Except here at CW.COM, of course.

Now, pardon me while I wipe this brown stuff off my nose..

:D

Michale.....

Michale...

And each is, more often than not, completely and utter felgercarb...

it's joshua, and that's the nature of nearly all political commentary. :)

If only this were retroactively true. I'd be rich. Rich I tell you!

Not if it were deducted from the times that my facts have gone unchallenged..

Which is more often than not.. :D

snark and cynicism are an easier sell for conservatives, hope and optimism are an easier sell for libs.

David,

And each is, more often than not, completely and utter felgercarb...

:D

Michale.....

i don't see why it wouldn't. saying the US is a center-right country is like saying we're a 98 IQ country. it may be true, but it has a minimal relationship to how people (or groups of people) actually behave in most situations. as drew westen says, we seek a working narrative that reaches us emotionally. we have a wide array of beliefs about liberals and conservatives, any of which could be used effectively by either side. snark and cynicism are an easier sell for conservatives, hope and optimism are an easier sell for libs.

Many people don't vote because they're disenfranchised. In Kentucky, if I'm reading correctly, you're disenfranchised for life just for one count of possession of any quantity of pot.

I'm disputing your "vast majority" regardless of what they do...

Any factual statement found to be not factual will be rewarded with a $20 finders fee"

If only this were retroactively true. I'd be rich. Rich I tell you!

Really???

Hmmmmmmmm

According to this....

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

... about 40% voted in 2010 and about 60% voted in 2008...

I really don't see a "vast" anywhere in there...

I'm curious how you come to that conclusion?

Which conclusion??

That when liberals are bashing conservatives they are bashing the vast majority of Americans??

Or that most Americans identify with conservatives on more issues and/or more often than they identify with liberals??

Or that the US is a center-right country??

Which conclusion do you need corroborating facts for??

Michale.....

NOTE: This comment has been certified by an independent agent to be 100% factual. All facts have been checked, rechecked and checked again for accuracy. Any factual statement found to be not factual will be rewarded with a $20 finders fee

The vast majority of Americans don't vote. Most of the political polls are of "likely voters". I'm curious how you come to that conclusion?

Then why are you always defending them so much? :)

Because more often than not, they have the right idea..

And they ain't hypocritical about it when they have the wrong idea.. :D

Liberals don't want to control the airwaves. That would be propaganda.

Oh what a load of felgercarb... The Left would LOVE to have the kind of airwave control that the Right has... They have tried it time and time again. Remember Air America??

The reason the Left can't succeed is that they spend all their time telling Americans how corrupt and greedy and evil Americans are...

Who would want to listen to that??

In fact, we don't really believe in conservatives vs. liberals at all.

No. YOU don't believe in conservatives vs liberals. But it's a conditional belief.. :D

The Left in general believes in conservatives vs liberals as much as the Right (in general) does..

NYPoet,

allow me to present an alternate hypothesis:

Damn, Joshua... I think you might have something there...

As much as I like that theory (I really do), it doesn't jibe with the fact that this country is a center-right country..

While I do believe that my theory is correct, I also like your theory enough to concede that it might play a part as well..

Michale.....

allow me to present an alternate hypothesis:

the majority of americans may identify with either liberals and conservatives depending on the issue. however, the public mainly like to experience things that are comfortable. to joe and jane american, conservatives are the gruff types, the officious jerks who gripe and snipe at everything. thus, bashing liberals is considered "in character" and is entertaining.

meanwhile, liberals are seen as the hippie types who have their heads in the clouds and sit in a circle singing kumbaya. to see those sorts of people bashing others for their politics is uncomfortable because it's "out of character" for the sort of person who wants to give peace a chance. people don't like to watch it, because liberals are associated in their minds with hope and optimism. cynical griping doesn't ring true to the archetype.

Then why are you always defending them so much? :)

As I've always said, I hope they're paying you. Cuz you sure spend a lot of time fighting for 'em.

Which is why liberals can't control their airwaves like conservatives can.

Liberals don't want to control the airwaves. That would be propaganda.

In fact, we don't really believe in conservatives vs. liberals at all.

*** smooches ***

Yea, but I ain't a conservative..

"You're what happened when the donkey snuck into the horse barn"
-Dr Leonard McCoy

:D

Seriously... Think Rachael Maddow, Matt Osbourne, Bob Cesca, MSNBC etc etc etc and THEN tell me that liberals aren't interested in bashing conservatives..

Oh yes.. They are interested in bashing conservatives..

The problem is that the vast majority of Americans, at some level, identify with conservatives more than liberals. Ergo, when liberals bash conservatives, they are bashing the vast majority Americans..

Which is why liberals can't control their airwaves like conservatives can..

Conservative's message resonates with most Americans.

Liberal's message only resonates with other liberals.

Michale.....

*** smooches ***

-David

{{cough}} {{cough}} BULLSHIT {cough} {cough}

:D

Michale.....

This is a no brainer. Because we're not interested in bashing conservatives.

I know the answer but just want to see if you do...

But you already knew that :)

-David

Why do they spend so much time bashing liberals?

Probably because it's lucrative and makes lots of money..

Now it's your turn.. Why can't liberals be successful at bashing conservatives??

I know the answer but just want to see if you do... :D

Michale.....

I see a lot of "b-b-b-b-but the Democrats ..." but I still don't see any issue.

Here's something I've always wondered: If conservative arguments are so good, why do they spend so much time bashing "liberals"?

They've got an entire TV channel devoted to liberal bashing. As well as the entire AM radio spectrum. As well as paper after paper and pundit after pundit devoted to bashing liberals.

Why do they spend so much time bashing liberals?

-David

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2011/10/foia-obama-wants-license-lie

NOT.....

Michale.....

To the FDR years and the steps that preceded the Roosevelt Recession..

http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/10/28/obama-campaigning-like-its-1936/

All of that sounds really REALLY familiar...

Michale

While I admit that some of the GOP ideology is pretty whacked, the reasoning is the damning point, IMNSHO..

Republicans are ideologically against gays in the military. It has little to do with pitting American against American.

And it certainly isn't done simply to win a re-election... Most of the GOP's stances on issues are that way, regardless of any pending election...

On the other hand, Democrats will, with one face, demonize the rich and then, with the other face, go to lavish fundraisers and take money from the very same rich people they demonize...

How completely and utterly hypocritical is that???

Obama let's the press take all the pictures they want when he is trying to play Joe The Plumber, but press is barred when Obama is hob-nobbing with the Hollywood elite at $50K a plate...

How completely and utterly hypocritical is that???

Say what you want about Republicans, but their HYPOCRITE meter is far FAR lower than Democrats..

As I have said many many times... I can handle a person who is greedy and arrogant and mean and an asshole if they are at least honest and consistent about it...

Democrats really rub me the wrong way because they are as greedy and as arrogant and as mean and as much of an asshole as Republicans, but they are completely and utterly two-faced and hypocritical about it...

That pretty much sums it up...

Michale

NOTE: This comment has been certified by an independent agent to be 100% factual. All facts have been checked, rechecked and checked again for accuracy. Any factual statement found to be not factual will be rewarded with a $20 finders fee

Andy Jackson had many faults, and he's not my favorite president or anything (see: Indian removal, for example). But he did nip a proto-Civil War in the bud during his term. South Carolina was making noises about nullification and secession (led by Andy's Veep at the time, Calhoun), and they passed a resolution saying they weren't going to follow the new tariff law (the Tariff of Abominations? I forget, too lazy to look it up). Andy sent some federal troops to get ready to start a war, but SC backed down in the end. [Funny, 30 years later, SC was again the instigator of the Civil War. What is it -- something in the water down there?]

I get your larger point about slavery and the planters (Jackson himself owned lots of slaves), but laying the blame for the Civil War at his feet is a step too far for me. Not to defend him as a paragon of the presidency or anything, but it's more complicated than that.

But you are right about him not being a champion of the little guy -- his Bank War was more personal (against Biddle) and based in his reading of the Constitution than it was ever about helping the little guy (fiery rhetoric notwithstanding). He did pay off the federal debt during his term, though. Jackson was a mess of contradictions, when you get right down to it.

-CW

OK, you've got a point about the pot and the kettle when it comes to Dems scheudling House workdays, I'll admit.

But by your own yardstick, Republicans complaining about "setting Americans against each other" doesn't even pass the belly laugh test, let alone your SERIOUSLY? test.

Name an issue the GOP has made political hay over, and it immediately becomes obvious they are "setting Americans against each other." Gays, immigration, war spending, taxes, the list is endless. Just name me one issue where the GOP has "brought Americans together" and I'll stop laughing, how's that? Remember when the GOP was calling people traitors and un-American because they didn't agree with war spending? Remember that? How, exactly was that "bringing Americans together"?

This is such a bogus argument, because ALL politics sets people against each other. It is the nature of the game, in other words, no matter who does it. For the GOP to complain about it is downright ridiculous.

-CW

They're not playing to the vast majority of the public. The majority of the public isn't paying much attention at this point, and the majority of those who do notice won't remember in a year anyway. They're playing to a section of their base. They need their base fired up during the primaries and donation-gathering, to get the opinion-leaders talking to their apolitical friends.

Today's talking points are nothing more than a history lesson on banks and what is now (laughably) called "class warfare" by the uninformed. If this sort of thing doesn't sound like fun to read, then I would strongly suggest you just stop reading now, and spare yourself. You have been warned, so don't complain later, in other words.

I don't necessarily have anything against so-called "class warfare", but I got no use for Andrew Jackson. He was against the money aristocracy, yes, but the class he fought for was the planter aristocracy. There was no 99% there, except as dupes. As the pivotal figure of early-19th-century US politics, he deserves a lot of the blame for the civil war.

Most of the work of Congress is done in their offices, meeting with staffers, constituents, and lobbyists. Not much is done in the Capitol grandstanding for CSPAN and trying to gain advantage from the arcane details of parliamentary procedure.

So what?

Not really...

Why point out something that Democrats are, as you point out, completely guilty of as well...

Ten days better?? What's the percentage?? .4%??? Math was never my strong suit..

To give you an analogy, it's as if John Smith and Jay Public are running against each other for office. John Smith releases a negative ad claiming that Jay Public beats his wife 6 days a week, when everyone knows that John Smith ALSO beats his wife, but it's only 4 days a week..

Just my personal opinion mind you, but having Democrats castigate the Republicans in Congress for "Vacation Days" is like having one politician castigate another politician for lying...

It doesn't pass the "SERIOUSLY!!????" test at all..

President Obama realizing that Executive Orders and other means exist for him to further his agenda is a good thing.

But President Bush realizing that Executive Orders and other means exist for HIM to further HIS agenda is a bad thing, right??

So, all the Democrats whining and crying about Executive Orders was just a hypocritical smoke-screen, eh??

Democrats don't MIND all the gross misuse of Executive Power as they claimed during the Bush years..

They just want to be the ones wielding it..

Today's talking points are nothing more than a history lesson on banks and what is now (laughably) called "class warfare" by the uninformed. If this sort of thing doesn't sound like fun to read, then I would strongly suggest you just stop reading now, and spare yourself. You have been warned, so don't complain later, in other words. Hmmph.

Gonna have to take your advice.. :D Although I might get some time later to soak up what ya wrote.. :D

But I will say this. Call it "class warfare" or whatever you want to call it.

But no one can deny that Obama and Democrats have decided upon a re-election strategy of pitting American against American.

And that's just plain sad. They don't deserve to be elected, just on THAT basis alone..

You see, I actually BELIEVED Obama when he said he will be an AMERICAN President, not a Democrat President..

What a fool I was...

You see, this is simply a war between the "have"s and the "have not"s with the Democratic Party fanning the flames of the "have not"s.

The problem is the "have not"s don't want to go out and EARN their way to be a "have". They just want to take what the "have"s have..

And Obama and the Democratic Party are encouraging them along the way.

I reiterate.

That's just sad...

Michale.....

NOTE: This comment has been certified by an independent agent to be 100% factual. All facts have been checked, rechecked and checked again for accuracy. Any factual statement found to be not factual will be rewarded with a $20 finders fee

:D

Oh, and using that same old Spock quote to take off on that ending: "...the advancement of the few at the expense of the many" doesn't count. Just to let you know. It's got to be more original than that.

Heh.

-CW

Goading Michale is exactly the same as poking a stick into a cage with a wild animal -- you do it to see the reaction, while knowing you're safe. It's irresistable, at times.

I say this, knowing he won't take offense, for the simple reason that that is exactly the same answer he'd give to the question: "Why do you post at CW.com when you know you're never going to convince anybody?"

Heh.

There is balance in the Universe, in other words.

Heh heh. What's more, I'd bet a bunch of quatloos he'll be able to come up with an appropriate quote to sum this situation up.

:-)

-CW