Not Exactly “A Comfortable Pair of Shoes,” But…

“…If all the pain is borne by only one group — whether
it’s workers, or seniors, or the poor — while the wealthiest among us get to keep or get more tax breaks, we’re not doing the right thing. I think that’s something that Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on.”
.
Except, of course, they won’t.

Is that, by any chance, one of those “abstract principles” a politician is NOT supposed to be enslaved by, once the election is past?
.
Is this kinda like the “public option” or “single payer”? Seem to remember a vow to fight tooth-and-nail for that too (during the campaign that is).
.
Honestly, I’m at the point where my guiding political philosophy is that “talk is cheap.

They = GOP

“I don’t think it does anybody any good when public employees are denigrated or vilified or their rights are infringed upon. We need to attract the best and the brightest to public service. These times demand it. We’re not going to attract the best teachers for our kids, for example, if they only make a fraction of what other professionals make.”
.
It’s too bad Obama didn’t feel the same about denigrating oil, HC insurance, banks and Wall St firms. And now he can’t understand why they don’t trust him and think he is anti-business.
.
Attract the best teachers for fractions. Reality meet President Obama. They are better paid and look at the results. That is a bogus argument at best and just another Obama lie.
.
“while the wealthiest among us get to keep or get more tax breaks”
.
The left refuses to believe or understand that the wealthiest pay 70% of all income taxes now while 50% have no income tax liability. Spare us the repeated lie about who hasn’t paid or shared the pain.

Interesting that you picked that ‘graph as well. Obama’s statement about the overall class war is more important that his comment about one aspect of it – the attempt to destroy employee unions.

“A Comfortable Pair of Shoes”
.
Presdent Obama ought not to run for a second term, grab his comfortable shoes and get a job he is actually qualified to do: Be a rabble rousing community activist!

Except, of course, they won’t.
.
Actually, they do agree. It’s just that they both agree that giving tax cuts to the wealthy and big corporations isn’t really a bad thing.
.
GOP and GOP-lite.

Obama’s public employees “rights” are stepping all over the real rights of the workers that pay their overblown salaries and benefits.
.
For example, the right to not be taxed without representation. Who represents the taxpayers at the collective bargaining party that goes on between the unions and the public employees? That’s right, nobody.
,
So where is the concern for the majority of American’s real rights from Obama…there isn’t any. He is the one that constantly denigrates and vilifies: “the police acted stupidly”, “cling to their guns and their religion”, “we must punish our enemies.”

Says the author of one long “villification”…

Just pointing out your hero’s hypocrisy, af.

So it is still an attack on the middle class, just a different wrapper.
.
It is all a give back to the corporations, reduce here, reduce there. Either we give them the tax brake or else. And they still do the or else..
.
Wages and benefits have been declining for at least a decade now, when will the public wake up?

My “hero”, meltdown…?

I don’t think it does anybody any good when public employees are denigrated or vilified or their rights are infringed upon.

President Obama is a big phony. When you sign a bill that gives the wealthiest Americans hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks while simultaneously calling for a pay freeze for federal workers…you kind of lose all credibility on the denigration of public workers front.

America is facing a very basic reality. It simply cannot provide the basic government services that Americans expect without doing one (or both) of two things: dramatically cutting defense spending or raising taxes on the wealthy.

In the past, America thrived when marginal tax rates on the wealthiest of Americans were higher. Even if re returned the tax rates to the Clinton-era levels (which at the time were historically low) America’s deficit situation would be significantly better. There is simply no economic argument against higher taxes. The only question is whether we want to live in a country that invests in the future through physical and telecommunications infrastructures, education, research, etc. If we do then we must pay for it. And that means taxes.

It’s not that we don’t believe that they pay the bulk of taxes, it is that we (working poor, lower middle income bracket) are the ones who have to deal with constant denigration, vilification, and the loss of our livelihoods and our resources shouldering burdens that are far too large for us to shoulder alone.
.
You whine about losing a money on the bottom line – and nothing else!
.
It is us that goe under in our homes, watch loved ones die due to lack of resources and/or insurance, or may even be out in the street. None of our wealthy are in any danger whatsoever of these things, taxes or no.
.
To place your point of view in the proper perspective, let me state that Sasquatch8 felt that ‘Caveat Emptor’ were words worthy of use to motivate the “Charge of the 600″.
.
It is counter intuitive to say the least to suggest that any American would want to fight for the right of some corrupt CEO to steal from or defraud their customer base, or to fight the upcoming battle to save our country while those that have lecture those who don’t on how to make sacrifices…

I’m p!ssed that Obama did that too, square 1, but there is nobody else given the fact that the Tea Party is starting to make itself felt amongst the middle class, to prevent a class-based calamity from happening.
.
Yup. Lets stop throwing rocks in his direction. Throw ‘em at the Teabaggers instead.

The class based calamity has already started. Just like me Obama can not serve two masters, he needs to choose. Did I elect him or, did Corp America elect him?
.
Once you realize what the truth is you will be really pissed.

They actually used that argument for the California Legislature to raise their own salaries. “We need higher pay to attract the best people.” No, we only attracted higher paid crooks and fools.

“t is that we (working poor, lower middle income bracket) are the ones who have to deal with constant denigration, vilification, and the loss of our livelihoods and our resources shouldering burdens that are far too large for us to shoulder alone.”
.
Stop calling fo idiot policies and regulations that negatively impact those you claim to help. Example: Trumka is calling for an increase to the federal gas tax for the ever famous infrastructure projects (shovel ready). Will it help the working poor? No it will make their lives worse. Who will it help –overpaid overprotected unions.
.
“the ones who have to deal with constant denigration, vilification”
.
Now this is funny. The left has used the wealthy, corporations and businesses as punching bags for decades. But what is even funnier is that you think that wealth -re-distribution will ease the “burden” of denigration and vilification. What may be even more amusing would be to see the economic theory about how increasing taxes one on will ease the burden of vilification.
.
“In the past, America thrived when marginal tax rates on the wealthiest of Americans were higher”
.
No matter where rates have been the percent of taxes to GDP has averaged about 18%. It averaged 18.8% under Clinton and 18% under Bush. When these percentages have been above the long term average their is a curious incidence of the economy going into a recession. (19.7% in 1969, 19.6% in 1982, 20.6% in 2000). Now isn’t that interesting!
.
You truly get dumber by the day

“The class based calamity has already started.”

Yes over 50 years ago by the Democrats and to make sure it continues they adopt policies to insure that the lower and middle class never improve. Otherwise how will they buy votes if they aren’t handing out other people’s money!

53_3: Why liberals insist on giving up the fight before it has begun is beyond me.
.
What do you mean that there is nobody else? There are millions of liberals who are willing to support liberal policies that work. Only when liberals stop electing corporate stooges like Obama will they see any results. Simply hoping that the “lesser of two evils” is going to do anything but screw you is a recipe for failure.
.
One thing that you have to give teabaggers credit for is that, as misguided as they are, they insist on some ideological litmus tests from Republicans. And teabaggers are not afraid to lose an election in an effort to elect a better candidate.
.
Liberals in the Democratic party need to be much more active in the primary process and start taking their party back. And, in order to do that, it means pointing out Democratic complicity when it exists.
.
None of this “don’t throw rocks at Democrats” nonsense.
.
In most Western multi-party democracies, liberal Democrats and Third-Way corporatist Democrats would not be in the same party. They might, at times, form governing coalitions. But liberals would never be bamboozled into giving unquestioning support for corproratists, as you suggest we do.

I might have said something a little softer than ‘throwing rocks’ but I think that there is already enough on Obama’s plate, disagreement wise.
.
I was and am pretty angry at what Obama has compromised away, too.
.
But he’s not our biggest problem, the teabaggers are.
.
As far as “third way” or this or that, I’m not really too interested in – right now it’s relativistically speaking a distinction without a difference – from the teabagger POV it’s a bit like standing in Seattle and point out the difference in direction of the Empire State Building and the Brooklyn Bridge in NY.
.
That’s where I’m coming from. Also, I think that Obama is engaged in a little political ju-jitsu here.

Maybe, but I consider the dogs of war like feeinpa to be a far greater danger…

Why exactly should it be that middle-class people, retired people or poor people should bear any “pain” (significant reduction in their standard of living) at all?
.
If there’s any reduction in standard of living to be suffered, why shouldn’t it be the people who can bear the consequences of cuts to extra luxury homes, private jets and stock portfolios?
.
Why shouldn’t the “pain” of the financial collapse be borne solely by “one group” –what FDR called “the forces of selfishness and of lust for power “, back when liberal Democrats knew who they were and who to elect as President?

For nearly four years you have had an Administration which instead of twirling its thumbs has rolled up its sleeves. We will keep our sleeves rolled up.
.
We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace—business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
.
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
.
Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.
.
I should like to have it said of my first Administration that in it the forces of selfishness and of lust for power met their match. I should like to have it said of my second Administration that in it these forces met their master.
.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1936 campaign speech in Madison Square Garden.

Why would Barack Obama talk of “shared sacrifice” at all?
.
Why should “everybody should be prepared to give up something in order to solve our budget challenges“?
.
It seems as if Barack Obama considers both the captains of big industry and finance, the Paris Hiltons of high-society inherited privilege and ordinary middle-class people to all be equally culpable for the damage inflicted on this nation by elites over the past decade or more, and equally responsible for bearing the cost.
.
Why else would there be a need for “a conversation about pensions and Medicare and Medicaid and other promises that we’ve made as a nation,” in which “everyone should be at the table and that the concept of shared sacrifice should prevail?”
.
What kind of value system puts old people’s health in their retired years and the “other promises we’ve made as a nation” on the same table with tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires? Why would anyone expect marginal tax rate promises to the investor-class to carry the same weight as the “promises we’ve made as a nation” to middle-class people about their retirement security?
.
What sort of thinking is that?

Both of you are using circular arguments:
.
“I am right because my ideology says so.”
.
Neither of you have given me a single reason as to exactly why we, who are not making over $250k a year have to make these kind of sacrifices when those over do not.
.
That is the bottom line.

OK, he mildly supports the public employee unions, but he follows it by implying we need to cut back on aid to the poor and elderly, when they are already hurting in this bad economy.

Using the Republican’s framing of “cutting our way to fiscal health” is a losing technique, because the cons will always shout it’s not enough cutting. Instead, the president needs to say loudly and often that it’s not too much spending that wrecked the budget, it’s the banksters’ plundering of our economy that caused the drop in income tax revenue, and we need to work together to get fix the budget by a) bringing back manufacturing jobs through repeal of free trade agreements, and industrial policy; b) bring back the progressive tax structure that prevailed before the GOP’s demi-god Reagan dropped the highest federal tax rates.

http://www.winningprogressive.org/

I’m not happy about this, Stuart, believe me.
.
As far as shared sacrifices, I had commented in the past about maybe accepting the doubling of my taxes or more as I already know that I paid almost $5000 this year in medical expenses.
.
In a sense, I’m already making that sacrifice, but its only making shareholders richer, not fixing the country.
.
Obama is not the apple of my eye, but other more dangerous, dogs are baying at the doors and I’m more interested in focusing on them. I think Obama is compromising with the forces that are acting on him but maybe it might be better for us to focus on those forces rather than on Obama.
.
Politically, we will never be able to exact punishment on those that helped destroy the country’s economy, any more than we will see Karl Rove and others brought to justice for Katrina.
.
The best I think we can do is to counter their arguments for the elitist privilege of not having to suffer like us a bit farther down on the economic food chain.

53, if you can’t find something better to do with your money: donate to a charity that will actually make good use of your hard earned income, or INVEST it back into the economy thereby helping to create a job or grow our economy, THEN feel free to put your money where your mouth is and write Uncle Sam a big fat check.

Where is the “shared pain” from government?

The Tea Party is not this country’s biggest problem, not by a long shot.
.
We movement liberals have just as much shot at forming issue-by-issue alliances with the Paul-ites as we do with the Obamacrats.
.
Repeal DADT? Ally with the Obamacrats.
.
Audit the Federal Reserve? Ally with the Paul-ites.
.
Stop enforcing DOMA? Ally with the Obamacrats.
.
Stop extending the Patriot Act’s worst provisions? Ally with the Paul-ites.
.
Hey, if the New Democrats can be all about “bipartisan compromise” when they want to empower the Security State, or want to bail out big finance, why shouldn’t the movement left find allies on a discreet, issue-by-issue basis to oppose the center?
.
The people who are really f*cking ordinary folks over in this country day after day, week after week are not the Tea Party. The Tea Party didn’t create the HAMP program. The Tea Party isn’t in charge of enforcing State’s Secrets doctrine in court. The Tea Party didn’t negotiate with PhRMA, the AMA and big hospital orgs to keep medical prices up out of the reach of ordinary, middle-class people. The Tea Party isn’t escalating the war in Afghanistan. The Tea Party didn’t pass a tax cut deal in lame duck.
.
The Tea Party isn’t responsible for the sh*thole America finds itself in these days. In fact, it seems as if the Obama Administration, with its talk of federal belt-tightening, and “only the private sector can create jobs,” doesn’t find many of the ideas of the Tea Party too terribly objectionable itself. If the Obama Administration isn’t so frightened of the Tea Party taking over as to stand in aggressive opposition to all rightist demands, then why should we be frightened on cue, whenever national Democrats say we’re supposed to be?
.
To be irrationally terrified of the Tea Party is to be exactly in the frame of mind in which national, institutional, partisan Democrats would like movement liberals to be.
.
Let’s think for ourselves, for a change. Maybe we should be a little more concerned about who’s holding our leash, and not so upset that the Tea Party seems to be getting somewhere making the Republican Party accountable to ordinary folks on their side.

“Maybe, but I consider the dogs of war like feeinpa to be a far greater danger…”
.
But he isn’t. If you listen to what he says it is garbage, it is a ceaseless argument, energy spent in a useless endeavor.
.
I would rather focus on where we are going, not in where we do not want to go.

“Why would Barack Obama talk of “shared sacrifice” at all?”
.
Because Andrea Mitchell loves it, that’s why.

liberalmeltdown:
.
So fundamentally, what you are saying that you think it’s ok that the wealthy don’t have to face the same slings and arrows we do?
.
I’m interested in why you think that. I mean, the very worst that they could ever suffer is that they would become more like us if they screw up risk-wise, but otherwise, I can’t see any reason that they should fly through this without taking a hit.
.
Explain. As far as I know, they are men and women who put their pants on the same way we do.

“Neither of you have given me a single reason as to exactly why we, who are not making over $250k a year have to make these kind of sacrifices when those over do not”
.
And your argument is what “fairness” What is fair with the top 10% paying 70% of federal income taxes collected while over 50% of the filers have no tax liability. They have been making the sacrifice for years while the left has been handing out their money
.
And you conveniently ignore the argument that forcing up tax rates will kill growth. The left always denies it, bu tif they truly believed it, it would be a stretch to say they had convictions (they don’t), they would not have passed the tax cut extension. The controlled both Houses and the WH.

Am I irrationally terrified as you imply in your rhetoric, stuart?
.
Try to avoid it.
.
Horrific crimes against humanity have been committed even in our day by right wing zealots and ideologues. They are just wearing a little different clothing than they were in, say, 2003, or in, say, 1995.
.
Again, try to avoid rhetoric. These people are not new. I’ve watched them for 40 years now.
.
The fact that Obama gave approval to states to implement their own HCR provided they meet certain requirements may smack to you of an example of finding the Tea Party less palatable to him than I think, but you actually are missing the point:
.
I think that Obama is engaging in a bit of political ju-jitsu here.

“Why exactly should it be that middle-class people, retired people or poor people should bear any “pain” (significant reduction in their standard of living) at all?”
.
Mainly because it has been the policies of the left that has kept them at low and middle class status.
. Jobs off shore – high union wages and highest corp. tax rate in the world.
.
AMT- another -get the rich policy failure that kills the middle class

.
Steadfast insistence and vilification of the right for any mention of revamping either SS or Meidcare.

.
I have said time and time again today- the top 10% pays 70% of the federal income tax while over 50% of the bottom earners have no tax liability. Fairness? Not even close.
But then how do Democrats get elected if they can’t hand out other people’s money?

Over the past several decades, revenues have grown at around 18% while spending has grown over 20%. You can say it over and over that it’s not the spending but that doesn’t make it true.

“As far as shared sacrifices, I had commented in the past about maybe accepting the doubling of my taxes or more”
.
The DO IT! You doi not need a law to do so. Problem is liberals talk loudly but in the end always use other people’s money

I’ve watched his type for years, allthings.
.
15 years ago, the Tea Party was the Pat Robertson right. You don’t remember 1995 and the terrorism committed back then?
.
You don’t remember Katrina?
.
The Tea Party has a lot of equivalents in history, and the problem is them, not Obama.
.
I look at the fact that Obama is not pleasing everyone is that he is trying to navigate violent political waters. We all know that that violence has only recently been papered over by “comity”.
.
Developments bear watching, and it is not Obama, but a Tea Partyier that is inflicting real pain upon people. I thought the problems’ name was spelled W-a-l-k-e-r.

More ideology from freeinpa.
.
Aside from that I said I will if the wealthy do to.
.
That is what I said.

“If you listen to what he says it is garbage, it is a ceaseless argument, energy spent in a useless endeavor.
.
I would rather focus on where we are going, not in where we do not want to go.”
.
Have you been listening to the f@cking economic debate that’s driving the policy? Cutting government spending with 10% unemployment and a liquidity trap? It is garbage fed to the media by the right-wing liars that he parrots here. That’s what’s driving “where we are going.”
.
If you don’t think that the “conservative” propaganda that infects the minds of the Teatards, Village centrists and politically vacuous swing voters is the problem, you need to buy a clue.

Oh Fck off Shep you talk out of both sides of your mouth.
.
If we do not tell Obama what it is that we want we will not get it. It is that simple.
.
These guys you are so afraid of say what they want, vote for what they want and, demand what they want. And we?
.
We beg.

What is fair with the top 10% paying 70% of federal income taxes collected while over 50% of the filers have no tax liability

You’re right, freep, it’s not fair. That 10% has what, some 90% of the total wealth in the country? And they only pay 70% of taxes? Perhaps, instead of siding with your corporate masters, you could look at it from a different perspective:
.
Group A has 10% of the wealth and pays 30% of the taxes. Group B has 90% of the wealth and pays 70% of the taxes. Sure looks like there is a much higher tax burden on Group A.
.
Of course you could complain about those who have no tax liability. But then you have to realize these are also the people working paycheck to paycheck, doing the jobs you would probably never deign do to even if they did pay half-decently. You would have to examine how many of that group are students, college and high school, working near minimum wage for spare spending cash. You would have to examine how many of that group are seniors, working near minimum for extra spending cash or on social security having paid into it for their entire life.
.
It’s so easy to villify those who don’t have it as good as you, don’t you.

Well, free, over the past single decade we’ve been bombing the sh!t out of a couple of Middle East countries in an ongoing, off-budget war, over WMDs that turned out to be the figment of a trusted “informer’s” imagination.
.
Clinton ran a budget surplus while in office.
.
Exactly WHOSE deficit is it that you’re complaining about? And who originated those cuts for the wealthiest that contributed to that?
.
HINT: look under the nearest “Bush”.

“To be irrationally terrified of the Tea Party is to be exactly in the frame of mind in which national, institutional, partisan Democrats would like movement liberals to be.”
.
No one is “terrified” of the Tea Party and there’s nothing irrational to see them as threat. At least it can’t be any more irrational than thinking they’re going to “ally with Obamacrats”. And what kind of logic says that if “institutional, partisan Democrats,” are fer it, “movement liberals,” must be agin it?
.
I swear to Christ, I’m thinking that irrational hatred of Democrats by liberals is starting to become this country’s biggest political menace.

“And your argument is what “fairness” What is fair with the top 10% paying 70% of federal income taxes collected while over 50% of the filers have no tax liability. They have been making the sacrifice for years while the left has been handing out their money.”
.
1. You are talking from strictly a monetary viewpoint. I am talking about equity, not money, of which the wealthy have plenty of and we don’t.
.
2. The sacrifices you speak of are “paper” sacrifices, and are not real. They do not make a decision whether to choose between mortgage or health, nor do they lack resources should calamity arise.
3. The recipient of the money “handed out” has been you and yours.
.
Simply put, I have worked all my life and 40% of the taxes I pay go to people like you to support your infrastructure, your health and your livelihood because your tax base is not large enough to maintain the roads, power grid, water, teleophony, and telemetry required to maintain rural America’s lifestyle at a level comparable to ours in urban areas.
.
So, while you whine, it is I who pays for your right to do so!
.
“And you conveniently ignore the argument that forcing up tax rates will kill growth.”
.
This is the circular argument I spoke of. I did not “conveniently ignore it”, I dismissed it out of hand as we have a recession – a near depression – a real live ideological and empirical experiment – to look at as a monument to your economic ideology.
.
Unless, of course, you are going to try to claim that the economy collapsed after Obama took office…

To summarize to all those debating me on the problem of Obama:
.
“United We Stand – Divided We Fall”
.
That is all…

And I have said, freeinpa, that this is not about fairness, it is about equity.
.
We have real sacrifices, the wealthy only make paper sacrifices.
.
And before you whine again about income redistribution, keep in mind that the urban communities spend about 40% of their tax dollars on subsidies for rural America!
.
In short, you are whining on my dime…

53_3
.
Please do not mistake my advocacy against partisan-inspired fear for a statement about your personal feelings. If I seemed to be doing so, please accept my apology. I am not calling you a coward, I am simply arguing for the courage to see all of the political and economic forces arrayed against ordinary people for what –and who– they are.
.
When you say “right wing zealots and ideologues” are responsible for the crimes of 2003 (Iraq?), do you mean the AUMF? The kind of Democrat we’re up against fell over themselves to enable that invasion. They’re also the kind that kept insisting on Saddam’s “threat” for a decade prior.
.
Like I keep saying, the worst case scenario isn’t a Republican President, it’s a Republican President and a Third Way Democrat-led Congress who make it possible for the “bipartisans” to ruin America.
.
To which crimes are you referring when you mention 1995?
.
As far as Obama & the states, I’m not sure what you’re saying. I honestly didn’t get that sentence, it seems garbled to me.
.
But, when it comes to Obama & jiu jitsu, I’m sure you’re right. Of course the Administration are playing what they consider to be high-stakes games for their agenda. I’m just aware that they’re not doing that for our interests, or the country’s interests, but their own.
.
…On some things.
.
On others, like “only the private sector can create jobs” and “HAMP worked” and “shared sacrifice”, that’s not jiu-jistu, that’s the Administration’s (and the national Democratic Party’s) actual agenda.

It’s not that we beg, allthings.
.
It’s not that we shouldn’t question, we should.
.
It is be cause we do not unite until things start really getting bad.
.
And I think that that time is now…

“If we do not tell Obama what it is that we want we will not get it. It is that simple.”
.
Who the f@ck is arguing that liberals and progressives shouldn’t be screaming bloody murder about bad policies, wherever they come from? Are the straw men in your head telling you you’re being rational?
.
Why don’t you deal with my point that “conservative” propaganda is at the heart of government and social dysfunction? Does it not fit with your pathological non-partisanship?

“No one is “terrified” of the Tea Party and there’s nothing irrational to see them as threat.”
.
Really? Nobody on our side loves to gin up anxiety about the bad, ol’ Tea Party for partisan gain?
.
Of course the Tea Party are a threat…to establishment Democrats. And establishment Republicans. They’re wildly wrong most of the time, but, when they’re actually consistent, they most threaten the way of political life in the capital, in which politicians say one thing and then do another. The American people need to be exposed to what the popular right want to do, instead of hearing Democrats freak out about the xenophobe Republicans, and then seeing George W Bush propose comprehensive immigration reform. Accountability, even in the form of the Tea Party, is good, especially to the extent that it threatens lying apparatchik Republicans.

“And what kind of logic says that if “institutional, partisan Democrats,” are fer it, “movement liberals,” must be agin it?”
.
Umm…the kind of logic that goes “Well, they’ve f*cked the country time and again, they’re probably going to continue, unless we stop them.” The kind of logic that says “What can we expect from the kind of Democrats that would appoint Larry Summers to shepherd an economic recovery from a disaster caused in large part from his policies a decade earlier?” You know, logic.
.
“I’m thinking that irrational hatred of Democrats by liberals is starting to become this country’s biggest political menace.”
.
Ridiculous. It’s pretty darn rational to see New Democrats —Obamacrats– as a distinctly different sort of Democrat who will do astoundingly bad things to the country, and be only too happy to wage political campaigns against liberal Democrats whenever we step out of line.
.
It’s rational to stop imagining that there is this monolith called “Democrats” for liberals to “hate.” There isn’t.
.
“Democrats” didn’t join with Ron Paul to sponsor a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, Alan Grayson did.
.
Or are you against even that minuscule attempt to use the Tea Partiers’ antipathy for the Fed to counter the establishment centrist-rightist agenda?
.
If so, isn’t it a little ironic to talk about “irrational hatred”?

53_3:
.
“As far as shared sacrifices, I had commented in the past about maybe accepting the doubling of my taxes or more as I already know that I paid almost $5000 this year in medical expenses.”
.
What? Why?
.
Why would you even think about raising your own taxes, when corporations have the Caymans, top marginal tax rates on millionaires were at 90% during Eisenhower’s presidency, and the estate inheritance tax exemption was just raised in the GOP-Obama tax deal to $5 million?
.
With all due respect, what can you possibly mean?
.
Why on earth would you take the “shared sacrifice” line as some sort of price for keeping Obama intact against “other more dangerous, dogs”?
.
What’s more dangerous to your and your people’s interests than the Obamacrats’ “shared sacrifice” –austerity?

(by “your people” I obviously mean “Americans”, in case there was any doubt)

Why don’t you deal with it shep? Do you think arguing with free or rusty does anything? Do you think calling them terrorists works? Do you think that you reach people who watch FOX news, listen to Glen Beck, Rush, adore Sarah Palin?
.
You argue with a wall. Your focused on the wrong people.

“53_3
.
Please do not mistake my advocacy against partisan-inspired fear for a statement about your personal feelings. If I seemed to be doing so, please accept my apology. I am not calling you a coward, I am simply arguing for the courage to see all of the political and economic forces arrayed against ordinary people for what –and who– they are.”
.
I didn’t take it personally, I labeled it for what it was:
.
rhetoric
.
In this case it is designed do denigrate those collectively who consider the Tea Partiers a danger, not just me.
.
“When you say “right wing zealots and ideologues” are responsible for the crimes of 2003 (Iraq?), do you mean the AUMF? The kind of Democrat we’re up against fell over themselves to enable that invasion. They’re also the kind that kept insisting on Saddam’s “threat” for a decade prior.”
.
I did not say “crimes of 2003″. I alluded to the different clothing they wore in 2003 and 1995. In 1995, many people within the GOP share the blame for the bombing in OKC. In 2003, and before, and after they were “neocons”, “the moral majority”, and others who shared the umbrella of the GOP. You can pick what you want that peeves you most; they were there, and they were the ones who got it done. Katrina, the Patriot act, you name it:
.
The words “Tea Party” is just another wrapper around people who have a habit of resorting to demonization, grabbing the mantle of patriotism, and have an agenda that they fervently believe in. This is regardless of the exact politics or religious forces. It is the forest, and not the trees…
.
“Like I keep saying, the worst case scenario isn’t a Republican President, it’s a Republican President and a Third Way Democrat-led Congress who make it possible for the “bipartisans” to ruin America.”
.
I see Citizens United vs. FEC as the death knell of democracy. We are now moving in the direction of a “democratic oligarchy” if that decision doesn’t get reversed, and soon.
.
I’ll disagree on Obama. and the danger to this country. Obama, above all else, has built a career out of compromise, and he’s doing that plus I think practicing some very astute “ju-jitsu” to place the GOP in untenable positions of their own making. Just my opinion, though.
.
“To which crimes are you referring when you mention 1995?”
.
See my above about GOP history and politics.
.
“As far as Obama & the states, I’m not sure what you’re saying. I honestly didn’t get that sentence, it seems garbled to me.”
.
I thought you knew:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/02/28/obama-gives-props-to-romney-on-health-care/
.
“But, when it comes to Obama & jiu jitsu, I’m sure you’re right. Of course the Administration are playing what they consider to be high-stakes games for their agenda. I’m just aware that they’re not doing that for our interests, or the country’s interests, but their own.
.
I see it differently, but we may be dealing with a “lesser of two evils” thing here.
.
“…On some things.”
.
Possibly, but I’m convinced that Obama is actually trying to do the right thing. He’s gotten far too much flack. We need to unite.
.
“On others, like “only the private sector can create jobs” and “HAMP worked” and “shared sacrifice”, that’s not jiu-jistu, that’s the Administration’s (and the national Democratic Party’s) actual agenda.”
.
HAMP helped but it didn’t go far enough.
.
You’ve seen my commentary on sharing sacrifices.
.
Thanks for your time.

“It’s not that we shouldn’t question, we should.
.
It is be cause we do not unite until things start really getting bad.
.
And I think that that time is now…”
.
WI has done more two weeks than we have done in two years of this crap on this blog.

“It’s pretty darn rational to see New Democrats —Obamacrats– as a distinctly different sort of Democrat who will do astoundingly bad things to the country, and be only too happy to wage political campaigns against liberal Democrats whenever we step out of line.”
.
No, it really isn’t. “New Democrats” are politicians and elected officials, just like liberal Democrats. They will do what institutional pressures inside the Beltway and the pressures exerted upon them by public sentiment call them to do for the sake of their own political and professional self-preservation. Not everything they do are “astoundingly bad things” for the country and liberals are “stepping out of line” according to the centrists viewpoint pretty-much all of the time and yet they very seldom “wage political campaigns against liberal Democrats” and almost always in such a clumsy public way that it telegraphs that they are merely hippie-punching for the benefit of the Villagers. Frankly, your characterization of New Democrats sounds a bit like a paranoid rant and I say that as someone who hates their bad policies every bit as much as you.

“Do you think arguing with free or rusty does anything? Do you think calling them terrorists works? Do you think that you reach people who watch FOX news, listen to Glen Beck, Rush, adore Sarah Palin?”
.
How ironic. Challenging “conservative” dogma in the public media narrative isn’t about reaching anyone on the right (since you presumably read what I write about them every day, I’d say you’re still listening to those straw men in your head) it’s about reaching pathologically non-partisan swing voters like you. Actually, it’s more about reaching the low information variety who get their political news with the sound turned off but your blindness to the real danger of right-wing politics is quite illustrative of the pathological part, even among the politically well-informed.
.
Again, do you not understand how false beliefs in the public, generated by “conservative” propaganda, drives bad policy by everyone in government?

First of all, 53_3, I really appreciate the comity with which you’ve approached my arguments. If you’re going to advocate a “we must unite” line, your advocacy is certainly consistent enough to support that position without irony, to be sure.
.
Second, though, I just have to ask:
.
What’s more of a danger to the country, in your opinion?

A) the popular right’s crusade against illegal immigration
.
B) the financial deregulation regime exemplified by Bob Rubin’s and Larry Summers’ repeal of New Deal protections
.
On which of those two political phenomena should movement liberals focus?

If, in light of the looting of the Treasury we just saw, B) seems more dangerous to you, 53_3, wouldn’t you say it’s necessary to aggressively oppose the proponents of B) –even at the cost of Democratic unity?

The NUMBER 1 reason for lower taxes: It is a fact that the most inefficient way to spend a dollar is to give it to government. Government agencies and bureaucracies eat more and more and more of every dollar that the government confiscates from the economy, producing nothing but waste.

shepherdwong:
.
Before I respond to your characterization of my opposition to the Third Way’s agenda on practical and ideological grounds as “paranoid rant,” I would find it tremendously helpful if you were to actually answer the question with respect to Ron Paul and Alan Grayson’s bill to audit the Federal Reserve:
.
“are you against even that minuscule attempt to use the Tea Partiers’ antipathy for the Fed to counter the establishment centrist-rightist agenda?”
.
Well?

It’s too narrow a set of choices, stuart:
.
A is one aspect of the demonization of minorities for political purposes, and you already know how I feel about that.
.
People have died, and die every year (typically ten to twenty a year) due to right wing violence. We both know where such political forces can lead, and history is replete with instances.
.
B is also too narrow. It is an aspect of the forces that helped create the atmosphere in which Citizens United could happen.
.
Which ones?
.
An oligarchy is as dangerous as a state envisioned by those who practice A.
.
Attacking Obama won’t help. Neither will allying oneself with forces who would otherwise destroy liberties in other ways (“paulites”*).
.
*”paulites” is a long enough shoreline feature, with sand on it, to support Social Darwinists and other pretty hideous characters.

Stuart, of course not but I’m not sure why that matters, unless you believe that’s it’s the beginning of a beautiful friendship between liberals and Paulite libertarians. Please tell me you don’t beleive that.
.
Also, I don’t believe I deserve your disingenuousness. I just said that I was just as opposed to “the Third Way’s agenda on practical and ideological grounds,” as you are (as if you didn’t already know that). We’re talking about your palpable hatred and hyperbolic criticisms of New Democrats, especially in contrast to your seeming friendliness toward right-wing “conservatives”.

“How ironic. Challenging “conservative” dogma in the public media narrative isn’t about reaching anyone on the right (since you presumably read what I write about them every day, I’d say you’re still listening to those straw men in your head) it’s about reaching pathologically non-partisan swing voters like you. Actually, it’s more about reaching the low information variety who get their political news with the sound turned off but your blindness to the real danger of right-wing politics is quite illustrative of the pathological part, even among the politically well-informed.”
.
Yea shep. Patholigical seems to be your new word for the day.
.
Swing voter? How so shep where do I swing for whom?
.
“Again, do you not understand how false beliefs in the public, generated by “conservative” propaganda, drives bad policy by everyone in government?”
.
Yea sure I do shep. But yours has become just as bad and, worst, it is apparent to me that you do not believe in what you say your self. One moment your a Liberal and the next your a Centrist. I think you just like to argue. The sound of your voice must be soothing.

I’m a bit confused by this, 53_3:
.
“[B) the financial deregulation regime exemplified by Bob Rubin's and Larry Summers' repeal of New Deal protections] …is an aspect of the forces that helped create the atmosphere in which Citizens United could happen.”
.
Can you explain a bit more what you mean by that?

For one, stuart, I’m focused on what is politically possible.
.
What isn’t politically possible, is to get the wealthy the shoulder the entire burden simply because they are too powerful and won’t do it.
.
Which leaves me, since I already have had to pay $4520 in medical expenses in addition to my taxes already, I know I can afford it if that is what it takes to get the wealthy to pull their fair share.
.
The fact is, for every buck I spend now, we have innumerable idiots like rusty and freeinpa who will suck up about 33 cents of it in the form of rural subsidies.

The political atmosphere now, which allowed the installation of people in high places who do hew to corporate interests is the making of a 40 year long propaganda campaign by the right.
.
These things were remembered as protections against robber barons, only now, it’s the robber barons who are driving the GOP, lock stock and barrel.
.
I do not agree that the same applies to the Democrats.
.
yet…

“How so shep where do I swing for whom?”
.
You tell me. Do you vote? Whom do you vote for? Ever stay home from an election? Ever vote Republican?
.
Me, I’m a liberal who always votes Democratic because I have no other choice…being a liberal and all.

I have to leave. My wife is entitlement jonesing at the hospital because of septicemia and a spinal infection and has lost the use of her legs.
.
I will continue when I have more time later…

@free: Technically, its not “other people’s money”. Once you pay your taxes, it becomes the government’s money. And that money is used to build roads, bridges, railroads. It is used to hire police officers, fire fighters and school teachers. It is not your money or my money but the government’s money. We have a small say in how that money is spent, and if you don’t like how it is spent, call your representative, but it isn’t your money.

Well I have to admit that once I didn’t vote for George McGovern .
.
I do live in TX and there isn’t always a Democrat to vote for.

“I do live in TX and there isn’t always a Democrat to vote for.”
.
That’s the best reason I’ve heard yet for sitting out an election but holding your nose and voting for the least bad Republican would still be the best course. And no, that doesn’t make me a Republican any more than voting for centrist Democrat makes me a centrist. Political choices are always the choice of the lesser of evils but the choice must be made to prevent the greater of evils from prevailing. There’s not a doubt in my mind that we would be worse off, by orders of magnitude, under a McCain/Palin Administration.

“The political atmosphere now, which allowed the installation of people in high places who do hew to corporate interests is the making of a 40 year long propaganda campaign by the right.”
.
That’s correct and both “A)” and “B)” are products as well as tools of the corporatist “conservative movement. Do you not understand that everything you hate is the product of the corporatist “conservative movement, including “Third-way Democrats”?

“We’re talking about your palpable hatred and hyperbolic criticisms of New Democrats”
.
Well, no, we are not. You are characterizing my opposition to what seem to me to be Third Way ideologues –not merely venal or corrupt politicians, not merely recipients of “institutional pressure”– as irrational, knee-jerk loathing and relative hysteria.
.
I’m talking about your reluctance to even answer the question “Is it possible to, in discreet circumstances, for discreet goals, ally with the popular right in order to challenge the power of Party elites?,” since it may lead to “the beginning of a beautiful friendship” between the populist wings of the major parties.
.
I can’t believe I have to say this, but…I could give a rat’s ass about being “friends” with people on the movement right. I’m not Brad De Long pining away for some “reasonable” technocrat at AEI with whom to have dry, academic email debates. I’m just not that interested in discovering personal relationships with the folks who idealize robber-baron America.
.
What I care about –the only thing that I care about– is finding creative ways by which to stop the Larry Summers, Tim Geithners, Bob Gates, James L. Jones, Diane Feinsteins, Mary Landrieus and Barack Obamas of the world from f*cking my country. If that means voting or campaigning with the popular right some small portion of the time against the center, then I’m willing to consider that course of action.
.
It’s the irrational, partisan hatred of the popular right that we need to escape. It seems to me that this sort of tribal reaction is A) characteristic of movement conservatives, and B) easily exploitable by partisan Democrats with marching orders that have little to do with a movement liberal agenda.
.
Why are you so concerned about the possibility of a “beautiful friendship” developing that you’re willing to play the reactionary role, even as you know full well the disastrous policies that such tribalism ultimately ensures, shepherdwong?
.
…And don’t tell me that I’m being disingenuous. I’m not. When I say that you’ve characterized my opposition on practical and ideological grounds as a “paranoid rant,” that’s because you did. It’s only if you were to refuse to recognize my opposition as “practical and ideological”, and only assign those adjectives to your own positions, that your complaint makes any sense.
.
But, because I disagree with the idea that “they very seldom “wage political campaigns against liberal Democrats” and almost always in such a clumsy public way that it telegraphs that they are merely hippie-punching for the benefit of the Villagers,” because I can see, based on the evidence of their own policy memos, that they truly do dispute the validity of liberalism on ideological grounds, I really am opposing the Third Way –and their representatives, the New Democrats– in the same terms.
.
I am making the case that it isn’t solely that Obamacrats are corrupt, or fearful, or normal national politicians in bed with the Village, or any of the other reasons why they pursue a Third Way policy agenda. It seems, based not on my passionate feelings or grand hyperbolic statements, that, in addition to those other factors, it may actually be centrist ideology that informs these elites’ culture and society that is responsible for the enactment of policies like the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
.
No amount of “pressures exerted upon them by public sentiment” called the Clinton Administration to deregulate credit derivatives specifically “for the sake of their own political and professional self-preservation” in 1999. I disagree with you that Gramm-Leach-Bliley was simply the prudent or anxious act of politicians trying to stay elected, and yet it has had potentially a worse impact on the country than even the Iraq invasion and occupation. I blame the New Democrats, without whom this destruction would not be possible. I blame them not for who they are, but for what they think. The fault, in my opinion, lies in a series of bankrupt ideas about how the world, politics and economies work.
.
That’s not a paranoid rant, that’s analysis. It’s not hyperbolic criticism to suggest that the neo-liberal rolling back of the New Deal is as destructive as an agenda as the neo-conservatives’. You may disagree, but it’s hardly a fair characterization to claim the irrationality of that analysis.
.
What’s so interesting is that, as soon as the thought of doing anything politically whatsoever with the movement right is mentioned, you’re moved to the opinion that it must be “palpable hatred” that would inspire such insanity as to do exactly what the centrists are proud to proclaim of themselves when it comes to the establishment right. In other words, you can’t possibly oppose my Lilliputian efforts at issue-based rapprochement more than you would the Obamacrats’ attendance record in the salons of cretins like John Cornyn or FDR’s “organized money” –the Chamber of Commerce.
.
We must not be led around on Tea Party-anxiety leashes by the professional compromisers, shepherdwong. We must not let a disproportionate, predictable terror of the right be peddled to us by partisan fear-mongers out to monopsonize our votes.
.
That’s not hatred talking, that’s cold, hard strategy.

Best wishes to you and your Mrs., 53.

“What I care about –the only thing that I care about– is finding creative ways by which to stop the Larry Summers, Tim Geithners, Bob Gates, James L. Jones, Diane Feinsteins, Mary Landrieus and Barack Obamas of the world from f*cking my country.”
.
Meanwhile, the Koch brothers (Richard Mellon Scaife, Rupert Murdoch etc., etc.) f@cked your country. Seriously Stuart, this is what I’m talking about. Tim Geithner “– the only thing that [you] care about –” isn’t the most important thing. He’s a tool. It’s the “conservative” movement that spawned Third-way centrism and everything else you hate. There’s a class war being waged by a subset of corporate owners on the rest of America and it precedes and is much larger that the Third-way Democrats that are “the only thing that [you] care about”. The reason you will never make meaningful common cause with anyone on the right is because their minds and hearts have been poisoned by movement “conservatism”, not Third-way corporatist centrsism. You just can’t see the forest for the New Democrats.

One more thing. The alternate choice to Bob Rubin would have been whomever George H.W. Bush picked and the alternative to Tim Geithner would have been whomever John McCain (not FDR) wanted. Do you really think their choices would better reflect your policy choices? I guess at the rate disaffected Democrats and confused Independents are going, we might just find out.

What’s more of a danger to the country, in your opinion?

A) the popular right’s crusade against illegal immigration
.
B) the financial deregulation regime exemplified by Bob Rubin’s and Larry Summers’ repeal of New Deal protections
.
On which of those two political phenomena should movement liberals focus?
.
Excuse me for butting in here but, I do not think we can choose, both are an assault on people. The trouble with throwing one group, us verses them, is it divides when we really need each other. It is not either or, it never is, it is who’s first.

Oh, Jesus…go take care of your wife. Best wishes for her full and speedy recovery.

In many cases shep there is only the Rep on the ballot, and often there isn’t even a Dem in the primaries but, I get the gist of what you are saying and have argued the same point.
.
My point is to push those Dems to the limit. Frankly Obama is the best we have but, I do not trust him, he would sell me out if thought he could get away with it. I am not sure he is a good bet when he doesn’t have to face an election in the in his second term.
.
What is he going to do?

If I remember correctly, Mr. Obama’s timew as a community activist involved working with laid off factory workers in Chicago.

Are those people idea of “rabble”?

“Excuse me for butting in here but, I do not think we can choose, both are an assault on people.”
.
I suspect that Stuart was just trying to make a point but you are, of course, correct. Just like liberals don’t have to choose between criticizing administration policy and voting for a Democrat because it’s the better choice.

I see Citizens United vs. FEC as the death knell of democracy. We are now moving in the direction of a “democratic oligarchy” if that decision doesn’t get reversed, and soon.

************************************************************

Then be afraid, be very afraid. There is no chance of reversal unless one of the 5 supporters dies and is replaced by a liberal. More likely is these 5 serve another decade unless one decided to retire under a conservative President so they can be replaced by an originalist. Even if one were to die tomorrow there’s no chance of passing a law to challenge the decision with this Senate or this house. You could not get it passed either body. Further it’s all bit certain at least 6 Senators who are moderate or liberal will be replaced this cycle with a Senator who is conservative. There are going to be at least 46 solidly conservative Senators in 2013 who would filibuster any attempt at another Campaign Finance Reform bill. So even if Scalia were to pass away tomorrow and be replaced by a Ginsburg clone Obama won’t be able to pass a bill before 2016.

Your idea of a union negotiation is a little off. The unions and the public employees don’t negotiate with each other. The unions negotiate with government on behalf of public employees. If you’re upset with salaries and benefits of public employees, then shouldn’t some of your anger be directed at the people who sat across from the unions at the bargaining table?

And I’ve heard the argument lately that public unions negotiate with people they’ve put in office, giving them a stacked deck to play with. Does anyone out there really think unions (public or otherwise) were instrumental in putting Scott Walker and Mitch Daniels in office?

Could I also point out that over the last hundred years or so government employment has been a powerful engine for lifting families into the middle class? Rules against minority discrimination were implemented and (pretty much) enforced by government well before private employers took such steps.

A person with a high school diploma could find work at decent wages at the post office or DMV or Veterans Hospital. I know the Tea Party seems to think that any government job is not really a job at all, but as the industrial base disappeared it offered a viable alternative to waiting tables and mopping floors. (Honest labor, but not exactly a ticket to the middle class.)

But, of course, in this day and age that sort of thinking is vilified as “redistributing wealth.” It’s too bad that the oligarchs who now hold the whip hand don’t see that a healthy middle class with disposable income is a benefit to them. The middle class is the consumer class, and they’re killing the golden goose.

These things were remembered as protections against robber barons, only now, it’s the robber barons who are driving the GOP, lock stock and barrel.

*************************************************

How old are you? This stuff hasn’t sold in decades. Who are today’s Robber Barons? Bill Gates? The guy trying to end childhood diseases in Africa? Warren Buffet? The guy trying to help him. Paul Allen? George Soros? Michael Bloomberg? Speilberg? Tiger? Michael Jordan? Jon Corzine?

“Obama is the best we have but, I do not trust him, he would sell me out if thought he could get away with it. I am not sure he is a good bet when he doesn’t have to face an election in the in his second term.”
.
I guess as a somewhat defender of Obama, I should offer you some comfort there but I can’t. I think I’ve managed to figure out how the man plays politics – brilliantly and, often, deceptively – but I have no idea what’s in the man’s heart. The good news there is that he could be a good deal more liberal than the Village will allow (and is playing a very cagey game pretending otherwise) but he could also be a pure opportunist or the Third-way ideologue of Stuart’s nightmares. The only thing we can do now is watch what he does.

So predictably simple-minded. Not all rich people are psychopaths and not all psychopaths are rich people but the combination — movement “conservatism” — is…deadly.
.
And you’ve got it exactly backward. The class war hasn’t been this hot since the 30s. And the banksters and other oligarchs giving themselves tax cuts and bonuses while they corrupt our entire government and public media and try to gut our pensions and Social Security to pay for their own greed and incompetence are making it quite marketable as well. We will see, won’t we.

Please take care, 53_3.

First of all, don’t purposefully misconstrue “the only thing I care about.” You know perfectly well that I meant that in the context of “being bestest friends forever with rightists,” not that I just don’t bother to oppose market fundamentalists, theocrats and imperialists. Come on, shepherdwong.
.
A) Are you really suggesting that Tim Geithner is a tool of the Koch brothers?
.
B) What precisely do you mean when you say “ It’s the “conservative” movement that spawned Third-way centrism”
.
C) Are you unaware the apex of the horrendous, terrible, awful policy that happened during that catastrophic window when George W Bush was President, both houses of Congress were GOP majority, and we got the Roberts Court was —wait for it— Medicare Part D?

I hope you noticed who mostly didn’t show up with this discussion.

“…not that I just don’t bother to oppose market fundamentalists, theocrats and imperialists. Come on, shepherdwong.”
.
I’m glad to hear about it, Stuart. I swear I did not think I was being unfair to you. I apologize for not being familiar with much of your work, I know that you are a prolific political commentator and I confess to knowing little more than what you write her at Swampland. Here at Swampland, I know you as a sharp critic of centrist, Third-way Democrats, not social “conservatives”, not market fundamentalist “conservatives”, not neo “conservatives”, nor any other kind of “conservatives”. I know you as a harsh critic of Third-way Democrats and New Democrats, not conservatives or Republicans of any kind. Please feel free to point me toward comments that suggest otherwise.
.
I’m sure you’re familiar with the Overton Window. Pathological as well as opportunistic centrism always tries to split the difference between the acceptable right and the acceptable left. If you can’t really see how movement “conservatism” enables Third-way centrism can you at least see how it constantly pulls “the center” — where Third-way centrism always resides — to the right?

Attached is a link to a video by Melton Friedman that I think would be good for all Swampland commenters to watch.
.

53_3,
.
“People have died, and die every year (typically ten to twenty a year) due to right wing violence. We both know where such political forces can lead, and history is replete with instances.”
.
Where do you come up with these lies? Can you not win an argument with truth?
.
With 40-50 million people claiming to be part of the Tea Party Movement, we have not had one conviction for an act of violence in the entire country.
By that measurement they are probably the most peaceful group in the country.
.
There were more acts of violence by the union protesters is WI, then in all the Tea party events over the past two years.
.
It’s reasonable to argue different political views and opinions. You should not make up lies to support your political views.
.

Stuart,
.
As you have correctly said in the past, I tend to lump all people to the Left of center as Liberals.
.
You speak of yourself as a “Movement Liberal”.
Could you give me a good definition as to the difference between a Liberal and a Movement Liberal?
.
My perception of Liberals has been that they are of two main types, Liberals and Extreme Liberals. Most of the Liberals on Swampland appear to me to be Extreme Liberals and Ideologues.
.
You and a couple others appear to be very rational in your beliefs and not Ideologues.
.
In the above discussion, it appears that you are the only one with an open mind. Everyone else just wants to hate Conservatives.
.
Most Liberals on this site believe I am a Right Wing Extremist. I am actually both a Social Conservative and a Fiscal Conservative. I am not an Ideologue. I am by nature, education and experience an analytical person. To change my mind someone has to show me provable facts. Personal Perceptions and Opinions, even though people really believe their opinions are fact, will not change my mind.

“Do you not understand that everything you hate is the product of the corporatist “conservative movement, including “Third-way Democrats”?”
.
I understand this statement clearly and emphatically reject it out of hand.
.
Is that clear enough?

Thanks you guys.
.
This is life. The new normal. It appears my wife won’t be home for a while, she has to devote most of her time to jonesing the entitlement system while she recuperates from a septic spinal cord abscess and septicemia of the blood.
.
She’s alert and much better. She’s going to be going to a rehab center to jones her entitlements there, too.

Old enough to know for a fact you are absolutely full of sh!t.
.
You can google everything I’ve said about the GOP.
.
Including your pitiful claims about the GOP as it is now.
.
Hint:
.
http://www.splcenter.org/
.
That is all, rdw…

3xfire3:
.
We’ve been through this before, and I wiped the floor with your mewling ignorance.
.
Google it, dumbell…

I have a better name for you, 3xfire3:
.
sh!t.
.
That is all…

My best wishes to your wife and you 53_3. My BIL is in an extended care facility now trying to recover from major surgery. I know how stressful the process can be.

IQ53_3,
.
“People have died, and die every year (typically ten to twenty a year) due to right wing violence. We both know where such political forces can lead, and history is replete with instances.”
.
“We’ve been through this before, and I wiped the floor with your mewling ignorance.”
.
Google it, dumbell..”.
.
IQ53,
.
Can you give us a few links showing where members of the Tea Party have been convicted of violent crimes?
.
Out of 40-50 million members you can surly come up with a few convictions.
.
Why are you such a hater that you have to make up lies about people you disagree with politically?
.
You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
.
Are you going to use your normal method and change the subject or just fail to reply and show what a liar you are.

IQ53
.
“People have died, and die every year (typically ten to twenty a year) due to right wing violence. We both know where such political forces can lead, and history is replete with instances.”
.
Here so information that I thought you would like to see.
.
The Media’s Myth of Right Wing Violence
.
“Before letting the media continue to perpetuate a stereotype that may not actually exist at all, let me give you the facts that U.S. journalists refuse to cite. Let me show you where real violence comes from.

It was not the fear of conservative violence that caused Ann Coulter’s speech to be cancelled this week.
.
It was a liberal who bit the finger off a man who disagreed with him on healthcare.
.
It was Obama-loving Amy Bishop who took a gun to work and murdered co-workers.
.
Joseph Stack flew his plane into the IRS building after writing an anti-conservative manifesto.
.
It was liberals who destroyed AM radio towers outside of Seattle.
.
It’s liberals who burn down Hummer dealerships.
It was progressive SEIU union thugs who beat a black conservative man who spoke his mind.
.
It’s doubtful that a conservative fired shots into a GOP campaign headquarters.
.
In fact, Democrats have no monopoly on having their offices vandalized.
.
Don’t forget it was Obama’s friend Bill Ayers who used terrorism as a tool for political change. SDS is still radical, with arrests in 2007 and the storming of the CATO Institute in July 2008.
.
It was a liberal who was sentenced to two years for bringing bombs and riot shields to the Republican National Convention in 2008.
.
It was a liberal who threatened to kill a government informant who infiltrated her Austin-based group that planned to bomb the RNC.
.
It was liberals who assaulted police in Berkeley.
.
It was liberals who intimidated and threw rocks through the windows of researchers.
.
The two Black Panthers who stood outside polls intimidating people with nightsticks were probably not right-wingers.
.
Every time the G20 gets together, it’s not conservatives who destroy property and cause chaos.
.
I could literally go on and on, but let’s try to have some perspective here. Violence is a product of the fringe, on either side, and it’s sickening to try to use it for political advantage.
.
Those who commit violence in the name of politics deserve political change no more than they deserve leniency in sentencing. Violence furthers no cause. The only call to action that violence has ever motivated Americans to is the retaliation on attackers. Somehow I think the liberals know that very well.”
.
http://www.t-six.com/politics/91903-medias-myth-right-wing-violence.html

IQ53,
.
“People have died, and die every year (typically ten to twenty a year) due to right wing violence. We both know where such political forces can lead, and history is replete with instances.”
.
“We’ve been through this before, and I wiped the floor with your mewling ignorance.”
.
Google it, dumbell..”.
.
IQ53, I took your advice and Googled “Deaths by Right Wing Violence”
.
I checked the first 100 links that came up and not “even one” of them were from a reliable source. No MSM nothing.
The only sources were all Left Wing partisan sites.
.
Could you provide a link to a non-Left Wing source that confirms your comments?
No I didn’t think so.
.
Your dishonesty has been shown again and again and again.