It’s Not Easy Bein’ Blue

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Marcus CA @ 10/20/2008 9:58:51 PM

    If America is a center-right country, how did we end up with a Democratic Senate and House of Representatives? Why does the liberal Democratic presidential candidate have any chance at all of defeating the center-right Republican presidential candidate?

    • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 10:20:03 PM

      Because the Media is Liberal and has been cheer-leading any and all liberal politicians since FDR.
      Remember the peanut farmer? He was 10-20 points over Ronald Reagan and yet he lost 55-45.
      Go figure.
      The lib-media always ignores any foibles, idiosyncrasies or downright indiscretions of democats.
      Even criminality is overlooked.

      • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 10/21/2008 1:33:18 AM

        Criminality by both parties. What one party is greater than the other. My gosh.

      • Posted By: Marcus CA @ 10/20/2008 10:45:27 PM

        Interesting perspective. To me, the media seems fairly centrist, since there are several longstanding publications (e.g., Mother Jones, Rolling Stone) that are far left of Time and Newsweek. Help me out here: what is far right of Fox News and the Weekly Standard?

        Secondly, even if you feel that the mainstream media takes it easy on the foibles and idiosyncracies of Dems, does it consistently misrepresent their policies --- or Republican candidates' policies? I don't think so. If you were right about this, then successful Republicans would be few and far between in Congress and state capitals, not to mention the White House (where Republicans have lived for 28 of the last 40 years).

        Basically, your argument is an insult to conservatives. You are saying that the Democrats have a majority in both houses of Congress, and may possibly win the presidency next month, because conservative voters are distracted by tales of foibles and idiosyncrasies, and consequently are voting for candidates whose policies they basically disagree with.

  • Posted By: tempnewsweeker @ 10/20/2008 7:24:35 PM

    Mr. Meacham - you are just plain wrong in your assertion that this is a center right country. Were that the case how do explain the phenomenal success of Barack Obama's small donation centered fundraising. He is raising money from the poor and middle class, the majority of which support a liberal progressive agenda. It is you and your blithering Washington colleagues who need to beware of what this country wants, because everytime you spout nonsense like this you are dead wrong. There will be increased Democraric majorities in both houses of Congress and a liberal Democratic president and you think the country wants center right rule? Please - any 2 cent blogger knows better than that. The fact that you are paid for this type drivel exemplifies all that is wrong with the Washington press corps.

    • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 10:24:45 PM

      Yes, of course, the congress and the president of one party will have absolutely no consequences.
      Unless you consider no consequences being that the dems in congress got the boot in 1994 for being morally, spiritually and economically bankrupt, which lead to the Gingrich Revolution and set the stage for the eventual budget surplus.

      • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 10/21/2008 1:32:23 AM

        and now its time for the Republicans to do as the Dems did back in 94 called regrouping.

  • Posted By: chindognyc @ 10/20/2008 6:04:37 PM

    I love it. The Repubs talk about drill baby drill, but the Dems say jobs baby jobs. I love it.

    • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 6:49:23 PM

      and how do you get those JOBS??? You DRILL, DRILL, DRILL!!!
      We have 1.5 TRILLION barrels of shale oil in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado that is worth TRILLIONS of DOLLARS!!!! Just waiting for us to go and get it, but two demo crats Salazar and Ritter are standing in the way of this windfall. They say we have to STUDDDDY it. American OIL drilled by American Workers getting American Wages paying American Taxes!!!
      Bet you have a probbbbblem with that, eh?

      • Posted By: marksgershenson @ 10/21/2008 1:31:10 AM

        How about outside the box thinking. The shale oil is not going to be available for ten or more years. Perhaps in a perfect world you would be correct.

  • Posted By: left coast @ 10/21/2008 1:27:44 AM

    Jon: After this election you will find that due to the large number of new voters voting for Obama that the United States is no longer a "center right" nation but rather is a "center center" nation.

  • Posted By: left coast @ 10/21/2008 1:26:31 AM

    Jon: After this election you will see that with the large turnout of young voters voting for Obama that the United States is not a "center right" nation but rather is a "center center" nation

  • Posted By: Nins @ 10/21/2008 12:58:19 AM

    After 9/11, the US government started rounding up Muslims without cause and without due process of law, and put them in prison camps like we did to the Japanese Americans in WWII. The Bush administration called it's main internment camp Guantanamo Bay. While there are certainly many guilty terrorists held in Guantanamo, there are also many innocent American citizens who have been held illegally for years without even being charged with any crime. They have been tortured by our government. Some of them have died.

    Recently the Supreme Court ruled against the Bush administration in the matter of Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court Justices were NOT on the side of the terrorists. They were on the side of the Geneva Convention, that says you can not torture POWs, and on the side of US laws that state you can not imprison a person without charging them with a crime and bringing them to trial. I'm sure that like most Americans, the Justices who voted against the illegal, immoral doings at Guantanamo didn't feel sympathy for the terrorists. They felt sympathy for the laws of AMERICA, the land of the FREE, where even rat finks get a fair trial.

    Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the Bush administration is busy trying to build a smokescreen to hide the CRIMES they have committed. Those pesky weapons of mass destruction. Just think, the National Debt went up over 6 trillion dollars under Bush. More than 2 trillion of it went directly into the pockets of Halliburton, a corporation owned by the Cheney family. Halliburton is now a DUBAI corporation and therefore is not subject to US taxes. All that money they took out of the US Treasury is going into the coffers of a MUSLIM country.

    Did you hear about how the US government is being charged millions for Halliburton deliveries of sand into Iraq from Kuwait? Sand. Like there is a shortage of sand in Iraq? Another contractor shipped sand from Idaho to Iraq at our expense. Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz discusses these and other excesses of our current government's out of control spending in Iraq.

    Your grandchildren will be working like slaves to pay off this debt, so that the Bushes and Cheneys can live the high life in Dubai.

    Yeah, they're patriots, Bush&Co. They wear flag pins. And hide the money they stole from America in Dubai.

    And they want me to believe that Obama is a socialist. Right.

    In case you think McCain is any different than Bush, watch this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJUCU1UH2w

  • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 10:55:55 PM

    What's the difference between "Spreadin' the Wealth" and "Separation of church and State"?
    They are both widely believed to be in the Constitution, but are nowhere to be found.
    Welfare in the eyes of the Founders did not mean a hand-out or being on the dole, but meant well-being, happiness and prosperity. As James Madison put it, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

    • Posted By: thm61 @ 10/21/2008 12:31:25 AM

      The phrase "separation of church and state" comes from the Framers and founders themselves. The most famous formulation, from Thomas Jefferson's 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, reads, "Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." Likewise, James Madison, father of the Constitution, wrote, "The civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State" (Letter to Robert Walsh, Mar. 2, 1819).

    • Posted By: Marcus CA @ 10/20/2008 11:14:26 PM

      The Preamble of the Constitution states that that document was ordained and established to "promote the general welfare," among other things. I agree that that does not mean the same as giving handouts to the poor. However, vague as that statement is, it probably does refer to the well-being, happiness, and prosperity that you mentioned. I'm not a Constitutional scholar, but I would assume that it referred to the Founders' desire to create a socioeconomic system in which there would be no maximum to personal wealth, but there would be a minimum --- except for the slaves, of course.

      As for separation of church and state, the 1st Amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." That is more of a separation of church and nation than church and state. Nonetheless, that clause has pretty consistently been interpreted over the last 225 years to mean that the U.S. shall never have a national religion, and that religious practice can neither be restricted or required, which was understandable coming out of an era when Catholics and Protestants had just spent a couple of centuries persecuting and killing each other.

  • Posted By: neos @ 10/20/2008 6:10:21 PM

    Palin talks about 'pro-American' parts of the country and 'real Americans.' McCain talks about the 'real Virginia.' These code words show us the true colors of their campaign. The Palin/McCain ticket's ugly philosophy of exclusion and division can and should be compared to the Obama/Biden ticket of inclusion and union. The Obama campaign shows us what an Obama presidency will look like, where Americans will be encouraged to put aside the tired old hateful wedge issues and to unify once again for the common good. A president should pull us together and not tear us apart. Have we learned nothing from the Cheney/Rove/Bush years?

    • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 10:26:52 PM

      Pro-America means you are Pro-America and not Pro-Gub'mint as the dems are.
      They are for the taxpayer as the dems are for the tax-collector.
      Simply put, the dems are the Sheriff of Nottingham and the Republicans are Robin Hood

      • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/21/2008 12:26:26 AM

        No, no, no, no. Democrats are Robin Hood. Republicans are John Galt.

  • Posted By: thm61 @ 10/21/2008 12:25:25 AM

    America is a "center-right" country? What a load of unempirical, pro-Establishment crap. Meacham might want to take a look at some actual data -- http://www.ourfuture.org/files/z_historic/reports/20070612_theprogressivemajority_report.pdf -- before drawing his conclusions.

  • Posted By: krohn2 @ 10/21/2008 12:09:49 AM

    This is so true about how the election is already bought and paid for:
    http://www.againstobama.com/2008/10/what-is-it-that-barack-obama-knows-that-the-rest-of-us-don%E2%80%99t/#comment-1929

  • Posted By: josemarti @ 10/20/2008 10:46:07 PM

    Friends. Let us all put aside our differences for a moment and bow our heads. A moment of silence please. Thank you. The last surviving neuron of Mr. Biden's superego expired today after a long battle with apoptosis. It had been in retirement for many years. It had recently given an interview during which it reflected on its long struggle with Mr. Biden's id over its urges to plagiarize. "I did the best I could and in general was able to hold them in check" said the heroic cell.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 10/20/2008 6:05:53 PM

    The GOP is grasping at straws. They have nothing substantive against Obama, but boy are they good at making up lies. He's a socialist, he's a terrorist, he's a Muslim! This is the leading Karl Rove tactic for years, and if America falls for this again we should be ashamed of ourselves. Not to mention the obvious fact that this is all a smokescreen to keep the focus off of the economy, anf off the fact that Palin has been found guilty of abusing the power of her office, and that she is in contempt of court for obstruction of justice. After Nixon and Clinton, Americans are to some extent jaded, but really, would you want a VP who refuses to attend hearings in her own defense, and instructs her employees not to testify?

    This year, the GOP offers you an angry old man and a woman who, while personable, is desperately uniformed on national and international issues. Both of them are far right politically. McCain used to be a maverick, but since 2004 he's voted 90% with Bush. McCain's policies are not original or reformist, despite how he's tried to co-opt Obama's popular message of change. Please go to the websites of both of the candidates and read their platforms. Obama's Blueprint for Change has more good ideas than McCain's plan. Compare them yourself. Obama's basic premise is that tax dollars should be spent to make America stronger and to improve the lives and well being of our people. For example, he uses education programs to train a new technology workforce, contributing to energy independence, creating jobs and improving the economy. When you read McCain's plan you will find no over-arching design to get America back on track. Instead you'll find more tax cuts for the wealthy, de-regulation of the health care industry, and a stated intent to overturn Roe v. Wade.

    I'm a Republican. Although I embrace some forward-thinking social values, in the past I've rarely voted Democrat. My thinking was that since Republicans grow robust economies, by voting Republican I endorsed a plan that would grow wealth for our nation, and then we'd be able to afford social programs. It was a good strategy for a couple decades, but I have to say that the tenure of W. Bush has changed my mind. Not only is there nothing fiscally responsible about today's GOP, the insidious alignment of the party with religious intolerance has really turned me off.

    On the other hand, the intelligent luminous thought of Barack Obama has ignited my patriotism. I want a President who puts America first and can get the economy back on track. In my mind, values voting takes a back burner when we are faced with a meltdown of the economy. It is time for a change, a real change. The Republicans have controlled the Presidency for 28 of the past 40 years, but they have fallen down on the job. The Democrats have a stellar candidate this year, and I am voting for Obama.

    • Posted By: Marcus CA @ 10/20/2008 10:08:06 PM

      Unfortunately, the Republican "plan that would grow wealth for our nation" was based on an illusion. Our national consumer lifestyle flourished until last year because the government cut taxes, but spent as though it had not done so. Consequently, wealth did not truly grow. Through federal deficit spending, wealth was transferred from our children to ourselves.

  • Posted By: changeiscoming @ 10/19/2008 6:32:05 PM

    to Pocolodi: Enough about Obama being a Muslim, I saw the interview and when he said 'MUSLIM" he meant to say "CHRISTIAN". He wasn't admitting anything!!!! If you have questions about Obama's faith, check this out on YOUTUBE. He is a CHRISTIAN who believes in JESUS, it's as simple as that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYAUIIE8oLA Watch this series of videos and you will never call Obama a Muslim again.

    • Posted By: Pocolodi @ 10/20/2008 8:15:29 AM

      Well, maybe you're right. But I'm wondering, how many life long Christians do you know slip up and make the statement of "my Muslim faith?"

      • Posted By: summer4077 @ 10/20/2008 3:10:43 PM

        Who cares if he is? Like Colin Powell said...religion is not the issue. That is not America.

        • Posted By: Pocolodi @ 10/20/2008 9:45:46 PM

          Who cares if he is? He would have a very different view of Israel. DUH!

          And of course, no one should care if Obama is Muslim, but leftists slam McCain and Palin for being supported by the Christian right. Always the double standard.

          BTW, I'd love to see how you'd react if McCain were endorsed by Hamas as they have Obama.

  • Posted By: Ginny in CO @ 10/20/2008 9:23:31 PM

    I've lived in this country for 56 years. Grew up in a politically and socially active household. Continued in my own life, from Illinois to Kansas, Philladelphia to Niagra Falls, Juneau to Anchorage to Denver. 31 years as an RN taking care of Americans from ICU to Home Care. I have been extremely involved in the 2004 and 2008 elections. Spend a lot of time reading, getting news from the web. Using the mind my scientist father trained to observe and analyse carefully and which I have continuously refined. There are few major problems that surprised me at all. I 've seen them coming. This transformational time in particular, I realised as a teenager in the late 60's would happen in my lifetime. So tell me,

    What country are you living in ?

  • Posted By: stlstox @ 10/20/2008 9:18:28 PM

    Mr. Meacham fails to realize we are a center left country. If we are to believe his thesis, we would always be trending backward. Rather, we are a progressive nation. Only spasms of conservatism breaks our leftward trend and even in those periods, the liberal agenda is not repealed (such as social security and medicare).
    Maybe you can label the country one way, but it just doesn't fit the facts.

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/20/2008 9:08:31 PM

    Nims: Funny how fast Newsweek took that article : AP IMPACT: Mortgage firm arranged stealth campaign, http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 , came off the general table of contents for this site once they figured out that, instead of being a bit on those evil lobbiest, it in fact admitted that the Republicans were trying to regulate Freddie and Fannie in 2005 and were targeted by Freddie, and the no Democrats were targeted because they were all in the tank with Freddie and Fannie not to regulate them as a means of promoting the Community Reinvestment Act. I don???t think that article stayed up 24 hrs before they took it off the main screen.

  • Posted By: Independant Voter @ 10/20/2008 8:57:06 PM

    I don't think our nation is right or left - we're just not that easy to label anymore. Eight years ago I was an enthusiastic McCain supporter - now I am an enthusiastic Obama supporter. I don't vote by party lines - I vote for whom I think is best for our country. Barack Obama seems to have an incredibly gifted mind - and I think he is the most qualified President because of his life expieriences. McCain just seems old and angry now - probably because of what Bush put him through.

  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/20/2008 7:25:20 PM

    Look and listen for yourself. Hear Obama in his own words discusses his links to both ACORN and the mortgage meltdown, and praises bundling and securitizing mortgages by banks as a means to float loans to the poor. Never mind the link commentators point of view, just listen to what Obama says in his own words. A picture is worth a thousand words. Maybe more in the case of the last half of the second link.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related

    See also:
    http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=808692&boardsparam=Page%3d2

    This is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
    See also
    http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 from this web site. (oops!) stating that Freddie Mac was spending tax payer money to target Republicans in 2005 who were trying to regulate Fannie and Freddies fraud. Democrats were not targeted, as the were all on board to not regulate Fannie and Freddie. Hear that, Republicans were trying to regulate, and Democrats were trying to stop it/

    The link below contains a purported list of the top 25 in Congress who got contributions from the folks at Fannie and Freddie. Obama is listed third, after Dodd and Kerry, even though Obama is just a junior Senator. Obama is followed next by Clinton. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi are on the list as well.

    http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080918

    And the link below describes how some Democrats in Congress tried to use the original version of the bailout bill to divert money eventually recovered to groups like ACORN, a group Obama has a long association with. See:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247015469280723.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


  • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/20/2008 3:34:56 PM

    Who "Joe the plumber" may be is not the issue, though it's easy to see why the Dems want it to be. That's because the real issue is what Obama's comments to him revealed about Obama. In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, Davis, Ayers, Wright, etc., and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive branch without any effective restraint, and you have something that should causes concern even among moderate Democrats.
    See Wall Street Journal: A Liberal Supermajority:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html

    And whether McCain won or lost the third debate is also not relevant. He succeeded in the first half hour to plant the seeds of a Reagan style wipeout. Reputable historians and economists overwhelmingly agree that the taxation imposed by Hoover and FDR, and the "stimulus" spending and public works programs of FDR, actually deepened and prolonged the Great Depression. It was the production demands of WWII that got the economy going again. And when the war was over, the economy promptly went into recession.

    See e.g. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/03/opinion/main4499465.shtml
    And
    http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx

    Point is, Obama's programs are tax, and it does not really matter who he taxes, those taxes are going to be passed through the economy. He has to tax, because it is they only way he can pay for his massive social engineering experiments. Any first year economics student knows that taxation is a tool used to contract an economy experiencing inflation, because it reduces demand by reducing the amount of money individuals and businesses have to spend. It is contractionary, which is exactly what you do not want to do when the problem is that the economy is contracting already into recession. Like Hoover and FDR, Obama's plans will only make it worse for longer.

    • Posted By: Dylan Rossi @ 10/20/2008 4:21:45 PM

      Who "Joe the plumber" may be is not the issue, though it's easy to see why the Dems want it to be.

      -- Nowforthetruth

      What?

      It was McCain that mentioned "Joe the Plumber" 20 times.

      He did so as an "EXAMPLE."

      And if "Joe the Plumber" is an "EXAMPLE," his circumstances (i.e. WHO HE IS) has to be examined.

      The problem is that McCain's people once again did a poor job of vetting, just as they did with Sarah Palin, who they later learned had a preggers 17 year old and a future son-in-law who described himself as a "redneck."

      Coupled with McCain's crazy antic of postponing his campaign to deal with a situation that had pretty much been resolved by the President and Congress, it adds up to three strikes.

      Vote how you want, that's certainly your perogative. But don't try to blame the Democrats for the public unveiling of Joe the Plumber. It makes you look like an i-d-i-o-t wind.

      • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 7:20:03 PM

        The "idiot wind" is "spreadin' the wealth around"
        From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
        From the Book of Vladimir 19:17

  • Posted By: bloglorn @ 10/20/2008 3:59:49 PM

    There's a big chronological problem with the "Anti-Christ" commentary here, and that is that Mohammed, the creator of the Muslim religion, wasn't even alive when the Book of Revelations was written. In fact, he wasn't on this earth until several centuries after. Try again.

    • Posted By: RockRibbedConservative @ 10/20/2008 7:16:44 PM

      Just for the record, the Anti-Christ IS an actual Christian who has fallen away and embraced Satan.
      He will be revealed and judged and thrown into the lake of Fire along with the Beast and all of those who follow them.
      You have been warned. Revelation 13:1-10 chronicle the rise of the anti Christ and Revelation 19:20 records the fate of him and the false prophet, which is being cast into the Lake of Fire

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse