While I am quite certain that The Source is a “left leaning” publication (I don’t think I have ever seen a conservative article), it is the reason why I am never “shocked” at what I see there. In a recent article one of your “columnists” made a “compassionate” comment about wishing a microwave would go off just as Dick Cheney was passing by, obviously wishing Cheney would die. (Whoa, is that more “right-wing” hate we see there?) Then in the June 25th edition he said about Justice Roberts “opposing the Voting Rights Act, Democrats voting, and women breathing.” Obviously this guy is ignorant of history or facts, since it was the Democrats back in the early 1900s that supported the KKK, and their murdering of any black that chose to vote Republican, opposed the Civil Rights Act and opposed a woman’s right to vote. And, as far as his comments on Iraq, when can we expect to see all that oil we are supposed to steal? The Kurds are exporting oil, however, and I believe it is going mostly to China. And since China is increasing its strategic oil reserves by 160% one might think we would be wise to be drilling for our own rather than banning it by a phoney “energy bill” that is going to put America in jeopardy. The liberals won control of both Houses in 2006, and what has gotten better since?
And what of those phonies in Salem? In this time of financial crisis they vote to pass higher gas taxes, permit fees, registration fees, etc. And even some phony Republicans voted with those crooked Democrats. How is that going to help the poor, the low income worker, or the guy having to buy gas to look for a job, or go to work? Ahhhhh, the “compassion” of the liberal.
So, this little rant brings me to my main question. Would any of you care to try and show me where ANY “progressive” program enacted by the liberal/progressive/socialist/Democrat has succeeded, produced the results intended, has not expanded federal control, and power, has not created a bloated bureaucracy, or increased taxes due to increased demand by those who want to be dependent on the government for their needs? Can you name a program that has not adversely affected the poor, and the working poor, while enriching the wealthy? Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, Farm Aid, Education, Preschool programs, school lunch programs, transportation with its gas taxes, SCHIP, anything? Ed Schultz, Bob Beckel, Randy Rhodes, Al Franken, and the many liberals I correspond with regularly cannot do it. Can you?
BTW, I am a Conservative who has not voted for a Republican, save one and it wasn’t either of the Bush’s, for over 20 years. The country grew under Conservatism when it was present in both parties. Now it is being destroyed by this foolishness called “progressive.”
This article appears in Jul 2-8, 2009.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
It’s hard to know where to start Ken, people seem to mount really good arguments against putative rather than real liberals – against “Liberals” in the pejorative rather than in reality. These arguments are almost impossible to counter because one is left defending something so ill defined (by one’s opponent). As to your question, my answer is “Yes, I Can”. I CAN list programs instituted by liberal/progressive/socialists that helped the poor and worked:
Right to vote for men without property
Right to vote for women
Right to vote for blacks
Protection for children in the workplace
Workers’ safety legislation
Right of workers to organize
Right to face and cross examine one’s accuser in a court of law
Women’s right to choose (w.r.t. reproductive choice)
Right to free university education
Right to Universal Healthcare Coverage
Damn and blast it… I gave it away with the last one or two! They’re in Damned Socialist Europe – the healthcare systems in MOST of the nations of Europe rank WELL AHEAD of the “system” (read as “disgrace”) in the US which is NO 1 in terms of cost per capita and NO 22 in Quality of Outcomes – World record Waste!
Take any list of significant rights that benefitted the poor – in any nation – look for the instigators of those rights and you will find Liberals not Conservatives.
Lastly, I’m sure you are aware of WHY the Republican party started doing so well in the South …. hint, Voting Rights Act….
Oh, I forgot… I presume you don’t believe that Conservatives in the US ended Slavery…
Is it possible that you are confusing “Liberals” with “Democrats” – yoiu see Ken, the problem is that political parties change with the wind in order to garner as many votes as possible and seize power – which is actually their main goal, above all else. Why it only seems like yesterday (2000-2008) that the GOP was a thinly disguised Imperialist, Fiscally Irresponsible Fascist Party addicted to phallic displays of machismo, fake history, Mythology and pointless pre-emptive wars …
I thought about replying, and then I thought, “Why bother?” There’s a part of me that really, really wants to believe that people can be persuaded by facts and logic, but hidebound ideologues like Mr. Swipies never can be. They believe what they want to believe and they disregard or discredit everything that runs counter to their beliefs. So to hell with it.
Elections have consquences.
HBM maybe you’re right, I don’t know why I bother, but bother I do. Somewhere down deep inside me there lives a flicker of Hope that these idiots don’t really believe what they say they believe – were I to be convinced that most of them do, this country would not only be doomed, but would be a very unpleasant place in which to live. So I explain, I define, I clarify… sometimes I ridicule (this is seldom a challenge) and I explain again. The hope is that every so often a mean-spirited, hard-hearted, unschooled tighty-righty-whitey will seize upon the opportunity to divest himself of the profound bigotry drilled into him (it’s usually, but not always a “him”) by his ol’ Daddy, or Uncle Mike or whoever it was, go read some books and deliver an awful jolt to his encrusted brain by engaging is some thinking for the first time in his unexamined lift.
That’s my hope, but it’s all uphill. Here, it seems, ignorance is not only bliss, it’s power
Cannot help but notice the high rating on the conservative article, and the low rating on the liberal article. Nice to know who actually reads the news to see what is really going on in the world. do you think Obama will help reinstate Honduras coke dealing leader or offer the new leader promising elections a chance. Did anyone catch the desgtination of that coke or the origins? I bet he will take more action agianst them than North Korea. Then he doesn’t risk making his coke dealing buddy Heugo Chavez angry. Anyone wanna argue wether he deals coke, hondura is offering evidence agianst both Zelya and Chavez. Not mentioned much in liberal media though.
A guest – They arnt even holding Obama accountable for Iraq. He didnt do what he said he was going to do there either. He came into the white house and stuck with Bush’s plan. What Obama needs to do, is stand up and say that it was Bush who started this war and it was also Bush who ended it. All Obama did was follow the plans left on his desk when be got in there. He didn’t do what he said he was going to do during the campain.
“Somewhere down deep inside me there lives a flicker of Hope that these idiots don’t really believe what they say they believe”
The smart ones don’t believe it. The dumb ones, who have been conned by the smart ones, believe it.
“Cannot help but notice the high rating on the conservative article, and the low rating on the liberal article.”
Because there is a coterie of right-wingers who have nothing better to do than hang around on this site and attack anything they perceive as “liberal.” It’s like the high ratings for Faux News — the True Believers need to have their beliefs constantly reinforced, because those beliefs can’t stand up under honest analysis.
And you’ll notice there are only 10 votes on this letter — not exactly an overwhelming number.
Now seriously, Seriously
One cannot deduce from a single Source letter rating who reads the news and “keeps up” and who does not.
Perhaps Obama will take his cue from Ol’ Ronnie Reagan and just fund some Death Squads down there or maybe a covert war or two and as for action against North Korea – you Tighty Righties just love to have a Rogue Nation to make you shiver in Terror, it’s funny. It’s as funny as your belief in a Liberal Media, that’s a Doozy. Remember when the biggest coke dealers in Central and South America was the CIA… ah, for the good ol’ days. Thanks.
Hats off to Swipies for submitting this letter. It has clearly bunched Shortall’s panties and that’s good enough for me.
Didn’t Reagan bankrupt the Soviet Union I find the idea nukes may not land on me today? Ever do drills for that in school? And I didn’t justify the CIA selling coke are you defending those socialist( Bolivia and Venezuela) countries ties to drugs because someone else did it once? How much money do you think they donate to FARC a year for weapons and military supplies? Where does FARC get many of their soldiers and some of their other funding? But must be ok because someone else does it.
Oh yeah and Most media is very liberal, have you only been watching Fox News
Well any conservative republican who can come on here and state his lies, perpetuated by the Bush administration as the holy truth is and has to be totally brainwashed by the likes of Rush Limpnob, Bull O’Lielly and Insanity Hannity and sits glued to FAUX and or CNN for the last decade.
So lets add up this spending and compare it to the Bush spending era benefitting only the ultra wealthy oil companies. If GM can be called Government Motors, then why is not Exxon and the other big ones called Government Oil?
Bush, the hero of this cretin signed EVERY SINGLE bill which was pushed in front of him in eight long years which benefitted private and special interest groups. Call me a liar and go look it up. I did and if some hippy dippy liberal such as myself can look it up, then perhaps some cretin republican can do the same if he can break away from the propaganda of the TV or the even worse radio AM disinformation jockeys.
So what this conservative is really trying to say is this: It is fine to give special interest groups and private interest groups Trillions of our tax money to benefit only a very few, but when a man of honor tries to clean up the mess of the likes of Bush and Cheney and actually do something AMERICAN and help AMERICANS, then he is a free spending liberal? Come on, you can sell that to the cretins down at sargents during the Rush Limpnob hour to cretins who are as ignorant as you are, but please save this nonsense for down there please. Liberals are for the most part three times smarter than the conservatives of Central Oregon and that is a fact. You all would rather sit around and collect guns all day, put on big tires on your trucks and neglect your wives and kids so you can go drink cheap beer and complain all day about how you are not getting your promised new pony. I laugh at you and at the same time pity anyone who is a fool and proud of it. You cannot banter or debate on any of the subjects you have brought up with any level of intelligence. Seriously do you think we are taking you seriously? LOL well that would in actuality be very funny.
I suggest you learn to read, learn to question the sources of your brainwashing and start paying close attention to what is going on globally as it is affecting us right here in Bend, Oregon
So if that is the case and liberals have no answers are you then stating that in the last eight years of Bush you were satisfied with his answers and the raping of America and Americans to create the highest profits in American business history to the oil companies, shafting every American with the highest priced gas in our history? Oil traders as in futures traders made all of the money, but only thanks to Bush who deregulated the trading of these futures.
Thank god McSame and Failin did not end up replacing Bush. Thank god.
The Liberals gave us the OLCC! I am sure of it! Wait, that was the conservatives – prohibition. Wait – if the conservatives gave us prohibition, which led to the OLCC (in Oregon, anyhow) that means that the Conservatives who don’t get drunk then don’t drive their big bad-ass trucks then don’t go home and beat their woman-folk stuck themselves with the OLCC! BWAHH HA HA HA!
Wasn’t LBJ a democrat? Remember Veitnam? We can try and point fingers at which presidents have done what, but neither side can win there.
Oh seriously, Seriously, LBJ didn’t start Vietnam… you poor little thing you. And this debate (I know it’s not a debate, they don’t happen in the US anymore) isn’t about winning and losing, it’s about poor ol’ Ken asking a simple question about what “had the Lib’rils ev’r dun fur us” and I gave the guy a list and no one has provided a cogent (that’s “dang smartass Lib’ril book smart so thure” to you) counter argument. This is what always happens – I know it, you know it and Jesus knows it…….
Thanks for the tickles
Can anyone name ONE problem that was solved or one evil that was corrected by conservatives in the past, say, 200 years? Just one?
Conservatives, by definition, want to conserve/preserve the status quo. They want things to stay as they are — or else return to a status quo ante that they think was better. (Like Grover Norquist dreaming of a return to the good old days of William McKinley). Progressives want change. Without change there can be no progress. Thus progress depends on progressives.
The Founding Fathers were progressives — radicals, even, for their day. The abolitionists were progressives. The advocates for women’s suffrage were progressives. Those who fought for anti-child labor laws, for a minimum wage, for food and drug safety regulations, for civil rights for African-Americans, for Social Security and later Medicare so that older Americans wouldn’t have to end their days in poverty — all were progressives.
That said, a healthy political system needs both progressives and conservatives — progressives to push for change, conservatives to rein in the progressives when they try to go overboard, as they sometimes do. I’m worried that we’re losing or already have lost the rational, responsible, viable conservative party in America.
Happy Fourth of July. This is still a great country and it can be even better. And progressives — not conservatives — will make it happen.
I believe…, how many people just tuned out, after all “this is just an opinion, he’s just espousing views and doesn’t really care what people think.” Which is a true statement of most comments, otherwise there would be more questions than statements, but I digress. Not to get all taoist in your grill, but without the conservative, does the progressive really go anywhere? You know, yin & yang, bull & bear, missionary & cowgirl. Progressive=throttle, Conservative=brake; you have to use both to get down the road, otherwise you end up like Little Johnny driving dad’s Beemer up to Bachelor in January, upside down and off the road.
World War II GI Bill
Good points Joe. You seem to be the only logical poster here. While I am left leaning, if left to our devices, liberals would probably ruin this great country of ours. Same goes for conservatives. After the last 8 years we need to move more left. Get back to honoring civil rights and helping US citizens. However, after the next 8 it may be necessary to move a bit right again. That’s democracy at its best.
I find it very hard to take you seriously, seriously. your arguments wader so…
“Didn’t Reagan bankrupt the Soviet Union I find the idea nukes may not land on me today (Did Reagan bankrupt the Soviet Union? And if so, so what?)? Ever do drills for that in school (no – and the “drills” were stupid propaganda anyway)? And I didn’t justify the CIA selling coke(Didn’t say you did – you were just being hypocritical and criticizing others for doing it) are you defending those socialist( Bolivia and Venezuela) countries ties to drugs because someone else did it once (No, and I have no problem with Socialist countries – how many have you been to)? How much money do you think they donate to FARC a year for weapons and military supplies (Hypocrit again…. how much did Reagan the Cowardly Warmonger pour into Right Wing Death Squads and Dictatorships…hmmmm)? Where does FARC get many of their soldiers and some of their other funding (I’m sure you’ll enlighten us)? But must be ok because someone else does it.(If you say so… but remember, I didn’t so as usual, you’re just shouting into the wind, seriously)
Mr (or Mrs guest)
“I agree with Jon Jegglie. If I remember right Shortall is a European immigrant who has nothing good to say about the US”
When you’ve got nothing else you resort to ad hominem.
Secondly, neither you nor Mr Jegglies has ever even attempted to address a single point I (or the original letter writer) brought up never mind countered successfully. You kind of wasted K-12 didn’t you.
It’s hard to know where to begin with Mr. Shortall’s original premise. He lists several problems that were supposed to have all been solved by liberals including:
Right to vote for men without property
Right to vote for women
Right to vote for blacks
Protection for children in the workplace
Workers’ safety legislation
Right of workers to organize
Right to face and cross examine one’s accuser in a court of law
Women’s right to choose (w.r.t. reproductive choice)
Right to free university education
Right to Universal Healthcare Coverage
I think it’s a mis-characterization to say that these problems were solved by a monolithic group known as liberals. I find myself asking for instance how many people who supported the rights to vote for blacks and women would be appalled at concept of abortion (aka reproductive choice)?
Mr. Shortall’s “liberals good-conservatives bad” view of the world seems kind of solopsistic (the kind of thing he would probably accuse conservatives like myself of).
First of all MrBill you not only used “solopsistic” in the wrong context but you made a mess of spelling it. Secondly, I only judge conservatives to be “bad” on the basis of what they have done and how they attempt to suffocate the freedom to debate by bullying and tinkering with elements of the English language so as to make debate between the political extremes almost impossible.
Thirdly I was responding monolithically to a question put monolithically by the since silent Mr Swipies (probably somewhere roaring a long drawn out D’Oh!) – he (and the other ‘contributors’ above) seemed determined to paint all liberals with the same brush (though his letter was so confused that it’s hard to say what he wanted to say).
Lastly, I was asked to list “things dem damn lib’rils’d dun fur us” – I was not asked to differentiate BETWEEN the many different types of liberals (it stands to reason there would be many “denominations” of free thinkers – or even “thinkers”). I provided a pretty good list and not one of my entertaining detractors alluded to it until you penned your response. I have now not only courteously responded to your points but have shown exactly where you made your errors.
Thank you for your contribution – at last, some points to talk about.
“You kind of wasted K-12 didn’t you.”
Typical European elitist remark”
Typical remark from a “man” who learned everything he needs to know from Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter.
I forgot to add MrBill,
You made two additional mistakes in your response:
1. like everyone else you failed to show that any of the dozen or so achievements of liberal political thrust were NOT in fact achievements of people characterized by the term “liberal”
2. you argued that there are likely to be some points of disagreement between various liberal groups but this does not mean that any of these groups are not “liberal” – so what was your point?
Again, I thank you for your contribution
Richard
“Typical European elitist remark”
Typical moronic right-wing response.
What’s your definition of “elitist”? Somebody with a vocabulary in double digits?
Thank you HBM, I WAS going to deal with the puerile ad hominems (no boys, relax, it’s nothing to do with being gay!) and their likely source in right wing talk radio, TV demagogues like Hannity and O’Reilly and so-called ‘writers’ like Coulter. But one has to pick his fights when there’s so many juicy apples to pick.
There is a serious split in the country in the rapidly dying skill of rational debate: from the right (predominantly) comes the insult, the ad hominem and the ploy of arguing exclusively off point (such as in the letters above) – from such a base base (not a typo boys!) comes the pathetic spectacle of Republican Debates amongst Presidential Hopefuls (could Republican Presidential Hopeful be oxymoronic!!!??) – JulieAnnie: “blah, blah, blah 911, blah, 911, Ronald Reagan, blah, blah, 911, be afraid, be very afraid, blabbidy blah etc etc, 911” – the others were no better. Even Republicans I know winced in shame when Palin was wheeled out as McCain’s secret weapon. Look back to 2004 and 2000 and we had the internationally embarrassing sideshow of “W” stumbling, mumbling and bumbling before a nation 50% of whom couldn’t see anything wrong with putting a dolt in the White House. It’ll be a long climb back and it’ll have to start with real change in k-12 and I’m not sure either party has the wherewithal to do the job.
Thanks again
Liberals are responsible for the American Holocaust….The Generational Welfare System. The absolute and complete destruction of millions of Black Americans….lives totally lost , families obliterated,dreams crushed, death, despair…this appalling crime alone overshadows ANY and all feeble attempts to portray Democrats as ‘for the people”.
Thank you jughead,
“Liberals” and “Democrats” used again as if synonymous – this leads to confusion and confusion only suits the dimwitted.
The generations of Black Americans who benefited from the abolition of Slavery, the dismantling of Jim Crow, wage equality, the integration of schools, jobs and the military, the Voting Rights Act and yes even Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid thank you for your concern.
No, jughead… if you want to put the blame for “destruction of millions of Black Families” on Liberals – you’d be better off looking in the Right Direction if’n ye git ma meanin’.
I’d say more but you will need to clarify your statements further first.
The KKK was and is an amorphous organization. Greatly segmented and compartmentalized. To suggest the KKK is a single entity is erroneous. Many times it was just a bunch of local “gangsters” who had no connection to the neighboring city’s KKK, let alone the others on the other side of the nation. My bet is that different divisions of the KKK had supporters from both of the dominant parties and then some. It just depended on the location demographics. Racism probably doesn’t respect political party affiliation.