Friday, October 5, 2012

Whose 'Mainstream Media' is it Anyway?; KCBS: Flawless Execution; Willie Brown and Matier; Friday Dish

On debate night when it became apparent that Mitt Romney was kicking Barack Obama's behind, (albeit a few facts-deformed and some talented acting by Mittster) I tweeted out early on that the right-wing minions and conservative press would call this a decisive Mitt win.

It was.

How so? You watched, right. And immediately after, you tuned over to MSNBC and saw Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow skewer the President. As they should have.

You do remember MSNBC-- part of what the right refers to as the mainstream media. That bastion of libs that's in bed with the "anointed one" --the president that can do no wrong. I thought Matthews was going to blow a fuse, he was so upset over the POTUS effort. Schultz sounded like a Romney adviser serving up platitudes. Yeah, that mainstream media is nothing more than a bunch of liberal pussies!

So much for that.

CNN was a tad more tepid, but they too were almost universal in what everybody on the planet knew: Romney took command of the stage, got off some zingers, took control of alleged moderator, Jim Lehrer, and ran away with the show.

Which begs the question: Whose Mainstream Media is it anyway? Last I saw and read, those libs and their NY Times brethren called it Romney's night. So much for that MM.

The left is no different. When their posse is all ganged up, they too resort to the Mainstream Media card. Boring. Illogical too. And darn misleading. Unless it's on Fox and Friends.

*I have lauded KCBS in Radio Ink. Here is the full article for you to read.

*Speaking of KCBS, Willie Brown and Phil Matier on Friday morning.: Best five-minute political shop talk on the radio. Willie is Willie, better on the radio than he is in print.

*Follow me on Twitter


  1. It looked and sounded like John Wilkes Booth debating a tired Abe Lincoln post civil war. After all he did,he's a President debating a southern apologist and accomplished actor in my mystical match up. Thus,he just didn't want to lower into a argument.
    Maybe the next debate Obama gets his old edge back..feeling his back to the wall,comes out swinging. I'm voting for him even if he can't act.

  2. Almost seemed as if the President was preoccupied with other thoughts, really distracted.

    Word count: Romney spoke 571 more words.
    Time: Obama spoke 4 minutes longer.
    Lies: Romney 27 in 38 minutes
    Moderator: useless

    1. You left out the fact that over the last six months, President Barack Obama has golfed 10 times and held 106 fundraisers, but his jobs council has never met.

      Barrack: useless

  3. Of course you are 12:58PM, as will all the other kool-aid drinkers who actually believe this President's policies are helping the country in spite of virtually every objective metric saying the opposite. Please don't cite the 7.8% unemployment drop which is clearly due to people giving up looking for a job and NOT due to them finding a job. The jobs numbers month to month make that very clear. The real unemployment rate is around 15%.

    Rich, you miss one point in your analysis. Yes, MSNBC (the guardian of liberal sensabilities) bashed POTUS after the debate. They bashed him because they were angry at the outcome and even they couldn't spin it enough to make it seem like he won. They had no choice. MSNBC is still the most vile of all the pro-Obama network stations, with NBC not too far behind. ABC is not as vile, but is definitely pro-Obama. CBS seemed to have become more centrist -- largely, I think, due to Scott Pelley's objective attitude. FOX, of course, is pro-Romney. So it's 3-1-1 (Obama-Romney-Neutral) in the network wars.

    Rich, please don't become a kool-aid drinker like 12:58PM and proclaim "see, MSNBC IS objective" based on this one data point when there are thousands of data points to the contrary.

    1. excellent point!

    2. I'm finding this Kool-Aid a little weak. Maybe you can help me find some that is a little stronger?

      You know, the type that gets people thinking that Obama is a Muslim and not born in America. That Gays and Lesbians are bad bad people. The type that says if we give more money to the top 1%, it will be better for the other 99%.

      The hard stuff, mind you, that gets you seeing WMDs in countries where they don't exist or believing that dinosaurs and man existed at the same time. The stuff that makes 80% of talk radio that is conservative radio look like a Liberal Media.

      This weak stuff is making be too clear-headed. I need some of that hard stuff that makes my head not think straight. Help a brother out, Anon. Score me some of that good shit. The type that makes Big Bird look like the enemy and gets you talking to invisible people in chairs at conventions.

    3. 1:40 PM: I said the same thing in my head but could not articulate it like you did.

  4. Well 1:40, at least we know who you're voting for.

  5. "...the other kool-aid drinkers who actually believe this President's policies are helping the country in spite of virtually every objective metric saying the opposite."

    really funny to watch the wingnuts react to an improving economy. LOL.

  6. Yeah, OK Rich. Obama's debate "performance" was so awful, even his crew of knob-polishers have to acknowledge it, and that proves that the "mainstream media" has been unbiased all these years even though over 90% of them are democrat voters. When was the last time anyone in the mainstream media even asked Obama a question? You libs are incredible. Go peddle that crap to the idiots raised through the Democrat Party/Union-controlled school system.

  7. I like Kool Aid. Especially lemon lime. A good all American refreshment for the common man.

  8. The main stream media by definition is CBS, ABC, NBC and the nation's newspapers. Everyone of these have given Barack H Obama a free ride.
    that is why Obama fell flat on his face.
    He had never been challenged. Obama's press conferences? Yes sir whatever you say Barack.
    They have been a collective cheerleading squad.
    Similar to what you see the Chronicle sports writers do to the San Francisco Giants.

    1. Apparently then the main stream media is anyone with any education, essentially everyone but Fox "News."

    2. Wow Rich, looks like your audience is largely right wingers.

    3. You make some good points. Nevertheless, GO GIANTS!!!

    4. Poster at 7:09pm
      You feel threathen by an opposing view point?
      For too long the hip chic bay area thought they had a strangle hole on public discourse.
      Well those days are over.
      Thanks to the world wide web!

    5. @7:09, no I don't feel threatened by opposing view points. I am simply surprised that the majority of posts on this thread lean toward Romney and the right, particularly since this is the liberal, bay area.

      I'm wondering if Rich's blog attracts a heavy proportion people leading right.

  9. Also note.... It was Barry and Michelle's wedding anniversary I'm sure the sister wore him out that morning. He'll be back for debate 2.

    1. Agreed. The combination of the high altitude and Michelle on the eve of the anniversary explains Obama's lackluster performance.

    2. 4:46 and 6:19, the stupidity of your comments speaks for itself. Thank you for revealing your attitude about people of color.

    3. @716 you ill informed piece of trash. Al Gore went on record today saying Obama was affected by the high altitude in Denver, I guess he hates people of color huh? I am a Latino who will vote for Obama. Stop being so hypersensitive!

    4. @716. If you believe for one second "sister" is a knock on "color" I happen to be an African American/Hispanic female. And yes I wrote that comment! You are way toooo sensitive. And yes. Some of us do read Rich's blog.

    5. I agree that the term "sister" itself is not a knock on color BUT the racial implications of "I'm sure the sister wore him out that morning" are quite evident.

      It's reflects an offensive stereotype about sexual behavior. Do you seriously believe that a similar comment would be made about Anne Romney or Laura Bush?

    6. @927 no you are right. Much like white men can't dance, they also can't.....
      I've learned to choose my battles wisely, and this is one not worth fighting over.
      Ps. Rich I love you!!!

    7. It is funny that the older white guy gets offended by the ”sister” and ”anniversary” references made by sister and latino pro-Obama voters...

  10. I think it's cute that we're talking about "appearance" and "looked" as opposed to what Romney actually said.

    When the President is preparing to combat the positions the other candidate held, he should be right in assuming the opponent will actually hold those same beliefs on election night.

    That wasn't the case.

    Obama wasn't great by any measure. There were massive openings to blow a hole in Mitt, and he missed. 2 Examples which stick out are when Romney said, "then I may have to get a new accountant."

    In that moment, how Obama didn't say, "No, Mitt, your accountant is absolutely perfect. Only the two of you know anything about your finances, and yet you're paying a lower percentage than everyone in this room."

    It was RIGHT THERE FOR THE TAKING. And he missed.

    Second miss was when Romney said "Well the 3% of businesses you're talking about create 50% of the jobs!"

    "Really, Mitt? Those business don't sound that small."

    Just major misses, like he wasn't even paying attention. Easy catches I recognized in my car.

    With that said, Obama was off the mark, and caught off guard by the disingenuous nature of Romney's answers. In the short run, it helps Romney, but in the long run it doesn't because now Obama only has to look "as good" as Romney, where as the tables were turned just a week ago. And now Romney's answers will parsed and studied, to make sure they conform with his previous positions.

    It's a lot easier to take shots at the sitting president, especially when you have no recent record to speak, or anything you necessarily need to cling to. It's apparent that Romney's camp recognized this, and decided to just say whatever they want to catch Obama off guard. Would have been much more effective in the last debate than the first, that's for sure.


  11. As for anyone's commentary about the "economics" of this country, or attempting to blame the President for any economics issues, that's nothing short of ridiculous. I'll go out on a limb here and say that these people know little on how the economy actually functions/works, etc. I'm not a genius in this department, but I studied enough in college and work in finance, so I think I have somewhat of an understanding.

    This President was handed the worst scenario ever. No joke. Ever. Did TARP save the economy? I'm not sure. But the economy hasn't failed, so at the very least it's a major success. Maybe the other option of "letting companies fail" would have worked out better, but is there any chance it would have worked out better in 3 1/2 years? No chance. So either way, according to those who dislike the President, there is actually no way he could satisfy those who dislike him. This is a fact. No matter what Obama did regarding the economy, even if he reigned in spending tremendously, he would be killed for it because the likelihood is things would be worse.

    I know some of you struggle with this.

    The basics of Keynesian Economics is that you prime the pump; that is the role of government during hard times. You don't STOP spending during hard times, but rather, you star. This is what you do. This is fact. It's when things are going well do you STOP spending. Unfortunately, our government doesn't understand this, and they start giving everyone gifts during the good times.

    The reality of it is the previous tax cuts, the extension of the tax cuts by Obama, the wars, and economic meltdown have led to massive problems. Yet......we're STILL HERE!

    Surely people have left the labor market, but again, to blame this President for that is pretty stupid.

    Now if you don't like health care, fine. If you want the wars to go on, fine. If you hate the fact that he's for government funding of businesses, fine. Don't vote for the guy.

    But to suggest he's been the problem with this economy, especially when this Congress has been an epic embarrassment, well that's just lame.

    I voted for Reagan, then Reagan, then Dukakis, then Bush, then Clinton, then Clinton, then Bush, then Kerry, then Obama. I have often tried to pay attention to economics, but that's hardly ever the issue for me. It doesn't really matter. Standing in the world is what matters most because trade is what drives. Keeping the world peaceful is what matters for positive economic output.

    Between these two candidates, I know which one will do that.

    1. To prove Keynesian economics, all one has to do is look at WW2. The American economy slowly improved during the ten years after the crash, but unemployment was still at 14% in 1940. It took the American entry into WW2 and massive deficit spending to bring about full employment. The unemployment rate dropped to 4% by 1942. The national debt rose to 125% of GDP, but you didn't hear anyone complaining about it then.

  12. Here is a little something to chew on Liberals.
    The New Yorker (the bastion of the left) will feature on it's front cover, Mitt Romney debating a podium with . . . . an empty chair?
    Looks like Clint Eastwood was right after all.

    1. The New Yorker is a somewhat intellectual publication and thus anathema to wing-nuts whose preferred periodicals are comic books and the National Enquirer.

      Anyone with IQs over 95 (i.e. not viewers of Fox News) possess the ability to interpret magazine covers for themselves.

      Here's a hint, if you think the New Yorker is agreeing with Clint Eastwood, ignorance is bliss.

      Your interpretation

    2. I've read The New Yorker since I was four. Many New Yorker readers like both comic books and the national enquirer, as do I.
      This new cover is very funny. Romney seemed zipped up on something speedy, if you get my drift(very un-Mormon) and the Prez seemed distracted, worried about something else, or just not feeling well. Everyone,right or left, agrees on that, pretty much.

    3. Christine, has anyone ever told you that you're kind of obnoxious? Starting to wonder if that, rather then gender bias, is the reason you've been fired everywhere.

  13. For once I'd like to hear something intelligent coming out of the mouth of one of these conservative posters instead of smarmy, empty rhetoric. There is NOTHING WRONG with being a liberal. History has been on the side of liberals in this country many times, and I'll give you the following examples:

    1.) It was a liberal president (FDR) that gave us social security, created massive government projects to put Americans back to work during the depression and who guided us through WW II.

    2.) It was a liberal president (Truman) who was the first president to speak up about the outrageous behavior of witch hunter Joseph McCarthy, who grandstanded his way t o prominence by creating mass paranoia over an enemy that never existed in this country, ruining many innocent people's lives along the way.

    3.) It was a liberal president (JFK) who stood toe to toe with Russia, but showed restraint and didn't listen to the Republicans and war hawks in the pentagon who wanted to bomb Cuba during 1962, and thus prevented WW III.

    4.) It was a liberal
    (LBJ) who signed into law the Civil Rights Bill which 100 long years after slavery had ended, finally gave African Americans some basic rights were at long last, granted.

    5.) It was a liberal president
    (Carter) who warned us that we needed to wean ourselves off of fossil fuel and look to alternative energy sources. Of course Reagan said it was better to consume and use more oil because at the time it was plentiful and we didn't need to slow down. We are now paying for that mistake in spades!

    Liberals have been on the RIGHT side throughout much of American history. I can't say the same for conservatives like Calvin Coolidge, Benjamin Harrison, or Ronald Reagan who helped set us up for major economic downturns by encouraging us to 'spend, spend spend,' as if there was no tomorrow.

    1. Personally, I think FDR was one of the greatest presidents we have ever had -- the greatest in the last 100 years. JFK and especially LBJ started and widened the Vietnam War. They listened to SECDEF McNamara who had it right for the Cuban Missile Crisis, but blew it for Vietnam. Carter, wow, who would dare want to mention him. He left the US military so weak Reagan had to build it back up. Reagan also won the cold war, but let's not get bogged down in minutea.

      My problem with liberals today is if I turn on MSNBC, NBC or ABC all I hear are hate-spouting talking heads telling me Mitt Romney kills people, hates everyone, cheats on his taxes, loves to fire people, tried to kill his dog, etc. Where is the respectful debate? Our President who championed "hope and change", transparency and an end to political derision 4 years ago has not demonstrated any of it. His campaign features key people who have no problem telling bold face lies and they laugh when they are caught. Most recent example is Stephanie Cutter. Disgraceful.

      It's the liberal leaders that I am forced to listen to today that I dislike, not liberals in general. FDR was great. Obama, Reid and Pelosi not. I like Obama personally, Reid and Pelosi disgust me.

    2. "My problem with liberals today is if I turn on MSNBC, NBC or ABC all I hear are hate-spouting talking heads telling me Mitt Romney kills people, hates everyone, cheats on his taxes, loves to fire people, tried to kill his dog, etc."

      That just isn't true!

  14. Hey Roy, "keeping the world peaceful is what matters for positive economic output"... By that, do you mean appeasement of radical Islamists? That was a real act of peace in Libya a few weeks ago. So much for the "Arab Spring". I guess it was just "another bump in the road to peace", huh? Tell that to the family of the American embassador who was killed and sodomized. You leftists just baffle me with your blindness. By the way, great economy we have going - just sweeten the numbers by NOT counting all of the UNDER employed - those who are barely squeaking by on part time and temporary work to avoid unemployment. And not counting those whose unemployment benefits have expired. Are you really better off today than you were 4 years ago? I don't know anyone who is. Oh, by the way, how about $5 a gallon for gas? It's all part of the "New Normal", I guess. Some economic recovery!!

    1. where do you get your fixation about "sodomy"? from Sean Hannity's rear end?
      I'd be willing to bet that your knowledge of Libya is less than minimal.
      I remember $5. gas when bush was prez, despite all his hand holding of Saudi princes.
      YOu should be glad the President is assisting Brazil to develop oil fields larger than the Saudis'. See Wall Street Journal...less difficulty in transport, closer, better price, no mid-east instability.
      It must have really annoyed a big believer in freedom of choice like you, when Egyptians made their own much for democracy.
      I think you should go join those romney boys in storming Persia.

    2. How about the President help develop oil fields (and coal and nuclear and natural gas) within the US? That would acutally create jobs. Wait. Better plan. Let's go green and fund companies like Solyndra. We all know how that worked out. How many jobs did the President create in Brazil? Their economy is doing great.

      Egypt. I bet you are very pleased that democracy worked and the Muslin Brotherhood now runs the country. One of their first acts was to reach out to Iran for closer ties, support anti-Isreali rhetoric and lecture our President that he needs to better control free speech in America. Win! Another home run for America! Let's send them another few billion of taxpayer dollars so they can riot in front our of embassy again and chant "death to America".

      The "Arab Spring" has swept across the middle east and installed governments (I use that term loosly) that are solidly anti-American. Outstanding. When you are planning on vacationing in Cairo?

    3. are you some kind of fabric queen? Muslin is used by clothing designers to make patterns.

      You probably think those "muslins" in Iran are arabs,"loosly".

    4. Poster at 9:04am.
      Please get your facts right.
      Egypt is controlled by the Muslin Brothehood.
      The Arab Spring failed. This is just another example of Barack's failed foreign policy.
      By the way, if you go to the latest edition of Merriam Webster's dictionary, you will find the following entry:

      Incoherent, an adjective: Obama's foreign policy.

    5. Good answer Christine, when you have nothing better to offer.

    6. Now I know why christine sounds so fucking stupid on the radio......she is stupid!

    7. Come on Rich, you let a gutter rat comment like Bruce Lew to get the light of day, yet you censor any Captain Hook references!!?? You ain't right baby!!

  15. Can we please stop using the phrase "Kool-Aid Drinkers", in respect to the murdered babies in Guyana at the hands of Jim Jones and The People's Temple. It's a sickening reference, and yes I know it was grape Flavor-Aid, not Kool-Aid.

  16. I love all the support for democracy, but only the democracy that goes your way.
    If you were Egyptian and Muslim and working class, you'd be a fool to vote for any other slate of candidates. Do you know why? do you understand the full role of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and in the region?Did you want Egyptians to vote for another repressive dictator?

    on another issue,

    Barack Obama says it clearly, if Mr. Romney wants to start another war, he ought to say so.
    The fact of the matter is that neither Israel nor the United States possesses a bunker-busting bomb that can reach the Persian nuke sites(deeply burrowed into mountains). That means that US soldiers and more borrowed treasure would be needed for a pre-emptive strike on a sovereign nation, to do another country's dirty work for it. Perhaps you non-stupid people can learn about the relationship between Russia and Iran and China and Iran. If stupid people like me can do that, then surely can you!
    Now, I may be stupid to prefer a different approach that doesn't destroy what's left of our economy and our national identity,but that's what I think and that's what most of the country thinks.
    You impassioned and determined types with fire in your collective bellies, can heed the Battle Cry: Follow those Romney boys into Iran!

  17. All of this talk reminds me so much of the back and forth broadsides that the establishment and the young people use to fire at each other back in the mid to late 1960s and early 70s.

    Americans are so self-involved and act as if the world revolves around only them, while they represent a mere 1/21st of Earth's population.

    We may have relative prosperity, (compared to most of the rest of the world), but we're still for the most part, physically isolated, somewhat arrogant, and very self involved when it comes to our 'empire.'

    Remember that Rome fell, Spain and France lost their empires, and England went into decline. We are on our way in that direction as long as we keep quibbling over politics and frittering away much of the good will and friends we built back in the post war years.

    Personally, I believe the US experienced its finest hours when it rebuilt both Japan and Germany up from the ruins after WWII. We also slowly, painfully, but finally allowed minority Americans equal rights and opportunities. It took too long, but at least it happened and that was a good thing too.

    Can we regain our 'greatness?' I don't think so because we have too many complex problems, and not enough good people who want to go into government service to help fix them. Most everybody seems more interested in making money and buying lots of shiny trinkets,
    (most of which are made in China or somewhere else overseas!) What a shame!

  18. Christine, I had no idea what a closed-minded Obama-disciple you are. You also previously demonstrated your lack of understanding of the Department of Labor's use of U1 through U6 and what they each are designed to measure. I think this all qualifies you for an anchor position on MSNBC.

    You have my vote!

  19. poor, pitiful 10:52. He can't spell Muslim, he can't spell Israel, and he thinks there's a big pool of oil(just like Brazil's) under Kansas. I wonder if he also believes the much-ballyhoed Keystone pipeline will help the US access it's own oil?
    He'll sputter when he learns that the oil from the proposed keystone pipeline is from another country and will go to yet another country. Do you think he knows which ones?

    1. Speaking of spelling:
      Here is a direct quote from Joe Biden.

      "Jobs; a three letter word *J*O*B*S*".

      Hmmmmm three letters?

      Another Liberal Democract who can't spell.

  20. To all the people who continue to support this President do you have no concern about our deficit and the debt that we owe to China? We are probably paying for China's military growth with just the interest payments to them. If we stay on the same path just think of all the money you will save if you ever wanted to visit Greece. No need to go because we will end up just like them.

    Oh wait, no that's not important let's focus on a womens right to free birth control and expand it from there as a 'War on Women.' No wait, let's pass a health care bill that no one needs to know what's in it till we pass it. A bill that most of the provisions(taxes) don't kick in till after the 2012 election.

    Obama has done more to divide this country than any president that I can remember, socially, racially and economically. He has the citizens of this great country fighting with each other rather than working together just so he can get re-elected. Sad.
    Hope and change, what a croc, you really believe things have changed in DC then you need to take off the blinders.
    Where is the transparency this administation alluded to back in 2008. Um, not when it deals with "Fast and Furious." Do many people know about this little recent slight of hand from the Obama administration,
    How about the voter id discussion. Rather than complaining that it is racially motivated to suppress the black vote how about spending all that time and energy fighting it to help these valid voters get their ids!!! No, wouldn't want to do that it might be too charitable and constructive (sic).
    Sorry to run on..... back to the debate.
    Maybe Obama will do better next time if they allow him to know the questions ahead of time and allow him to bring his tele-prompters. One can only hope...hey Hope and Change!! I bet Chris Matthews Hopes they Change the rules for that, he needs to get that tingle going again.

  21. I had never heard of a "slight" of hand before. Are you sure that's what you mean?

    1. There are some really dumb posters.

      We're blaming President Obama for what happened in Libya. That's interesting. Very intelligent take on things.

      When you see the world through a skewed lens you've chosen for yourself, the likelihood is you'll never seen anything for what it really is.

      You should certainly be blaming Obama for the death of Ambassador Stevens, himself a liberal, who while worried about his safety, was not requesting more protection. No amount of protection could possibly keep all of our embassies safe.

      As for the economy, are you making a case that this President creates the formula for unemployment? Do you even now how many different statistics are left out of this equation? THIS IS THE FORMULA, PAL! THIS IS THE ONE THEY ALL USE. In good times, and bad.

      But still, as for the economy, I can assure you that in my line of work, had John McCain been President, or worse, Mitt Romney, the utter chaos that would have ensued in allowing the auto-industry to fail is such a dangerous suggestion it should automatically make Romney unsuitable to be President. Any serious person would recognize this. Had he done so the economy would be in shambles. Take it further, I assume people like yourself (those bashing me) believe that gov't spending on industries is a bad idea. Surely you'll site Solyndra. I'll site the internet and science/space. If the auto industry failed you can't even imagine how many government dollars it would take to recreate it in order to be on par with Germany, Japan, Korea, and every place else.

      By suggesting Obama's economy is his fault, and that you can't see the good in it, I suggest you're not an intelligent thinker. I actually wonder what you do know about anything. I'm not the type of person to get nasty, but I can be nothing but direct.

      By suggesting the Arab-seasons/death of Chris Stevens is Obama's fault is insane. There was less info on that event than there was about 9/11. You won't hear me casting blame for that, and it would be easier to do.

      My suggestion: grow up.

      -Roy B

    2. Btw, any understanding of SIMPLE economics puts into display perfectly what the causes of the deficit are. Go find out for yourself what the primary cause is:

      War 1?
      War 2?
      Bush Era Tax Cut?
      Spending outside TARP?

      Get back to us once you find a source that isn't connected to FOX News. There's tons of real data on the matter. In fact, the data is so overwhelming it's comical an uneducated person would even attempt to use this as a talking point for Romney.


    3. Oh wow, I mispelled a word. Sorry I meant sleight.

      Hey Roy B., who's comments are you talking about??? I, Anonymous 7:50am, never mentioned Libya and Mr. Stevens. Hey if you are going to say negative things about people be specific or least learn to post your reply in the correct place. I would think an educated person as yourself would know how to do that.

    4. Poster at 9:51am.
      See comment regarding Joe Biden.
      By the way, when did you win the Spelling Bee?

  22. It appears that the Obama haters love to get on Rich's blog and spew their vitriol, which is their right, but it would be nice if they expressed some well crafted, credible points rather than playing fast and loose with the facts.

    The fact is that the Republican Party, especially since it embraced extremist right-wing philosophy, (this started with Barry Goldwater being nominated for president in 1964) has been the party of the rich, the super conservative, and the jingoist.

    The Democrats have their share of problems and they are not blameless either, but they at least try to listen to all sides and represent more of the 'maintstream,' (the poor, the middle class, minorities, women, people who are gay). They argue and bicker among themselves and are sometimes way too concerned about not offending anyone, but the Democratic party has historically
    (at least in this century), represented more of what America is all about.

    Republicans and conservatives don't like to hear this, but I have a theory. Because of the gains of women, gays, minorities, immigrants, etc in the last 30 some odd years, many of the
    'good old boys,' don't like losing their power. And the 'young bucks' who were born in the 1960s, 70s and 80s are especially upset, because they never personally saw many of the inequities that existed in t his country for so many years. Thus their historical outlook is limited to the last couple of decades (if that!) and they go instead with their gut, rather than their head when it comes to choosing sides.

    I would suggest that some of you younger white guys read a little American history (1860-1970) and you might learn a little more about your own country. When you instead wave the flag, claim "I'm a patriot," and think anyone who doesn't agree with you is a
    'Commy or a muslim/terrorist sympathizer, you really make yourselves looks foolish. Remember what Samuel Johnson said in the 18th century? "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel!"
    It's still true today!