More Undeniable Proof That the Conservative Movement is Dying in America

sad-paul-ryan-1If you listen to Republicans talk (because they’re masters at propaganda) you’d think conservatism is engulfing the United States and Americans are becoming more and more conservative every single day.

Except, that’s not true at all.

It might sometimes seem that way because Republicans are usually good at being unified and controlling the message.  Generally if Fox News is saying it, 95% of Republicans will be saying it.

That’s not the case with liberals.  Our strength and our weakness is essentially the same thing – our diversity.  Diversity is a wonderful thing, though it also fragments the message, while often projecting a sense that Democrats are disorganized and divided.

Then you have to factor in the reality that Republicans rely heavily on older voters, especially white ones, and when you look at stats showing who votes more often and consistently – it’s older, white voters.

But the reality is, the United States is becoming more liberal all the time.  Conservatives don’t like to admit this, but that’s the funny thing about reality – it’s real whether or not they want to believe in it.

Take for instance two separate new polls that show support for the very conservative tea party wing of the Republican party hitting new lows while support for same-sex marriage has reached new highs.

According to the one poll, only 32 percent of Republicans identify themselves as supporters of the tea party.  That’s down 10 points from February and 23 points from July 2010.

And for those tea party supporters who might want to discredit this poll, just take a look at how many of this year’s GOP primaries have gone for ultra-conservative candidates.  Many tea party Republicans have easily been defeated by non-tea party affiliated candidates.  Even Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, someone who Republicans felt was very vulnerable to lose his primary election, easily claimed victory.

Then when you look the poll concerning same-sex marriage, support hasn’t just reached new highs, support is rapidly growing.  Right now, 55 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage.  That’s a 15 point increase since 2009.  That’s huge.

And if you want to look at the opposition to same-sex marriage, it’s dropped in that same time span by an even bigger margin.  In 2009, opposition to same-sex marriage was at 57 percent.  Now it’s 17 points down to 42 percent.

And if you really want a great example of how liberalism is slowly (but steadily) taking over this country, just look at the same-sex marriage numbers from 1996.  During that year support for same-sex marriage was at an anemic 27 percent, while opposition sat at 68 percent.

While I know some will say, “But it’s taken 18 years,” that’s a short-sighted way to look at it.  Big change within a society often doesn’t come quickly.  And while equal rights should honestly be a very simple issue, even for a lot of Democrats, same-sex marriage wasn’t something they supported just a few years ago.

But what the poll on same-sex marriage does show is that Americans are becoming more liberal while the Republican party has tried to push itself to be more conservative.

So if you look at the tea party’s emergence around 2009, and the numbers concerning same-sex marriage around that same time, you seem a drastic shift away from ultra-conservative beliefs and political candidates who advocate for them.

But this doesn’t just stop at ultra-conservative tea party candidates, this reflects on the Republican party as a whole.  They continue to try to cling to this “conservative ideology” of theirs, while Americans are generally becoming more and more liberal.

Republicans aren’t going to disappear overnight, but polls such as these clearly show that while society as a whole is becoming more liberal, the GOP continues to prove how out of touch it is with most Americans by insisting that we’re becoming more conservative.

And ultimately that’s going to be their downfall.


Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • richard

    Not fast enough for me.

  • shopper

    As someone who remembers a time when the two parties overlapped on many issues and most people were more in the middle, I keep hoping as the economy improves, so will the political climate. The two parties used to be the checks and balances on each other and they worked together for solutions that worked for all citizens. It does seem that when the economy falls, fundamentalist churches grow and extreme conservatism appears such as McCarthy, John Birch and the Tea Party. Many of these people may only have one to two issues that they support but they ignore all other issues and focus on that to the detriment of the entire country. If the Tea Party is collapsing that is a sure sign the economy is improving………………..YEA!!

    • FD Brian

      When people lose hope, they can easily be persuaded by snake oil sales men who offer them something to cling to in a storm.

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        God, Guns, and Chik-fil-A.

      • gian keys flat mom

        praise jeeeeeeesus— and pass the tax free tithe

      • shopper

        Say something intelligent or just keep your mouth shut all the way up.

      • gian keys flat mom

        ps– love the genesis name!!

      • Patrick Klocek

        … yes, from The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway … very obscure and esoteric.

      • gian keys flat mom

        im into ELP/YES/KING CRIMSON/ TANGERINE DREAM/ PORCUPINE TREE/ MAHAVISHNU ORCHESTRA
        ====================================
        I will not bore U with my classical tastes

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        Try some Spock’s Beard or Transatlantic. It’ll cure what ails ya. For classical, I always go for Ravel, Copland, or Berlioz.

      • gian keys flat mom

        Rossini/ Vivaldi/ CPE bach/ Michael and franz hadyn……
        ravel? bolero cool but————–
        I hate brahms

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        Ravel – Try these: “Pavanne pour une infante defunte” or “Le tambeau de Couperin” or “Valses nobles et valses sentimentales” For my money, “Bolero” is Ravel’s Stairway to Heaven (i.e. – overplayed, turned into a joke). Wow – we are waaaaaaaaaaay off topic!

      • gian keys flat mom

        give “abaddons bolero” by ELP a spin on your player
        I will try to find those U posted. off topic? thank god!

      • Patrick Klocek

        Like Al Gore and Obama … snake oil salesmen to the bone.

      • gian keys flat mom

        shall we compare the policies of the past 25 yrs in democrat( federal) VS republican and see which caused more pain and suffering and financial ruin for the USA?
        ” please continue; govna”

      • Patrick Klocek

        Yes, we should. I remember Jimmy Carter all to well. Clinton — with the help of Newt — represented a New Democrat. After 1994, Clinton governed as a social and fiscal moderate. The Progressives were always put off by this. But the dramatic expansion of the US economy that took place between 1992 and 2007 could not have happened with out Reagan and Milton Friedman. The crash of 2008 should have been a brief blip (like 2001 and 1991) had it not been for the reincarnation of Jimmy Carter.

      • gian keys flat mom

        ahem,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I must have screwed up:
        ” twenty five years” ( 25) which doesnt include carter or Reagan.
        why stop there? FDR is known for some pretty good America building………………..

      • Patrick Klocek

        25 years back from 2014 is 1989. Reagan was president for three weeks in 1989. But what is the purpose of that arbitrary date — 1989. Historians usually look for some coherent period. If I was to discuss Polish or Romanian history, I would talk about pre- and post-1989 history. If I were discussing Russia, it would be 1992. But in US history, that year is not really significant. In post-1945 US history, we usually bracket things as being 1945-1980 and then 1980 until the present.
        FDR!?! FDR’s policies prolonged the Depression which should have ended within a years or two but he successfully turned into a lost decade. Good job, FDR.

      • giankeysflatmom

        why is 25 yrs “arbitrary”? because it doesn’t fit your agenda?
        25 yrs is a well-used timeframe. 50 yrs ….. 100 yrs….. 1 year,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
        as our economy has obviously suffered as a direct result of what Reagan did ( his policies are as cocaine: immediate gratification/ painful withdrawal) 25 yrs is a full period to evaluate them
        =======================================
        I do not known enough of FDRs policies and the fight with republicans of that time which may have hindered him and the countries growth; but I do know this: (a) depression started by repubs ( hoover) (b) FDR 4 term president so americans mustve liked what he was doing…..(c) repub fear of his success in 4 terms made them scream for-and achieve– 2 term limits. success ( even with the shady gamesmanship in politics) does bring detractors. witness Obama. I cant WAIT 2 see what pigeon the repubs offer in 2016.

      • Patrick Klocek

        In history, we usually use meaningful time brackets: 1815-1914, 1648-1789, 509 BC – 44 AD, and then our own 1914-1991 and then the latest pre/post 9/11. This allows us to compare like to like. 1914-1991 is usually then divided up in to chunks 1945 as a pivot. Our formative years were 1945-1991. In that people, we usually place Reagan/Thatcher in the middle because that represents the tidal shift in the Cold War. I add Pope John Paul II into that. With the election of those three (1978, 1979, and 1980), the West shifted its footing in the Cold War from retreating (1954 at Dien Bien Phu until the Fall of Saigon 1975), to surging.
        That’s why I find your insistence on going back ONLY to 1989 seems arbitrary. If you just want to score points for your side (Progressives/Democrats), fine — say so. Your time frame means the discussion is really only Bush II v. Clinton. I treat Reagan/Bush I as an ideal that should have been built on by Bush II — it wasn’t. “W” was not a Reagan Conservative — he was a Neo-con. That’s basically a Democrat who just happens to love unborn babies and Bombing foreign countries (particularly Muslim/Communist ones). Otherwise, “W” was a Democrat to many of us.
        So, you think Obama is going to get a “third term?” In order for the same party to win three presidential elections in a row, the first two terms needed to have been quite solid, prosperous, and successful. I don’t see that we approach the 2014 mid-terms. Who won a “third term” (again, going only since 1945). Poppy Bush, obviously. Nixon should have been president in 1960 but Mayor Daley’s graft and corruption in Chicago delivered JFK to the presidency. Nixon declined to contest the election because he thought it would be divisive. Carter couldn’t even win his own re-election. And much like 1960, Bush v. Gore was a case were Clinton ALMOST won a “third term” to be carried out by Algore. But Algore never embraced the Clinton legacy and the two were clearly chilly towards the other at the end. So, since 1945, it was only Reagan who was liked enough, and successful enough, to propel his sitting VP into the presidency.
        Now really, do you SERIOUSLY think Joe Biden is going to ride Obama’s coat-tails into the Oval Office?!?! Biden is the heir-apparent. Now, Truman’s VP, Barkley, dropped out of the 1952 Presidential race only to be replace by Adlai Stevenson who would be a 2-time loser against Ike. History is on Joe Biden’s side. Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Algore, and of course Bush I and Nixon were sitting, or had been, VPs who sought the presidency. Alben Barkley was the only one who didn’t clinch the nomination. In order for Hillary to clinch the nomination, Joe Biden will need to step aside. That remains to be seen.
        But the point is; Joe Biden has no natural constituency apart from the Democratic Party operatives. Hillary’s time as a NY senator and Secretary of State was mediocre at best (and State was a potential disaster). She has nothing on her side but Identity-Politics. Republicans will have the advantage going into 2016 simply because they are not Democrats. The Democrats have a weaker coalition than the Republicans. The Democrats’ coalition is made up of the 1% and the bottom 20% of income earners, racial minorities, and organized labor (both public and private sector). I see a lot of potential for defections from that camp — particularly private sector unions who are taking a hit by the EPA and the refusal to build Keystone, and upwardly mobile “racial minorities” who don’t want to live on a plantation as 2nd Class citizens (Asians, “white Hispanics”, and Jews). Rick Perry, JEB Bush, Chris Christie, even Newt Gingrich would be strong in 2014.

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        Patrick – you are EXACTLY correct! The illusory expansion that took place between 1992 and 2007 (with the exception of the internet boom) was precisely due to “Reaganomics”: unfettered capitalism, the repeal of the Glass-Steagall banking act, exponential corporate mergers and acquisitions and the refusal to enforce the Sherman Antitrust Act, the intentional destruction of labor unions, NAFTA, and a host of other treasonous Republican crimes that put more money into the hands of millionaires and billionaires while breaking the backs of the poor and working middle class. Capitalism reached its logical conclusion in 2008 when the facade began to fall away. Unfortunately, too much of the gullible, Fox News-watching American public buys into this “Give rich people more money and they’ll create jobs!” bullshit. It hasn’t worked, The rich continue to get obscenely more wealthy, corporations are paying historically low tax rates, CEO pay is now thousands of times greater than that of the average worker while real wages have STAGNATED for over 20 years, and REAL unemployment is at level heretofore not seen since the Republican Great Depression of the 1930’s. All the while, the manufacturing jobs that helped to build the greatest middle class the world has ever seen were all shipped overseas or south of the border. Unfettered capitalism is a cancer that is eating this country alive. 98% of all the gains since the crash of 2008 have gone into the hands of the already-wealthy. Why aren’t the workers and middle class reaping the rewards of the recovery? Why does CEO pay continue to climb exponentially when compared to worker’s pay? Why are millionaires, billionaires, and corporations allowed to hide TRILLIONS of dollars in off-shore accounts without paying ONE DIME in taxes? Why has the share of federal taxes that corporations once bore at 18% of overall revenues is now at a paltry 6%? Who has picked up the tab? The middle class. Friedman and his sick twisted Ayn Rand devotees have nearly succeeded in killing the middle class of the country. Their wet-dream fantasy is to return to an era of “Haves/Have Nots” where 99.9% of the wealth is held by a small, benevolent oligarchy and everyone else are indentured workers. Poor workers don’t fight back. Poor workers keep quiet for fear of losing their jobs. Poor workers only want food on the table and will not make waves. THIS is the vision of Milton Friedman and the Republican, Koch-controlled cabal in Washington. And they’ve damn near succeeded.

      • Patrick Klocek

        I hope you appreciate the great effort it took me to read all the way to the end of your bizarre, semi-literate, Marxist-inspired screed. I didn’t know that CEO salaries were going up exponentially. Can you please point to an executive earning more than a billion dollars per year — and US DOLLARS, not Zimbabwean dollars, please. If their salaries are going up “exponentially” over the last few year — an executive earning 100,000 per year a decade ago should be earning in the trillions by now.
        You seemed to forget the expansion of 1982 to 1991. That was sure convenient for your thesis. Also, if you are unhappy about all the gains going to the top 1% over the last 6 years — maybe you better take that up with the President of the Progressive (he sure cares more for his political movement than the US or people who didn’t vote for him), Obama himself.
        I love your line about companies being allowed to hide trillions in off-shore accounts. As if the government were suggesting they do that. If you don’t like that activity, place economic sanctions on Bermuda, invade Aruba, maybe you could suggest deploying a naval blockade around Liechtenstein — (if your geography is as bad as your math — you
        might not realize its landlocked). Multinational companies can set up the tax domiciles anywhere they like. I have done that myself. I haven’t paid taxes in the US since 2009. The more government try to tighten the taxation noose around corporations’ neck (at the insistence of loud-mouthed Marxists), the more the corporations will off-shore. You see, the corporations are run by people who are smarter than loud-mouthed Marxists — that’s why they have profits rather than benefits checks.

      • gian keys flat mom

        read both his and yours
        ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, U wont agree: but U got dusted
        why is it when someone doesn’t like your regressive policies they are invariably Marxists ( name calling) along with knocking brit bands in the 70’s?
        do U listen to low IQ us country? or maybe old crappy any Williams / ray coniff/ Mario lanza / dean martin ???
        business goes offshore? make it worth their while to stay– if greed makes them too big to talk to: f*ck them and drive them away from America and replace them with hungry innovative younger americans . keep it simple. Help ALL americans live a nice life; from that the cream will rise to the top. now the old white cream stifles competition with the help of powerful lobbyists and roman empire politicians.

      • Patrick Klocek

        I don’t know where you got your resentment against white males. Maybe you think it makes you edgy. I don’t know. I also don’t care about your tax returns or the number of properties you own. I consider such boastfulness to be vainglorious. Besides, there are always bigger fish in the sea.

        Why do you think “Marxist” is an insult. Are no not familiar with dialectical materialism and Marx’s views on class struggle? “Real” above was channeling Marx even if he didn’t know it. He was mouthing pure Marxism. If you spout Marxism, be prepare to accept the moniker and wear the badge. I proudly wear my badge as a Friedman-loving Neo-Classical Liberal and Thatcherite. I am not running away from ideology as I continue to embrace it.

        It is fine if you want to think that whatever incoherent nonsense “Rael” wrote above “dusted” me. Agreeing with people who mirrors yourself is really quite easy. My aim here is to get you to begin a structured study of important and respected Economists starting with Adam Smith and then including Schumpeter, Ludwig von Mises, and on to Friedman and his disciples.

      • giankeysflatmom

        my resentment is against ill informed/uninformed white trash in this country who make up the tea bag party ( nonexistent b4 jan 2009) and if U are mentioning economist please stay contemporary. the ones I listen to mostly do NOT agree that tax cuts to the TOP will stimulate growth; tax cuts to struggling americans will-
        friedman was the most decorated economist and much of his work still is “doctrine” but he often neglected –or had it outgrow him– what has happened over the past 25 yrs. I do like him being agnostic and calling himself libertarian/republican and ‘classical liberl” all at once- it shows he was open to all.
        my bottom line is what I have witnessed in the past 25 yrs/ especially with Clinton/bush and Obama. Clinton was fabulous and overrated; bush was inept and a puppet and Obama is up against what NO president has ever encountered ( degree) by the obstruction of the repubs in congress and the resurgence of the john birch society ( tea party)
        ========================================
        what U call boastfulness I call edification as Im not bovaristic enough to “boast” of a net worth of less than a million ( luv 2 get there by 2016) knowing that what IS important is how I live my life and treat those close to me while recognizing the motives of those NOT close to me. Im simply saying that I indeed am more educated(/) and following financial markets than probably 90-95% of all americans which translates into do NOT group me with the idiots on the far left and far right.
        “Badges” such as Marxist/socialist/Christian/libertarian/ ETC are all stultifying and worn by those who don’t dare do homework to be freed OF those badges ( IE: lemmings and followers)
        incoherent? I must not be as intellectually gifted as you as I understood what ‘rael’ wrote. we all have limits with how we express; and my 151 IQ may pale ( I doubt so) to you but many times when the terms such as ‘incoherent’ are used it is just a defense mechanism to display being a “TOFF” to hide the truth
        =======================================
        U may now denigrate further- please attempt so with moxie and aplomb
        :))

      • Patrick Klocek

        You are right that there was no TEA Party before January 2009. I was there for the start of it. We began to organize in February 2009 and had our first demonstrations in April 2009. I am sorry to disappoint you but RACE was never our motivator. It was the BAILOUTS of the banks, GM, and certain mortgages that motivated us. Eventually, the TEA Party rallied around Herman Cain and Sarah Palin as spokespeople — a black male and a white woman with a heap of kids. That was not a focus-grouped decision. It was because we liked what they said. I am not sure where the claim of racism fits in to that. But I heard a lot of people on the left deriding Herman Cain as an “Uncle Tom” which to me is even more racist.

        Tax cuts for the wealthy: They don’t bother me. But I prefer they be joined with tax cuts for the middle class and poor too. I am a flat-tax supporter. I don’t like progressive taxation at all. I view it as unfair. Why should some people be forced to bare a higher percentage of their income than other people? Because they are political enemies of some ruling elites? Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rich Perry were all flat-tax supporters. I am too. Hong Kong and Estonia have RELATIVELY flat taxes (though there is some bending to them)

        Do you know who opposes a flat tax? People in Congress. It takes away their discretion to reward their friends and punish their enemies. Also opposed is the IRS — which would require a considerably smaller bureaucracy to enforce a flat-tax. Also, tax lawyers/accountants oppose it. How else who you justify your jobs if the tax law was simply enough to fit in a pamphlet. I could LITERALLY fold the Hong Kong tax code and put it in my pocket. Try that with the IRS’ tax code! Too many people have a vested interest in a byzantine tax structure — and none of those reasons are benign.

        And one last personal note that I have seen in our discussions. I am quite keen to list my badges — my top Economist (Friedman), my top historian (Niall Ferguson), my top presidents (Coolidge then Reagan): this allows you to understand my intellectual underpinnings. You, on the other hand, are pretty quick to note your personal and financial virtues. And even now your IQ — none of which helps me understand your intellectual framework you use to see the world.

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        There has been a movement in Congress to simplify the IRS. One proposal would be to have the IRS essentially send you a “bill” or “statement” at tax time. In effect, the IRS would be filling out your tax forms for you – all you would have to do is sign it, or submit a correction – then collect your refund or send them a check (depending on your situation). However, corporate money has stalled this in congress as HR Block, TurboTax, Quicken and other tax-software corporations are certain this would put them out of business. So, instead of a simpler IRS, the corporatocracy has worked hard to keep the system as complicated as possible in order to maximize their profits.

      • Patrick Klocek

        Politicians use the tax code as a vehicle to dispense gifts to friends and punishments to enemies. Corporations also make profits from TurboTax and accountants and lawyers build up client lists. But the corporations can always find new products to hawk. It’s not so easy for politicians.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        Coolidge: yes,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Reagan: yes ( then; but his policies started the ball rolling down,,,down,,,,down ( see: debts and deficits)
        tea party start? supposedly “spending engendered the beginning. spending/ tea/party? really? spending???? Hmmmmmm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,where were U clwons when gw saw spending???
        and do NOT talk down to me regarding cain- he is now called ben carson: the propped up African who ( behind the true scenes) is laughed at for his color, Carson laughed at less as he is sharp witted and eloquent and aesthetically more appealing even to white trash scum
        carson simply is taking the money ala glenn beck and rush limbaugh et al: if FOX “news” gave me a show at say– 500K per year with % increases and commercial revenue streams I would leap and say ” Benghazi” as loud as all of the regressives do en masse
        bottom line? my INTELLECTUAL framework was formed by ( a) watching BOTH SIDES in the battle (b) subsequent studying of what they both were bitching about (c) invariably the rightwing trash tells us how VOODOO( their religion) is the only way as THEIR GOD has told them so

        logic???? GOD tells me to run/ pass this bill/ kill this doctor etc???? LOGIC????

      • Patrick Klocek

        Thanks for illuminating just how uneducated you are. If your intellectual framework was formed by listening to Rachel Maddow and Rush Limbaugh, then you are truly lost. I suggest you start really political and economic theory. I sense in you more rage than proper learning.

        How can you attack Ben Carson — a true great man? It is Obama who is the “House Negro” of the Left. Even Bill Clinton and Harry Reid have mocked him in public (Reid talking paternalistically about how “clean” he looked and how great it was that you could use the “negro dialect” when he wanted it. And the Clintons complained about how Obama should be pouring their coffee.) Thank you for that revealing bit of projection.

        I move in Right Wing circles. People have nothing but respect for Ben Carson. He is respected because he walks the walk and espouses conservative principles. I think he will make a great Surgeon-General in the next administration — maybe Rick Perry or Bobby Jindal. Carson was a pediatric neural surgeon. What was Obama? A “community organizer” and part-time adjunct lecturer. Obama was nothing but a rabble-rouser. If he stayed on at University of Chicago any longer, he would have been fired because he never published a single article while there (autobiographies don’t count as scholarly works).

        I am probably wasting my time by talking to you but I have hope that you can be educated.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        hey shiiiiiiiiiiiiiitbag— I did NOt attack carson: I attacked how he is being use ( which translates into my calling U shiiiiiiiitbag as U didn’t see that)
        surgeon general?? sounds great!! he is very qualified!
        president carson?>?? cmon!
        U immediately attack Obama ( pre president) because ??? he knows the constitution: which terrified white trash regressives in the repub party
        OH I 4GOT: what exactly (exacly!!) are “conservative” conserving??? PLEEEEEEEEEEZ tell me ( be detailed) ,,,,,, conserving what? scumbag trash religion? screwing all americans who are not white>??? ( and not hetero)
        please ‘educate’ me upon this easy-2-answer( for those moving in rightwing circles—and I mean CIRCULAR!!) inquiry I ask: what are U idiots conserving? don’t lay that crap about ‘conservative” values— give me details

      • Patrick Klocek

        Conservatives have as their core principle the desire to preserve the existing institutions, laws, and customs which have proven themselves valuable and successful in the past. Conservatives see their existing societies as being inherently good and worthy of protection and further development. Conservatives are proud of their “textualist” reading of the US Constitution. The are believers in the free-trade system of the country’s founders, and they seek bolster independent civil society bodies that are outside state-control such as organized religion, the free press, and independent educational establishments. Those very areas are ones that Progressives have been seeking to bring under greater and greater “government regulation” since the time of the original Progressives one century ago.
        Progressives start at the opposite end of the same spectrum. They see existing institutions, laws, and customs as inherently flawed, exclusive, racist, homophobic or whatever is Progressives’ annoyance d’jour. Progressives seek change and revolution as a matter of principle. Since society in inherently bad, the Progressive seeks to undermine or overthrow the existing laws, institutions, and customs of the dominant society. Currently I am hearing non-sense about “trans-gendered rights.” Progressives here have invented a new category or person and then, in their own fertile imaginations, stripped that new class of people of their rights only so that Progressives, in their benevolence, can extend those rights to them. The only people Progressives want to limit the rights of are all those who disagree with Progressives.
        It was there, in my early 20s, that I made my break with Progressivism. Having an ethos that derives its meaning from perpetual change must, by design, descend into pure nihilism at some point. If a Progressive, at some point, ceases to want CHANGE, he/she will automatically revert to being a Conservative. This is indeed what happened in the Soviet Union by the 1930s.
        Ben Carson: I too believe he is not ready for the White House. He has too little executive experience. Electing a head of a hospital to be president would only be slightly less ridiculous than electing a half-term senator with no legislative accomplishments to be president — I guess we could do worse than Doctor Ben Carson.
        But more to the point — you indeed mocked him. And the only mocking of him that I have heard thus far has come from the Left and from Democrats. This is telling to me. The Left and the Democrats are still the party of Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood) who wanted to sterilize blacks and other members of lower races like Australian Aboriginals whom she likened to chimpanzees. Progressives cannot tolerate a non-white person who appreciates Western Civilization and Western culture on the grounds that such a person MUST be a race-traitor. Progressives reject most of Western Civilization as racist therefore any non-white who embraces Western Civilization must therefore be in the mold of Vidkun Quisling.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        im with you on the TOTAL BS regarding ” transgender”……. being born homosexual is what “god” allowed– so leave it there. these furthering ( man made) extractions of that discussion are pure bullshit.
        that being said I appreciate the time u took to write that stuff ” en totality”,,,,my argument is that much of what regressives wish 2 conserve is BS: religion/ strict adhering to RELIGIOUS marriage dogma: ——— the smallish group of white ( trash) religious scum who want to KEEP JEEEEESUS ( their jesus; not the teachings of that man) and splash it all thru legislation to keep America white and Baptist. That does NOT help ALL America; nor does quelling regulating that which MUST have regulation to safeguard most of America.
        comparing carson to Obama is showing your toxicity: Obama is a constitutional lawyer and teacher; Obama served in congress. carson simply makes big money as a surgeon. GW bush wasn’t qualified either ( according to how U placed Obama above) yet his ass made it thru hook & crook and we see his legacy– a legacy which is easiest defined by the 2012 GOP party in tampa did NOT ask him or cheney to attend.
        ====================================
        your final paragraph mustve been written before U had any coffee or a nice warm shower: it was absurd X 10

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        oh,,,and excluding finances and education– how EXACTLY is ben carson a great man???
        allowing head joined twins to live ( not die thru exsanguinating?) ?????
        that about all he has done. Nothing beyond this as I have read up on him.
        I can name 50 americans – male and female — greater than he

      • Patrick Klocek

        That conservatives that you speak of would be reject by me, were I to ever actually meet any. You rage against a caricature of conservatives.

        While being an agnostic, I am personally fond of the Catholicism of my youth (we have great ceremonies and great hats). Catholics make up about a quarter of all Christians in North America and a large portion of them are non-white. The Church has also been a vehicle of social mobility for many non-whites and non-Anglos (the Church was long dominated by Anglo-hating Irish). For that matter, my family is “white-ethnic,” meaning we come from a non-British and Non-Germanic heritage and hence excluded from the dominant power-structure. The leading lights and spokespeople of Conservatism today — Thomas Sowell, Rudy Giuliani, Charles Krauthammer, even Bobby Jindal would probably be hated by the Conservatives you speak of. Of course, they are still the leaders. Go figure. Conservatives mustn’t be a racist or xenophobic as you like to imagine they are.
        Anyway, I don’t actually care about racism. As long as there is no institutional or legal bars to people of a particular race, it’s all good. I don’t care if some Good Ol’ Boy don’t care much for the colored folk. You can legislate people to like you. And if you try, you are bound to engender even more hatred.
        What did Ben Carson ever do beside save the lives of a bunch of children!?!?! I would be careful with that line of thought. Did Obama ever save the life of a child? Obama’s only achievement is being elected. Even ObamaCare isn’t his so much as it is Nancy Pelosi’s. What exactly do “community organizers” do? Oh, right — the wander around and look for reasons to sue people and businesses whom they don’t like — they are extortionists and racketeers who operate just barely within the law. I too can think of 50 people more qualified than Obama to be president …

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        quaint; but U again didn’t answer my question. I have a basketball/ stock trading friend who has been an emergency room surgeon for longer than carson has been excelling at what he does; and Im willing to bet my buddie has ‘saved” many more lives than carson ( which is NOT a slice at carsons abilities) and Tony has never intimated he is a great American. NOTE: I believe Reagan was pedestrian as a president yet I hold Reagan as a great American for what he accomplished in his life.
        at this stage of history Obama is 100X greater — as an American — than ben carson.
        Id bet carson ( off camera) would agree

      • Patrick Klocek

        There are different kinds of doctors. Not all doctors are “life-saving-doctors.” I doubt my ophthalmologist ever saved a life and forget about my dermatologist. But you also never explained why Obama was a good president? What has he done besides being the Jackie Robinson of presidents in a post-Jackie Robinson world. Obama has done ObamaCare and a host of unpopular minor measures and ObamaCare is a mess (according to many doctors and my sister the nurse). Bill Clinton said the “Dubya” called him for advice more often than Obama called on “Bubba”. John Boehner has no working relationship with Obama. Hamad Karzai reviles Obama. Putin mocks Obama. Angela Merkel doesn’t trust Obama. The president of Brazil cancelled a state dinner with Obama on account of the NSA. Why can’t you admit that Obama is making a hash of the presidency.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        where is my excedrin???? U have me spinning ala Godunov and Baryshnikov!!!
        u DID NOT explain why carson is a ” TRULY great man”!!!!!
        what has Obama done? OK– U asked!!
        (a) aca,,,,,,,,,,,,, and F*CK what ur regressive white idiot friend say: millions of AMERICANS now have the opportunity for health coverage which works
        (b) now we have EQUAL PAY for women ( see: American EQUALITY)
        (c) ended media blackout on war casualties
        (d) limited lobbyist accessibility to white house
        >>>>>>>>>and<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
        limits for white house aides working FOR lobbyists after their tenure with administration
        (e) got rid of USELESS and EXPENSIVE F-22 plane which was obsolete and not used
        (f) allowwd STATES to enact and implement fuel efficiency standards ABOVE federal guidelines
        (g) saved USA auto industry( see: MILLIONS of AMERICAN JOBS SAVED) an GM now- again- biggest car maker on planet
        (h)MUCH better body armor for our soldiers
        (I) gave our VETERANS better access to MONREY and HOUSING ,,,,much much better!
        (j) kept our economy from collapsing ( see: bush)
        (k) doubles stock market and got BIG BUSINESS profits at record levels
        (L) more jobs created — public and private– in 6 yrs * than both bush presidencies combined.
        (m) repealed ' don't ask/don't tell" (see: EQUALITY for ALL americans)
        (n)
        (n)
        (n) KILLED THAT FELLA– and 95% of his generals– WHO DESTROYED TWIN TOWERs
        ********************************************************
        ( did I mention bin ladin yet?)
        ********************************************************
        housing growing after free fall ( see: bush)
        took restrictions OFF of stem cell research–
        ….closed the medicare " donut hole'…..major credit card reform…..reformed wall street ( good luck with THAT Mr Pres)………..made BP pay over 21 BILLIOn in helping the gulf disaster
        —————————————————————– but easily his best contribution???
        allowing creeps such as glenn beck/ michelle " no tits and hates her life" malkin/ rush Limbaugh and a plethora of crybabies make TONS of money off of the stupidity of white trash religious grunions!!!
        ……………….. did I mention he was born in Kenya???

      • Patrick Klocek

        Oh lord, it is *I* who needs a percoset after reading that! I will take them in order:

        “(a) aca,,,,,,,,,,,,, and F*CK what ur regressive white idiot friend say:
        millions of AMERICANS now have the opportunity for health coverage which
        works

        (insert eye rolling) It doesn’t work and almost every survey finds that 55-60% of the people don’t like it. 10 million people lose their insurance so that six million can gain it!?!?! If you attack the “regressive white idiots” who don’t like it, I shall attack the Upper-Class White Elitists who foisted this system on an unwilling majority.
        “(b) now we have EQUAL PAY for women ( see: American EQUALITY)”

        Thanks for creating a problem so that you can claim to solve it. Women were not being systematically discriminated against before the Equal Pay Act. This is just a boon for trial lawyers. Women who marry, have kids, and leave the labor market for 5 years make less than men because they left the labor market for five years. When you compare similar women to similar men, you find no disparity. Women often also make the lifestyle choice to work less over-time or not travel for work. This hurts their earnings. If women REALLY earned 20% less than men, all businesses would hire only women!
        (c)
        ended media blackout on war casualties

        Speaking as a former soldier — I never heard of this blackout. We knew the casualties perfectly well. We lost two guys from my MI BN of the CA Army NG.
        (d) limited lobbyist accessibility to
        white
        house
        >>>>>>>>>and<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
        limits
        for white house aides working FOR lobbyists after their tenure with
        administration

        Yes, good job! Now they meet at Starbucks. Big help!
        (e) got rid of USELESS and EXPENSIV E F-22 plane which was
        obsolete and not used

        The plane is not that bad. You guys hated the F-111 too but that plane a good mission and it was well-suited to it.
        (f) allowwd STATES to enact and implement fuel
        efficiency standards ABOVE federal guidelines

        I oppose CAFE and others standards. This should be a market decision — NOT a bureaucratic one.
        (g) saved USA auto industry(
        see: MILLIONS of AMERICAN JOBS SAVED) an GM now- again- biggest car maker on
        planet

        GM is the biggest car maker in the world because of its production in Brazil, Mexico, and Europe — please, get a clue. US production is declining.
        (h)MUCH better body armor for our soldiers

        That had little to do with Obama — it had been in the works for years.
        "(I) gave our VETERANS
        better access to MONREY and HOUSING ,,,,much much better!"

        Especially the ones who died waiting for treatment at VA hospitals!
        "(j) kept our
        economy from collapsing ( see: bush)"

        It wasn't going to collapse! This claim is as ridiculous as claiming that Dubya thwarted a full-scale Al-Qaida invasion of the US.
        "(k) doubles stock market and got BIG
        BUSINESS profits at record levels"

        That's not always a good thing! Money that would be saved in banks is now moved to the stock market. The gains are not all they seem.
        "(L) more jobs created — public and
        private– in 6 yrs * than both bush presidencies combined."

        Considering Bush had 5% unemployment when he took office — there was upward pressure on wages and hence little job growth. I would rather talk about the labor-force participate rate that plummeted under Obama.
        "(m) repealed '
        don't ask/don't tell" (see: EQUALITY for ALL americans)"

        Again, as a former soldier, that should be up to the company commander — not the president.
        "(n)
        KILLED THAT FELLA– and 95% of his generals– WHO DESTROYED TWIN TOWERs"
        All very nice but OBL had long since retired. It wasn't as big of a catch as you like to think. Revenge is nice but killing Rommel or Guderian would not have ended World War II. There were loads of attacks before OBL and there have been many since OBL. It wasn't about OBL it is about defeating an ideology — Hanbali Islam.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        beatles wrote a song about U– or at least COVERED IT:
        “twist and shout”
        ================================== regardless; U again did NOT answer my initial inquiry

        ( remember?????)

        keep spinning,,,,,,,,,and keep avoiding answering a direct simply question.

      • Patrick Klocek

        Why do I like Carson? Was that the question? He sings that right song, that’s all. I also like Sarah Palin and William F. Buckley. I don’t need to rationalize my biases and try to empirically prove that he is fabulous. I think he is a great man because I am leveling a value judgment. I believe he is thus. I also contend that Obama is easily the worst president since Harding. Obama has also been about as good for democracy as FDR who I consider to be a disaster (he gets props only for leading us through WW II and not for exasperating the Depression or assaulting the rule-of-law). Wilson was pretty bad too.

        Anyway, your song — from John Lennon — would be “Imagine” since you so deeply want to believe that the ACA is great and that Obama is bringing love to the world and ignore the reports the just today, Poland’s foreign minister described its ties with the US as “worthless.” Funny — I sort of remember Poland priding itself on being a close ally of the US during Dubya’s “reign of error” and now a relationship with us is “worthless.” Gee — what’s changed? Could it be: Obama, Hillary, and Kerry?

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        worse than the prior administration? U indeed are daft. but– I understand: U hav to say that to keep ur white trash regressive card alive.
        ====================================
        my question was ” why do U call carson a GREAT man”? ( nice try TRYING 2 change it)
        ========================================
        carson is a great man as he has financially capitalized upon the low IQ trash which populates the rightwing of this country. glenn beck/ Limbaugh/ Hannity/ “no tits” malkin/ coulter/ varney======= all able to reap windfalls . I would also!
        ********************************************************
        that being said U hav again not answered yet showed immense oligophreniality by saying Obama is worse than,,,,,,,,,,,
        Im not at all violent but would luv 2 have scum such as U an varney and Hannity and beck and Limbaugh and especially malkin ( she is such scumbaggery) in an MMA ring. beck would be my first one as hes such a liar. Michael grimm also as bhe thinks hes a bad ass being a marine. Luv how he threatened some small Asian reporter. hey mike: im not small! come threaten me with NO ONE around
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        write again if U need 2 ( you will; its what U do) and I will remain an asshile as U have now shown U 2 be a total small dicked chowderhead worthy of aspersions

      • Patrick Klocek

        Excellent, wonderful! Yet another pathology for you: violent fantasies. We can add that to you misogyny and your racism. I have lots of political fantasies but non of them involve assaulting Fauxcahontus Elizabeth Warren, that femmy-dude Rachel Maddow, Obama, or even the lecherous drunk, Chris Matthews. No, my Obama fantasy simply involves he and Michelle getting deported to Kenya. I only hope that all will someday see the errors of the ways and I have no desire to batter them or you for their and your persistent errors.
        The hostility, condescension, and elitism evident in your posts re-enforces my earlier assertion that Progressives have little desire to help people and simply have a desire to command and order other people’s lives as an exercise of pure ego. You seem to personify this urge to control and dominate. I see it in your inappropriate comments about women and in your violent fantasies direct at those who disagree with you. These are dangerous traits and I hope you will either find Jesus or a good psychiatrist. I believe these traits will inhibit you from ever being happy in your own life since you will never accept others as equals in your relationships.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        find jesus?
        you just proved how stupid U are………….
        “believing” that a MAN is GOD
        ******************************************************
        fini

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        I wear my Marxism with pride and do not back down from it. Just because you disagree with facts doesn’t make them “incoherent”. If you are “unaware that CEO pay has risen exponentially” then you are clearly not paying attention to what’s going on in this country. Furthermore, calling my writing “semi-literate” demonstrates that you are incapable of carrying on an intelligent conversation and prefer to lie, smear, and insult. But I guess if you ain’t got no facts, then lies, smears, and insults is all yous gots.

      • Patrick Klocek

        CEO pay isn’t going up exponentially. At best, it is going up geometrically. There is a vast difference. It would imply squaring their salaries and that’s not happening. It would mean that CEOs would be earning trillions of dollars by now. They are not. I
        suggest you simply re-evaluate your math.

        Anyway, my point with the growth in CEO pay is more nuanced. That is to say, I DON’T CARE. I couldn’t care less about the pay gap between a top CEO and his or her bottom worker. Let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that the CEO of McDonalds makes 12 million dollars per year. Then, in the interest of social justice, the social revolutionary-types nationalize his pay. What difference does it make?!?! McDonalds has 35,000 employees. If you seize that CEO’s pay and re-distribute it to the workers; the workers will secure a phenomenal raise of 29 dollars PER MONTH! That translates into $7.25 per day or a raise of just under a dollar an hour. CONGRATULATIONS!!!

        The attack on CEO pay has nothing to do with sound economics. It has everything to do with envy and hatred of those who happen to be earning all that money. The Left is full of people who simply seethe with jealousy over those who have more than themselves. “Equality” is really just a code word for class envy.

        Now, to be fair, my area is 20th Century social history. I had to learn economics as it effected my area of specialty. So, I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt here: Which countries actually grew and prospered under Marxist regimes. Which countries developed themselves out of poverty with the help of Marx and re-distributed their way to prosperity?

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        OK – you win. You are EXACTLY right. CEO pay has ONLY gone up 735 times the rate of the average hourly worker. I guess that’s not EXPONENTIALLY, it’s just criminally. I have a problem when worker productivity doubles, corporate profit doubles, CEO pay umm…geometrically increases, corporate taxes are slashed, and worker pay stagnates or falls flat. That isn’t Marxist to wish for people to earn more under those conditions – it’s fair, it’s moral, and it’s HUMAN. Why is it that everyone is prospering except the people actually doing the work? If that makes me Marxist, then so be it. I just thought it was the right thing to do rather than bringing back the era of Dickensian sweatshops.

      • Nate Bruce

        Dont worry its comming. We will get there money eventually. The gap does increse each year i sugest a simple google search might claer up the confusion?? But they will eventually be made to give more if there money back. Lowere classes have historically allways won class warfare situations.

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        Over 100 million records sold tells me that Genesis are hardly obscure.

      • Patrick Klocek

        Don’t get your knickers in a bunch — I’ve been listening to Genesis since Duke came out. I then went back and dug up their earlier recordings. That’s why I immediately recognized the name. While Genesis is hardly rare — their early Peter Gabriel era recordings are obscure and not that well known. Personally, A Trick of the Tail is my favorite early Genesis work but “The Lamb” and “Wind and Wuthering” never excited me.

      • Patrick Klocek

        By the way, you really shouldn’t conflate Phil Collins AND Genesis. Those are two very different musical styles. Tripe like “Susudio” would never have found its way on to a Genesis album.

      • Rael Imperial Aerosol Kid

        …preachin’ to the choir, bro.

      • Jimmy65

        Why do you feel it is OK to not do your part as an American and not pay taxes? You contribute nothing so you should not be able to participate or reap the benefits of our collective support for the US. If a corporation chooses to evade paying its fair share then they should be excluded from the benefits of our society. But since our leaders are on the take from the those corporate dead beats. We get the shaft. Thanks for nothing freeloader…..

      • Patrick Klocek

        Paying tax is your entre into the community? That’s your registration card for the collective!?!? I feel fine not paying taxes — I haven’t paid them for years. I also get very few benefits from your collective because my not paying taxes corresponds to my not residing in the US (I am an American ex-pat). And to be blunt, while *I AM* an American, the collective to which I belong includes no people named “Jimmy.” I have people who rely on me for support and they get it from me — not the US Government. The US Government has not help us at all. Even US Citizen Services at my local consulates have been giant ZEROS for me — I am still waiting for my son’s passport after six months. Anyway, the point is, me spending my money and investing my surplus both inside and outside the US is a far better and wiser use of funds than turning it over to some moron bureaucrat in DC.

      • gian keys flat mom

        ahem,,,,,,,,,,,
        “twenty five years ago”
        need to brush up on time displacement?

    • gian keys flat mom

      tea party( john birch) and regressive republicans are joining the WHIGS in history

      • Patrick Klocek

        Do you have any real evidence of this. Perhaps you can site a continual drop in the “generic ballot.” Is there a shift away from Republican, Conservative, or TEA Party self-identification as recorded by Gallup? Do you have anything besides your own desires to report?

      • gian keys flat mom

        to quote the chambers brothers biggest musical hit ……
        ” TIME”

      • Patrick Klocek

        In other words … “you got nothing.”

      • gian keys flat mom

        I got the facts that america –all of America; not just the former “in power” white trash regressive religious ( see:VOODOO) scum — are tiring of being second/third et hoc genus omne tiered “americans” not fulfilling the jeffersonian dream of “the pursuit of happiness” by being subjugated by white trash scum.
        we are still washing away the destructive policies of Reagan and the bush boys: which transposes quite nicely into…………..
        ” you ( and your nugatory repub ‘policies’) got nothing”
        enjoy Hillary 2016-2024/ then eliz warren after her.
        ted cruz/rand paul/ scott walker anyone??

      • Patrick Klocek

        WOW — incoherent and vaguely racist to boot.
        Another President Clinton … I doubt it. I actually don’t think she will run. She will have a new grandchild. But also, she lost in 2008. She had four super-mediocre years at State. And she will be the same age as Reagan when he ran in 1980. I don’t think she will relish the microscope again. Besides, Joe Biden looks interested.

        As for GOP in 2016 — I have my hopes set in Rick Perry. But I will be content with Chris Christie as long as he puts either Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, or Susana Martinez on the ticket.

      • Jean Oltvedt

        It ain’t gonna happen. Prepare now to be disappointed. You can hope all you want, but the majority of us have seen what these candidates have done to their respective jurisdictions. We’ve also seen some of their recent scandals. I’m shocked you really think Rick Perry has the intelligence to run a country, much less a state. He would only be another George W Bush, someone who is TOLD what to say and what to do because he doesn’t have enough sense to think for himself. Clinton may be “old” in your eyes but that is one brilliant and capable woman. Does that scare you?

      • Patrick Klocek

        Rick Perry doesn’t have the intelligence to run a state!?!? He’s been running TX for around 13 years now. His state has the lowest unemployment, the highest growth, and is beating CA when it comes to HS graduation rates. TX has also been a magnet for New Yorkers and Californians fleeing taxes and high costs. So, yeah … Rick Perry has just been a disaster, I guess. Are you SERIOUSLY going to tell me that Obama’s much-vaunted intellect has benefitted this country over the last 5 1/2 years!?!?! And are you really going to tell me that the bridge-scandal in NJ is bigger than Benghazi and the total destruction of our relations with Russia?!?!

        What is shocking here is your total disregard for evidence and reliance on identity politics. You accused me be afraid of strong women. In 2008, the only thing that got me vote for John McCain was Sarah Palin. Yes, Sarah Palin. It matters to me not one bit that she doesn’t read Shakespeare or the New York Times. She was a strong woman who only sought results as a business owner and a governor. I liked her even though she was stumped by questions about Darwin — who has absolutely NO RELEVANCE to governance. But the Progressive’s WAR ON WOMEN will not tolerate a strong conservative women or a non-white. The racism in this country is driven by the Progressives who match political positions to skin color and reproductive organs. I like what Sarah Palin and Dr. Ben Carson stand for … their genders and races are a matter of absolute insignificance to me. Does that scare you?

        I believe Hillary would be more competent than Obama. Obama is thoroughly INCOMPTENET and has made a hash of his entire tenure in office. Hillary would be better. She may run, she may not. I don’t know. But if I were given a choice between a super-smart Progressive who wanted to control and direct my life and a shaved-ape who wanted to transfer power back to the states … I would pick the shaved-ape without any hesitation. And I would do so because FREEDOM doesn’t scare me.

      • gian keys flat mom

        Benghazi is such a HUGE scandal that D issa (R) is NOT going to be involved with this committee— even he knows there is nothing
        ======================================
        keep crying

      • Patrick Joseph Klocek

        I am not sure what you mean. I just know that the investigation is moving forward. I do not know that I will uncover impeachable offenses. But I has already uncovered a breath-taking and shocking disregard for the lives of the staff at the US Consulate in Benghazi.

      • gian keys flat mom

        that starts with repubs ( 2 yrs in a row) not allowing ( congressionally)more funding for overseas embassy security.
        silly lil facts

      • gian keys flat mom

        enjoy the sleigh ride
        perry? his corruptions in TX are even being used by teddie boy cruz………
        =======================================
        and nothing inn_CHOE-herannnt about what I wrote: I am near flawless in my delivery ( minus NOT capitaliuzing at times,,over-emphasizing,,,ETC)
        sorry U don’t know larger words ( see: lexiphania)

      • Patrick Joseph Klocek

        “Near flawless”!?!? That was a joke right?
        Rick Perry’s scandals are small town and provincial. I think he will be a strong candidate in 2016. I think he will run. He is already sporting glasses to make him look smarter. I would venture to say that only the Huffington Post is interested in them — and that’s just because they want to carry water for Hillary or Elizabeth Warren.

        Hillary really better run. Elizabeth Warren, Fauxcahontus, is only popular with the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party. She will win about the same percentage as George McGovern, Walter Mondale, and Michael Dukakis did. Hillary will be in trouble if Joe Biden runs. Not because he is a formidable campaigner — because a lot of the DNC will line up with him out of loyalty. Biden is a sitting VP and almost assured of nomination should he want it. When was the last time a sitting VP failed to win the nomination of his party?!?! Even FORMER VPs and VP candidates get institutional priority — think Walter Mondale in `84 and Bob Dole in `96.

      • gian keys flat mom

        rick perry is your candidate????
        ” Burp”

      • Patrick Joseph Klocek

        Yes — because I actually want to see this country succeed and prosper again … not just pass out EBT cards and disability checks.

      • gian keys flat mom

        excellent!! would that “success’ be a mirroring of those sterling republican policies ( federal and state; repub states are most unemployed and indebted in country per capita) which –in the past 25 years– have so helped America 9 as a whole) to ” prosper”?
        NOTE: latest tea party hero ted cruz is after rick perry,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, now THAT will be fun to watch in RNC debates

    • Patrick Klocek

      You can tell conservatism is dying by all the elections that conservative candidates are winning. RealclearPolitics also moved the Oregon senate race from “safe dem” to “leans dem” just today. Who knows, maybe soon it will be a “toss up” soon and by November, we will have Republican senator from OR … because conservatism is dying.

      You guys keep thinking whatever you like in order to sleep at night. We will keep organizing and educating voters. The TEA Party is alive and well. OWS is a distant memory …

      • Danny Mathey

        dude you haven’t been winning shit! even the Mitch mc C beat you t party favorite ….the t party is OVER !

      • Patrick Klocek

        Check out Nebraska’s senate race. Nebraska is a US state, in case you hadn’t heard of it.

      • gian keys flat mom

        wow–
        “one”

      • FD Brian

        Ben Sasse is a carpet bagger who won with outside money.

      • gian keys flat mom

        alive? yes!!!!!!!!!
        growing in stature/populace and political impact?
        ============================================
        see: whigs

  • truefaith00

    I find that most people—especially Americans, and especially American
    liberals—have an “engineering attitude” toward politics. There is a
    Correct Solution that satisfies everyone (Sesame Street morality), good
    people can always get together and find an answer, so any acrimony must
    emerge from incompetence. Combine that with a huge amount of conflict
    avoidance and the practice of jingoistic silencing, and you see why
    people claim to be tired of partisan bickering.

    • surfjac

      I just have problems with folks who think tax cuts creates jobs. It’s kinda’ like getting into an argument with someone who questions you when you state metaphorically, “snow is white” or “the sky is blue”.

      • gian keys flat mom

        tax cuts DO create jobs——
        the uber wealthy need more accountants

      • Patrick Klocek

        Are those not jobs?

      • gian keys flat mom

        yessssssssssssssssssss!!!

      • Patrick Klocek

        I am sure all of those accountants and “vacation brokers” will love their new EBT cards courtesy of “gian keys flat mom.” I am sure you will think of it as freeing all of those poor workers from job-lock.

      • gian keys flat mom

        so– does this extrapolate into a ( your) delusional belief that tax cuts create jobs?
        please look at bush 2/ Clinton raised taxes and created over 23 million.
        ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, trickle down? hows that working for your employed white trash ass?

      • Patrick Klocek

        I would like you to now prove causation. The economy grew more robustly when Hootie & The Blowfish recorded albums together. Hong Kong has a dramatically lower tax rate that the US and it’s unemployment hovers around 3%. The US economy’s expansion from 1982 until 2007 was due to a dramatic restructuring both of the tax code, the regulatory environment, but most importantly the technological innovations that increased efficiencies in industry during that time.

      • gian keys flat mom

        ahem…………
        our economy stalled when g bush 1 took office; roared under Clinton ( and newt),,,,,,,,,,,stalled under bush and then went swmming nearly drowning us all
        Reagan sold us out by offshoring ( see: asia) our manufacturing jobs
        cannot argue the technological aspect. spot on
        shall we look at the past 5 presidents debt & deficit records ( please quote the CBO and US treasury; NOT FOX “news”)
        we willnot bring up military American deaths and injuries today

      • Patrick Klocek

        Oh good Lord! This post is so rife with historical inaccuracies, fuzzy thinking, and downright economic illiteracy that I almost opted to ignore it. But again, I will do my best to educate you here.

        1. Stop looking for single data-points or variables. This is what people latch onto when they don’t understand all of the parts of a complex system. We don’t live in Cuba or North Korea — I am assuming you live in the US although I do not — the US economy is much more complex than one president’s whim or urge to either raise or lower tax rates.

        2. The recession under Goerge Bush I did not happen as soon as he took over. It happened 2 years into his Administration — around 1991. This coincided with the First Gulf War and a dramatic spike in oil prices that choked off a lot of disposable consumer income.

        3. The Reagan expansion (which nearly downed us all) saw uninterrupted growth from 1982 until 1991. Oil prices were down, technological innovation in telecoms and computers increased efficiency and the demographic bulge of the Baby Boom moved into peak earning years. You really need to expand the number of variables in your system beyond your “me think Democrat Good — me think Republican Bad”.

        4. I don’t know what you are on about when you say “Reagan sold us out by off-shoring.” This comment marks a profound and glaring economic ignorance. Under the US economic system as it existed in the glory days of the 1980s — which I loved — the President of United States had no power to force firms to offshore US manufacturing to Japan or China or Taiwan. The President also has no authority to block the movement of firms to any other country. Firms move to countries for numerous reasons. The most important are lowest labor cost for a particular skill level. A US computer manufacturer might move to Taiwan to cut it’s labor costs but if it just wants cheap labor — why not relocate to the Congo or Rwanda? It’s because that firm still needs a certain skill level to make their products.

        By 1985, US labor costs had become too high. Any company that stayed in the US for nostalgic reasons would be foolish and if I was a share-holder, I would urge the CEO be replaced. There are also things like access to raw materials, tax structures, transportation costs and distance to the market to factor in. GM produces more cars OUTSIDE the US than it does inside the US and most of those cars are also sold outside the US. This isn’t treason — it is Business Studies 101. If firms were leaving the US, I would say it was because the Invisible Hand guided those firms to the place they could make the best product for the lowest cost and thus increase their market share. I am sorry if that offends you.

        The Professor has talked to you long enough tonight — I will go look up the deficit spending of the last couple presidents later. It’s late here in my time zone. But I do recall Obama having some pretty crazy high numbers for deficit spending whereas Bush’s average over his 8 years was considerably more modest.

      • gian keys flat mom

        bush? took surplus to RECORD deficit while crushing jobs and killing thousands of americans. (modest: I like that)
        deficit shrinking now— debt rising. don’t cry2 me about debt as no one cried when repubs were HUGELY raising debt ( see: Reagan debt chart and bush 1&2)
        if U have to look up the deficits rise and fall U are not near a professor– but I have learned that anyone who self proclaims ( see: wile E coyote; genius) certainly is not…
        as for the bavardage regarding ” labor costs too high” u are an imbecile. leaders ( Reagan at that time) lead—-they find ways to make it work; not crushing our manufacturing. simple legislation would’ve ( could’ve) kept most jobs here,,,,,, but the 1% didn’t care— they wanted more and they bamboozled the joihn birch white trash to believe that this crap ( trickle down) was the newest nirvana.
        we now see that fruit–
        again I put to you O “professor…… lets compare federal policies implemented by republicans VS policies done by democrats over past 25 yrs and the effect upon America as a whole.
        try to stick to that topic– I live in south east FL and see enough hurricanes; I do not need more spin

      • Patrick Klocek

        How many years did Clinton run a surplus? I believe it was just two years and then the excess revenues dried up after the dot-com bust and the 9/11 attacks. There is no need to pat Bubba on the back for his masterful feat of getting a small surplus in two out of eight years.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        wow–
        in the republican age of running world class deficits U small dicked regressive white trash bemoan a SURPLUS!!
        ok; I will play with ya!!
        please let me know which repub pres most recently ran a surplus-
        pat: u be one dumb white trash religious scumbag

      • Patrick Klocek

        Well, your Royal Shirtlessness, I am not totally convinced that you know the difference between the debt and a deficit. But I do find it telling that you continue to crow about a two years of a balanced budget from 15 years ago. Has Obama balanced a budget? Did Carter balance a budget? How about Johnson? Two balanced bugets out of 30 since 1945 is what we call in that statistics business,
        “an outlyer.”

        I see only one reason why you would be crowing about an event from 15 years ago — you are religious. You BELIEVE that Democrats and Progressive are champions of the common man and are fiscally prudent. And that’s why you are actually more dangerous than people who love Jesus and his Blessed Mother. You Believe in all of the unverified claims of Progressives the same as other believe in things like the Virgin Birth and the Immaculate Conception. You see — I happen to be an agnostic. And our discussions have never touched on religion or theology. But you called me a “religious scumbag” becuase it is your BELIEF that I must be. You made your assumption without factual input or inquiry. You took it on FAITH that *I*, as a Conservative, must be of the same mind as Michele Bachman or Sarah Palin, perhaps speaking on tongues or handling snakes in my spare time.

        This is why YOU, and your progressive friends, are actually far more dangerous than my Jesus-loving friends. My Jesus-loving friends extend a blind faith into things that are not of this world. They BELIEVE that things will be a certain way AFTER they die. Progressives, on the other hand, have blind faith in Earthly matters that effect other people. And liberated from an afterlife, they are freed to attempt to create their heavens on Earth — in their own lifetime. Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Zhedong, and Fidel Castro are/were all atheists (like yourself) who sought to create their heavens on Earth and the result was a hell for all those subjected to their whims.

        All that Christians religious people do is blather on about the state of my soul — which not actually having, it’s health doesn’t worry me in the slightest. But Progressives operate prisons, and gulags, and death camps to inforce their moral code. In this respect, Progressives are a lot like the Jihadis of Iraq, Syria, Aghanistan and Somalia who are striving to perfect human nature on Earth — by brute force if need be. I see in you not only a vulgar person but a latent fascist. Progressives like you terrify me.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        hey brainiac:
        (a) im agnostic– agnostics ( in my case) weigh all evidence as collected by OUR senses and make the assessment that GOD cannot be defined my a finite creature such as man.
        (b1) debt: incurred when we borrow faster than we pay back ( gee: that’s tough one)
        (b2) deficit: occurring when expenditures outweigh income ( please note obamas spending have shrunk at fastest ‘per capita’ pace since IKE)
        (c) I mentioned 25 yrs as it is a well-balanced number which has MOST people in America relating to things that happened 25 yrs ago ( or since) yet U spun away -of course- with bavardage befitting sean Hannity or michelle ” no tits” malkin .
        My terrifying U is colloquially expressed ( as is ” shirtless”) yet ostensibly infantile as U are terrified by life itself: witnessed by an otiose jobation weakly comparing progressives to religious trash overseas. The bottom line is — as I fell into above– U have leaped b4 U looked by your exigent attempts to make thy querimonies seem above reproach; yet as ALL regressives (see: conservatives– and WHAT are U exactly conserving????) you boorishly bring up dates and players of history which are worthy of view and nothing else,
        again: lets review the repub federal policies of past 25 yrs VS democratic ones and see which had better results for ALL americans; not just aging white trash scum who now cry “foul” as the minorities are getting the equality they deserved all along.
        U don’t like me shirtless? sounds like you are aesthetically challenged and know it: thus extrapolating into your social ineptitude with delightfully appealing ( sexually of course) women
        *********************************************************
        based upon your photo im willing to wager that alopecia and steatopygia are well within your anatomical characteristics ( see: shitty genetics)

      • Patrick Klocek

        I guess I should applaud your consistency. You continue to show a total lack of class, taste, a decorum. Congratulations.

        A) I am agnostic because I simply don’t care about God or any other supernatural force. If there is a deity, I can only assume He is equally as interested in me as I am in the various bacteria I wash away everyday.

        B) Deficits are yearly shortfall between tax revenue and government expenditure. The debt is the accumlation of 50 or so years of deficits. Since spending is always based on projections of revenue to be collected, there will always be some imprecision. I can live with that.

        C) Bill Clinton’s fabulous feat — which you are still droning on about after 15 years, was to under-estimate revenue for a couple years. That was his much-vaunted “surplus.” It did not eliminate our debt. George Bush kept very close to a balanced budget his first couple years in office too. And, YES, “W” exploded his deficit around 2006. Obama continued that trend and debt-to-GDP surged to its highest level since the Korean War. Only Sequestration — which Obama fought — brought his own spending back down to Earth. it wasn’t by any herculian executive effort.

        Looking at debt-to-GDP since Truman; the debt had declined consistently since 1946 when it was about 120% of GDP. The debt bottomed out around Nixon/Ford at around 35% of GDP. During the Reagan/Bush years of the 1980s, the debt-to-GDP ratio shot up to around 70%. Mind you, Reagan/Bush endured a Democratic Congress during that entire time and they consistently pushed for more and more spending. To Clinton’s credit, the debt-to-GDP ratio declined to just under 60% by the end of Clinton’s tenure. For most of W’s time in office it was just over 60% until 2006 when W Bush went off the rails and leaving at around 80% of GDP. Obama hit the ground running and ran it up to 100% of GDP with his insane spending.

        D) Minorities have suffered more under Progressives than at any other time. The Obama Regime has presided over one of the greatest destructions of African-American wealth in history. And in the same time, African-American unemployment has surged. It went as high as 16% and is now around 13.5% — way above that of Whites and Asians. So, again, congratulations on all that new-found equality. Obama has been a disaster for America but especially for blacks and hispanics — not that progressives would care about that.

        E) Your shirtlessness. It’s crass. It’s lower-class (dare I say, “white trash” of you). And your comment about “Michelle `no tits’ Malken” underscores your tendency to objectify women. This is yet another reason I don’t trust the Left. All of its talk about “women’s liberation” is a sham. It has always been simply a vehicle for sexual self-indulgence and hedonism. You seem to fit that mold. Women exist, not as the familial bedrock upon which society is built (as Conservatives hold) but rather are objects for male sexual gratification to be used when they are pleasing. Ted Kennedy, Roman Polanski, Bob Filner (of San Diego), and Bill Clinton were all sexual predators. The real “War on Women” is led by Progressives against women and diminishes them.

        F) My hat: I happen to live in the well within the tropics. As a white person — that’s a bit un-natural for us. When spending any more than about 20 minutes outside, I wear a hat — especially due to the alopecia. As for my physique; I regularly scored 300 on my APFTs so have nothing to be ashamed of. What is making you so insecure that you need to boast unceasingly about yours?

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        a- on it we agree b- on it we agree c- spinning and inconsistent d- suffered under Obama? wow– they did so well stultified under the thumb of white trash religious scum
        e– objectifying women??? HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS————– and those are capable of being objectified love it. its the ones who no one wants who complain ( see: micromastial/steatopygous viragos) I love knowing that those silly slender large breasted chics seem to enjoy my “objectifying ” them– especially in an intimate setting. I do appreciate the roll call of ONLY cherry picked men who predated (??) women easily ignoring the equality presented by religious/conservatives…… which extrapolates into U being an archetypal boor. 300 on those military exams? wow!! either you are ( always) perfect or you are lying or the tests are somewhat able to include pedestrian men.
        ( sorry about your baldness,,, that genetic thing)
        for kicks an giggles here is my girlfriend Ronnie ( veronica) at beach last year. totally objectified and totally abuuuused by me.
        keep crying

      • Patrick Klocek

        Misogyny is never cool. It wasn’t cool when I was a rutting 20-something and it is certainly isn’t now, decades later, as a father. I hope that you grow out of your prolonged and extended adolescence but since you are a “Progressive”, I won’t hold my breath. Hedonism was the primary motivation behind the “sexual revolution” of the 1960s and it informs the lifestyle choices today of celebrated idiots like Sandra Fluke. I suspect you too are “Bro-Choice”. That’s a guy who favors abortion-on-demand simply because it makes it easier to get into a woman’s pants. Really, there is little difference between Progressives and Boko Haram when it comes to their views on women. Roman Polanski believed that young girls existed to satisfy his desires — Boko Haram believes that young girls are created by Allah to satisfy the desires of Muslim men. Really, there is no significant difference. I am sure your imam would be proud of you.

        My APFTs were solid. Granted, I have not done one in a decade so I doubt I would score 300 tomorrow. My life is in a different place now. I left the Guard a long time ago. I don’t need to be “deployable” anymore. I kept the haircut but added a gut since then — it’s not unusual. My focus is on my boys now — and one day with my boys is far better than a year of promiscuity with any girls/women including “Ronnie” or whatever you named your imaginary girlfriend (I suspect her name is really — “Your Right Hand.”)

        And minorities under Bush: Yeah, all that low-unemployment and high rates of home-ownership must have been horrible. Thank the Goddess that those days are over and they can get back to being poor and under the enlightened rule of the White Bourgeois Progressives who know what is best for all those darkies.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        hey lardass,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, veronica velasquez ( please annoy her on facebook as U typically don’t believe that men such as I can conquer dynamite foxes with EASE) will be happy to tell U how much I hate women
        NOTE: I hate all who are extreme: such as booooooooob–jobs ( non medical) and religious trash; extreme crybabies who simply do NOT “OVER” inform themselves with FACTS ( see: “ME”) don’t knock ‘promiscuity’ until U have tried it: it certainly cools the engines and does wonders for the ego when the female participants all look yummie and are oh-so-willing!
        if your boys don’t learn all about REAL women they will invariably be the fruit which falls not far from the tree: namely YOU- some loudmouth who truly doesn’t know life outside his suburban aquarium=============================
        enjoy the slow inexorable turn away from the disgusting grip all the religious white trash has had on USA over the past eons; and watch and see how AMERICA is when integrated with those who NOW enjoy the equality mandated by our constitution and bill of rights.

      • Patrick Klocek

        Again with the misogyny! I am not the slightest bit interested in your sexual conquest. Sorry to disappoint. I am nether 15 y/o nor do I desire a return to those days … although when I was 15 y/o, Reagan was president and the band Asia was making great music, so things were good then. The 1970s called! Disco is dead and nobody else cares about your “foxes.” Good lord, I haven’t read anyone call women “foxes” since Carter was president!
        I had my burst of promiscuity in my 20s. It was neither intellectually nor emotionally rewarding. The fact that you find it so is telling indeed. Most progressives are stunted adolescents.
        I generally don’t share a lot of autobiographical information. It is secondary to profound power of my ideas. But you alluded to my suburban aquarium. Again, you are making assumptions about my domicile. I am an American-expat. I have lived outside the US for most of the last 10 years overseas. From my experience, most Progressives believe themselves “multicultural” simply because they at a Burmese restaurant once. On the other hand, I have spent the last 10 years living and working several different countries — mostly Hong Kong, Philippines, and Saudi Arabia. I encourage you too to get out and experience the world — not just go bed-hopping. There is more to the world than this website and MSNBC.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        -hey creep– U insinuate I don’t have (had; ETC) females ( veronica ???) and then U cry about my ” promiscuity” hey gerbil droppings: ya cannot have it both ways; so PICK one and live with that choice. My xenophobia — and enjoying what America has2 offerep me here: f*ck other countries. (NOTE: im a chef so eating and cooking other ethnic foods is commonplace)
        ASIA disappointed me initially as im a BIG ELP and YES and KING CRIMSON fan ( ttry them all)
        MSNBC? I also absorb CNBC and CNN and PBS and even the ridiculous FOX “news”,,,,,,,,,,so again U have stumbled and fallen in a quagmire of erroneous verbosity.
        NOTE: another photo of Ronnie is up– how many do U need?
        chowderhead regressive–

      • gian keys flat mom

        serious spin job there
        ,,,,,,,,,,,well avoiding the americans deaths and horrible injuries

      • Patrick Klocek

        Soldiers die in war. I was a soldier once, as was my father and grandfather. I have friends who still are in. Our Army is a 100% volunteer force and highly professional. It’s what the military does. It’s what they train for. It is the president’s job as commander-in-chief to deploy those forces in a way that enhances the security of the people of the US. Every loss is mourned by me. And I don’t want another drop spilt in those heathen lands.

      • gian keys flat mom

        funny how U avoided answering my below post

      • Patrick Klocek

        Serious economists would say, “yes.” Cutting taxes allows more money to be spent on investment. The cut itself doesn’t do anything. It is the making more disposable income available either for consumption of investment.

        But the biggest problem I see in your post is both a-historical and non-economic thinking. I see you latching on to one data-point, one variable, and riding that. That’s now how complex systems work. Tax cuts simply allow tax-payers more freedom to direct resources. They could direct those resources into Folger’s coffee cans under their collective beds. Or, some could choose to invest stocks in some stocks. Others still may choose simply eat a bit more filet mignon and a bit fewer cheeseburgers. It doesn’t matter. Tax cuts a philosophical issue. Who is best able to allocate goods and services: the government or the market? I say it’s the market.

        Your insistence on referring to Clinton’s success is, again, interesting. You seem to make the odd connection between an increase in the marginal tax rates and a growth of jobs. I am assuming you understand counter-cyclical monetary policy here. Raising taxes when Clinton and Gingrich did was appropriate in that situation but I have never heard an economist of note describe that tax hike as the reason for increased employment. In keeping with counter-cyclical monetary policies — taxes are raised at the risk of inflation and upward wage pressure caused by prolonged economic expansion. Clinton’s move was right in order to counter balance the economic boom of the late 1990s.

        Raising taxes doesn’t create jobs. Likewise, cutting taxes doesn’t create jobs. Cutting taxes simply returns power and resources to the people who created that wealth. Raising taxes confiscates wealth and re-distributes to the State which may or may not have an efficient or valuable use for the wealth. Personally, I will place my bet on them wasting the money. I know best how to allocate my resources to serve my family. I doubt either you, Timothy Geitner, or Barrack Obama have the slightest clue what is best for my family. So, in the words of Milton Friedman, “I am in favor of tax cuts at any time and for any reason.”

      • John Masters

        I read once a statement that’s come to make my life a lot easier, “You cannot reason a person out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into in the first place.”

      • John Master- Bates

        That must come in handy when you are trying to bed 10 year old boys. sicko

      • Patrick Klocek

        Can you show me some evidence that tax increases spur growth and development? Or do you simply like to stick it to people who make more money that you?

      • gian keys flat mom

        shall we peek at the bill Clinton presidency? his job creation? biggest and longest in the recording of that stat

      • Patrick Klocek

        Bill simply carried on the expansion started under Reagan in 1981 and he did so with considerable help from the great Newt Gingrich — an unsung hero of Conservatism. I would be pleased as punch to have Bill Clinton return — but I doubt Obama would. You over-estimate the comity between those two camps.

      • gian keys flat mom

        wow– so the Reagan second tem flatline– robustly including deficits explosion and the huge escalation of debt which helped ouster bush 1– is now the genesis of Clinton success????????
        U really should audition for either the musical group “spin doctors” or maybe an eponymous show on FOX “news”
        =====================================
        Clinton: surplus
        Reagan- nope
        bush 1- nope
        bush 2: ( please!!)
        Clinton and Obama created more ( much more) jobs – public and private– than Reagan and the bush boys
        look it up b4 U cry
        if the brilliant but wishy washy newt was sooooooooooooooooooooo great: why was he NOT your candidate to beat the Kenyan?

      • gian keys flat mom

        hey pat
        Reagan / bush 1/ bush 2 VS Clinton & Obama
        ========================================
        stop cherrypicking…. ur regressive had 20 yrs; Clinton/Obama 13
        ======================================
        keep crying

      • gian keys flat mom

        didn’t answer those either— mustve been bizzzzie

      • surfjac

        Bill Clinton raised taxes and had unprecedented job growth, generating enough revenue to pay off our WWII debt and create a budget surplus.
        I wonder what ever happened to the surplus though. It sort of bothers me that it got sad and went away.
        🙁 However, that answers your question.
        Sticking to people who make more money than me? Sounds so vindictive. However, no that’s not it. It’s the only way money will ever trickle down. The only way money has gone is up. We need to bring more revenue in and where should revenue come from but from the fortunate few who reaped most of the money over the last ten years. Salaries are flat in the middle and lower economic classes for 30 years while the wealthy have steadily increased their wealth. Don’t think I think taxes won’t eventually come down on the middle class either; it will have to. However I would think once there is more buying power in the middle and lower economic classes, there will be more jobs so more revenue. Don’t forget we owe a big debt to our veterans and that’s something else that needs to dealt with financially at some point.

      • Patrick Klocek

        You need to understand something called the business-cycle. Keyens’ real contribution was he idea to use taxes to counter the business cycle. If done properly and in a timely manner, it can yield positive results. If left to mindless politicians — it is dangerous.

        According to Keynes, taxes should be raised in times of high-growth to ward off inflation and prevent asset bubbles from forming. In times of recession, governments should dramatically cut taxes and even indulge in deficit spending in order to compensate for lost-demand. Now, the problem here is timing. Often by the time booms end, the new tax rates finally go into effect and the effect is a harder crash. Or, in other cases, politicians purposely fuel asset bubbles as George Bush did in the mid-2000s.

        So, congratulations on putting the cart before the horse. Cinton’s late 1990s tax increases did not spur growth, they were an answer to too much growth — actually timed correctly. The Clinton tax hikes took a little air out of the dot-com and real estate bubbles of the late 1990s so that when both popped around 2000 and 2001, the fall sharp but quickly correct when Bush — true to his ideology — cut taxes at the right time.

        As for wealth “trickling down,” it does. It just doesn’t announce its arrival with any fanfare. Firstly, you need to divorce yourself for your monopoly-man, 1930s idea of what “wealth” is. While there are a few billionaires around like Tom Steyer, George Soros, and the Koch Brothers — they are not the standard. No, most of the “wealth” is locked up in the property and assets of the rapidly aging and retiring Baby-boomers. As they die, those accumulated assets will be passed to 2-3 descendants (on average) and possible among grandchildren as well. Similarly, millionaires like Vanilla Ice and M.C. Hammer often lose their fortunes. Both of those two musical geniuses mindlessly lost more than your or I will ever have. They were 1-percentagers who left those ranks on account of their financial incompetence.

        Their wealth was re-distributed without any assistance from the state. It went to luxury goods and lawyers mostly — but it “trickled down” nonetheless. Can the state do a better job of directing that “trickle”? Most likely not. It would have to spend a tremendous amount of money staffing a bureaucracy to do what happens naturally anyway. (Of course, those who staff that bureaucracy defend it vigorous — the public sector unions.) Most people who slip into the top-1% are not there after a few years. And all the wealth locked up with the Baby-boomers is being unlocked right now … slowly — the big winners will be home healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies because that generation isn’t going anywhere without a fight. The greatest flaw among Progressives, apart from their arrogance, is their horrible impatience.

    • modera8

      I don’t think that’s true at all. Have you ever been to America? Have you met a real, live American liberal?

      • gian keys flat mom

        sadly I have met waaaay 2 many white trash regressive “Christian” republicans———- they all cry JEEEESUS and tell us how the bible is flawless. when I quote verifiable numbers/statistics they tell me Im a communist.
        that means,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

      • Rob Mark

        Give em guns and bibles and you can steal every cent they have

      • gian keys flat mom

        correct———I wish I would’ve recognized that decades ago

  • adcbeast

    2014 Conservatism = Childish Crazy Notions of Govt …

    • gian keys flat mom

      conserving what?————— ,,,,,,,,,,,,, they are aptly called ” regressives”

  • Rob Mark

    The GOP is dying because it has shifted to far to the right. The democrats are dying because they shifted to far to the left. The only thing that keeps them alive is the GOP is worse. If there was a third alternative that was moderate it would sweep every one of you out of congress. But moderate does not suit big business who wants us fighting over idiocy while they quietly pay both parties to kill the middle class.

    • Patrick Klocek

      If we are dying, why do we have a majority in the House and why is the DNC rushing to shore up support states with Democratic senators — like OR, LA, and NC? Are you afraid that this dying part is about to rob you of your senate majority?

      • Danny Mathey

        stop beating your chest…..Remember how you felt when Romney lost ?…..you were spewing the same spew!…and how did that work out for you ?

      • gian keys flat mom

        Romney didn’t lose—
        …………… he came in second

      • Patrick Klocek

        If the election were RE-held tomorrow, Romney would easily win. Obama won on pure character assassination. In 2008, he won on feel-good blather. But now we are seeing just how dangerous it is to elect people based on such campaigns. The current president is dangerously incompetent in a way that Mitt Romney already proved that he wasn’t.

      • gian keys flat mom

        Aesop wrote about ” sour grapes”
        ===============================
        keep crying

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        please keep our bavardage open,,,,,i want to be here as your ‘party” continues to collapse and eat each other,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
        stay tuned!! and praise a dead fisherman/carpenter that we know NOTHING about with 93% of his life!!!
        TRANSLATION: would U vote for a REPUBLICAN TEA PARTY candidate when we knew NOTHING about 93% of his F*CKING LIFE??

        you would???
        great call pat baybee,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      • Patrick Klocek

        I just want to see you get the help you need. I have no vested interest in long-dead Jewish carpenters. You could also seek the help of the Buddha or simply pay through the nose for a good psychiatrist. Jesus and the Buddha are simply cheaper.
        Your comment about getting me or Michelle Malkin into an MMA cage was shocking and chilling. Part of me thinks I should copy all of these comments in our discussion incase they are needed as evidence at some future trial.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        excellent!!! shouldn’t U be buying more GUNS? ( see: NRA profits)
        ok,,,,,,,,,,,, how about we do some exercise and see who is simply in better physical condition? im substantially OLDER than Ur sad ass and will gladly laugh at you as im sooooooooooooo non violent! ( haven’t been in a fight or skirmish or ANYTHING since,,,,,,,,,since,,,,,, maybe 1984???? )
        another archetypal crybaby. and yes: I would readily punch and wrestle and go after ( legally) those I mentioned.
        wait! that makes me a woman hater and a sociopath!!
        ” calling Dr Freud…”

      • Patrick Klocek

        I am not sure how me buying more guns translates into NRA profits. I am a member of the GOA not the NRA. I am thinking about buying a new AR-15 but I will buy it from a private seller. We will probably build it ourselves from assorted receivers and barrels. But I won’t do that until I move back to the US.

        And yes, I do think wanting to get Michelle Malkin — a spunky, Filipino-American mother of two — in a MMA is a bit disconcerting. I don’t like Rachel Maddow but I don’t dream of punching him in the face.

        I do wish I was in better physical condition. I was in great condition while I was in the Army but that was more than a decade ago that I was discharged. But I have moved on to different things in my life now. As a father of two young boys, I have different priorities now. Once I moved to Hong Kong, my condition really declined. We worked super-long days and the only viable transport was public transport so I was more sedentary than at any time since I was an infant.

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        u seem a normal well balanced guy— and im not punching malkin; but hate her misplaced vitriol ( yet I do understand she makes a TON of $$$ feeding the regressives)
        I just wish most of the un educated ( or should I say UNDER informed ) regressives (see: repubs) would do more homework and view things as they are.
        Obama? flawed as we all are. BUT– hes sincere about TRYING to get a leveled playing field for all americans- the “field” which up 2 now only whites enjoyed. Im white and middle aged. I still see whats going on and the lies I was fed from day ONE.
        imagine yourself as a WOMAN or GAY or a MINORITY ( especially black) and KNOWING the hatred out here just because of how U were born.
        ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and imbeciles hiding behind VOODOO( see: religion) fueling that stultifying nightmare
        au revoir my good family man

      • Patrick Klocek

        We both have the same desire — we have just different ideas about how to get to that same place.
        Auf Wiedersehen …

      • gian keysTOOEASY flat mom

        epilogue:
        look up ” black throated monitor video” and U can see what I THINK I might get one day!!
        ( I already own an argentine tegu– next 2 me as I type– and a caiman lizard: both about 9 months old)

      • Patrick Klocek

        You are looking only at the top of the ticket. We are looking all up and down the ticket. The Democratic Governors association could probably all squeeze into the same taxi for rides back to the hotel. Of the 17 House seats currently in play (according to RCP), only four are currently GOP-held. And only two of the nine current toss-up senate seats are GOP seats.
        You are not doing a good job reading election results. In 2006 and 2008, Democrats had good years. That’s true. But 2010 was a disaster and all the money and effort they pumped into 2012 got them a wash under the best circumstances imaginable. Obama retained his office with diminished numbers and the Democrats picked up only a couple marginal seats. I wouldn’t start popping the corks just yet …

      • gian keys flat mom

        we are afraid as the tea bag party regressives keep giving the mass public media stuff to laugh at ( and destroy) them with almost daily
        ==========================================
        praise jeeeeesus

      • Patrick Klocek

        “Destroy them almost daily.” Isn’t destruction somewhat final. How would one destroy something daily. That implies an never ending ability to regenerate doesn’t it?
        And what is the “mass public media?” Does it refer to media companies that have share-holders and that are publically traded. Does it refer to the “public broadcasting” which is media subsidized by the state? Is it different from the “mass media” which contains includes publically and privately held corporations as well as state-own/subsidized outlets?

      • gian keys flat mom

        hey kreskin: if U are gonna “quote” me,,,,please QUOTE me exactly— as that is what crybaby regressives seem2do best: alter and spin
        =====================================
        mass public media? allow me to edify:
        internet
        television
        cable television
        newspapers
        infantile ( somewhat) facebook and twitter
        ******************************************************
        funny how U inevitably regress to the business aspect of what I wrote/named
        tea party/ john birch: same dinosaur

      • Patrick Klocek

        So, just what everybody traditionally calls “mass media” anyway.

      • gian keys flat mom

        why do U ask a question Ive already answered???

  • KIdGallahad

    Conservative movement is dying? This is a joke right? When the GOP re-takes the Senate and adds numbers to the House this fall will you be saying the same thing? No, just bury your head in the sand.