Whats the story?

I think his question was, did you spike the story?

The story is about a chat room discussion in which journalists decided to kill the story about Jeremiah Wright during the presidential campaign. Among other things, there are chats that go back and forth in which they decide to kill the story by deliberately calling Rove and others racist if they even mentioned it.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/

Good to know, Mark.

Are you going to weigh-in further?

Mark Murray: I didn't mean to imply that the journalists were from NBC. Sorry if you took it that way. However, there were journalists from the Washington Post, the New York Times, Baltimore Sun, ABC News, etc. who did conspire to kill the story by deliberately (and without cause) call conservatives racists for speaking up against Rev. Wright. They behaved despicably.

Great! Tucker Carlson's electronic rag! The worst part of the electronic versus print journalism debate is that you can't wrap fish with electronic crap! There is no more of a Jeremiah Wright story than there was a John Hagee story (he endorsed McCain) or a Bishop Muthee story (he's the whack job who blessed Sarah Palin to protect her from witchcraft)! You want to go on about whack job preachers, fine, but you know what they say about people in glass houses!

The Journolist story does reveal that the playing of the race card is considered a perfectly legitimate political tactic by many on the left in a high-stakes situation.

Which brings us around to the real genesis of the Shirley Sherrod story.

The hair-trigger response by the Obama Administration in dismissing Shirley Sherrod is a result of the poisonous climate created by folks like Chris Matthews, and the stable of MSNBC "contributors"...Eugene Robinson, Richard Wolffe, Joan Walsh, Jonathan Alter, et al, who continually support Matthews' theme that legitimate political dissent is actually racism in the age of Obama.

And, Matthews is not the only one doing this. It's a persistent theme in the left-of-center MSM narrative, and leads to events like the NAACP's assault on the Tea Party movement and the charges that there are racists in the Tea Party ranks...when there's absolutely no evidence that Tea Partiers, as a whole, are any more racist than members of the NAACP, or the public in general, for that matter.

Shirley Sherrod actually addressed this on the day of her firing when she told CNN that her dismissal was a result of the NAACP's attack on the Tea Party movement.

Point is, nobody in the mainstream media should be at all surprised when the race monster that they've helped to create (in an effort to defend the unpopular Obama agenda) forgets who the intended target is, and begins to eat it's own.

Stop the race-baiting, MSNBC...no good can come from it.

Mark - While I agree with your reply in general, perhaps you could have just stated the simple truth about this "Journolist story": there's nothing there. Is 'PatrickSaltLakeCity' suggesting that there was insufficient coverage of Jeremiah Wright? I seem to remember hearing about him ad nauseum for weeks and weeks... your liberal media at work, I suppose!

Mark-

I can understand your reluctance to comment on the actions of other journalists...

But, you're not seriously suggesting that the Journolist story isn't a political story, are you?

It's a partisan story, being driven by partisan hacks, so pretty obviously it's a political story.

For the love of Christ.

Don't you have anything better to do than bait our hosts?

Thank you Michael!

If he keeps it up I may have to take the FR 'Master - Baiter' award away from JoAnna Smith and pass it on to Mixed Nuts!

My, my...

So uncomfortable with dissent.

Why is that, exactly?

Again, thanks for the affirmation, Michael.

And the NBC "Political Unit" could choose to cover that story...or not.

Dissent is fine.

Behaving like an ass is another thing entirely.

Feisty

Can't wait to see that!!! Be sure to let me know so I can be there!!!!!

This is going to be good...I mean real good!!!! LOL

There are surveys to determine how liberal or conservative a person is, which would mean a lot more than self identification. Everyone thinks they are a moderate don’t you know? And note that those who say they are conservative have moved farther to the right than the Republicans of our past. Just because they are the loudest does not mean the majority of the nation is also as extreme.

As for liberals, they need to be reminded that compromise is an important part of democracy. With that said, conservatives need this reminder much, much more. The far left does not feel legislation has been progressive enough. Well that’s because Obama has actually tried to reach across the aisle. As for the Republican Party of No, it’s their way or the highway—nothing in-between, not even their own prior legislation. Their intolerance goes across the board, including racism (yes!), and their obstructionism is only to cause economic woes to pick up seats in November--despicable!

Let’s hope people remember government intervention in the private life of Terri Shiavo per social conservative rule. Let’s hope people remember the right-wing free market extremes that caused the current Great Recession, and that by doing the same things we will get the same results. If people vote for Republican and Tea Party candidates, it will indeed be a sad commentary because it could only be due to ignorant hatred.

As for liberals, they need to be reminded that compromise is an important part of democracy. With that said, conservatives need this reminder much, much more. The far left does not feel legislation has been progressive enough. Well that’s because Obama has actually tried to reach across the aisle. As for the Republican Party of No, it’s their way or the highway—nothing in-between, not even their own prior legislation.

quoted for truth. The Republicans gripe about the left not compromising, however we have yet to see them compromise on anything. Nevermind when Bush was in office and the Republican controlled house/senate served as no more than a rubber stamp...

I don't know anything about journolist, but if their goal was to ice the Wright story, they did a pretty lousy job of it, so what's the controversy? And Mixed Bag, your view of the race issue is so obviously one-sided to border on the ridiculous. Chris Matthews as an example of a race baiter? MSNBC? Oh for lord's sake. If there could possibly be bigger race baiters than Limbaugh, Beck and Breitbart, I don't know who they'd be. As for Obama's agenda being unpopular, speak for your narrow-minded self. Thank God he's the president and not another right wing greedy power grabber. As a liberal, I believe we would be much better off as a nation if all the "moderates" didn't buy into the complete b.s. served up cold by the right.

TRR Barboursville, WV

Feisty

Can't wait to see that!!! Be sure to let me know so I can be there!!!!!

This is going to be good...I mean real good!!!! LOL

____________________

You got it TRR!

It's good to see you around here @ FR more!

Want some popcorn? lol

______________________

True Patriot - I agree with you that the difference between self identification and opinions on specific issues can vary greatly. Polls that ask about specific topics can be much more educational, depending on how the question is phrased (which is important). It seems that both parties are not compromising much and trying every tactic to bring down the other party. Both are to blame in my opinion and Obama is very much a part of this problem (as was Bush in his last 1 ½). Exactly how has Obama reached across the aisle to Republicans? When he blamed them for holding up unemployment benefits when their objection wasn’t to extend relief but rather where the money would come from? Was he reaching across the aisle when he used his platform as President to berate Republicans to their face during a speech? The only reason Obama has “compromised” was because he couldn’t get his own Democrats to support him, i.e. Heathcare. That’s not reaching across the aisle.

You said “If people vote for Republican and Tea Party candidates, it will indeed be a sad commentary because it could only be due to ignorant hatred.” So no Republican or Tea Party candidate in the entire country could possibly be the best choice for voters come November? I think that may be defined as ignorant hatred.

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000

3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

A: That's right!

Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------

Arodoll "asked why truepatriot said “If people vote for Republican and Tea Party candidates, it will indeed be a sad commentary because it could only be due to ignorant hatred.” So no Republican or Tea Party candidate in the entire country could possibly be the best choice for voters come November? I think that may be defined as ignorant hatred."

I don't claim to speak for TruePatriot, but I can tell you why I feel pretty much the same way. MOST Americans inhabit the political middle, and once upon a time both parties were closer to that middle. We could find rational options for leadership instead of aligning ourselves with a party. Today, the fringes hope that by making themselves out to be in the majority, they can bring more sheep into the fold. They count on Americans playing follow the leader instead of thinking for themselves. They also count on driving their opponents to extremes so they can condemn them for it. I find myself moving away from the radical right to a position at times that is further left than I have typically held. (I'm sure that some people on the right react the same way to the extremists on the left.) It's too easy to do, especially since I find much of the rhetoric coming from the far right terrifying in terms of its threat to democracy. I would prefer to be in the center, capable of weighing decisions based on merits rather than ideology. However, I truly fear for the country if the extreme element that has seized the Republican Party comes to power. Consequently, I hesitate to support Republican candidates that in the past would have appealed to me. H$ll, once upon a time I WAS Republican. Today, however, I'm afraid that if elected, even the moderate Republicans will fall victim to the madness that has seized the right and, if given a majority, lead this country into a dark, dark place that we may not escape from.

So no Republican or Tea Party candidate in the entire country could possibly be the best choice for voters come November?

Even acknowledging that I'm pre-disposed to be skeptical about the conservative candidates now running for office around the country, I'd have to say that, considering what I've seen and heard froom them about their policies and ideologies, not a one of them has impressed me-- and frankly, the thought of giving some of these people a modicum of power is deeply troubling.

Reply to memo. Bullsh1t!

Conservatives would love for liberals to believe crap like this in the hopes that the liberals will stay home and not vote.

Liberal memo to conservatives.

Why don't you just lay down and die already?!? You already stink sooo bad.

Logical fallacy: Equivocation

The article starts-off pointing-out that a fifth of the country identifies with the label "liberal." Then, the author asks: "So the bigger question for Democrats and liberals shouldn't be: "Why isn't Obama's presidency more progressive?" Instead, it should be: "Why isn't the country more progressive?"

This hack-author provides "data" and then equivocates. Obama is not a "liberal" Most Democrats in Congress are not "liberal." But don't let facts get in the way of an intellectually dishonest article.

are you for real obama and democrats have become so liberal . i do look for moderate democrats i am unenrolled in mass but i really just dont know what happened to the true dem. i feel they lost their way to the progressives i also am looking for someone with common sense no more left or right for me im looking for that moderate politician rep. or dem. i did vote for scott brown right now i like what hes doing not everything he does i agree with but to me hes a coomon sense type of guy.

So the bigger question for Democrats and liberals shouldn't be: "Why isn't Obama's presidency more progressive?" Instead, it should be: "Why isn't the country more progressive?"

___________________

Ummm... maaaybe...because as left as I lean I realize that the country is governed from the center?

Rome wasn't built in a day and these liberals NEED to take a deep breath and get a grip!

Some of them come across as appalling as the raving tea baggers!

Instead of condeming the President for not doing enough - an genuine Democrat would stand & support him!

FACT: Elections are not won by the extreme right or left!

PS: Thanks Mark for tossing the uptight righties some grizzle to chew on! ;0)

If the country is governed from the center, why is the news coverage wall to wall tea bag/Conservative?

Fiesty says of the liberals

"Some of them come across as appalling"

This coming from the end all be all whaco feisty?....................................................heheheheheheheehehhehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

Feisty, excellent points. There are some wonderful hardworking liberals out there. They will be out there once again knocking on doors for the Democrats in the midterms.

But you're right - there are some bullying fouled mouthed egocentric liberals whose tactics have pushed many of us far far away from them. Cenk is the lastest. He says that this is President Obama's last test - he had better appoint Elizabeth Warren!

Can you imagine? I think that once Obama was elected, the "liberals" thought they could just dictate to the president what they wanted (demanded). It's not happening. I know I would have loved more progressive legislation, but with this Congress, it isn't going to happen. It just isn't.

But I would say overall, Democrats are very happy with President Obama and do in fact outnumber the liberals, who if you say something nice about the president, you get your head chopped off. It's similar to what happened in 2008 during the election. Every nice thing we said about Obama was quickly dismissed. With a hatchet. Lol.

Agreed Pat!

Which brings me to the question, if these liberals are so upset with President Obama who the hell are they going to vote for in Nov & 2012?

Tea-baggers?

My President has not delivered on everything I had hoped he would (closing of Guantanamo which I wish he would have moved the detainees to the prison here in N.E. IL and the many jobs it would have brought to that town) but as I said Rome wasn't built in a day!

I'm reassured that he is working HARD on behalf of the American people everyday!

Patience is a virtue! ;0)

I SO agree with you, Feisty. I don't think folks who say he hasn't done enough realize how far we've come in a year and a half, and against such odds! The real world isn't like "24." Change takes time.

I'm glad this story was reposted again today. It was overlook yesterday because of the Sherrod story. This is an important and interesting topic and glad we were given an opportunity to discuss it.

I'm with you Feisty - 100% on what you said about his "base".

Fiesty is right, Rome wasn't built in a day, this Recession won't be finished in a day. People need to realize the amount of time this happened in. Starting w/ Reagan and carried through w/ the Lil Shrub and Darth Cheney. We won't see the result of Obama's policies probably until he out of office. The biggest problem w/ Obama and w/ the Dems, trying to build compromise bills. They have the majorities, the Senate is really the only true issue for the Dems. Too many w/ their own ideas of granduer to make concise good bills that affect the majority of the populace. They make bills that have obvious loopholes for the corporate masters, BOTH sides do this. The House really is the only place where the people's business is addressed. The Senate is a true representation of Rome during its end days. Slow, ponderous and ineffective.

Feisty:

The liberals who are upset with Obama will 1) Suck it up and stay with their best bet 2) Simply not be interested enough to vote or 3) will shift their votes to the Green Party or something more in line wiht the ideological purity they desire. Maybe Eric Alterman should form his own party and run. Then again, I've never seen evidence that he is happy with anything.

They won't go the Tea Party route anymore than a dissatisfied conservative will go the green party route. Libertarian maybe. Tea Party? Well, no, because the Tea Party isn't really a party in the political sense.

If the 'liberals' don't suck it up and stay with the party it will only PROVE they never were legitimate Democrats...

Come to think of it... if they are that selfish then they should fit right into the 'me first - FU crowd' and I say to them - grab a tea bag and good riddance!

Liberals who are upset with Obama will stick with him in 2012. What else do we have. The reason we are upset is that he is too hands off. Yes Congress passes legislation, but that is the big kicker. Congress passes the legislation! Give them a firm starting point. On many fronts he should have said this is what I want to see in this bill. He should have pushed legislation from a hard left position, instead he starts everything a little right of center. I guess he read the first read memo.

As an example, everyone who has tried to buy a car doesn't offer to pay for more than sticker price. Not Obama he starts the negotiation with $1000 over MSRP and then signs the deal at $2000 over MSRP. Normally, people in a job interview will not propose to work for less than the employeer offers. Its not about me not supporting what he is trying to do, he should just start negotiating from a point further to the left so that by the time it goes through Congress it won't be so watered down.

Liberals NEED to stick with President Obama in NOVEMBER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you imagine the sound of 'Speaker Boner'?

I agree YellowDog - as I said I have been disappointed by the President as well! I fought tooth & nail here last summer promoting the public option. Did I get it? No!

We did however get the most comprehensive HCR in our history! And now Finance Reform. Let's face it... yes we do have the majority in Congress and some of the blue-dog Democrats are making it is difficult as herding cats trying to get the Presidents FULL agenda through!

Let's take what we can get for now and show the American people that despite the opposition we as DEMOCRATS are getting things done!

Feisty - Opposition in the democratic party is a fact. On a good note, my Dad an older very conservative democrat who sees me as an extreme liberal, no longer sees Obama as that bad (he was a big Hillary supporter). I bet the republicans antics have ensured some conservative democrats like him and maybe even some independents to vote Dem this November.

Thanks YellowDog!

I have no problem with opposition (Lord knows... I wouldn't march lock step like the right wing nuts)!

Having said that... in an election year that is going to be close we MUST put the opposition behind us to make sure we don't hand the keys back to the drunk drivers (see Agent Orange)!

Bitching about President Obama not being liberal enough is of your use or value. They should take that energy and put it towards making sure we NEVER hear the words 'Speaker Boner'!

That's the point I'm trying to convey...

Glad to hear about your Dad! ;0)

OH my FIESTY,

Speaker of the House Boner does sound good if your in to that kind of thing(which im sure your not wrong gender and color I imagine)

May you hear him every night in your dreams come December and for the next 4 years LIVE IT and LOVE IT LOL

You're right Scole... I'm not 'in to' Orange! ;0)

You mean Boehner who likened the Great Recession to an "ant"? He, and Barton who apologized to BP, Blunt, etc. are NOT who we want running congress. Come on, if Republicans had decent candidates, better than Newt Ging-grinch and others with scandal (Ensign, Vitter, etc.), I'd understand conservative enthusiasm.

If I remember, Republicans were like that in the run up to the 2008 presidential election too. Oh how wonderful that month or two of silence was after Obama won with good margins... Perhaps they have lived in denial a little too long and/or desperation, which has turned them to edited videos and other fraud (repeals my arse). Rememeber the Alamo, er, Iraq war!

What I find is funny is that the Dems today cover the entire 'old' spectrum from left to right, while the Repubs have all moved in lockstep to the extreme right!

All of the 'old' political spectrum has shifted and has moved over a notch to the right, what used to be Left is now considered Far Left, the old Center is considered Left now, the right is considered the 'center while the old extreme right is now called the right, and the Extreme right of today used to just be called the 'off-the-page lunatic fringe'. Sadly the Repubs are now into that Off-the-page lunatic fringe thing where they do not even seem to see where reality actually starts!

It is time to drag things back to the Left where they really belong. The Right has gotten to be more and more extreme and nasty while they did so and have become less and less relevant to honest discourse.

What is stacked against progressives is the "liberal media"

quoted for truth. It's hard to get your message out when the messenger, save for a small segment of it, has no interest in broadcasting it.

The media has turned politics into entertainment to drive up advertising dollars. FOX News showed the MSM how its done. Why does Palin, a failed VP candidate and a less than one term Governor get so much publicity vs working public servants like Mark Warner or even Bobby Jindal? Because she sells. Any website will tell you, just headlining her name on a post will generate hundreds of comments. Hits equals dollars.

It is called selling soap.

In addition to Sarah Palin, I give you her predecessors Al Gore, Al Franken and Michael Moore, significant beneficiaries of media driven political entertainment.

Yes, the "liberal media", which is 1984 double-speak at it's finest.

Al Gore and Al Franken significant beneficiaries of media driven political entertainment? I don't get it. Gore was not elected in 2000 because the media went on a rampant "make Gore look stupid" campaign, and look what we got. And I simply am not following the Franken reference.

Please, do not mention Al Gore or Al Franken in the same sentence with... her. Aside from incredible academic backgrounds and/or other achievements in their lives (look it up), there are no more William F. Buckleys on the right who could remotely compare.

louee - The MSM uses political entertainment all the time to espouse their opinions on candidates, stories, etc. Both conservatives and liberals do it constantly. Do you actually believe the MSM did not in-effect endorse Al Gore and Al Franken? C'mon!

Louee:

I'm not talking about running for office. I'm talking about selling books, movies and speeches. It's capitalizing on having been involved in politics and largely using the political media to promote yourself. Writing a book to attack another political media personality. Advancing one's own personal wealth utilizing climate change politics. Making money off of running for vice-president and the left wing's penchant for keeping one constantly in the news.

Al Franken "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat White Idiot".

OK?

True Patriot:

I consider Al Gore to be just a step above "Jon & Kate Plus 8", but it's pretty close to a dead heat.

True Patriot - Hey, Tina Fey's impression of Palin is better than any character Franken had on SNL period...brownie points to Palin for such an achievement!

Amy - you said "FOX News showed the MSM how its done. Why does Palin, a failed VP candidate and a less than one term Governor get so much publicity vs working public servants like Mark Warner or even Bobby Jindal? Because she sells."

While I agree to an extent, why is it that she is talked about more on MSNBC and Olbermann/Maddow/Matthews shows than the network that employs her? You can blame Fox but facts don't lie. You can watch a week of Fox primetime and not hear one story about Palin, you can't watch one night of MSNBC without a thorough bashing of her. Meanwhile it only bolsters her spotlight much to liberals’ chagrin.

If the "liberal media" has turned news into entertainment, how can we even trust statistics researched and reported by such media? This particular article is a good case-in-point. Exactly why should we trust NBC's numbers, Mark? And what's the point of boiling down this week's Netroots Nation conference to a big Obama complaining session? There are plenty of people there trying to find real solutions to major problems. I'd like to see some old-time journalism that actually reports all sides of an issue or gathering rather than deciding for its audience what to think about it. I know you can do better, Mark!

--caleb/FSTV

Silly Bev!!! Don't you know margin of error is only to be used when its a democrat who is ahead in the polls?

Obama was elected by 53% OF THOSE WHO VOTED, not 53% of the country.

KLM,

But it was the largest voter turnout in more than 30 years.

Presidential voter turnout as a percent of voting age citizens:

2008 = 56.8%

2004 = 55.3%

2000 = 51.3%

1996 = 49.4%

1992 = 55.1%

1988 = 50.1%

1984 = 53.1%

1980 = 52.6%

1976 = 53.6%

1972 = 55.2%

comment to KLM but not directed at KLM :-) if you don't vote; your voice, your opinion, your concerns, your complaints and suggestions simply don't matter. If you don't vote, your not a real American, so 53% of the real Americans (the ones that matter) voted for Obama. I get so sick and tired of all those people (mostly teabag repubs) complaining about this and that when half of them didn't even vote...Shut up!... and next time get off your fat lazy butt and vote!

...oh and on a further note...can't remember where I read it on MSNBC, but it was an article about how this Teabag mess is nothing more then a Public, Republican driven, temper tantrum LOL, one of the best article headlines ever! The article itself was simply ok, but oh well...F'n tea bags!!!

Bravo Sitting Aces, Bravo

Yeah, cause there was really a lot of choice between Obama and McCain. Or Bush vs. Kerry in 2004. Maybe if elections were more than a choice between the lesser of two evils, assuming there even is one, (see congressional races) more people would feel like participating.

Nate, “lesser of two evils”

I’ve been hearing this for the 50 years I’ve been voting. It is an excuse for not dealing with the reality that elections have consequences and for those that didn’t vote.

Get over it !!

Please don't encourage people who parrot Hate Radio and FAUX Noise talking points to vote.

If there is anything to say about the media, it is the important role it is supposed to play in a democracy as a Watch Dog and to inform voters with facts. This clearly did not take place with the most recent Shirley Sherrod fiasco!

The other problem is the lack of investment people are willing to make to learn the facts and to do some critical thinking on their own. The red herrings, straw man, and Godwin's Law from entertainers like Limbaugh and Beck is why there is no meaningful debate in this country.

America is a center right country. We were sold a ton of lies from a hard left socialist Barack Obama. His approval will continue to fall. Hes a one termer like Jimmy Carter.

I wonder why?????????

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000

3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

A: That's right!

Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------

Neal O - You are either a liar or seriously misinformed. Which is it?

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/03/fdrs-voluntary-social-security/

Social Security has never been voluntary and taxes paid to support it have never been deductible from federal income taxes. A widely e-mailed "history lesson" gets nearly all its facts wrong.

Thank you Fleep!

Not to mention little Neal posted it about 20 times under various threads - I would suggest you to the same with the truth!

Independant Woman,

You are correct, and anytime one party moves too far from the center they usually get their rear ends beat off. It has happened to the Democrats several times, and if it does not happen to the Republicans this election year and they keep moving away from the center, after two years of strick right wing control we will likely swing back toward the left again. i always vote Democrat, i do leave some spots blank (if I don't like the candidate i am not one to hold my nose and vote for them anyway) but I am a very centrist voter. A friend of mine once told me I was the most liberal conservative she has ever known. On some issues I'm extremely conservative and on some I'm quite liberal. I don't believe there is much room for remarriage after divorce - only in cases of severe abuse to the spouse or children or unrepenting flagarant adultry, I believe abortion should be legal and used as a last resort not as birth control, and I think anyone who works and pays taxes should have the same rights - including marriage rights as I do. I think everyone should live within their income, I think corporations need to pay their way and not get all these freebies from the government or our workers, I believe in God, Jesus Christ is my savior, and I love my country. I like to attend church and worship every week. No one else has to though. I do not like lunitics or support the mega rich of either party, another person's color, religion or sexual preference is none of my business. I do not want to work til I'm 70 (did not stay drunk and stoned til I was 40 georgie, and I should not have to pay because others did).

While I always vote Democrat, I fit nicely in the center. Most voters feel the same about different issues and that makes them center too - and this is why our country works.

Peace,

Amen to that!

Very well said (and I thought I was the most conservative Democrat.)

I agree. Excellent points.

This is has always been what I consider a Liberal to be:

"...if by a liberal they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people - their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, their civil liberties... if that is what they mean by a "liberal" then I am proud to be a liberal." ~ John F. Kennedy

Too bad Ronald Reagan led people believe that Liberals were some sort of wacked out fringe element instead of people like Saul Alinsky, Tip O'Neill, Jimmy Carter, Nelson Rockefeller etc.

And this points out the real flaw in the article. It assumes that only "liberals" or people who would self-identify as "liberals" are in favor of a public option, tighter financial regulations, etc. The only requisites for being a proponent of these policies is an education and a memory.

In the 1980s we saw the left side extremists trying to run the Democratic party and they failed. Now the right side extremists are trying to run the Republican party and they too will fail. We need to govern from the center. Some of us will be slightly left of center others slightly right of center and that works well. Unfortunately sometimes we get into periods where the extreme elements of one side or the other controls things and we have problems. Feisty, great post.

Union Baby, you and I vote very much alike in that we are both tending to vote Democrat but not on every candidate or every issue. I, for one, am conservative on some issues and more liberal on other issues. Most people are probably like that. Only the extremists of either side seem to be voting strongly in one direction on all issues.

American politics is like a clock pendulum moving left and right. It will move one direction and then reverse and move the other direction. Over the past decade or so it has pegged right and is now slowly moving toward the left. At some point in the next decade or so it will have moved as far left as we will allow it to go and then start a rightward swing again. When it moves too far to the right or left we call in a "clockmaker" who has to pull the pendulum off the peg and get it moving again. While too early to tell, it is possible the President Obama will be that clockmaker that will move the pendulum left. The left wing extremists will want the pendulum to move faster but he won't let it. The right wing extremists will be screaming Socialism and other epithets to stop the leftward movement and slam it onto the right peg again. The public will, however, allow the pendulum to swing at a nice pace so extremists on either side will be frustrated but realize, in the end, that the country is better off for the movement, albeit slower than they might like.

Independent Woman, so true. The definition of conservative is status quo, evil versus good, etc. (I would add irrational fear), and the definition of liberal is open-minded, favoring progress, etc. The differing profile for each has become very obvious with the polarization that was fueled during the Bush/Cheney years.

And look at congress since that time. The reason Dems struggle to overcome the record filibusters (requiring 60 votes instead of the usual 51 majority) is because they are more independent thinkers per the liberal definition. It doesn't work very well against the Republican lock-in-step Borg.

I agree about the pendulum, though I suspect this is changing. As stated above, the right has moved way to the right. As such, the pendulum will have to swing a lot to get back to the center.

Oh God, you cannot possibly be serious!

Then why are the poorer states Democratic? We all know that the poor are generally less eductated yet the "Progressive party" has their votes. I disagree heartily with the idea that progressive is educated. Progressives feed the public programs and it's base is the ones who use those programs. Critical thinking gives one the ability to see through political posturing and think for themselves and that gives both parties new membership.

You may not like it, but Sharon is correct -- there's a valid, statistical correlation between higher levels of education and more progressive political beliefs...add in greater worldly experience and knowledge and you very like have your causation: better critical thinking, empathy for the wide disparities in opportunity and treatment, etc...there are, of course, many, many highly educated conservatives as well -- and yes, this allows them to see through political posturing as you suggest pats.

One note though pats, you are incorrect about the poorer states skewing Democratic -- it is in fact the higher income, higher tax paying states that skew Democratic (CA, NY, MA, etc.) and the poorer states which receive great net tax benefits from the government that are reliably Republican (MS, AL, KS, ID, etc.) -- this is ironic if you think about it and suggests again that Sharon's thesis is correct.

Sharon- I believe a study was done showing the average Tea Party member actually had more education than the average American.

Pats- Actually, the poorest states are all in the south, and they are almost always considered Republican.

I think there is a big difference between education and intelligence. I am not going to say one party has an advantage over the other in regards to either of them. Even the most highly educated among us act incredibly stupid at times.

Too many people think the word Liberal is a bad word. It now comes w/ the term "elitists". Liberal isn't a bad word people. We are governed from the center because the fringes are far too extreme and the common person, whether they are conservative or progressive, simply leaves a bad taste in our mouths. Some ideas though from the fringes aren't always the boogie man that people think. Social security, Medicare, Conserationism, all things that may have come from the fringes but have been moderated into things that are now acceptable in today society have their place. There's nothing wrong w/ hearing the ideas, its how to mold them into something that is acceptable to society at large.

Same goes for "progressive" -- Jefferson, Lincoln, T. Roosevelt were ALL progressive thinkers in their time. I would invite those who are anti-progressive to let that thought percolate for a little while.

Also: if you think things like 40 hour work weeks, freedom of speech, press, assembly, and religion, civil and voting rights for all, national parks, and clean air, water, and food are good things you need look no further than the actual laws and individuals who proposed and backed them to see that without a doubt progressive thinking, though at times and in some applications it may certainly have flaws and overreach, by and large has delivered much of the liberty and things that enhance and protect our quality of life in America.

Sharon, I believe some of these comments have proven your point. I suppose I come from a poor state, and my state generally votes to the right, although the few urban areas tend to vote Dem. To me the GOP people are voting against their self-interest, and the reason is they uncritically buy into a lot of heated rhetoric from the right that usually involves blaming someone else for our problems. The right has no interest whatsoever in the human beings who make up our citizenry; they've proven that time and again! They are about low taxes for the wealthy, stealing our natural resources without paying for it, and stirring up hate among the rest of us so that we will be distracted from the truth: that these rich power mongers are using us!

Divashels may just be a troll, but if not, case in point about lack of intelligence among the far right.

Seriously, one can't just look at education. There are many factors from the major to graduate level education to GPA, but most of all whether people learned good research skills (most notably knowing what a credible source is) and critical thinking. Conspiracy theories have become rampant among conservatives, and this can only happen when people lack those skills.

Also note that many of the more educated quickly left the Tea Party upon greater understanding of the movement. And studies still show that the more education a person obtains, the more liberal they are likely to be.

Sharon-2047418.....

"I am saying it is far easier for an uneducated person to be conservative than to be progressive."

Why then do progressives court the uneducated welfare handouts, and undocumented immigrants? Are you saying it requires more intelligence to use uneducated masses to do your bidding? Seems to me, progressives are modern day slave owners!

Sharon,

When it comes to education the difference between conservatives and liberals is conservatives get degrees that allow them to support their families and contribute to society. Liberals tend to get degrees that have no market value and expect society to support them.

No, George, the difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives like to make sweeping generalized statements like you just made, while liberals will ask for empirical evidence. So, George, I am asking. Support what you just said with facts.

Poetic,

1. The "valid, statistical correlation between higher levels of education and more progressive political beliefs" may be the result of extended indoctrination. The vast majority of college professors are liberals and those pursuing advanced degrees may tend to idolize and bow to their mentors.

2. Acquisition of a college degree is dependant more on opportunity than intelligence.

3. Progressive thinking has nothing to do with political progressivism. Lincoln and Jefferson had great respect for their fellow citizens and faith in their ability to live their lives as responsible, free and independent people. They were conscious of their responsibility to the country and future generations. Political progressives believe they are better than the rest of us as evidenced by your attacks on the intelligence your fellow citizens simply because they disagree with you. Political progressives think most of us are incapable of taking care of ourselves so our lives should be ruled by bureaucrats, unions and politicians who know what’s best for us. You actually believe we are so ignorant we live in constant fear, “cling to guns and religion”, hate people who are different from us and the only reason we would disagree with President Obama is because we are racists. Progressives claim to be caring and generous people but in fact most have little respect for the rest of us and are only generous with other people’s money.

Evidently, Georgie: You have never spent any time on college campuses. Just like any other gathering of large groups of people, you will find numbers of Conservatives and Liberals. Since I have taught at the level, I must tell you that a citation would be required to back up your allegation. Your second point is mindless drivel. Your third point is vague and ill defined. Jefferson was a Liberal. There is no question of that. Lincoln was a Liberal since he joined a newly formed party that believed in abolition, a revolutionary thought of the time. It is the mindless Conservatives that are always telling everyone that the Second Amendment trumps all in the Constitution, and that whatever religion they belong to is the true religion and must be adhered to by all. Witness the Texas Board of Educations perverting of books to coincide with their petty beliefs. Witness Palin's and Bachmann's talk of "taking this country back" and how the basis of the formation of this country was Christian. You, sir, are throwing your lot in with mindless morons.

Newday,

Do you mean sweeping generalized statements like "People are afraid so they cling to their guns and religion." or "...it is far easier for an uneducated person to be conservative than to be progressive." or perhaps "...FAUX Noise talking points..." how about "…people vote for Republican and Tea Party candidates…could only be due to ignorant hatred…". How about the term "teabaggers"? Is that how open minded progressives show respect for their fellow citizens who happen to disagree with them? All but the first quote are from liberal/progressives on this page. Of course the first comment is from our president.

Yes I generalized but the opinion I expressed is based on years of experience in industry, education, as a parent and foster parent. I have known few engineers or businessmen who were liberals and few (actually 0) social workers who were conservatives. Again, just an opinion based on years of experience. I happen to think entrepreneurs have a more positive effect on a community than do "community organizers" and politicians. Who would you rather have move into your community, Henry Ford or Jesse Jackson? Who would have a more positive long term impact on your community?

In 1987 two friends and I started a company with $50,000 borrowed from friends and family. That company is still in business and employees over 100 people. The company, its’ employees and stockholders have paid millions of dollars in taxes. In one year I paid over $60,000 dollars in taxes (mostly capital gains). I don’t mind paying taxes but based on my experiences I think I could have had a more positive effect on my community by reinvesting that money in another business. Contrast my experience with our government spending $175,000 in stimulus money to save 1 job for 1 year and bragging about it. If you accept the president’s premise that the $870,000,000,000 spent in the stimulus package saved or created 3,000,000 jobs then each of those jobs cost $290,000. If you think that is a good deal then you are probably a liberal. If you think an entrepreneur like me could have put that money to better use then you are probably a conservative. We are the sum or our experiences.

Newday,

You said, "Your second point is mindless drivel". And I thought you lefties were kind hearted, open minded folks who enjoyed differing points of view. If my point is mindless drivel then you must believe a black child of above average intelligence born in Harlem in 1946 was as likely to attend Yale University (or any other university) as George W. Bush and university admission is based solely on merit. Many of us, in fact most of us, didn't have the opportunity to go to college after high school. After serving in the military for four years. I worked as a technician in silicon valley during the day and went to school at night. I suppose that makes my Bachelor of Science a "Faux" degree in liberal parlance. But what I learned in college pales in comparison to what I have learned from experience. As a 10 year old picking strawberries with migrant workers I learned about efficiency of effort by watching how a woman and her two kids (younger than me) picked more berries than anyone else in our row. The most important lesson of that day was that good ideas can come from anyone and that is the way I have always approached management and life in general. I suppose you would not consider an ex berry picker, shoe shine boy, farm hand, saw mill worker (that was all by the time I was 16), janitor, electronic technician, night school student to be a person of importance or value. My experience tells me good people and good ideas are where you find them. My heroes are Abraham Lincoln (integrity), Thomas Edison (persistence), Henry Ford (innovation) and Bill Russell (the ultimate competitor). Only one had a college degree but all made a great impact on our society.

Here’s a fun fact. I don’t have an advanced degree but have taught classes or been a guest lecturer at every university in the area. So I too have spent a little time on college campuses. Have also taught in China. I am invited not because of my degrees but because of my experience and demonstrated ability.

Your response to my comments about Lincoln and Jefferson are bizarre. Don’t know what second amendment, religion, etc. has to do with anything I said. Lincoln and Jefferson respected their fellow citizens. I don’t think today’s “progressives” have much respect for anyone other than their small circle. You assume most of us are too stupid to take care of ourselves so the government should become our caretaker and those who have worked hard and had a little success in life should be punished for doing evil things like creating jobs and saving some of our money. You may need the government to tell you how to spend your money but I don’t and most of the people I know are quite capable of taking care of themselves.

If you were in the military, you had the opportunity to attend college. You are the one that brought up guns and religion by saying that all Liberals think that all Conservatives cling to guns and religion. My point is that they do. One has only to look at Bachmann, Palin et al to understand that. I am also beyond exhaustion with people trying to co opt Jefferson to make a point. Jefferson was a Liberal. He was not a Conservative, he was not a "Progressive" he was a Liberal. Jefferson did believe that that people could take care of themselves. That is Liberal dogma not Conservative. Conservatives believe (like the Royalists) that there must be an upper class that is protected. That is the very definition of Reagan's trickle down economic "theory". As I posted earlier, Conservatives are too stupid to understand that the success of a nation depends on an expanding middle class. If that class is secure through, jobs, the ability to provide for its family, and to improve its station, the nation prospers. If not, the nation will eventually collapse. One only has to understand Russian history, French history amongst others to see that always holds true. Here is a hint for you Georgie: You cannot generalize to attempt to make your point, and then accuse the other side of always generalizing. You automatically lose.

Actually June, this president is just as mixed race as I am (and yes, I get quite brown in the summer but am listed as caucasion in the census). Mixed race does not necessiarily mean white or black, quite a few of us with Native American blood still amongst the population.

Moving forward doesn't equate to increasing the role of the federal government. And change for the sake of change is never a good thing.

If you are against increasing the role of the federal government, then I assume you are against the Republican Party. Aside from inferring in private matters like Terri Shiavo, warrant-less wiretaps, etc., the military industrial complex represents more expenditure than all other spending, and all defence spending by our allies combined. Deficit spending has been greatest during Republican administrations.

Hey, if UPS and FedEx took over the U.S. Postal Service, and you had to pay to educate your own kids, I'd be fine with that. But where will this country be in a few years if we don't have infrastructure, police and fire services, public parks, etc.? The Tea Party fails to think things through. The Something for Nothing crowd is just short-term self-serving silliness.

To quote a news comment, if the newly-formed Tea Party caucus wants to prove itself, they will vote for tax cuts and see where that gets them in balancing the budget.

Now this is not to say that conservatism is bad.

Yes, it is. Conservatism is exactly what is destroying the America that our Founders fought and died to create and preserve. It's just beyond belief how the conservative media have rewritten history to obscure that fact, and one-third of the people out there are STUPID enough to believe them.

Pbj, I dont know how to respond to that, I must be a stupid conservative. I mean I have a bad taste in my mouth about any media. Its backwards driven, things were much less stressful when we were not bombarded with usless bias fodder on a second by second basis. This is just an example, When I was in the military (10 years) during time of no conflict we had people dying every day some days in number higher than that of the past few conflicts. We never ever heard of those losses even though they were american young people dying. It wasnt news worthy, however toss a few arabs in and distrubing video of people being blown up and we have a story!

Puckie, I'm not buying it. You have a bad taste in your mouth about any media you disagree with. When they serve up short-sighted, self-justifying BS that makes you feel good about your prejudices (as Fox often does), you lap it up greedily. You are so willing to buy any twist to the news that satisfies your bloodlust and greed, like every other conservative out there.

So yes, you must be a stupid conservative.

pjb:

I'm afraid you may be confusing conservatism with various indivuiduals and/or poltical personas who misuse the true definitions, therories and objectives of conservativism to their own ends just as some terrorists misuse the Muslim religion to their own ends. There is absolutley nothing wrong with being either conservative or liberal. But what is wrong is when certain persons try to divide and control others in the name of conservativism or liberalism. Think in more simpler terms pjb. As an example if one person is say more conservative with the amount of time they view television each day versus another who is more liberal as to the amount of time they watch television each day, neither is wrong or right but both simply have different televison viewing habits.

pjb - Your closed-minded observations and stereotypes are a perfect example of why average Americans get turned off by extreme liberals. You don't offer anyone thoughtful discussion. You have no real point other than conservatism is "bad". Why? How was our Founding Fathers dying to protect us from "conservatism"? You just make ridiculous generalizations that all conservatives are stupid and hurl personal attacks against someone who served our country so you have a right to speak your hate. Pathetic and desperate.

arodoll...couldn't have said it better. The lib goes to further lengths of pretzel logic to justify untenable ideas than does any religeous figure which the lib hates. Progressives are commies who want to control all means of production and redistribute wealth. But "he can't even run his own life, I'll be damned if he'll run mine".

Ana - If Obama and Congress are "centrist" as you claim, why do the majority of Americans disagree with a great deal of the administration’s decisions and policies? Most Americans were against the Healthcare bill that was voted into law. Most Americans disagree with the passage of the Stimulus bill. Most Americans disagreed with bailing out the banks (which Bush signed into law and Obama voted for). Most Americans disagreed with the GM takeover. Most Americans support the AZ immigration law that the Obama administration opposes. Most Americans disagree with how the administration has handled the oil spill, Christmas day bomber, the NYC terror trial location choice, etc. etc. That is why poll after poll, Democrats are losing ground in the upcoming elections. I don't know if they will lose the majority but its safe to say Obama and the Democratic Congress are not in-step with the majority of Americans on a lot of issues. Voting for Democrats just because they have a D next to their name won't get us anywhere. You should use that good head you have on your shoulders to really research the candidates and then choose who best represents your beliefs. Following blindly behind one party will always lead to corruption and we all deserve more than that.

Thank God.

memo to conservatives

your'e outnumbered, also

one third is not a majority

Thank god neither fringe has a majority. They are both equally crazy and potential tyrants. It is interesting that both fringes have used big government to make their vision come true. The mayhem and murder they both inflicted on their countrymen and the world is no secret but their devoted followers fail to recognize the similarities. Politics is a circle and the far left and right are closer together than they would like to believe.

Memo to tinman: We may be "outnumbered" but at least we are not led by the rings in our noses by Limbaugh and the rest. The fact that anyone is persuaded by the outright lies those jerks spew that are refuted, and then spewed again, makes me weep for the future of my country. And Carlos, liberals are not crazy or tyrants. We simply are people who desire the best for our country and our fellow citizens. Yes, it involves paying taxes to live in a country deserving of the title "democracy." Only in the minds of greedy anti-Americans could the payment of taxes for social purposes be considered tyranny.

So you have issues with the WOMAN being the "breadwinner" in the household and a young man having the right to pose for a magazine undressed???Sounds like you are the conservative.

You can't expect it to be 99% Liberal with all those radicals, advocating dealth panels, elimination of 25 millions Americans, nationalization of healthcare and all those govt run economic programs which don't produce but only serve dead end services. For example, a govt run job program will give admittedly , people work but it won't produce capital as a free market economy where jobs produce capital.

well, given your opening statement I figure it's safe to not read the rest of your post. You're delusional and full of @!$%# anyway, so why would the rest of the post be any different.

lol... death panels...

you still believe that nonsense?!?

JuvenBachan

Foxnews in the only news service that try at least to give us the American public a fair and balanced service even though at times they trip up.

I;m sorry to tell you this but Fox news is part of the problem. the saturate the air waves with negative news, news that is not conformed by reliable sources. there fair and balance new you talk about is filled with one sided reporting from start to finish. they do not give the left when there are on that channel time to rebuff or give there side. O'reilly is best at int erupting and prejudging a guest. classic example the head of the washington chapter of the NAACP hillary (can't remember last name) was on the show and cound not get a word in because O'rielly kept interupting and going to the other guest when hillary did not give the FOX news style answer. Hannety when he interview the president shows no respect for the office. karl rove who should be in jail) does nothen but defend the bush era at the same time giving his one sided accesment of the Obama administration.

FOX news is a joke and if you think so much of fox then there one sided new program has gotten in to you. try and watch CNN for 1 night, you will se that they do give a fair and balance assessment. anderson cooper give a keeping them honest segment that goes agter the prwesident if it is needed as well as the republican lawmakers. yes fox gets tripped up because who ever is the programing director is not controling the news. remember the old saying, let the inmates control the assilen

That is one of the most incoherent and ignorant things I have ever read. You are clearly a member of the Fox Cult because all the crap you just rambled on about comes straight from them. I truly feel very bad for you. Please go read a newspaper (not the Washington Times) or watch another news channel for a while. You can't honestly believe that Fox is the only one reporting the truth and all the other outlets are lying. Is that really logical? You might want to consider that maybe the channel going out of their way to convince you that they are fair and balanced and telling you the "real" truth is really the ones who are deceiving you.

"One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest - THE SEQUEL!!"

now he is the farthest left wing psycho in our history.

um, no. Obama is further to the right than former Republican presidents like Eisenhower. Any objective view of history will lead you to the same conclusion.

I'm not sure how you can say what you said with a straight face.

I'm not sure how you can say what you said with a straight face.

Must be the tea he's drinking.

Yep Obama has worked so hard over the last week he is taking another vacation… Let see, date nights, golf, photo ops, and vacations…. I vote to give him the next 52 weeks off for vacation!

Huskyforliberty,

And I supposed that compassionate conservative understand the common people then right? Spying on the populace is always a good thing, trying to get rid of the 4th amendment so they can hold you indefinitely w/o charges is always a good thing. The Lil Shrub and Darth Cheney we're trying to make the United States in to 1984. You should read that book if you can read that is. It might be on CD for you to listen to though. Just hear it and tell me you don't see the similarities between the prior administration and that book.