New York’s 23rd is a Victory for Democrats

For one-hundred and twenty years The State of New York’s 23rd Congressional District has been maintained by The Republican Party.

This has come to an end.

The voters have rejected Conservative-Republican ideals, once again.

This in no small part due to their infamous venom spilling forth unto their own kind in their quest of hatred of all who do not met their standards of ideological purity.

They have destroyed themselves in this district and they will continue with this pattern of crypto-fascist politics to destroy their chances of being taken seriously by any thinking person in the United States.

Some blowhards are crowing about minor Republican victories in races projected for their position to win in the first place.

The fact remains that the NY 23rd was uncertain up until this point.

Then the Conservative Party candidate, Hoffman, could not gather enough votes. He flopped with the voters, just as I had thought he would.

Just as we saw beforehand, America is ready for a change for the tired politics of conservatism.

Be is from the Republican side or the Conservative side, does not matter. People are sick of an ideology that empowers Wall Street at the expense of Main Street, and in the same breath of speaking of war & conflicts they seek to weaken & spread lies about the U.S. Government.

Frank Luntz is a Word-Weasel

Rightwing pollster Frank Luntz is out promoting his new book: “What Americans Really Want, Really” and getting his definitions completely wrong in regards to Political Science, which I seriously doubt is an amateurish mistake.

On Alan Colmes Radio, Luntz continued the conservative rhetoric that United States of America is a “center-right country” and his words in explanation of this were very revealing as to his own personal bias against getting the definitions right, even when those words might not serve your own political ends.

“This is a center-right country but the definition of ‘Center-Right‘ has changed. ‘Center-Right’ doesn‘t mean keeping government out of our lives anymore, .. now it means fighting corruption.”

This is the Word-Weasel at work.

Fighting corruption in both government and private sectors has always been the ideals of The Progressive Reformist Movement since it's inception and these ideals have remained as a fact of American Life since then. To attach his own ideological group to these values is outright inaccurate.

Frank Luntz is very good at catering messages that appeal to conservatives and work well for The Republican Party but I find the notion that he is not affected by political bias in most of his statements completely absurd.

Center-Right has, and always will, mean exactly what Luntz claimed on the air that it does not mean.

It is clear to me that he feels free to change the definitions of words as he sees fit in order to further his own personal political agenda. If he cannot admit that the nation obviously shifted to Center-Left with the election of a Democratic President, and the ambitions of sixty House seats being attained by The Democratic Party then I am left to question the very conclusions of his work.

No doubt he has attained a great deal of significant data in his 6,000+ focus groups he used to compile his recent book, but if the standards of recognizing professional bias and personal bias are ignored then the conclusions of the body of work become suspect.

This is a Radio-interview Review, not a Book Review, so that body of work is not my focus and I invite anyone interested to avail themselves of this literature.

My only point is that if Frank Luntz is going to change the definitions of sound science to fit his image on a radio show, it begs to question other matters of credibility as well.

In his credit, I don’t believe he ever joined in the hateful mantra of “socialist” aimed at liberals, Democrats and mainly Obama.

On the list of all the partisans out there, Luntz is a minor offender.

But I still find it the worst of offenses to change the words to fit your needs, and considering they call him ‘The Words That Work Guy’; I think maybe it should be elongated to ‘The Words That Work No Matter What Guy’.

Frank Luntz is a smart cookie. But I’d personally almost compared him to Karl Rove, myself. Dancing around the truth has never been part of The Scientific Approach.

--

What Americans really want, really, is for pollsters to stop telling them what they think when it’s really just what the pollster thinks about what you think.

Gov. Sanford and His Many Mistresses

“It‘s a love story. A tragic one, a forbidden one ..”

Mark Sanford expressed in a recent interview that he felt that his Argentine mistress was his ’soul mate’ and noted a sense of mortality surrounding his decision to commit adultery on his wife. But in the same interview he revealed that this was not his only mistress but was the only woman other than his wife in which he engaged in intercourse with.

To me this notion of a fleeting sense of your own morality that the governor eluded to would not be any sort of excuse to commit adultery but rather a reason to strongly consider divorce and pursue a new life with this newfound ‘soul mate’ in Argentina. Even more so if he was violating his marriage vows with other women already.

More than anything else Governor Mark Sanford proved today to the discerning public that he holds no regard whatsoever for his wife and his marriage.

Be it maintaining his public imagine and political position or simply caring more for his carnal desires than he does for his commitment to his wife is not clear. But the stain to his character is absolute.

In regards to the resignation of Mark Sanford from office I have a neutral opinion. If the people of South Carolina believe he should do this, then he is obliged to do so immediately. Otherwise I think the entire scandal simply goes to character.

The character of Governor Mark Sanford is clear to any who care to know.

What irritates me is the likes of Lindsey Graham coming forth to declare Mark Sanford as ‘only human’ in an attempt to elevate the character of the governor for what I believe are purely political motives.

The stain of poor character sheds itself only to a small degree to The Republican Party. Yet their representatives insist on standing up for a man who pursued his ‘forbidden love’ in place of his marriage at the cost to his family and his character in the public arena.

This man is a disgrace and I send my personal condolences to his wife and his children.

Bigots Against Islam Run The Republican Party

The hatred of others based on their faith is the favored tactic of the Anti-Obama Republicans in this current political climate. If this hatred was directed at another religion the whole of the American public would reject this bigotry as unpatriotic and down right sick. This propaganda and lies about Islamic faith is tolerated by Republicans because many Americans chose to believe lies, such as the misnomer that the majority of Muslims are in fact terrorists, in place of speaking with their fellows whom may be more directly connected to the truth of the matter than a pack of lying pundits.

Racism against Arabs and bigotry against Islam seems perfectly acceptable to millions of Americans, while racism against Blacks and bigotry against Christians or Jews is downright unacceptable. These Republican Americans and their conservative counterparts seem to believe that civil rights extend only to certain colors and certain faiths.

These disrespectful and partisan Americans put into question their dedication to the principals of non-discrimination in our society. Until major representatives of the Republican Party denounce this bigotry and racism in their ranks they remain in my mind a continued threat to peace and national security in the United States of America.

People Who Voted McCain Hate Obama, Big Surprise

I follow politics on both sides of the coin.

In my view the turning point for the McCain Campaign was the selection of Sara Palin.
The Thinking Conservatives removed their support in droves while the Limited Conservatives found a new poster-child for Partisan Logic.

Aside from the racism allowed to crop up in the Republican Campaign and the market crash under a Republican President, the Conservative Americans who actually think about their positions for longer than the span of a thirty second sound byte could not accept the ‘Say it so, Joe’ Logic and the overall presentation of John McCain’s pick for VP.

Many asked themselves and openly begged the question:

“If John McCain made this bad a decision for Vice President, then how can we trust him to make the right decisions on the war on terror.”

I am trying to draw a connection between the Obama-Hate Committee found on right wing radio and FOX Broadcasting with the vague demagogue figure of religious and moral authority found in the Governor of Alaska and her bid for the vice-presidency in 2008.

I think this group is just loud, and well-funded. Most, if not all, popularity of extremist presidential bashing from the Media Republicans comes from people who want theocracy and the destruction of American Liberty in the name of unfounded ideologies.

There are of course exceptions and a rare pack of conservatives can formulate a fair review of the Obama Presidency thus far, but they increasingly move into the minority as Media Hacks and Partisan Pundits rule the conservative-media.

Loyal Opposition No More

For many years I have felt that for all our disagreements between liberal and conservative individuals there was a shared position by both sides. A loyal opposition to the opposition.

For the time being I believe the majority of the conservatives of America have thrown down this national system of civil loyalty in politics in place of a pure obstructionist agenda.

I have not heard any amount of logical rebuttal to an Obama policy or policy proposal, except in very rare cases.

I find I cannot listen to the standard bearers of GOP right wing radio these days. Like most people I have my ‘hang-ups.’

Dismissive attitudes and screaming people down end up on my list.

Every time I have been listening to conservative talk radio, or GOP responses, since the election of Barack Obama I am disgusted by the complete lack of integrity and grace in politics.

Reducing everything down to simply ‘name-calling’ is not the issue. Though it is important thing to avoid as much as possible.

Not sticking to the facts about our democratic representatives and our recent national historical history is unpatriotic.

I wish it were not so. And no group can claim to innocent of some form of vitriol in these times.

But not having an actual political dialogue and instead presenting vague facts along with connect-the-dots logic is simply dirty pool.

Difference Between a Liberal and a Conservative?

We hear this question posed often in our lives, if we are a political person ourselves.

I recently heard a response to this question on the radio that I disagree with, but I still believe desires to be heard. I offer it as but an anecdote:

Question: "What is the difference between a liberal and a conservative?"

Response: “Think in terms of kind and unkind.”

While this sentiment starts to address the huge gap between these ideologies it only touches the most bare and stereotypical edges of the matter.

The truth of the matter is more that historically both liberals and conservatives morph and relocate themselves throughout the political spectrum in all nations. Only certain key values and standards define each group and it is easier to grab one specific location and timeframe than to just say all liberals or conservatives are so.

Modern American liberals are clearly defined against modern American conservatives in terms of their views of separation of church and state.

Modern American liberals are clearly defined against modern American conservatives in terms of their views of the use of military budgets and international policies.

These kind of statements are the only real response to this question and it is obviously verbose to try to answer this question with what sounds like reading a textbook at someone.

It is said sometimes that these groups are defined by the members they attract.

I believe this only partly defines the ideology and the group.

The common views and desires are the true backbone of every movement.

Some claim the liberal movements to attract the more ‘fringe’ elements of society while conservative attracts a more ‘common’ element of society.

That may have been true in days past but in our world, right now, the conservative movement has attracted the truly fringe elements of our society in the past national campaign and to this day on talk radio and certain websites. Unquestionable willful destruction of non-partisan debate is expressly un-American.

I think my own answer to this question is more like an answer one might get from a wandering mystic:

Response: “Ask me again when you know which one you are.”

I think if someone is even asking this question they are just fresh into politics. All political types, even myself, must claw backwards into our memories to a time when we were mostly apolitical and remember that nobody comes out of the womb with a position on taxation rates.

We form all these things we call ‘opinions’ as we go. So cut a break to people who were spacing out on their nation when we needed them the most, because we still need them now that they are paying attention.

Does Limbaugh Offer Any Solution To Unions?

“Do you want to accept the conditions in the workplace as is no matter what or do you want to work to change them?” Rush Limbaugh, 12/19/08.

Rush was speaking about an incident from his broadcasting past in which a station owner told him to stop saying the word ‘therefore’ and a caller, Faith, had posed a question about unions to him.

“Unions are not the answer [we should] support the American worker.”

Unions began in the spirit of supporting the American worker.

Bringing us child labor laws and safer workplaces.

If any Republican agenda includes removal of unions from our country should include some kind of solution to the workers who would lose representation. Without an alternate outside of the ‘let the market handle it’ mentality to the issue of the UAW, the GOP is proving that they do not support the American worker

How exactly do you go about changing the conditions in the workplace without any kind of representation?

Rush has completely lost his ability to decry unions as the source of all corruption as a union that strikes into thousands of American homes comes in danger of dissolving with dire consequences, and still he wants the auto bailout to die in the Senate.

I question if any core GOP member or Rush-type even cares about this country beyond just a place to tout to their ideals.

Common Sense for Michael Steele

New RNC Chair, Michael Steele, claims to stand against obstructionists in his first speech then condones the stagnation of the Obama Stimulus bill in the House by Republicans, shortly thereafter.

This is shameless hypocrisy that reminds me of the previous tactics of Republicans that have done nothing but twist politics into a double-pretzel.

When interviewed about abortion and gay marriage, he explained that certain issues comprised his core beliefs and could not be compromised. In an earlier comment he expressed that he sought to avoid those who simply talked a lot and wanted no resolutions done.

Steele fails to understand that the Democratic Party is easily equal to the Republican Party in terms of members who do not back down on core ideals and core beliefs.

One such core belief is that legislation should pass without a partisan standard of approval in both the House and Senate.

It is obvious that it is nothing more than a partisan agenda of the Congressional Republicans to keep the Stimulus package under a Democratic President from passage due to the fact that the last Stimulus and the equally large Bailout under Republican President Bush received quick and bipartisan support, without any major concessions to the Democratic Party included therein.

The fact that not even one Republican voted for this bill, even after the requested tax cuts and concessions were included, proves beyond all anecdotal commentary on the exact specifics of the package that the opposition is simply against all policy with no need for explanation or discussion.

These actions prove that the current agenda within the RNC is simply to reject all policy proposed or supported by President Obama--in a dangerous game of raw politics.

It is the responsibility of Michael Steele to encourage the Congress to come to a constructive level of progress in this time of great economic instability.

I do not, thus far, share in any level of elation that some have expressed within the Democratic Party with this new chairmanship of the RNC.

There is no more time for these word games and the extremely familiar partisan-stalemating in America today.

The game-clock has run out and there is nothing but lasting damage done by such an obvious favoritism for Republican sponsored bills and immediate scorn associated to a Democratic sponsored bill.

To be fair, no Chair can be expected to be able to effect a great many votes in the Congress just after receiving the such a position.

I am simply stating that if the situation reversed, I would chastise the DNC Chair for taking such a narrow view of policy.

Steele was in a unique position to help put an end to Republican-obstructionism in modern-American government.

Instead he chose instead to be vague in his declaration against such a serious matter.
I would have hoped that the broad declarations against Americans and the vague comments eluding to items of a serious nature that often amount to slander would come to a close within the RNC and its members with the losses of 2008, but it appears that the tactics of distraction are not dying out as hoped.

Another unsettling element is that he speaks as if the Republican Party is not in great need of reconnecting its core foundations with its message and representatives after such a serious national defeat.

It is unfortunate that the need for keeping up appearances is keeping what I tend to believe to a genuine and honest man in his convictions from telling the simple truth that he has a lot work ahead of him if he wants to keep "conservatism" within the American dialect of politics in years to come.

I would like to attempt to dispel this term "common sense" from politics, that Steele is so found of.

"Basic knowledge" about civics gives a person both personal political perspective and helps with a debate on policy.

"Common sense" is to not running with scissors and taking good care of your health or things like not swearing in a church and being polite to others.

I see plenty of basic and advanced knowledge in the RNC but very little common sense. This has not changed in any fashion, in my view.

Lastly, the former-Congressman David Duke expressed that he saw Steele’s election as a "dark day" in Republican history.

I think that is simply absurd, and that Duke is a racist.

It is simply more of the same from the past eight, in what I see so far.

I find it difficult to find excitement and relief, at this time.

Ann Coulter on CNN

On CNN’s Larry King Live tonight, Ann Coulter expressed that the appearance of Rush Limbaugh running the Republican Party in recent weeks was an excellent thing.

Condoning more of the viscous partisanship and unpatriotic intolerance of any policy not generated by Republican-means as an outright impassable bill. This constitutes a complete breakdown of debate and any further progression toward any goal.

She also contends that someone who is a New York Times Best-seller couldn’t possibly be someone who is hated in America. I wish I could walk some high-road on this but I’ve uttered these exact words aloud many times. I hate that extremist wing-nut calling herself a conservative when she is more a nationalist than anything else.

I tryto hate the viewpoint and not the person but this brand of character makes it extra difficult for even the mellow-tempered group, whom I have never claimed to be a member of anyway.

She wants all of America to believe that the size of Limbaugh’s daily audience as well as her own book sales in combination are proof of a conservative majority that agrees with her and not with Obama or any of the Democrats. Anyone who knows about modern media knows that you can’t judge public opinion by simple things like ratings or sales of specific materials. It gives a general idea of what people wish to read or hear about but is not in any way affirming the policies or agendas expressed in the material itself. (A side-note: Limbaugh generates roughly 20 million listeners a show which is an incredible number but compare it the roughly 16 million listeners a show for Coast to Coast AM; a paranormal, philosophical, scientific and investigation oriented program which remains somewhat apolitical to this day. You can also use these same numbers to see that only a small percentage of Americans even listen to any radio programming on any given day.)

Public opinion is always somewhat intangible and fiends like Coulter always seek to twist it to fit into their politics. Even in the absence of facts.

This woman is one of the most obvious ‘political shock-jocks’ out there and even I have to step back and just laugh at this silly woman from time to time. She enrages me, she irritates me, she lies at us all and then smiles. But at the end of day she is just spouting old rhetoric from by-gone eras of the enemy being the ‘commie liberals’ and a return to the days of McCarthyism.

May her distain for Americans be recorded and may her hatred for our country and its values be seen by all who think her worth their time. If anyone not of her party does anything it is bad for America and she practically admits exactly that. This is anti-Americanism and if I have to explain that to anyone, they are disrespecting the Founding of this nation and the blood shed to see us free from the yoke of tyranny.

Let it be known, this level of misinformation and slander quickly escalates past idle commentary and into the realms of criminal activity as we demonize real people with real lives. The whirlpool of refutable statistics and broad generalizations coming from this unseasoned wench is some of the worst American politics has to offer.

I do not claim any level of innocence in this. I am as guilty as she is for as much as responding to this nonsense.

As long she and I can roll around in the mud of politics together then I have no complaints. But this woman tries to get fresh before you finish reading the first two words of the title of her book. I can write slam pieces on conservatives and try to publish them but I don’t view it as constructive use of my time as a writer in any way. She honestly wants America to believe she really believes even half the garbage she prints and says.

Also she said something to the extent of a real man being a ‘conservative-man.’ I think your average ‘conservative-man’ is too frightened of goons and gays to please any real woman. She will remain unsatisfied with her sex life until she gets back to dating liberals again. If she puts a bag over her head I’ll take her out to diner.

“The numbers are in.” Republicans who buy this brand of garbage are misinformed, racist, sexist or anti-American.

Buy my books! They are called The Military Code of Conduct, The Bill of Rights and The Geneva Convention to finish it up.

Interesting how to learn my perspective on national affairs you don’t end up filling up my bank account in the process.

Eric Lightborn
http://ericlightborn.wordpress.com/
February 19th 2009

Global Warming: Politi-Science or Fact?

Let’s crack this egg wide open.

Here’s what I understand so far:
------------------------------------------------------------
Years back, a group of scientists came together and presented a case to the world based on their work.

They sought to show essentially three items:

a) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) gases are increasing due to human action.
b) CO2 causes a green-house gas effect that causes global warming. Global warming causes extreme climate change including extreme colds, warms and weather.
c) Unless CO2 levels decrease worldwide the planet will be damaged beyond a repairable state.
------------------------------------------------------------

Now, another group of scientists recently came out to try to disprove the ‘global warming agenda’ citing their own evidence.

They are seeking to show essentially these three items:

a) CO2 is a natural gas that is less harmful to environment than reported previously. Harmful gases such Carbon Monoxide should fall under government regulation but not CO2.
b) They have studied the green-house gas effect data presented and do not concur that this is the cause of climate change. The planet is undergoing cyclical changes not recorded previously due to lack of technology required.
c) CO2 levels and their mandated decrease is ‘politicizing science’ and not a scientific agenda but rather an anti-industry agenda.

------------------------------------------------------------
I don’t pretend to have all the facts on this but I’ve listened to a lot of commentary on it, I can assure you.

The bottom-line is that no significant figure in any government is coming forward about the one important issue to address:

CAN WE LIMIT CO2 GAS EMISSIONS AND CONTINUE TO GROW AS AN INDUSTRIAL NATION?

Those versed in this topic will know that certain major super-power nations (China & Russia) refuse to participate in carbon credit programs or CO2 gas mandates on their industries.
They believe that regulating such gases will cause a loss of profit necessary to maintain their populations. Or a similar case made in defense of themselves.

I would like to take the time and read both of these studies and all the data and every professional I can find who ever said / wrote anything about it. But this is what I see. One side brings a valid argument about how far we can do these actions and remain strong in industry and the other side brings a valid point that once enough damage is done in ignorance there is no return from ruin.

Michael Crichton, famed author, held the opinion before his death in 2008 that the combining of politics and science was something he saw as very possible in coming years and very dangerous in its nature. I tend to agree with the author of “Jurassic Park” but I don’t know if I fully trust some internet downloaded research data, and I’m not flying of to foreign countries to gather up all the documents either.

I just want to focus on empirical evidence when we talk science and focus on personal conviction when he talk politics. That’s all. Is that some crazy request?

I feel it important for those who didn’t know to know that the worldwide scientific community accepts the idea of green house gases effecting current climate changes.

------------------------------------------------------------
And let us not forget the pure-politics side of this:

Former American Vice-President Al Gore of the Democratic Party has run up the ideological hill and he is not coming back down on this one.

He is behind the ‘carbon credit’ concept along with others. Gore remains one of the most controversial figures in certain circles of America because of his intractability on the Global Warming Crisis Issue.

The Republican Party, long before any but bought-off scientists said word one on global warming, decried the whole thing a myth created in some liberal agenda book or manifested by what some called "religious-environmentalism".

The study I mention are not bought-off scientists, as far my informational sources provide, but rather simply dissenting scientists from the group of scientists that initially presented the whole concept.

In the campaign for The White House this year (2008) each campaign had the same line on global warming:

“We need to do something about global climate change.”

The critical thing to know is that the vocal conservatives, prior to the RNC speech of John McCain where he directly addressed global warming, there was a constant smearing and mocking attitude of people who wanted to speak out on this issue of climate change. Then all of sudden they just stopped talking about it and mocking anyone about that. Not one more mention of those ‘crazy global-warming kooks,’ for quite a long time.

I tend to believe they and most outspoken-Republicans did was actually read what I read when it came out like 8 years ago: "The Kyoto Treaty."

Another strange hush-factor that struck the Limited-Conservatives, during the previous national campaign is the whole immigration issue.

That’s another issue entirely but both candidates and the right-wing media just completely shut their traps on that issue, almost entirely to date.

The only reason it’s significant to bring up is that these loons that call others ‘Enviro-Nazis’ also bashed anyone who didn’t want to ‘kick the bums out of my country.’ They did this ten-fold on John McCain when he sought some kind of solution oriented legislation on the issue. Now they feel better about starting those old lines up again but nobody seems to want to actually do anything about it over in what I hear from Republican-land.

It is like a willingness to shove your head in the sand as far it will go. Then leave it there for the course of an entire campaign.

Evidence that the Republican Party is willing to engage in not only ‘Politi-science’ tactics but to a willing blindness to anything that is a serious issue in the nation.

They just want to talk about homosexuality or atheism while we go broke and choke to death.

Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
December 22nd 2008