and even though The Donald had a hand in several of those reasons why the league folded. It wasn't all his fault but with The Donald I could put down the facts that the league grew way too fast going to eighteen teams by 1985. And also expanding in NFL markets that already great established pro football franchises and weren't looking for another pro football franchise like. Washington, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Boston, Detroit, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Tampa, and Denver. And I could put the fact that Donald Trump decided the USFL should be playing in the fall and go up against the NFL. When they had the spring and summer all to themselves.

So yeah I could put most of the failures of the old USFL on Donald Trump. Because he had a hand in a lot of their management failures. But he wasn't the Commissioner of the USFL, but the majority owner of one of their franchises. And the USFL didn't have strong enough people amongst their other owners or a commissioner to stand up. And say "you know what we shouldn't be doing this. Going up against the NFL in their own markets and playing when they do. When we have all of these other major markets that do not have a major league pro football franchise yet". If they had strong smart people like that, they probably never go out of business. And have the spring and summer to themselves and still be in business in today. 

The Phil Donahue Show: The Tonight Show With Johnny Carson (1970)

Source:Phil Donahue Show- The King of Late Night Johnny Carson, on Phil Donahue in 1970 

Source:The New Democrat 

"Please show your support for all the time and effort I've put into recording, collecting, as well as storing, transferring, editing, and uploading all of these interviews which are sometimes very rare and hard to find. Please send your Paypal donation to myinnereyeinterview2@gmail.com    Your support is very much appreciated!!"

From My Inner Eye Interview

Johnny Carson is not the best interviewer of all-time, but he was a very good interviewer. A bright guy who did his homework. Johnny is not the best standup comedian of all-time, but he's certainly on the short list of greatest standup comedians who have ever performed. 

But what Johnny is, is the best comedy talk/variety show host of all-time because of his ability to do so many things and play so many roles. That generally started off with a very good standup performance of his own, followed by an interview that he would do.

I think what made the The Tonight Show With Johnny Carson work (and there is really only Tonight Show, at least as far as I'm concern) but what made that show work was that it didn't try to be anything other than what it was. 

Johnny would interview everybody and only interview those people as himself. Not interview a politician as if he was Walter Cronkite. Not interview a great athlete as if he was Curt Gowdy. Or interview a great entertainer as if he was Barbara Walters. He was comedian first and foremost and played the other roles on the show as himself doing the best job he can.

The Johnny Carson Show was real and it was about Carson and what made Carson work. The standup part for him and perhaps the comedy skits were natural for him. But the interviews and preparation were work because that wasn't his background, but he was intelligent and knew enough about the other issues he dealt with like interviewing public officials and politicians and interested in those things as well that he could interview people well and have intelligent conversations with them. 

Hail To The Redskins For Life: Daniel Snyder- 'Plans Have Already Been Made For a New Redskins Stadium'

Source: Curbed DC- RFK Memorial Stadium-

Source: The New Democrat

This is something that should've been done twenty years ago. But back then Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke was dealing with Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly and her administration in Washington. And even though Mr. Cooke had offered to build the stadium himself and pay for the whole thing, which is something he and the Redskins can afford to do because of the value of the franchise, he couldn't get an agreement with the Kelly Administration in Washington to build the stadium there. There was also a factor with RFK Stadium because Washington was still looking for a new MLB franchise.

Times are much different now and not only is the City of Washington run much better and no longer dealing with runaway crime, or runaway deficits, or runaway debt, or runaway poverty. The education system is getting better and the city is no longer losing people, but actually adding people and has become one of the safest big cities to live in America. As well as having one of the best economies. And has Mayor's and a government as well as City Council that knows how to govern and to make deals.

The point is because of all of these factors not only does Washington want the Redskins back in the city. But the Redskins also want to back in the city they represent and Washington is still the best location for them in the Washington metro area. Because it is a great big beautiful city where a stadium there would be easy to for everyone to get to and where fans will no longer have to worry about getting stuck in Maryland traffic because they could either drive downtown, or take the train.

For just the simple reason that Washington now has MLB again and has it's downtown at Nationals Parks with the Nationals, RFK Stadium not in it's current form, but either though renovation and expanding it with two or three additional decks and perhaps a retractable roof dome for a Super Bowl and other indoor events. Or simply tearing the stadium down and replacing it with a hundred-thousand seat stadium, that spot becomes a perfect location for the Redskins in Washington where the Redskins now and always have belong.
Source:WJLA-TV News

The Tomorrow Show With Tom Snyder: Ayn Rand (1979)

Source: NBC-

Source:The New Democrat

Tom Snyder trying to learn about Ayn Rand's objectivism and in this interview they are getting into religion. And Ayn telling Tom that "religion is wrong and not for people who base their beliefs on religion". And that is probably putting it nicely. Snyder was a lifelong Catholic, so probably hearing Ayn Rand who was what I would call a fundamentalist Atheist talking about why she doesn't like religion is probably hard for him to hear. But that is why Snyder did these interviews to learn about how others think even when he disagrees with them.
Source:NBC

John Stossel: You Can't Say That

Source:The New Democrat

Private organizations have the right to regulate themselves as long as they are within the law and their contractual obligations. They don't have to be fair or even consistent and I don't have a problem with them being able to do this as long as they are a private organization. Even though I tend to disagree with a lot of the decisions as they make when it comes to kicking people off the air as it relates to what they say may be offensive.

I'm not interested in outlawing fascists thoughts and people being able to express their fascist views whether they come from the Right or Left. As long as they aren't able to pass those views and policies through law. Because that of course would be against the First Amendment even if it does offend some people. Because again we have Freedom of Speech and the First Amendment and I having my right to argue against fascism and the political correctness movement from the Far-Left. Or the moral majority movement or whatever from the Far-Right.

FOX News: John Stossel- Stupid in America

Source:FOX News- TIME Magazine, talking about education reform in America.

Source:The New Democrat 

"5-6-12 John Stossel - Stupid In America"

From FOX News

I take stupidity seriously and when you have a lot of Americans who are stupid, meaning they don't know important basic things that they should know. Like what state the Kentucky Derby is in, (first word being the giveaway clue there) I get concern simply as an American who wants to see my country do as well as it can. And as much as the Great Recession was caused by Wall Street, the fact that our workers especially the ones that lost their jobs during it do not have the skills they need to get another job, or our college and high school graduates do not have the skills that they need to get a good job, you know we have a serious problem.

And as serious as a problem that stupidity in America is, it is also impossible for me as someone with a quick off the cuff sense of humor to just let slide by without making fun of it. I mean seriously we have Americans who know what the latest smartphone is, or what's the latest rehab clinic or jail that Lindsay Lohan is at. But couldn't tell you to save their life who is on Mount Rushmore, what is the Bill of Rights, who was our first President, what was the Civil War fought over. How many states does America have  and you can go down the line.

We have become as a society where whatever is considered hot, awesome and popular at the time and that generally comes from either Silicon Valley or Hollywood, or it is not important "and like so not worth my time to like totally notice". To paraphrase some valley speak. "What is hot is what is now, and history is in the past" and when it comes to learning it is about what is hot and what is now so you can fit in and be as popular as possible. Where you are judged by how many followers you have on Facebook or whatever the hot social network is at the time and what is the latest technology. Instead of being judged based on how much you know and what are your actual skills.

I know this might sound nerdy or whatever, but people who believe that aren't my target audience and those people are the problem to begin with. If you want to be hot, awesome or cool, (and cool might sound old at this point) you might have to be stupid as well. And sound like Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, Sarah Palin, or even Johnny Football soon to be Johnny headed for Hollywood after he gives up on football Manziel. But if you want to be intelligent and successful outside of Hollywood or sports in America, then you have to be intelligent. And that only happens from learning about things that are actually important that gives you the skills to be successful in America.

The Atlantic: Peter Beinart: ClintonPhobia: Why No Democrat Wants to Run Against Hillary Clinton

Source:The New Democrat

'ClintonPhobia' ? How about Clinton fatigue? Does anyone who seriously understands the Democratic Party who is honest and knowledgable about the Democratic Party believe that Hillary will get a cakewalk to the Democratic nomination for president in 2016 based on her 2008 presidential campaign, or the way her tenure as Secretary of State ended and just because her name is Hillary Clinton? Oh by the way who is not a rabid right-wing partisan who's known for writing for some Tea Party affiliated publication or group. Of course not! Because that is not how Democrats operate. We don't nominate someone simply because the establishment loves that person, or that nomination would set some new milestone.

And people who like to make claims of the fact that Hillary is an overwhelming frontrunner with no possible real challenger like to use history to make their case. Peter Beinart did that in his Atlantic piece, so fine lets do that. Who in 2006 saw Barack Obama as not only someone who would win the Democratic nomination for president overwhelmingly by the way. It was clear he was going to win the nomination by April if not March as far as where the remaining primaries were. Let alone winning the White House in November and winning states like Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia. And oh by the way being the first African-American ever elected President of the United States.

My point about that is that it is 2014 and the late summer of 2014 in August (even though Maryland didn't see summer this year) and we are still more than two years away from the 2016 president election about about sixteen months away from the first presidential primaries. A year from now we'll have a much better idea about who will and can try to challenger Hillary for the Democratic nomination for president and we still don't even know if she wants to run again. 2008 was a huge disappointment for her. She didn't run a very good campaign and took a lot of shots she wasn't prepared for from both Republicans and Democrats and wasn't prepared for the campaign that happened.

Democrats don't hand out presidential nominations as gifts. You have to earn them and if Hillary's message in 2016 is "vote for me because I'm me!" Which is essentially what it was in 2008, the same fate will happen to her because one of several Democrats will see that from a hundred yards away and use that as their opening to challenge her. "If Hillary won't tell you why she wants to be president and what she would do as president, I will". And be able to lay out the campaign, support and organization to do it. Which is what Barack Obama pulled off in 2007-08.