View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

Kevin Buck: Reasons why conservatives are upset

Posted: June 17, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: June 17, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

There is a reason that conservatives in general and conservative Republicans specifically are angry and upset.

They are losing the cultural and political battle for the heart and soul of the American public.

It began with FDR’s election and the enactment of the New Deal. The Republican Party fought tooth and nail against that progressive legislation. They lost badly, yet they have never given up trying to dismantle its legacy and repeal its signature achievement: Social Security.

In the 80-plus years since the progressive New Deal legislation was enacted, we have seen many more progressive political triumphs.

Medicare for seniors, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act became laws.

The women’s rights movement was born and continues the struggle for equality in the workplace, education and the home.

In just the last decade, the acceptance of gays and lesbians as full and equal members of our society has become another great political battle for civil rights the progressives are winning.

Clean air and water standards, safe foods, federal lands protected for generations to enjoy are government working for us.

It is no wonder that conservatives are angry. As hard as they try, the progressive agenda is inexorably being advanced, one issue at a time, and they have been powerless to stop it.

That is not to say there have not been setbacks, roadblocks or losses on some issues — that is the nature of power and politics, but the overall arc of recent American history has a leftward tilt.

As some say, reality has a liberal bias. Government working to make our lives better undercuts the conservative belief that the federal government should be small enough to drown in a bathtub.

The main reason conservatives have such a difficult time countering the liberal agenda is that, taken separately, each issue is supported by a majority of Americans.

Medicare, Social Security, stewardship of federal lands, the minimum wage, equality for all Americans regardless of race, gender, religion or whom they choose to love are winning issues and will remain so as the huge Millennial generation matures and solidifies its own nascent liberal bias.

There is probably no better modern example of this than the Affordable Care Act.

There was no logical reason for Republicans to oppose the ACA. It is a market-based health care plan, originally introduced by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

It was first implemented on the state level by then-Gov. Mitt Romney, later the 2012 Republican presidential nominee.

But the ACA was passed and signed into law by the Democratic Party and President Obama, so game on, beginning with the 2010 mid-term elections.

Conservative billionaires, led by the Koch brothers, funded astro-turf political groups to rile up the conservative base and protest the law at town hall meetings — and the Tea Party was born.

Because the ACA was three years from implementation, the lies, distortions, attack ads and imaginary worst case scenarios worked their magic, Republicans swept to a majority in the House and only terrible candidates kept them from a Senate majority.

But 2012 was a different ACA story. We saw the same fear-mongering from conservative PACs funded by the 1 Percent, the same faux outrage from the right-wing media, but this time the political magic was gone.

Republicans lost seats in the House, failed to win the Senate majority, and President Obama was re-elected in an Electoral College landslide.

This year the ACA is no longer theoretical; it is the law of the land helping more than 10 million people get health coverage previously denied to them.

It is another government program that will help generations of Americans.

The Republican political leadership has dropped it as an issue in the coming election; they don’t even have DOA repeal bills scheduled for a House vote as a sop to the tea party.

It’s over, and in its place as the new shiny object to rile up and focus the base, which is ... Benghazi!

More on that topic later, since it is now the horse Republicans are riding all the way to November.

However, it is not a winning issue, as the ACA was in 2010, but it’s all they have left, so once again, game on.

Kevin Buck is a Santa Clarita resident. “Democratic Voices” runs Tuesdays in The Signal and rotates among several SCV Democrats.

 

Comments

BrianBaker: Posted: June 17, 2014 6:53 a.m.

All this does is remind me of the "Tytler Cycle".

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury.

"From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence:

"From bondage to spiritual faith;
from spiritual faith to great courage;
from courage to liberty;
from liberty to abundance;
from abundance to selfishness;
from selfishness to apathy;
from apathy to dependence;
from dependency back again into bondage."


chico: Posted: June 17, 2014 7:59 a.m.

This guys thinks its only conservatives who are upset with Obama-

It's as if only the conservatives had their insurance cancelled, or their work hours cut, their utility rates necessarily skyrocket, or are the only ones who are just plain tired of paltry economic growth despite all the spending.

This author claims to know what upsets conservatives, but doesn't seem to know squat about what upsets ordinary Americans.


therightstuff: Posted: June 17, 2014 9:46 a.m.

Mr. Buck is right. Conservatives are angry and upset.

It is upsetting when a sitting president is awarded "Lie of the Year" for a health care scheme that would have never passed if he had not lied 37 times, even to members of his own party.

It is upsetting when the head of the IRS deliberately targets groups opposed to this president, refuses to testify, and now claims that all of her personal emails have been accidentally deleted.

It is upsetting when a president negotiates with terrorists for political posturing while thousands of veterans are suffering - and dying - because of the ineptness of this administration.

It is upsetting when a president and his minions repeatedly and deliberately blames a terrorist attack that murdered four Americans on an offensive video. Even shameless Democrats like today's columnist refer to this tragedy as nothing more than a "shiny object".

It is upsetting that the current occupant of the White House refuses to govern and spends full-time in campaign mode to divide the country and pit Americans against each other by using the absolute lowest denominator to bring out the worst in all of us.

We could go on and on about one of the most deceitful and inept administrations in American history but I'm glad that useless partisans like Mr. Buck actually believe this destructive behavior only upsets conservatives. This is how Democrats got shellacked in 2010 and it is how they will get shellacked again in 2014.

You keep denying the truth Mr. Buck and we conservatives will just say BINGO!!!




projalice11: Posted: June 17, 2014 10:05 a.m.

BINGO Mr. Buck

Prepare yourself Mr. Buck for some very hateful, cynical and negative responses ..

Quote from Mr.Buck:
"The main reason conservatives have such a difficult time countering the liberal agenda is that, taken separately, each issue is supported by a majority of Americans."

Quote from Chico:
"This author claims to know what upsets conservatives, but doesn't seem to know squat about what upsets ordinary Americans"

Mr. Buck's take on the reasons that conservatives are upset is where it is much to
the dismay of the conservatives

Conservatives "Stop and smell the Roses"

"There is a reason that conservatives in general and conservative Republicans specifically are angry and upset."

"They are losing the cultural and political battle for the heart and soul of the American public."

In regards to this post please don't be redundant and repetitious in your not
so kind post ******


Unreal: Posted: June 17, 2014 12:52 p.m.

Civil Rights Act was fought by Dems! They were the ones in bed with people like the KKK. It was the Reps who pushed through the Civil Rights Act.

Environmental protection agency (EPA)was proposed and signed into law by Richard Nixon a Rep!

The people blocking voters in the south were Dems! Also the "Voting Rights Act" of 1965 was passed by Reps and Dems. with more Dems voting against it than Reps.

What bothers Conservatives is having Liberals try to take credit for progress made when they were the ones fighting against them. Liars.

What also makes Conservatives angry is seeing our country being drained by Socialist ideas. We just have to hang on for 875 more days until the 2016 election when we can regain control of America and begin the long process of healing our country.


therightstuff: Posted: June 17, 2014 12:53 p.m.

Mr. Buck whines about the GOP "lies and distortions" about Obamacare but apparently has no problem with the "lies and distortions" of his president to get it passed. And where does Buck get his 10-million number? The author of the 2013 "Lie of the Year" said the number was 8-million. A number which has never been independently verified. The media is just taking the word of a pathological liar for those numbers.

And does anyone except Obama's shameless wh0res actually believe that none of these people had previous insurance coverage? This White House refuses to tell anyone how many millions from their bogus number already had health insurance before it got canceled by Obamacare.

Oh...and in Buck's perverted view of history, notice how he doesn't mention that it was HIS Democratic Party that fought against ending slavery and that it was HIS Democratic Party that fought against civil rights for blacks?

Reason # 2,911 why I would never be a Democrat.


therightstuff: Posted: June 17, 2014 12:55 p.m.

It may be less than that Unreal if the GOP can take the Senate. We can limit further damage by Obama before 2016. Frankly, he doesn't care because he will spend 99% of his last two years in full campaign mode with his "us vs them" mantra. That's all this guy knows how to do.


Unreal: Posted: June 17, 2014 1:07 p.m.

This is true right stuff November will be a step in the right direction.

However since Obama keeps adding powers of a King to himself and side stepping congress and the senate there is still reason to worry past the Nov elections.

Unless we IMPEACH Barry!

I used to have an IMPEACH Clinton bumber sticker. I would love to find an IMPEACH Obama sticker.


Lotus8: Posted: June 17, 2014 1:10 p.m.

Whichever party is in charge, we all lose. The power structure that the office of president has built up over the years will be the ruin of us. Congress is too busy acting like selfish children protecting their little kingdoms while the emperor gets to make all of the rules. The public is less educated and more divided than ever. This rah rah article for the blue team is just another hilarious example of someone who has his party blinders on and eats all of the brown goo his party bosses feed him.


stevehw: Posted: June 17, 2014 1:38 p.m.

"Civil Rights Act was fought by Dems! They were the ones in bed with people like the KKK. It was the Reps who pushed through the Civil Rights Act.

Environmental protection agency (EPA)was proposed and signed into law by Richard Nixon a Rep!

The people blocking voters in the south were Dems! Also the "Voting Rights Act" of 1965 was passed by Reps and Dems. with more Dems voting against it than Reps."

I love the way we're not allowed to bring up Bush when talking about things like the Iraq war (the "conservatives" around here will jump all over you, telling you to "get over Bush" if you do, etc.), but then they're allowed to go back FIFTY years to a now-defunct version of either party and use that in their argument.


17trillion: Posted: June 17, 2014 1:53 p.m.

The difference is Steve is that there is no conservative doing touchdown dances about Iraq or just about anything Bush did around here. Unlike you people, there are a lot of disgusted people around here about how Bush conducted himself. The better question is, why don't you guys love Bush? Other than Iraq, he's a liberal's wet dream.


stevehw: Posted: June 17, 2014 2:02 p.m.

Yes, we know. They were forced to hold their noses and vote for him...twice. But they really didn't *like* doing it.


17trillion: Posted: June 17, 2014 2:10 p.m.

Not me, just once. What's your excuse?


17trillion: Posted: June 17, 2014 2:37 p.m.

Although I do admit that had I lived in Ohio or Florida I would have voted for him over.....laughing.....John Kerry. Can you just imagine that fool as a president? Could anyone possibly be worse than Obama? It just could be Kerry!


Unreal: Posted: June 17, 2014 3:02 p.m.

stevehw: Kevin Buck is the one who brought these items up trying to say that the Dems were the ones who fought and pushed these items through.

Liar.

I just pointed out the historical truth.


Indy: Posted: June 17, 2014 3:51 p.m.

Unreal wrote: Civil Rights Act was fought by Dems! They were the ones in bed with people like the KKK. It was the Reps who pushed through the Civil Rights Act.

Indy: Yes, indeed, there were some really racist dems back in the south during the 1960s when a democratic President got the Civil Rights Act passes in 1964.

Yet, today, its republicans that are trying to deny minorities equal rights to vote using voter suppression and gerrymandering.

Why do you suppose the parties ‘switched’ on racism? A black President maybe . . . you decide.

Unreal wrote: Environmental protection agency (EPA)was proposed and signed into law by Richard Nixon a Rep!

Indy: Kind of the same situation here . . . where today, republicans fight tooth and nail against environmentalism . . . calling it a 'JOB KILLER'!

Unreal wrote: The people blocking voters in the south were Dems! Also the "Voting Rights Act" of 1965 was passed by Reps and Dems. with more Dems voting against it than Reps.

Indy: Sadly, then as we see today, many politicians are stuck in the mud with their ancient beliefs and ideologies . . .

Unreal wrote: What bothers Conservatives is having Liberals try to take credit for progress made when they were the ones fighting against them. Liars.

Indy: Yes, how easy to ‘ignore’ the current actions of today’s republican party.

Unreal wrote: What also makes Conservatives angry is seeing our country being drained by Socialist ideas. We just have to hang on for 875 more days until the 2016 election when we can regain control of America and begin the long process of healing our country

Indy: What really amazes me is how the RNC can get their members to vote against their own interest.

We see that most with income inequality as the ‘wealth concentrates’ in America from tax code changes that see ‘income concentration’ to the top 1% that now take over 20% of all income up from just 8% when Reagan entered office.

And now we see republicans running to off shore jobs to nations that pay $1/hour . . . so yes, I’m ready to see how the public will vote . . .


Indy: Posted: June 17, 2014 3:53 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: We could go on and on about one of the most deceitful and inept administrations in American history but I'm glad that useless partisans . . .

Indy: Gee, right off the lips of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones and Glenn Beck to name just a few of the ultra-right wing conservatives that now run the republican party . . .


BrianBaker: Posted: June 17, 2014 3:56 p.m.

Indy: "Why do you suppose the parties ‘switched’ on racism? A black President maybe . . . you decide."


Okay, I decided. I decided that you're full of baloney.



But Indy, credit where credit is due. You finally managed to write one of your endless and boring monologues without mentioning "Fox" once!

Kudos! You may be on the first step to recovery!


projalice11: Posted: June 17, 2014 7:05 p.m.

BINGO stevehw and I quote:

"I love the way we're not allowed to bring up Bush when talking about things like the Iraq war (the "conservatives" around here will jump all over you, telling you to "get over Bush" if you do, etc.), but then they're allowed to go back FIFTY years to a now-defunct version of either party and use that in their argument."


tech: Posted: June 18, 2014 10:24 p.m.

President Obama Job Approval

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html


therightstuff: Posted: June 18, 2014 10:30 p.m.

Steve, you often complain that no conservatives complained about Bush when he was in office. In your ridiculous rants, I believe you say, "never, ever, not one word, ever!"

Interesting how you never complain about Obama now. Where does the hypocrisy end with you guys on the far-left?


therightstuff: Posted: June 18, 2014 10:36 p.m.

Indy: """Gee, right off the lips of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones and Glenn Beck to name just a few of the ultra-right wing conservatives that now run the republican party . . ."""

Yet another brilliant defense of Barack Obama. When even his wh0res can't defend the lying and incompetence of their leader, they default to attacking the messenger.

Duuuuhhhh....you're just listening to Fox and Talk Radio.

Duuuuuhhhhh.......

Is this honestly the best you've got?


ricketzz: Posted: June 18, 2014 6:27 a.m.

Tech posts a low presidential approval number without noting his approval rating is much higher than Congress'. Why the half truth? Why the propaganda?

"Conservatives" (not even) passed "upset" on the way to "crazy train" a long time ago. They have left the planet on a voyage of absurdity. They have only one constituency, frightened hillbillies.


17trillion: Posted: June 18, 2014 7:26 a.m.

Tech, you also didn't post what the price of milk is. Why the half truth? Why the propaganda? You also didn't post the solution to 1 + 1. Why the half truth? Why the propaganda?


Unreal: Posted: June 18, 2014 7:42 a.m.

This country is bogged down in cr*p right now with no end in sight and everyone knows it. That is why the polls of Reps. and Dems. show such a low presidential approval rating.

Barry is inept and almost everyone knows it. Even a few Dems are now willing to say the "Emperor has no clothes".

The only way out of this quagmire is Nov. this year and Nov. 2016. And we better pray for a good strong LEADER who can turn around this freight train before it derails. --edited.


stevehw: Posted: June 18, 2014 9:18 a.m.

"Steve, you often complain that no conservatives complained about Bush when he was in office. In your ridiculous rants, I believe you say, "never, ever, not one word, ever!"

Interesting how you never complain about Obama now. Where does the hypocrisy end with you guys on the far-left?"

You must have quite the selective memory. I've posted many things about this administration that I disagree with or am disappointed in. Do I believe he's "the worst, most divisive, evil, corrupt President ever?" No, decidedly not. But I have quite a list of things that I think he's done wrong, IF you had been paying attention instead of foaming at the mouth about him.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 18, 2014 9:19 a.m.

Its easier to be given something than earn it.
Liberals have discovered that this is the way to sway an increasingly
lazy America.

Soon, Congress will start giving away free food and provide circuses
for our entertainment. Wait a minute....


CaptGene: Posted: June 18, 2014 9:26 a.m.

tech, I love RCP, don't you? Here's the result on Obama Job Approval on the Economy. They don't have it in chart form, but you can scroll down through his term and see that back when he inherited "The Worst Economy In History!" and see how his approval ratings have shifted from + to -.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval_economy-2820.html


tech: Posted: June 18, 2014 9:27 a.m.

"Tech posts a low presidential approval number without noting his approval rating is much higher than Congress'." - ricketzz

Because that would be irrelevant as a response to Mr. Buck's talking points column, ricketzz. A reality check of the polity's opinion is an informed approach.

I recommend review of Obama's aggregate polling results for the economy, foreign policy and direction of the country as a counterpoint to Mr. Buck's screed. If he were accurate, the results would match his cant.

Here are the links, respectively:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval_economy-2820.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval_foreign_policy-2821.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/direction_of_country-902.html

11/4/14®


tech: Posted: June 18, 2014 9:45 a.m.

CG:

Yes, RCP's poll averaging reveals outliers, if any, to address purported bias from those who dislike the results.


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 11:14 a.m.

Unreal wrote: The only way out of this quagmire is Nov. this year and Nov. 2016. And we better pray for a good strong LEADER who can turn around this freight train before it derails. --edited.

Indy: I wouldn’t hold your breath . . . most of the politicians today simply aren’t our best or most knowledgeable people.

They come up through the ‘party ranks’ starting at the city council and school board levels and by the time they are running for congress, they are little more than ‘party YES men’.

The strong leader thing sounds great but we’ve seen before that good orators that are clueless are just digging the national grave deeper.

When you start hearing a politician talk about ‘sustainable growth’ and addressing cultural and religious differences then we’ll see change . . . short of that, we’ll get the same old ‘it’s their fault’ nonsense and just more fanning of the partisan political fans so at least the ‘bases’ feel good (think keep the party money following in . . . . ) even if nothing is going to happen that will improve our long term survival.

Time is of the essence . . .


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 11:19 a.m.

Tech wrote: "Tech posts a low presidential approval number without noting his approval rating is much higher than Congress'." – ricketzz

Indy: Yes, Tech likes polls . . . as if polling the unformed is somehow a ‘good thing’.

It’s the lazy man’s approach to politics since anyone that has even the slightest clue realizes that most of the public, being ‘bathed’ in ‘focus group tested’ (and I might add ‘mindless’) slogans just parrot that in the polls.

I’m not surprised that Obama’s ratings are low since one you’re in office, most Americans ignorant of what’s going on (not really their fault since the ‘for profit’ media just recites ‘focus group tested’ press releases as ‘news’ . . . ) have to blame somebody other than themselves for the problems.

In any event, I’m not surprised that a libertarian advocating ‘individualism’ see the results of polls from individuals as his ‘nirvana’ but anyone thinking can see that today polls reflect a gross ignorance on the behalf or the American public . . . and sadly, that’s what we have to deal with.


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 11:31 a.m.

AlwaysRight wrote: Its easier to be given something than earn it.

Indy: The poster recites one of the most popular conservative beliefs slogans yet it’s totally false and misleading . . . since in order to give anything, you have to ‘earn it first’. I hope that helps this poster.

AlwaysRight wrote: Liberals have discovered that this is the way to sway an increasingly
lazy America.

Indy: Americans aren’t lazy per se . . . the loss of jobs started decades ago with ‘free trade’ that today has manifested itself in globalization that simply moves jobs to the nations with the lowest wages. This benefits multinational stockholders but not most Americans.

And any time you see a statement ‘framed’ with the word ‘liberals’ as the opening word in a sentence, you’re simply getting a ‘belief’ recital that the posters wants to believe in that he can’t grasp the fact that if no jobs are there, people ‘look’ lazy . . . but they only ‘look’ that way for having no job opportunities.

I wonder why this poster didn’t note that today we’ve got around 3 people looking for each ‘1’ job available . . . I guess another ‘inconvenient’ truth to painful to understand or grasp.

AlwaysRight wrote: Soon, Congress will start giving away free food and provide circuses
for our entertainment. Wait a minute....

Indy: Yes, republicans have used ancient biblical scripture to cut food to poor people . . . have cited conservative economic beliefs to not raise the minimum wage to offset the income advantages given to the wealthy through republican legislation, and have pushed millions of Americans out of their homes as the same republicans ignore the consequences of globalization and financial malfeasance that have created a long lasting recession where people can’t find jobs but find conservatives cutting off their unemployment.

Easy to make such nonsensical observations from decades of conservative belief recitals . . . but this shows an intellectual ‘laziness’ whose consequences effect ‘real Americans’ . . . and not in a good way.

Conservatism today is destroying the nation far more than liberalism . . . although both fail to address ‘sustainable growth’ that addresses the long term economic problems we are currently facing.


tech: Posted: June 18, 2014 11:55 a.m.

Indy: Yes, Tech likes polls . . . as if polling the unformed is somehow a ‘good thing’.

The polled are "uninformed" because they diverge from your ideology? It seems you're as inept in polling as well as general statistics.

Indy: In any event, I’m not surprised that a libertarian advocating ‘individualism’ see the results of polls from individuals as his ‘nirvana’ …

Entirely rational as individuals = voters.

11/4/14®


therightstuff: Posted: June 18, 2014 12:00 p.m.

Steve: """You must have quite the selective memory. I've posted many things about this administration that I disagree with or am disappointed in....But I have quite a list of things that I think he's done wrong, IF you had been paying attention instead of foaming at the mouth about him."""

What total bullsh*t. Is anybody swallowing this crap? If so, please provide an example of where Steve has been critical of Barack Obama. He claims to have "quite a list of things" to draw from.

Anybody?


therightstuff: Posted: June 18, 2014 12:03 p.m.

Indy, when do you think we will be getting verification for the eight-million people your leader says enrolled in the ACA? After lying about it 37 times, we need independent verification for anything Obama claims.

Or was this in an email that got lost during the IRS computer crash?


CaptGene: Posted: June 18, 2014 12:45 p.m.

TRS, he has never been critical of Obama. He is the first to trot out the "bring it back to Bush" strategy. It works on him, he figures it will work on everybody.


tech: Posted: June 18, 2014 1:15 p.m.

My recollection during the last few years is that Steve has been critical of Obama's continued renewal of Patriot Act provisions, NSA domestic data collection on citizens, failure to close Guantánamo, drone strike denial of due process on American citizens and dysfunctional rollout of Obamacare.

Anything on your list that I missed or erred on, Steve? --edited.


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 18, 2014 3:22 p.m.

AlwaysRight wrote: Its easier to be given something than earn it.

Indy: The poster recites one of the most popular conservative beliefs slogans yet it’s totally false and misleading . . . since in order to give anything, you have to ‘earn it first’. I hope that helps this poster.

This is from the standpoint of the receiver, not the giver. That is the great weakness of liberal thinking. Everything is always viewed from the giver standpoint and ignores the harm done to the receiver (albeit with good intentions). I hope that helps, Indy.


CaptGene: Posted: June 18, 2014 4:41 p.m.

My recollection differs tech. I know I've seen steve say "I've said I am critical of Obama for 'X'", but he never actually says it, nor does he provide evidence that he ever said it. I've also noticed that when he does say that, it's followed by the "bring it back to Bush" mantra.

I cannot remember any time where the conversation was about any one of the subjects you mentioned and steve said "I agree" or words to that effect.

I could be wrong, and I invite evidence to the contrary.


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 5:22 p.m.

Tech wrote: Indy: Yes, Tech likes polls . . . as if polling the unformed is somehow a ‘good thing’.

The polled are "uninformed" because they diverge from your ideology? It seems you're as inept in polling as well as general statistics.

Indy: I understand polling just fine . . . even the problem with questions that are poorly structured to get the type ‘results’ someone may be looking for.

But you’re half right . . . many Americans that are polled are indeed poorly informed with much of what they know being based with the ‘focus group tested’ slogans used by political parties.

Tech wrote: Indy: In any event, I’m not surprised that a libertarian advocating ‘individualism’ see the results of polls from individuals as his ‘nirvana’ …

Entirely rational as individuals = voters.

Indy: Again, people bathed in ideology slogans are poor selections to guide long term policy . . . . one reason anyone relying on polling data is deluding themselves other than if they wish to see if indeed the focus group tested slogans are working . . .

Tech wrote: 11/4/14®

Indy: I’ve searched this site: Trademark Electronic Search System (TESS)

And your trademark doesn’t show up . . . why is that? Are you lying about it?


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 5:27 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Steve: """You must have quite the selective memory. I've posted many things about this administration that I disagree with or am disappointed in....But I have quite a list of things that I think he's done wrong, IF you had been paying attention instead of foaming at the mouth about him."""

What total bullsh*t. Is anybody swallowing this crap? If so, please provide an example of where Steve has been critical of Barack Obama. He claims to have "quite a list of things" to draw from. Anybody?

Indy: You give me the same ‘recital’ as well . . . and indeed I don’t keep ‘key lists’ per se of my comments . . .

But indeed, Obama is a politician just like any other . . . he stays in office based on his base perception of his activities in much the same manner you keep in line with your religious conservative beliefs.

In any event, you take the Obama thing far too personally . . .


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 5:34 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy, when do you think we will be getting verification for the eight-million people your leader says enrolled in the ACA? After lying about it 37 times, we need independent verification for anything Obama claims.

Indy: Man, conservatives have been ‘lying’ about tax cuts and smaller deficits for 40+ years that I’m personally aware of . . .

But it was the insurance companies themselves that cancelled those policies . . . not the ACA.

As far as the verification, if you’d read mainstream media that reports on such things, you’d know:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-obamacare-numbers-20140331-story.html#page=1
"How many have paid?" (Also known as "The statistics are full of deadbeats"): We examined this argument a few days ago. We observed that the concern is probably exaggerated and certainly premature, since many people who enrolled late in the cycle, including those in the March surge, may not have payments due for as much as six weeks after enrollment. Many haven't even received their first monthly premium bill yet.
Figures from states that track this metric, including California and Vermont, show that 85% to 90% of enrollees have paid on time, which secures them the coverage they applied for.

Therightstuff wrote: Or was this in an email that got lost during the IRS computer crash?

Indy: Yes, yet another conspiracy theory hatched at Fox and stinking of ‘innuendo and speculation’.

What I find interesting is the constant reduction in IRS funding by republicans that leave the agency ‘shorthanded’.

Further, rather than ‘deal with the problem’ by addressing a better standard for judging whether 501C4s are just hiding political donors with agendas, we get the same lame, tired and worn out slogans from you parroting Fox!

You’ve got to do better than that to be taken seriously . . .


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 5:39 p.m.

AlwaysRight wrote: Its easier to be given something than earn it.

Indy: The poster recites one of the most popular conservative beliefs slogans yet it’s totally false and misleading . . . since in order to give anything, you have to ‘earn it first’. I hope that helps this poster.

This is from the standpoint of the receiver, not the giver. That is the great weakness of liberal thinking. Everything is always viewed from the giver standpoint and ignores the harm done to the receiver (albeit with good intentions). I hope that helps, Indy.

Indy: The greatest weakness I see in conservative thinking is simply not understanding basic economics and relying on beliefs and ideology.

This whole ‘taker/maker’ or as you put it ‘receiver/giver’ thing is just admitting they you can’t grasp what’s going on in the job markets.

You IGNORED the reality that a 3 job seekers exists for every job listed.

If somebody can’t get a job due to this, are they a really a ‘taker’? Please . . .

Likewise, the safety net programs to address the shortcomings of capitalism including just basic recessions is fought against by conservatives that again doesn’t get basic economics.

So please, try addressing the economic reality in play versus reciting what your visions are about ‘liberals’.


Indy: Posted: June 18, 2014 5:40 p.m.

C(omedy)aptG(old)ene wrote: I could be wrong, and I invite evidence to the contrary.

Indy: LOL! But indeed it’s ‘pure’ comedy gold . . .


tech: Posted: June 18, 2014 7:15 p.m.

"But you’re half right . . . many Americans that are polled are indeed poorly informed with much of what they know being based with the ‘focus group tested’ slogans used by political parties." - Indy

I stated nothing of the sort. That's entirely your statement and you're rather confused.

People that disagree with you aren't ignorant, Indy. As with the majority of what you assert, the opposite is the case.


therightstuff: Posted: June 18, 2014 7:27 p.m.

Indy: """As far as the verification, if you’d read mainstream media that reports on such things, you’d know:"""

Yet another useless link that never addressed the question, but at least he provided a link this time. Usually he makes outrageous claims, refuses to provide a link, and then childishly slings personal attacks.

Normal people know that the '8-million' number could be verified with the stroke of a computer key. We could also find out within seconds how many people who were forced to sign up for Obamacare because their previous insurance got cancelled. The fact that this White House refuses to give these numbers must mean they are sucking air.

But for Obama wh0res, they will continue to take the 'word' of the guy who lied to them 37 times about the healthcare law. Amazing.


ricketzz: Posted: June 19, 2014 7:22 a.m.

It is impossible to intelligently comment on mass media polling without digging into the methodology. To go ahead and quote stuff because of a feelgood headline just shows how shallow and childlike you really are.

This country is psychotic. It has no tangible link with the real world. This dangerous situation can only end badly. Like War or National Threat from weather, or Jesus back on a space ship with JFK, (and a fabulous new diet plan!) Go ahead and have your TV inspired zero depth barb exchange. You are Nero and your violin is badly out of tune. The longer you dally the more people die.


tech: Posted: June 19, 2014 9:53 a.m.

It's your denial and inability to rebut data that's childlike, ricketzz.

Polling is a well established practice in statistical analysis and RCP poll averaging controls for polling question/sampling bias.

Your vague assertions about methodology have no merit because you don't provide specifics on why polling results are flawed/invalid. The polls reflect what people really think about the President's job performance, his administration policies and the direction of the country.

11/4/14®


AlwaysRight: Posted: June 19, 2014 9:55 a.m.

Indy: The greatest weakness I see in conservative thinking is simply not understanding basic economics and relying on beliefs and ideology.

This whole ‘taker/maker’ or as you put it ‘receiver/giver’ thing is just admitting they you can’t grasp what’s going on in the job markets.

Me: Sir, I don't think you understand the context of the statement and are simply asserting a point of view that is a non sequitor. The statement made was from the point of view of the receiver, nothing more.

When one has to chose between receiving something for nothing or working for it, man naturally chooses the easier route. If we, as a government and nation, build systems that freely give benefit as opposed to creating the mechanisms to earn benefit, we are making a serious mistake.

Therein lies the conundrum, Mr. Indy. BTW- never presume to know more than someone else regarding economics or science. Humility may suit you better.


Unreal: Posted: June 19, 2014 10:32 a.m.

Indy: "you said They come up through the ‘party ranks’ starting at the city council and school board levels and by the time they are running for congress, they are little more than ‘party YES men"

I disagree with that statement. We have had a chance with a few good leaders these past years. John McCain would have made an excellent President. Regan was great. Even Clinton was not inept like Barry (Obama).


stevehw: Posted: June 19, 2014 1:07 p.m.

"John McCain would have made an excellent President." Particularly if you're a defense contractor. Just *imagine* how many wars we'd have going right now! Libya, Syria, Iran, not to mention the never-ending wars in Afghanistant and Iraq. Oh, and North Korea. Why, it would have been enough to make LM, GD, NG, etc., wet their pants with excitement...


tech: Posted: June 19, 2014 6:27 p.m.

Simplistic hyperbole that assumes a President conducts war unilaterally, Steve. That's not how it works, no matter who holds office. Consultations takes place, even if there's no immediate Congressional action.

I'm not a fan of McCain as a politician, but any major candidate for President had superior experience compared to Obama in 2008. His resume was the thinnest of any President since Truman.


Indy: Posted: June 19, 2014 6:28 p.m.

Tech wrote: "But you’re half right . . . many Americans that are polled are indeed poorly informed with much of what they know being based with the ‘focus group tested’ slogans used by political parties." - Indy

I stated nothing of the sort. That's entirely your statement and you're rather confused.

Indy: That’s part of your problem in that you can’t see the relationships between what you post here and the reality that’s in play . . .

Tech wrote: People that disagree with you aren't ignorant, Indy. As with the majority of what you assert, the opposite is the case.

Indy: The public is the victim of the polarization of our political reality in that both bases are pandered to using the same type of ‘focus group tested’ slogan nonsense.

Thus polling is now severely biased by the nonsense put forth to the public as ‘real political discourse’.

If we go back in time, the majority of humans on this ‘fixed rock in space’ thought the earth was flat.

Later when astronomers determined that the earth revolved around the sun, those folks were ‘jailed’!

In any event, much of our political discourse is based on beliefs or ideology which are both founded in ‘non-reproducible’ formats. In other words, they represent what the followers of same ‘want to believe’ . . . or ‘want to happen’ usually by ignoring reality as we see in the early human experience with ‘science’ or what we see today in modern conservatism.

In your case, you stay mired in libertarianism that is failing most Americans . . . but this matters little to you since you’ve come to be a true ‘believer’ in this ideology. Great. Have it at hoss . . .

But thankfully, we can debate such failings in this forum and actually ‘educate’ the public to same.

That’s the key . . . knowledge is strength . . . while beliefs and ideology are just there to ‘control’ people.


Indy: Posted: June 19, 2014 6:31 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """As far as the verification, if you’d read mainstream media that reports on such things, you’d know:"""

Normal people know that the '8-million' number could be verified with the stroke of a computer key. We could also find out within seconds how many people who were forced to sign up for Obamacare because their previous insurance got cancelled. The fact that this White House refuses to give these numbers must mean they are sucking air.

Indy: The data will be forthcoming . . . so you can stop your useless and misleading Fox based ‘innuendo and speculation’ that supports your failing conservative ideology . . . remember when conservatives in the first months of enrollment were calling for the ACA failure? Guess what . . . 8+ million 'sign ups' . . . with another several million Medicaid signs up for the poor.

Therightstuff wrote: But for Obama wh0res, they will continue to take the 'word' of the guy who lied to them 37 times about the healthcare law. Amazing.

Indy: Again dude, it’s not personal . . . let it go . . .


Indy: Posted: June 19, 2014 6:37 p.m.

Tech wrote: It's your denial and inability to rebut data that's childlike, ricketzz.

Polling is a well established practice in statistical analysis and RCP poll averaging controls for polling question/sampling bias.

Indy: Well, the GOP will have to ask their strategist that told them Romney was winning and so was Cantor!

But more to the point, yes, polling is accurate based on statistical methods but you can’t ignore the ‘conditioning’ fo the public from the ‘focus group tested’ slogan meant to deceive them.

So indeed, I can understand the GOP using such polling to see how effective their ‘messaging’ is . . . but putting the future of the nation on such polling is poorly conceived at best and creating a tragedy in planning at worst.


Indy: Posted: June 19, 2014 6:43 p.m.

AlwaysRight wrote: Indy: The greatest weakness I see in conservative thinking is simply not understanding basic economics and relying on beliefs and ideology.

This whole ‘taker/maker’ or as you put it ‘receiver/giver’ thing is just admitting they you can’t grasp what’s going on in the job markets.

Me: Sir, I don't think you understand the context of the statement and are simply asserting a point of view that is a non sequitor. The statement made was from the point of view of the receiver, nothing more.

Indy: I always find it fascinating that conservatives here spend so much time on the minutia and simply ignore the greater context of the issues as you’re doing here.

This is especially egregious when you state a ‘slogan’ then run away from it . . .

AlwaysRight wrote: When one has to chose between receiving something for nothing or working for it, man naturally chooses the easier route. If we, as a government and nation, build systems that freely give benefit as opposed to creating the mechanisms to earn benefit, we are making a serious mistake.

Indy: Why do you suppose conservative ‘think tanks’ go to so much trouble to bastardize the word ‘entitlement’?

As far as the ‘earned’ benefits of something like unemployment insurance, why do republicans and conservatives deny the extensions of same in the worst recession since the depression?

Why would ideology be placed ‘above’ the general interest of the workers that need help during a recession?

Why are these folks termed ‘takers’ by leading republicans?

AlwaysRight wrote: Therein lies the conundrum, Mr. Indy. BTW- never presume to know more than someone else regarding economics or science. Humility may suit you better.

Indy: It’s sad that you resort to stating something like this . . . I did expect something more from you than that . .


Indy: Posted: June 19, 2014 6:47 p.m.

Unreal wrote: Indy: "you said They come up through the ‘party ranks’ starting at the city council and school board levels and by the time they are running for congress, they are little more than ‘party YES men"

I disagree with that statement. We have had a chance with a few good leaders these past years. John McCain would have made an excellent President. Regan was great. Even Clinton was not inept like Barry (Obama).

Indy: Again, politicians today simply recite the party line . . . they are very reluctant to say anything that is not ‘pre-approved’.

We see this in the elections here with candidates that vote 100% toward their parties positions . . . with the knowledge that neither party is correct ‘all the time’.

And sadly, to get any chance at being ‘nominated’ for a given party, you better well be ‘in line’ with their standardized positions or you go nowhere . . . this takes all the 'thinking' out of congress and makes most of the them 'lever pullers'.

Just look at the party line votes . . . somebody dare 'cross over' and they are severely condemned.


therightstuff: Posted: June 19, 2014 8:52 p.m.

Indy: """The data will be forthcoming . . ."""

LOL

It would take two seconds to get the data. We all know if the news was good, Obama and his subservient wh0res would be shouting it from the roof tops. Instead, Obama just says..."uuuhhhh....8 million people signed up" and his blindly loyal disciples ignore the "Lie of the Year" and drool over his words which have been documented to be untrue. Truly disturbing behavior.


therightstuff: Posted: June 19, 2014 8:56 p.m.

Steve, you criticize John McCain *IF* he had been president while giving the current one a total pass. Dude, you need to pull your nose out of Obama's ass now and then for some fresh air.


stevehw: Posted: June 20, 2014 12:08 a.m.

"Polling is a well established practice in statistical analysis and RCP poll averaging controls for polling question/sampling bias."

Let's be clear about what polling or surveys or what have you can and can't do, from a statistical sense.

With a large enough sample (and "large enough" doesn't have to be some huge number), from a given population, a statistical sampling will have results that are repeatable to within a certain range of error a certain percent of the time. Normally, that's expressed as a result, +- some number of points, 95% confidence (2 sigma).

All that means is that if the same questions are asked of any similarly-sized sample of the same population, the results would be within the error 95% of the time (essentially...it's a little more specific than that, but that's the general idea).

If the *questions* are poorly phrased, or misleading, or what have you, that's irrelevant to the numerical results.

That's why it's important to understand what's being asked, and good pollsters (or social scientists, or anyone conducting a sample of a population) make sure the questions are properly phrased so as to avoid biasing the results.


stevehw: Posted: June 20, 2014 12:15 a.m.

"My recollection during the last few years is that Steve has been critical of Obama's continued renewal of Patriot Act provisions, NSA domestic data collection on citizens, failure to close Guantánamo, drone strike denial of due process on American citizens and dysfunctional rollout of Obamacare.

Anything on your list that I missed or erred on, Steve?"

Thanks, tech. That's a pretty good list, and I appreciate you remembering it. Your memory must be better than CG's. :)

Enjoying a nice Avo right now...picked up a four-pack of Avo robustos from the store on the way home tonight. A pleasant end to a hectic day of travel :).


stevehw: Posted: June 20, 2014 12:20 a.m.

BTW, you can add to that list the Obama administration's role in the recently-discovered attempts (successful so far) to keep the public from knowing about the cops using cellphone "stingray" devices to probe your phones for data without a warrant. This is the stuff of police states, and it's flat-out unconstitutional. Somebody should go to jail for this kind of crap. And it outrages me that this administration is trying to keep it secret via the FBI, etc.


ricketzz: Posted: June 20, 2014 6:59 a.m.

You not only quote trash polling, you actually believe it! Politics is like climate; it makes no sense if you jump from data point to data point constantly. "Public opinion" is the most fickle metric going. The media hypes everything for ratings; terrorists sell Viagra.

On any given night, the biggest single segment of the potential TV viewing audience is the one not watching TV. They tend to be younger and more affluent than the vidiots, and less neurotic needless to say.


Unreal: Posted: June 20, 2014 9:26 a.m.

ricketzz: Oh, you must mean the audience who reads Mother Jones online and
keeps complaining about the Chem trails right? They were the suckers who elected Obama and are STILL waiting for that "Hope and Changie" thing to happen.

The country would have been better served if they stayed at home instead of voting.

If you have ever seen "Watters World" interview some of these winners, they are not able to name the Vice President, do not know what "Benghazi" is, can't name any their Congressman or Senator, don't know anything about past or current events. Real WINNERS! Or should I say WEINERS.

My hope is that if we legalize pot they will be too stoned and lazy to come out to vote. Another reason to legalize it.


therightstuff: Posted: June 20, 2014 9:40 a.m.

"""Thanks, tech. That's a pretty good list, and I appreciate you remembering it. Your memory must be better than CG's. :)"""

I don't remember any of those tech, and apparently neither did Steve, but I'll take your word for it. In Steve's avalanche of support for Obama, I must have missed those rare criticisms. At least we didn't say "you never, ever, never, ever, criticized him...never, ever, never, ever, zero, notta, not once, never, ever!" as we often hear Steve mistakenly rail about the right wing's treatment of Bush's failures.

And speaking of hyperbole, I certainly have never said Obama is "the worst, most divisive, evil, corrupt President ever" as Steve suggests which is a childish way to deflect legitimate criticism. But I'll go on record that Barack Obama is the most divisive, most narcissistic, and most partisan.

Waiting for the...."what about Bush" default position...three...two...one...


stevehw: Posted: June 20, 2014 10:01 a.m.

"I don't remember any of those tech, and apparently neither did Steve, but I'll take your word for it."

You have a short memory. And my deepest apologies for not being able to respond to you immediately at the drop of a hat. I had other things to do yesterday.

I'll pull a favorite tactic of certain others around here: go search the archives if you don't believe me (us).


tech: Posted: June 20, 2014 10:07 a.m.

" we go back in time, the majority of humans on this ‘fixed rock in space’ thought the earth was flat." - Indy

When was that, Indy?


therightstuff: Posted: June 20, 2014 12:53 p.m.

"""And my deepest apologies for not being able to respond to you immediately at the drop of a hat. I had other things to do yesterday. """

Ahhh...poor Steve. The king of hyperbole and victimhood. Soooo...what are we to do if we don't believe you but don't want to waste time searching your past posts? We all have other things to do.

Tell you what, how about a fresh start? We'll clear the board on your 100 to 1 ratio of defenses to criticisms of Barack Obama and we'll watch for traces of intellectual integrity in your comments when it comes to the actions of your leader.

And yes, I accept your apology. :)


ricketzz: Posted: June 22, 2014 7:06 a.m.

People see Jesse coming and they throw the contest to get on TV. They know if they answer correctly they have no chance. Obama was elected by comfortable majorities both times. He has a wide and varied constituency, that is growing. The current GOP is ideologically rigid, socially oppressive and not growing.

Now that the evangelicals are leaving the GOP what will they look like in a couple years? Just shills for climate change responsibility shirkers like the Kochs and ExxonMobil, most likely.

I get my news from Twitter. My favorite newsgathering organizations are McClatchy and the Christian Science Monitor. Mother Jones is for waiting rooms.


therightstuff: Posted: June 22, 2014 10:24 a.m.

So if it gets tweeted, it must be reliable news. Why is no one surprised, ricketzz?


ricketzz: Posted: June 23, 2014 7:44 a.m.

That's like saying if someone issues an utterance it must be true. Twitter is not content, it is merely the soap box. You choose who to listen to and others decide if they want to listen to you. We share what we find interesting with ReTweets (these are where the social media power of Twitter manifests; hash tag activism, etc.). That's it. Takes 30 seconds a day or 12+ hours, up to you. It is enticingly similar to Direct Democracy (the "free market" of government). Governments fear Twitter so I love it.


len99: Posted: July 7, 2014 4:04 p.m.

A quote from President Cliniton.
====================================

Last night at the Democratic National Convention, former President Bill Clinton made a startling assertion about jobs during his speech:
“…since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats, 24. In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private sector jobs.

So what’s the job score? Republicans, 24 million; Democrats, 42 [million].”

According to Bloomberg News and federal employment statistics, it is true.
Also, you may not know that investors actually earn more when the presidency is held by a Democrat.

- See more at: http://www.politicalruminations.com/2012/09/fact-check-democrats-have-created-most-private-sector-jobs-over-52-year-period.html#sthash.rSwEasP3.dpuf


tech: Posted: July 9, 2014 10:51 p.m.

Bill Clinton’s claim about Democrats spurring job growth

But here’s why this is a bit of a nonsense fact:

1. The time span is too long. Fifty years is a long time to make conclusions about economic performance of different political parties. The policies of Republican Richard Nixon, who by today’s standards would be considered a liberal on domestic policy, reflect little of the positions of today’s Republican Party.

2. The economy does not start or end with a president’s term. It’s a bit silly — though common — to suggest that a president is directly responsible for every job lost or created as soon as he takes the oath of office. This is why Republicans regularly blame Obama for the 750,000 jobs lost every month in the first three months of his tenure — even though none of his policies had taken effect.

Similarly, Clinton benefited from the deficit-reduction package passed by Republican George H.W. Bush, at great political cost. And Reagan was aided by the tough fiscal medicine demanded by Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, a Jimmy Carter appointee.

3. Luck is a good part of it. Clinton, for instance, took office just as a recession was ending — and just as the computer revolution was about to begin, boosting productivity and spawning huge fortunes in the stock market. No doubt, Clinton was skillful enough to take advantage of these economic circumstances, but one cannot attribute all of those jobs on his watch to his specific policies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/bill-clintons-claim-about-democrats-spurring-job-growth/2012/09/06/9dec4164-f858-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...