Cult of exposure
No evidence of a vast left-wing media conspiracy
Cult of exposure
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
I proudly consider myself to be the only Fourth Estate denizen who has yet to weigh in on the brouhaha concerning JournoList, the now-defunct listserv where roughly 400 liberal pundits, reporters, bloggers, and academics communed with each other online. This has become a big issue lately, at least in the usual overheated right-wing precincts, thanks to Tucker Carlson’s Daily Call website, which has alleged that JournoList was proof of a vast left-wing conspiracy to control public discourse – an hilarious concept, given the fact that (and I'm speaking from experience) a quartet of journalists standing in a hotel lobby generally can’t even agree on where to go for dinner.
Was I a card-carrying JournoLister, a foot soldier in the alleged cabal organized by Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein? Not a chance. Even if I had been invited to join (which I wasn’t), I would have declined. I instinctively value my independence; when a journalist joins a group, over time he or she risks being exposed to group think.
A second problem was the format itself. In this era of digital transparency, there was zero chance that the email traffic would remain private. It’s astounding that 400 people in and around the news business would somehow assume that their ideas (both full-baked and half-baked), gossip, and various harrumphings could remain off the record. The cult of exposure does not permit that kind of naivete. I agree with Bill Maher, who remarked not long ago that it’s nuts to say anything in an email that you wouldn’t want to see quoted on the front page of The New York Times.
Foolish as the JournoListers were on that issue, I can still understand, in theory, the impulse to create it. In the old media world, journalists enjoyed physical proximity to their colleagues; ideas and gossip were swapped at the cubicles and the coffee machine. The new media world is a lot more atomized; scribes often work alone, often craving the stimulation of absent peers. From this perspective, the list serv idea made sense – as a virtual newsroom were people share their thoughts and kick around ideas. Which is what list servs always do anyway.
Member discipline was impossible, however. It was inevitable that some of the most fervent (and, by all accounts, the youngest) JournoListers would write some insipid stuff - like suggesting that everybody should try to defend Barack Obama by accusing all conservatives of racism, like saying what a laugh it would be to watch Rush Limbaugh drop dead. And it was inevitable that such suggestions and remarks would be outed and cherry-picked by conservatives as evidence of a unified conspiracy – even though, in reality, most JournoListers probably deleted the stupidest messages as a matter of routine, along with the penis-enhancement emails and the rest of the daily dross.
Of course, it shouldn’t be a surprise that a group of 400 people would include some outliers – just as any meeting of 400 people (community confab, city council chamber, whatever) is often dominated by those who are the loudest. None of this strikes me as evidence of a lock-step mentality. Even the Daily Caller’s recent scoop - about how JournoListers authored a pro-Obama statement during campaign ’08 – is seriously overblown, given the fact that only 10 percent of all list members (41 of 400) signed on to the statement. This strikes me as a sign of the list’s diversity, not the smoking gun of a conspiracy.
JournoList, nevertheless, was a wrong-headed experiment. Everyone in the far-flung punditocracy – on both the left and the right - needs to be able to air the first rough draft of their thoughts, to have casual conversation about stuff that isn’t fit for publication, to engage or reject the nuttiest ideas on the table. But none of this can be done online, not when ideologues on the other side are anxious to overplay snippets out of context. The telephone is still a fine substitute for digital chatter. So is face time at the bar. In any event, I’m glad I was not asked to join up. I take seriously the old Groucho Marx joke about not wanting to belong to any club that would have me as a member.
But wait! If you string together the first words of each of the preceding paragraphs, in descending order, you wind up with a sentence. Could it be...gasp...a secret confession? Conspiracy paranoids, arise! Take out your codebooks! And have a nice weekend.
Comments (125)
I have to give Dick credit for addressing it in an honest way.— CD75- But, beyond what Dick says and tries to sweep under the rug, the actual posts show corruption and fraud in the liberal media. Dick grossly understates what the posts say. Trying to run ABC News out for just giving Obama a hard question? Coordinating an attack on Palin? Coordinating advocacy for Obama? Plotting to call anyone who raises the Rev. Wright issue a "racist" is sinister. This is fraud. There is no media. Journalism is dead.— CD75
- According to Wikipedia, Joe Klien of Time and Paul Krugman of the NYT were members. I would not call these guys "young". They knew what they were doing.— CD75
- Could you imagine the outrage on the left if an e-mail came out where Rush tells Fox News what to say about Obama? That is exactly what happened here, but with leftists.— CD75
Comment removed.- LOL---Very nice piece---Please people, read it for what it is and enjoy it---I am conservative and open minded---You be tooooooooooo— will_wonders_never_cease
- I heard about JournoList, but hadn't really understood the implications or issues--thanks for describing it.— Nalaka
- Comment removed.
- What if word spread that Polman is a racist - which we all know is patently untrue. I'd imagine that would be a fate worse than death for a lefty.— A Friend
- It sounds like Dick "refudiated" JournoList. Sarah Palin would be very proud of him.— Rabe56
- If journalists did their job on the Rev. Wright matter Obama would have been dead in the water. He was asked one question at a news conference about Wright, and answered he was NEVER THERE WHEN THOSE WORDS WERE SPOKEN. Now if Mc Cain had attended a racist church for twenty years how many journalists would have descended on that Church until they found twenty eyewitnesses who said Oh yes he was. As far as I know the one question was the lone foray into that subject. So, Dick, your contention that the club was meaningless has no sway. I do believe if the public was aware how close Obama was to this racist they would have rejected him. And he and his racist and America hating wife would not be living in the White House. ( Yes, she is a racist. It's a matter of record)— Phil Checchia
- CD- Your 11:31 post could lead one to believe that you may be an employee of Fox News or Rush's show. With a deft slight of hand you have taken what DP said in the post and twisted it into something not said or meant. DP's statment did not say that all the people involved with this list were young. What he said was "that some of the most fervent (and by ALL ACCOUNTS, the youngest)JournoListers would write some insipid stuff...." The statement is entirely, 100% different from what you were trying to make it out to be! Perhaps you should heed will_wonders_never_cease's advice.— jti
- CD, I agree with you about Rush and Fox News, but how is that a group of 400 people? Also, since only 41 people signed, how would you know that the Times reporters did? Also, how does it show corruption and fraud in the liberal media? Are you surprised that liberal media would come up with that? If you're implying it's the mainstream media, there aren't enough people or issues to prove corruption or fraud. Batty, it can't be a hate group because they're attacking based on policies, not a persons biological or religious persuasions. With or without Journolist, I still think that the majority of conservatives have pushed for policies that discriminate on the basis of race. That's not because a journalist wrote that, it's because I look at proposals, watch C-Span, check opencongress, and that's the conclusion I can see. I don't think conservatives hate people of other races, I just think they use race as a determining factor in deciding what laws to push (in some areas). It all leads up to the normal ending, Why are you attacking people instead of pushing alternative policies? What do conservatives actually want to pass?— HandNik
- Every so often you hit a homerun with a fair and balanced post. You've certainly done that here. Well done, Dick.— PhillyTru
- Comment removed.
- Handnik... Way to go. You liberals are so predictable. Whenever the facts are against you one of your favorite ploys is to yell RACISM. Please cite any of the so-called racist based bills introduced by republican law makers. I doubt you can. However check out some of Michele Obama's writings. Now there's racism.— Phil Checchia
- Thank you Dick. We wont judge you by the liberal "Tea Party standard" where if there is a fringe element of a group that your affilitagted with, the whole group is guilty.— tr88
- Sorry, in the interest of truth, I have to call you on being the the "only Fourth Estate denizen who has yet to weigh in on the brouhaha concerning JournoList". A quick search of Philly.com indicates youre the only denizen of the Fourth Estate that works for PNI that has weighed in.— tr88
- Comment removed.
- "I still think that the majority of conservatives have pushed for policies that discriminate on the basis of race." "I don't think conservatives hate people of other races, I just think they use race as a determining factor in deciding what laws to push (in some areas)." - Care to provide some examples, Nik?— PhillyTru
- Comment removed.
It is clear to me that the Journalism Party is filled with partisan bigots and liars who wish ill (and even death) upon those they disagree with. Until the leadership of Journalism Party takes to the stage and loudly and public condemns and expels those who hold these views they are simply not to be trusted. Whitewash jobs like Polman's are simply a means of providing cover for an party of ill repute filled with insidious and treacherous liars who will do anything to remake the world into a socialist paradise. Throw the first stone Polman! Cast out the devils amongst your brethren, Polman! Do it now, before there's nothing left to salvage of your low and mean profession.- That was fun. Perhaps I was a liberal in a previous life?
- Here are some of the racist tea party people the amg was talking about on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1CLPhz0DHM&feature=fvw and here is a video of one the the racist tea party person that carried a gun to the party. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7syx26QtQIM— Mike Welbourn
- Mike Welbourn- Excellent link. Should be some reccommended viewing for Nigelsthemastiff. Perhaps it will open here eyes.
I'm shocked at the violent rhetoric among journolisters. The whole "plate glass window" piece really makes me think there are some left wing nutcases out there.- This should tell you all we need to know about the cries of racism from the left " It was inevitable that some of the most fervent (and, by all accounts, the youngest) JournoListers would write some insipid stuff - like suggesting that everybody should try to defend Barack Obama by accusing all conservatives of racism,"............................... Tell us something we don't know Richard! I can't imagine the left would trivialize this if conservative journalists were doing the same thing. I guess the days of objective reporting are over.
- Lordhumongouns- The left always tries to portay themselves as the beacons of tolerance and understanding. Seems to me that quite a few on the left are viscious vindictive hateful people.
- Nigel- you said " And SMike, I don't believe I'm using a political narrative just because I know that racism still exists in our country.".................. If you say so. I certainly don't know anyone who is racist. I guess it's still prevalent among Democrats( see klansman Robert Byrd) but Republicans, conservatives, and Libertarians believe in the content of people's character. We see potential in people You seem to always see a victim. Right now we have legitimate policy differences with this President. But that's all there is to it. Did you view Mike Welbourns link?
- Great link Mike, just proves what I've been saying all along, the Tea Party as a whole is not a racist organization. But if you want to post one link and use that as proof positive that racism no longer exists, go ahead and believe what you want. This link does not prove that racism no longer exists nor does it prove that there are no racists within the Tea Party. And I find it funny that SMike chided me earlier for using a youtube video as proof of racism yet lauds you for providing a link from youtube. SMike, have you learned nothing from the Sherrod incident?!?!? LOL. And one last thing, the woman at the beginning of the video calls blacks "her people" and says "they haven't done anything better for my people (among other comments that would be called reverse racist)." Had she done that in opposition to the Tea Party or your viewpoint, you'd call her a racist. You'd be screaming about how entitled she feels and how she's just waiting for the government to give her a hand out and do things better for her people. And please, spare me the hubris and denial. You've already done it.— amg
- One last thing, please be careful tomorrow. If you have pets and elderly folks in your family PLEASE make sure they are somewhere with air conditioning. We might disagree here but we're all people just the same and it's going to be super hot tomorrow. Please, be smart, be safe and be cool.— amg
- Phil Chechia - To your point about racist bills. Start with the Hazelton, Pa. immigration bill fiasco - something about not renting to folks that were Hispanic, followed by the infamous Arizona SB1070 which is now being litigated from all sides, voting rights for convicted felons, the string of anti-gay legislation that has been pushed in most red states (thank God for Iowa). Racist, bigoted laws are still very much in vogue and that isn't even going back too far in history or doing a whole lot of research. Just reading the newspaper or watching the news or reading things on-line. Doesn't take much to see it - even if not looking for it. For example, this whole JournoList thing. It is amazing how people can be called racist for trying to scheme ways of shutting off bigoted, racist rants by certain factions of the neocon world. Of course, that's no excuse (1st Amendment and everything)but looking at the participants of the list there doesn't appear to be many "mainstream" media types unless you count folks from The Nation, Slate, NPR, etc. And we all know the NeoCons, who have spent many years telling folks that speak out against wars we are involved in and shouldn't be they are "unpatriotic" and calling for birth certificates for elected officials that are - different - are truly the ones that care deeply and are offended by a chat room where folks are expressing ideas - unarguabley foolish - with the old, neocon pro tourture ruse of "See, they do it too so they can't call us names". Please, elevate the discussion from the second grade level!!!!!!!— jti
- Amg-When the left comes out with an organized strategy to frame tea partiers as racist with no basis on facts then it becomes highly suspicious when internet sites claim to have proof. To compare that to the video link that Mike Welbourne posted is ludicrous.
- From Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post " But there is no getting around the fact that some of these messages, culled from the members-only discussion group Journolist, are embarrassing. They show liberal commentators appearing to cooperate in an effort to hammer out the shrewdest talking points against the Republicans -- including, in one case, a suggestion for accusing random conservatives of being racist."
- amg - I don't think anybody on this blog would deny that racism exists. Just not as much as the race baiters and you say. Just a little on your tea party racist signs. Did you look at the person who was holding and probably drew the monkey sign. It was a young boy who was doing a take on the children's monkey see, monkey do books. http://www.monkeysread.com/ (see the racist monkey picture in the link). As for the Obama with Hitler mustache most of those were done by the crazy neo-marxist cult followers of 7 time democratic presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2009/08/12/nbc-cnn-msnbc-all-assign-communist-larouches-obama-hitler-poster-conse Now I would have to admit that many of them are racist and think anybody right of Stalin is a fascist. But they are not tea partiers even if they do show up at the events. I was wondering if you supported the anti-war protesters when Bush was President? If you did you maybe an American hating commie. You do know that most of the anti-war protest were put on by International A.N.S.W.E.R. which is anti-American communist organization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.N.S.W.E.R— Mike Welbourn
- How about the anti war protesters that were carrying signs that ready " thank god for IED's ". Under the rules the left wants to apply anyone who is an anti war protester must also hate our troops.
What exactly are those 2 videos that Mike posted supposed to prove? That there are black TP members? Already knew that. That all TP members are not racist? Knew that too. Yet the people holding racist signs are not tea partiers, even if they show up at the events. Got it. And not that it means much, but the only 2 racists I know are both republicans. One has been collecting unemployment for 6 months and has yet to look for a job. He was against govt handouts until he lost his job, now he is all for it. Go figure.— one_eyed_jack- One Eyed Jack- You knew that already? Really, cause that certainly isn;t part of the liberal narrative on the tea partiers. Between the journolist and the NAACP the cat is out of the bag for those you on the left. I think only the most fervent Obama supporters believe the nonsense. And its reflected in the polls. Obama was a 43% approval today.
- Oh the hypocrasy!............Sen. John Kerry, who has repeatedly voted to raise taxes while in Congress, dodged a whopping six-figure state tax bill on his new multimillion-dollar yacht by mooring her in Newport, R.I.. Saving over $ 500,000 in state and excise taxes. Yet this dooooooooooooooosh bag is for letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
- This was a good post by Polman, and I love the "first word of each preceeding paragraph" line, where they state "I was a foolish member of Journolist". The plot thickens. As or Handnik and the conservatives base everything on race comment, I wonder what that person would think of GM and Chrysler using race and gender in deciding which dealerships to close. Yep, turns out the inspector general reviewing the closings found out that although they used a scorecard to determine which ones to close, they retained a lot that did not meet the criteria because they were either minority or woman owned dealerships. Of course, GM and Chrysler deny this is the case. Besides, that is not racist because they favored minority and women, right? You can't be racist against caucasian males.— tom - wilmington, de
- You know, SMike,I think I can understand why you don't know anyone who is racist. When I lived up there, I don't believe I did, either. I really did think we had moved on. However, when I came back to the South, I realized that while there has been a slight shift, there are still many racists here. The South really resists change. I have heard the N word more times than I can believe. And have been shocked each time. Racism still exists, believe me (or not, as you need to). I don't see everyone as a victim. However, some people really ARE victimized by others, by circumstance, family, etc. To deny that is to be delusional. Some people rise above their horrible experiences; others struggle to cope with them. I believe there has been a great deal of study to determine what makes a successful survivor. I'm not sure there's an answer. Certainly, I admire those who rise above. But I don't condemn those who can't.— NigeltheMastiff
Dick, Nice Job. Glad to see a member of the fourth estate come out and discuss this subject. And you know what? You wrote in a sincere way and I believe you enjoy your independence and wouldn't participate in such a group. Oh my god, I'm lauding Dick Polman. Of course you threw in a couple of shots at the right, but if you didn't, you would be disingenuous.- "I don't see everyone as a victim. However, some people really ARE victimized by others, by circumstance, family, etc. To deny that is to be delusional." Really Nigel? Let's deconstruct this statement of yours. OTHERS? What does that mean? Plenty of laws on the books to counter that. Especially if you are a minority. And if not, move on. Maybe you have to move to another area of the state or country where things are better. CIRCUMSTANCE? So someone is in a bad situation. They cannot get out of that situation? If you have the will to better yourself, you can get out of ANY situation, unless you violated the law and are incarcerated. FAMILY? Are you kidding me? If your family stinks and is a lead weight around your ankles and keeps you from doing anything, change your surroundings, divorce the family. Maybe, yes again, move, get a better job and help them that way. And yes, if you are not making a lot of money, don't keep having children. It makes the situation worse and is preventable. I don't what ETC means. Is that a catchall for any problem someone runs across? It's all about personal responsibility. And on top of that, develop a work ethic. It might seem beneath you to work the counter at WAWA, but if that is all you can get, deal with it. And who knows maybe it will parlay into something else. Too many excuses nowadays. There are a lot of successful people that pulled themselves out of bad situations and I feel this culture of accepting lack of responsibility is disturbing.
- Ok, I reread my post, and the FAMILY part may seen a little harsh. That needs to be clarified. Family is kind of a broad term. Immediate family, no. You have to do what you have to do to keep that entity together. But families can move to where the better opportunities are. However, I have personally seen people keep themselves in bad situations because they felt they had to stay where they grew up. I saw another situation where a brother of one guy was shiftless, couldn't hold a job and the older brother was keeping him afloat. I understand family bonds, but you have to be realistic about them and others have to work for the effort too. If not, then too bad. Thats what I meant by the divorce line. And if you can't relocate, I don't know what to say. Lots of people do it because they are pragmatic and see the only way out is to move where there are better opportunities. I'm sure this sounds harsh, but if your are truly at wits end, it's something to think about. And I believe a lot of people just don't want to accept this kind of reality.
- Nigel, so then I guess you admire Clarence Thomas? He certainly rose above his situation and circumstances.— tom - wilmington, de
- jit, firstly the Hazelton, PA bill made it illegal to rent to illegal immigrants, not to Hispanics. Again a liberal either failed to read the bill or simply misrepresents it to fit his agenda. Isn't that what brietbart has been criticized for doing? The Arizona law is not racist, since it outlaws profiling and someone must be stopped for another violation first, and if they have ANY form of ID (drivers license, work ID, state/federal issued ID card) then they are presumed to be citizens. How is that racist? As for the anti-gay legislation, are you referring to laws about gay marriage? Lots of them are voted on by the people. Funny how liberal groups will go along with a referendum on something, unless they lose. Then, like in California, they sue to get it overturned. Can you say sour grapes?— tom - wilmington, de
- Latest headlines..."New estimates from the White House on Friday predict the budget deficit will reach a record $1.47 trillion this year. The government is borrowing 41 cents of every dollar it spends. That's actually a little better than the administration predicted in February. The new estimates paint a grim unemployment picture as the economy experiences a relatively jobless recovery. The unemployment rate, presently averaging 9.5 percent, would average 9 percent next year under the new estimates." And there was Obama today, touting his victories...Obamacare and Financial Reform. Job killing legislation that has not done anything to help the economy. So, is the deficit still Bush's fault?— tom - wilmington, de
- Expecting the Eitorial Board to weigh in on this violation of journalistic ethics and perhaps a Tony Auth cartoon any time now.— tr88
- Nigel.... Good to talk to you. You are obviously a giving and caring person. I am not, not to the extent that I condone the government stealing my money to redistribute it to their constituents. This philosophy has failed everywhere it has been tried, most recently in Greece and other European countries. But we now have the democratic party on a collision course to bankrupt this country. They always explain, but yes, it is for the less fortunate. Well, they created a lot of the less fortunate people. They get support from a broad spectrum of people, people like you against war, abortionists, greenies, unions, libbers, and along with minorities form a vote bloc that is difficult to defeat. The thing that annoys me is that democrats do things that ARE NOT HELPING ALL AMERICANS, but punishing those that are the most productive. You must see that, how do you feel about it?— Phil Checchia
- Phil, I just don't see it the same way you do. There will always be people who try to beat the system and take advantage. But there are many more who genuinely need help. Apparently Blackhawk90 thinks there are no victims. Perhaps he believes that rape victims are to blame for the assault? Are children to blame for being beaten by a drunken parent? I do consider these people victims, and their wounds can last a lifetime.— NigeltheMastiff
- Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post has an interesting piece on the JournoList flap which she more or less characterizes a symptom of a "destructive gotcha mentality". Worth reading.— Rabe56
- Nigel... I agree with you, there are folks who need help. I just have a problem with how they came to need help. And I'm not talking about victims of crime. I'm talking about the institutionalized POOR, those that are sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters of poor people, that are victims of democratic policy. Democrats profit in the troubles of others. That to me is immoral. When people try to help poor people in job creation or school vouchers, the democrats step in and prevent it. Think about it, if you have a job and good education you want safe neighborhoods and tax breaks, just like most contributing folks. However, if the democrats lost 50% of black vote the party would die, and what they do, preventing them from climbing out of their morass is tragic. I could never vote for a party that PREVENTS folks from getting ahead, and the D's do that.— Phil Checchia
- Phil Ceccia- BTW, my neighbor is a retired philly policeman. You're right, the last thing the left needs is the advancement of poor people. Which is why they go after school voucher programs. The last thing the Democrats needs if for poor people to advance to the point where they don't need handouts. That is why the handouts are just enough to keep them for them to get by and still be a realiable voting bloc. The lefts destructive policies are in full display in such places like Philly and Detroit. Places where the left has run things for decades. And what do we have to show for it? poverty
What he's missed here is, as a journalist, he's exposed to groupthink. Very deceptive here. Comparing 4 journalists in a hotel lobby who can't agree on where to go to eat (not a "crisis) to a group of "overheated" journalists (journolist)in a dither about "their" candidate losing the election to....GASP....BUSH LITE is apples to oranges. When faced with a threat, people bond together. And this group conspired to steal an election by printing known falsehoods. Now, what I really want to hear is that there is no media bias. That would really make this story complete.— rudytbone- Hmm, so if a young boy is holding a sign that depicts Obama as monkey and uses a catch phrase to go along with it, it ceases to have any racist overtones?!? Really?!?!? I suppose that young boy drove himself to the rally too, huh Mike? I don't suppose his mom or dad looked at the sign, helped him make the sign, helped him come up with the idea, put the sign in the car or even noticed he had a sign, right!?!? You crack me up. I'm starting to think you and SMike are one in the same. You both have you heads buried in the sand......And one other thing, I never said the Hitler signs were racist. I said they were inaccurate but not racist.— amg
- SMike, the only ludicrous thing is how you cherry pick what you will accept as "proof" of something that is can be found on the internet. The video Mike linked had six or seven people interviewed out of tens of thousands. What is ludicrous is to think that those few folks represent the thoughts and feelings of tens of thousands of people. What's even more ludicrous is that you still keep saying "the left" as if every one on the "left" is trying race bait. It's a small portion of people on the left doing this, not the entire left. Just like it's a small portion of Tea Partiers that are racist, not the entire movement. Except in your world of course. Glad I don't live in that pathetic and sad place.— amg
- AMG- Actually it's not a sad and pathetic place at all where I live. Just finished mowing the lawn. Getting a babysitter and the wife and I are going with another couple to the Auburn Road Winery in Salem County. Cheers and have a good weekend.
- Swede... There is no better view of the damage democrats do to cities and people than police work. It isn't pretty. And it has turned me against democrats forever. And I'm sorry, if you vote for them, you play a part in their destructive policies. Mention my name ( Unlike most bloggers I use my correct name ) to him, maybe we know each other. I retired in 1987 from homicide.— Phil Checchia
- Hey Phil, congratulations on being able to retire so young. I think you got give a little thanks to unionization for your benefits. You richly deserve them. I too worked in the streets,not a cop,for a while and have seen the worst. Good for you if you want to use your name. I prefer to remain anonymous not because I'm ashamed of anything I say but because I had a bad experience on another website and don't need the aggravation of being threatened by someone who disagrees with me.— Rabe56
- For cosmetic political reasons the Administration will in the coming weeks try to portray itself as the friend of small enterprise, proposing a bunch of tax credits and other goodies. But these things will be mere Band-Aids for the hemorrhaging these entities are experiencing. Most are taxed at personal rates; thus the higher tax levies coming in January from the expiration of the 2003 tax cuts and the expenses incurred as the new health care stipulations go into effect will drive many companies with tiny profit margins off the cliff. I am convinced that higher unemployment is exactly what this administration wants. The more people they can get on the dole or working for the government the more they can consolidate power. Hopefully we take the country back from the neosocialists in November. But the risk is there is no telling how much damage this congress could do in a lame duck session— mgm65
- Rabe56: In police work they need a union to protect themselves from the lawsuits brought by liberals at the ACLU.— mgm65
- Also Rabe the union can help when Neo Socialist Presidents make comments off the cuff without knowing the facts. Like when Obama said the Police acted Stupidly.— mgm65
- swedesboromike : picked you since you've broght it up a few times. Turns out that the decision not to criminally prosecute the New Black Panther case from Philly in the 2008 election was made - oops - before Holder and Obama were in office..... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jul/23/bill-oreilly/bill-oreilly-blames-obama-administration-not-pursu/— still_independent
- mgm 65: Before lawsuits unions worked for better salary, benefits and working conditions. I'm not an expert but when the police get sued by outsiders they are defended by the city soliciter. If it's a matter where the department goes after a cop then the unions help. Don't get the purpose of the name calling.— Rabe56
- mgm65 : assuming they extend the tax cuts to those making under $200k or $250k per year, then a small business owner operating at a "tiny profit margin" won't see a tax increase.— still_independent
- Still Independent- I don't recall bringing up the black panther case. Fortunately for me voting in Woolwich Twp is very easy. No one is there with night sticks. I stopped reading your aticle after I read this paragraph.........The Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice, which handles all racially motivated voter intimidation offenses, determined that "the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the federal criminal civil rights statutes," according to testimony provided by Thomas E. Perez , Assistant Attorney General, on May 14, 2010. Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler confirmed to PolitiFact that that determination not to file criminal charges was made prior to the filing of the civil case."............. One I read that it kinda appears to me that this is just a bunch of clever flim flam from a journolist to once again cover for the Obama administration. Because on May 14, 2010 Obama was President. So perhaps some more research and fact checking is order. Maybe the video is out of context. Maybe the large intimidating guy with the nightstick was just showing what he used to do 24 years ago. Who knows.
- Still- OK, I read a little more. From the same article............"Some may say the government was too lenient, that the case should not have been dropped against the three other defendants, or that the injunction against Shabazz should have extended nationwide -- not just in Philadelphia -- and for a much longer time (not just until 2012). Those decisions were made during the Obama administration."......................... so what you have here is headline that is not supported by the facts. Common these days with Journolists. Key phrase and punch line from your article is -THOSE DECISIONS WERE MADE DUR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. Maybe just a typo? You let me know
- Still Independent- did you even read the article you posted? From your article .........." We think it's fair to hold Holder accountable for the decision to limit the civil case, but not the criminal one. ".............. I can't imagine why we would not pursue this case. I guess it all depends on who's ox is being gored.
- swedesboromike: mu apologies if you never brought it up the six or seven times you commented on it. What don't you get? The decision not to file criminal charges was made PRIOR to the filing of civil charges. The civil charges were filed Jan 9, 2009. Perhaps you don't understand what criminal charges are and how they differ from a civil lawsuit? Maybe your neighbor can explain it to you.— still_independent
- Still- Yea. so what? And it was the Holder Justince Department that opted not pursue the case civilly. I don't know why because it sure looks like voter intimidation to me. And please show me the 7 times I brought up this case before today.
- Still Independent- you said " he civil charges were filed Jan 9, 2009."................ok, then they were filed while Bush was President and the Obama justice department dropped them. It's like you're doing some mexican hat dance here with this. I get it. You love Obama and you want to cover for him as much as possible.
- Mike: I mentioned a that Kathleen Parker had an interesting piece in the Post where she essentially called the JouroList flap a symptom of a "destructive gotcha mentality." As far as the Black Panther voter intimidation goes, it warms my heart to see so many republicans concerned that someone might have been intimidated. I don't recall any of the purveyors of the story giving a full throated support of the extension of the Voting Rights Act. It's my understanding that the incident took place near a polling both in an entirely black area. Were they trying to intimidate the 2 republicans in the precinct? Kidding aside, no one filed a complaint. There's an old saying in law, something like, if there's no crime; there's no proecution.— Rabe56
- still_independent, nice red herring. Sure, Bush's DOJ decided not to pursue criminal charges, so they then filed the civil charges. Under Obama, they actually won an injunction by default with the NBB did not show up for the trial. So, what did the Holder DOJ decide to do? They decided to drop the civil charges for no apparent reason even though they had won the case by default judgement. What is even more curious is why they will not make the official who supposedly decided to drop the case available for testimony before the House committee. It will be interesting to see is Issa, if the Reps win the House and he becomes committee chairman, issues a subpeona for this official to compel his testimony. Odd how the firing of 8 US attorney's warranted so much scrutiny (which the DOJ inspector general has recently ruled does not merit any charges...guess the MSM missed that story) but this DOJ action is just a minor thing. Also, amg, what is sad is that you automatically rule as racist the motives of that boy and his parents who drew the "monkey see monkee do" sign about Obama and his policies. Without even knowing them, their motives or what is in their hearts, because of a sign that you neither like nor agree with, you label them as having racist motives and a racist intent. That is what is so sad.— tom - wilmington, de
- Rabe- the 2006 extesion of the voter rights act won 98-0 in the Senate and was signed by President Bush.
- Rabe- You said " I don't recall any of the purveyors of the story giving a full throated support of the extension of the Voting Rights Act. ".............. Really? Cause when I looked it up it passed the Senate 98-0 and was signed by President Bush in 2006. Earlier votes in the 1060's had some nays but suprise, suprise, the Democrats had more nays than the Republicans. I guess that doesn't fit your narrative so why bother with facts.
- mgm65, the police union also helps: the 5 squad thugs, cops who turf drop, cops who give 'nickel rides' and the brass who browbeat uniform officers to lie about drunk detectives who wreck their cars and leave their guns in a bar— JimR
- Smike, I'm glad you live in an area free from the hustle and bustle of racism but as someone who grew up in NW Philly, (long ago) the primate referrence to blacks was quite the norm. I've heard the formentioned 'porch m..." as recently as three days ago by a moron in work. And racially identified stories in Philly.com had the monkey ref twice this week on comment boards. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume the recent deals were not meant to be compliments.— JimR
- Mike, when I was talking about purveyors of the story I wasn't referring to Bush or the Senate. I was referring to the talking heads in the media. I knew it went through under Bush and I knew it was overwhelming but I didn't know it was 98-0. Facts are good. Did Bill O'Reilly or Hannity dedicate any narrative on the importance of the Act? Yet now they appear very concerned about intimidation. Mike, I mean no disrespect to you but if we were discussing this in person I'd be laughing. We both know that if the Klan showed up at a 99% White precinct, maybe the Southern Poverty Law Center and maybe Eric Holder would call for their heads, but I would bet dollars to donuts the conservative media would care not one iota.— Rabe56
- For the talk I hear about 'narratives' the intimidation story in N.Philly is one for the books. The 14th ward is 99% AA. McCain got 113 votes (slightly less than 3% of the votes) Even Bob Barr, the Libertarian, got a couple of votes. On the videos, there's more white media types than white voters. There's a few things that should have happened quickly. The cops and DA should have been on these clowns like hounds from hell. The overt racist tone and action of this street theater should have brought an immediate denunciation from the local head of the NAACP. Neither of these things happened. (Testement to the legacy of "corrupt and content") But, as has been noted, no one complained. There were other veiled attempts at intimidation at places around the city by both parties, but little gets done about them and it rarely rates a camera crew or exposure like this media circus. The Bush DOJ probably (hopefully) saw that this was typical N.Philly, B.S., street theater and didn't want to waste time and money on it. It was left to civil court to be settled by anyone who felt intimidated. The Obama DOJ really looked foolish for dropping it after they won the case.— JimR
- Rabe... the FOP is NOT A UNION, it is a bargaining body. We cannot strike. Nor would cops want to. Unlike teachers, we care about the people we serve.— Phil Checchia
- Phil, I know cops can't strike. My point was that they are allowed to bargain collectively for wages and benefits. It's a form of a union. It's semantics. I didn't go to public school and today I'd fire the school super for how Southern was handled but I know a couple of public teachers and they appear to be dedicated to their students. Your remark was an insult to many many people.— Rabe56
- Comment removed.
- Bill, I read these boards alot. Learn a little and laugh more. When I see your name it assures me that I'll learn nothing and not laugh. You need new material... the macho posturing is a tired act.— Rabe56
- Comment removed.
- Phil, Messrs McNesby and Costello disagree with your description of the FOP as not a union. And teachers who slog into North or West Philly and face that mess, care about the people they serve.— JimR
- I didn't insult anyone on this board and no one insulted me until you came on. You insulted me twice in your two post. It would be easy for me to respond in kind but I won't. Finished with you.— Rabe56
- Billreilly, you were kind enough to apologize to me yesterday. And that mattered to me. Words do matter. They have power. It's more difficult not to react negatively when you disagree with another person. But insults usually have negative results. Just a thought. We all have a better chance to change minds when we are reasonable and kind.— NigeltheMastiff
- tom/swedesboromike: it's not about "defending Obama". i criticize hime all the time. But it's posted here pretty much every blog that either Obama or Holder or both decided not to prosecute the "New Black Panthers case". It's untrue. Period. The decision not to file criminal charges was made under Bush, and predates Obama and Holder. Now if you want to discuss the civil side, I agree with you. The civil summary judgement shouldn't have been dropped against those individuals. And I think a defintive answer is owed as to why the case was allowed to drop. But that's not what I was addressing. Tom, continually bringing up the civil side is the red herring. I was discussing the criminal, and solely the criminal.... And then you brought up the fired attorneys, "which the DOJ inspector general has recently ruled does not merit any charges". Yes, the report said that. But it said that because there wasn't enough evidence to bring charges, not that there is a probability that something illegal didn't occur. They also found that Alberto Gonzales made a "series of statements after the removals that were inaccurate and misleading." And you of course ignore the fact that this most recent special prosecutor was appointed because the DOJ IG has already issued a report that the firings were improper and politically motivated. .... Finally, Tom, no, you don't always need to know someone's motivations. Maybe the spray painter of the swastika isn't really anti-semetic, he's just a "WWII buff". You're right. The child, who of course is a strict constitutionalist and is concerned about big government (as all kids are) just loves Curious George, and thought it would be cute to draw Obama as a monkey. He then pedaled his little pike down to the local protest. His parents were completely unaware and uninvolved.— still_independent
- Phil Checcia: from the FOP - "Martin Toole and Delbert Nagle knew they must first organize police officers, like other labor interests, if they were to be successful in making life better for themselves and their fellow police officers. They and 21 others "who were willing to take a chance" met on May 14, 1915, and held the first meeting of the Fraternal Order of Police. They formed Fort Pitt Lodge #1. They decided on this name due to the anti-union sentiment of the time" .... If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ....— still_independent
- The word of the week has been "CONTEXT". Thank goodness there are still people out there who will not bow to pressure. They can look at a picture and with no other context proclaim somebody or something is racist. Good for them.— Mike Welbourn
- I won't give DICK Polman credit because he did not condemn the efforts to brand conservative Obama critics as racist and to wish physical harm on conservative pundits. DICK may not have joined Journolist even if invited, but he acted as a free agent Obama water carrier.— Thoughtful&concernedvoter
- still_independent, my argument about the boy with the poster of curious George did not exclude the parents. My statement was that by citing that poster as having racial intent is immediately labeling the parents of the boy as racist. In case you missed it due to light glare, this is what I wrote..."you automatically rule as racist the motives of that boy and his parents who drew the "monkey see monkee do" sign about Obama and his policies. Without even knowing them, their motives or what is in their hearts, because of a sign that you neither like nor agree with, you label them as having racist motives and a racist intent. That is what is so sad." So you see, it was never mentioned that the parents were unaware of the poster, but it was mentioned that calling the sign racist without knowing the parents or what was in their hearts is just as bad as firing Shirley Sherrod without knowing the full extent of her video statements. As for the Bush US attorney prosecutor report, it actually said that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute for obstruction of justice or perjury in testimony about the firings, but the report steadfastly said the firing of the US attorney in New Mexico was not a crime, as was alleged by Democrat members of Congress. All the IG report said was that three of the firings were politically motivated, but did not pass any judgement on the others. Nice cut and paste though.— tom - wilmington, de
- Still. Didn't quite understand your blog. Are you saying the FOP is a union? They officially consider themselves a Fraternal Lodge. Cannot strike so cannot be a union. And about teachers. I spent twenty years around them. I never once heard one of them bemoan anything about their students. It was always about themselves, how tired they are, how they cant wait for summer vacation. This started around Christmas.They suffered a disproportionate amount of Chronic Fatigue Disorders. In short, it is no wonder that children underachieve in Public Schools, they are instructed by weak, selfish leftists.— Phil Checchia
- Still- I don't see that article as any great reveleation about the black panther case. Even in the article they admit is was Holder's decision not to pursue the case. It's really just a sad and feeble attempt on behalf of another " journolist" to cover for Obama. Nice try but don't hurt yourself twisting in a pretzel.
- swedesboromike : I know you are not that obtuse. But as susual, you are completely unable to yield anything. The decision not to file criminal charges was made under the Bush DOJ. What don't you get? Holder made the decision not to continue with the civil case. While I disagree with that decision, it has nothing to do with the lack of a criminal case. It's not "covering" for Obama. It's addressing the mis-information that O'Reilly spews out nightly (which subsequently get repeated here daily). I am perfrectly willing to criticize Holder/Obama for dropping the civil case against three of the defendants - and I have. But it's a flat out lie to say that Holder/Obama decided not to prosecute the panther case. That decision was made before they got into office.— still_independent
- Still- O'reilly is fairly balanced and reasoned. He'll make some mistakes once in a while but he owns up to them and apoligizes. You'll have to show me quotes from O'Reilly that he mispoke. Either way it was the Holder just dept. that dropped the civil case. If the talk show host said it was a criminal case I wouldn't count that as an egregious error. Rather minor in my view.
- Phil: forst of all, I have no love at all for the teacher's union. My wife used to teach, amongst other places, in Camden. She had far more problems with most of the other teachers (and the union) than she did with the students or even their (lack of) parents. ... My only point is that the FOP is a union. The fact that police can't strike has nothing to do with it. For what it's worth, in some departments, the majority of the officers aren't even members of the FOP (they're PBA). I can give you other examples of professions that are unionized that aren't allowed to strike, either. Think of the air traffic controllers.— still_independent
- swedesboromike: "But because Attorney General Eric Holder is involved in the dismissal of the CRIMINAL charges, the situation takes on some importance." - fine. i give up. He actually meant civil. As did all the posters here. I'll only hold people accountable for what you think they meant, not what they said. mea culpa.— still_independent
- Still Independent-The word trivial comes to mind. Also this is after the election of Obama so who's to say the transition team didn't consult with the lame duck Bush DOJ? Not quite sure this was worth 15 posts to argue over but it was fun.
- tom: why this refusal to cede the fact that there are some racists amongst tea partiers? Even if they are no more represented than the population at large, there would still be some. Again, why try to defend the indefensible? Why twist yourself around in knots trying to come up with some innocent explanation for "Monkey see, Monkey spend" ? Can't you just say "hey, there's going to be fringe people. it happens. it doesn't represent the overwhelming majority of tea partiers"? I could buy that, and would probably agree with it. But to go the swedesboromike mike route of simply denying that racism even exists, or your route of saying we must know what they intended is just ridiculous. I find many things the NAACP does to be racist. I have no problem admitting that, nor am I a fan of that particular organization. There is racism on the part of the left. There is racism amongst independents. There is racism amongst conservatives. See, it's easy - I have no problem saying it. Why do you?— still_independent
- Funniest quote of the week goes to Nancy Pelosi, who said "I believe the high-end tax cuts did not create any jobs, increased the deficit and should be repealed," She also stated "When asked Thursday if the House leadership would consider a bill to extend all of the Bush tax cuts, as Republicans and some Democrats have advocated, she said, "No. No. Our position has been that we support middle-income tax cuts. The tax cuts at the high end have increased the deficit enormously." She criticized Republicans generally and President Bush specifically for adding to the federal deficit with increased federal spending and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans." Funny thing though is that prior to Democrats gaining control of Congress in 2006 the deficit was coming down every year, since then it has gone up to exceed $1 Trillion. The last year before the election we has the largest deficit ever at $450+ Billion, which was under a Democrat Congress and spending policies. Also funnier still is that extending the middle class tax cuts (which until now Democrats have never admitted even existed in the Bush cuts) will add more than twice the amount to the deficit than extending the cuts for the top two levels. Now, how many of you have ever been offered a job by someone in the lower level income brackets? Even Christina Romer has just updated a paper she and her husband wrote saying that tax increases are contractionary and have devastating impacts on economic growth. I wonder, how many liberals who think extending the tax cuts is wrong because of the deficit would be in favor of more stimulus spending regardless of the impact on the deficit?— tom - wilmington, de
- swedesboromike : because I get annoyed when certain posters continue to post the same, factually incorrect tripe over and over and over. And no, that's not directed at you, at least not this time :)— still_independent
- Come on Still! The tea partiers issues are taxes, spending, and government largesse. This indictment of the movement is totally baseless.
- tom: see, now here I agree with you. BOTH increase the deficit. I'm fine with extending tax cuts, so long as we cut spending to pay for them, as they do not pay for themselves. I think that TARP had to be done, regardless of the effect on the deficit, to prevent a total collapse. I wasn't in favor of the majority of the stimulus spending (I do think that certain programs, like Cash for Clunkers, actually worked quite well). And I am certainly against further stimulus spending, unless it's made up for somewhere else.— still_independent
- If Nancy Pelosi thinks a $ 1 of uemployment turns into $ 1.60 in the economy then imagine the possibilities if the liberal establishment just let people keep their friggin money in the first place?
- swedesboromike : I don't think that the movement, by and large, has racist motivations. i really don't. However, that's different from saying that there aren't racists amongst its members (which would be expected of any large organization). Where they fall down is that since the tea party isn't a cohesive movement or a top-down organization, there's no one calling the shots. So when White Supremacists, for example, help to support and organize attendance at tea party events, there is no one to speak up for the tea partiers to say "Hey, we do not apporove or condone of these guys". And there are several large, racist organizations that are very active in the tea party movement. Again, there isn't really anyone to "kick them out", as there isn't anyone in charge. You could hold you own tea party event in Swedesboro. I could then make the charge that tea partiers are effite', wine-loving girly men (sorry, had to go there). Yet you in no way represent some larger tea party movement, as there isn't one - it's a disorganized collection of common interests.— still_independent
- still_independent, nowhere did I ever assert that there was not a racist element in the tea party. Nowhere did I ever assert that there is not racism still in our society. Show me where I ever stated that before saying I am posting the same tripe over and over again. There is a racist/fringe/kook/loony fringe in every group, and the larger the group the greater the possibility of that element becoming exposed. However, I would not label ANYONE as a racist based on a sign, statement, protest, or anything without knowing their intent and the context of their remark. For example, I am sure you would argue that Sonia Sotomayor's statement about the wise Latina woman with her breadth of experience being able to make better judgements than a white male was not racist, true? But, you would argue that a 10 year old boy carrying a "monkey see monkey spend" sign is a racist remark on the part of his parents or someone else. As for O'Reilly and the NBB case, I have searched his talking points memo's and scanned his interviews and have found where he discusses the dropping of the civil case and the dropping of charges, but nowhere have I found the quote you posted that says "But because Attorney General Eric Holder is involved in the dismissal of the CRIMINAL charges, the situation takes on some importance." Have you got a specific link to that statement? And I more than see your point about people posting the same tripe regardless of the facts. I am not referring to you of course, just the tripe that people post, especially they post referring to statements/assertions made by the target of their commentary.— tom - wilmington, de
- Oops, meant to say "statements/assertions NEVER made by the target of their commentary".— tom - wilmington, de
- Still Independent-Then why even bring it up? Seems to me this is the first and last refuge of debating with liberals. I think it says a lot about the left when they cannot debate and call their adversarys racists. It means your bankrupt of ideas, your polls are dwindling, and your solutions aren't working. Obama approval rating today is a 43%- therefore everyone is racist. Let me know how that strategy works out for you.
- still_independent, Jim Webb just wrote an op-ed saying that government programs that help all people of color are unfair to whites, and that programs that are favorable to immigrants are also unfair to whites. Is Jim Webb a racist? As for the tea party, they do have local control, as evidenced by the banishing of Mark Williams after his commentary regarding the NAACP.— tom - wilmington, de
- Phil, the FOP is the legal representative of the police collective bargaining group. They negotiate rules and benefits (often decided by panels on which the FOP has a mandated representative) Presidents of the groups do indeed hold themselves as presidents of a union. Having spent so much time around teachers, listening to everything they say and do, when did any police work get done?— JimR
- Jim R. Two things. One, check my name on Google and Archieves of Inquirer and Daily News. That will answer your question of did I do any Police work. Second, my second wife was a teacher and I spent many long, ardous dinners sitting ,listening to teachers complain about their lot. Also, Police do not consider the Fraternal Order of Police a labor union. They dont like the word UNION, most find it offensive. Yes they negotiate contracts for us. It also serves as a social meeting place. They also recognize members for outstanding performance of duties, unlike unions who insist that all members are equal ( Comes from Communist Origins ). So please, dont ever refer to me as a union member.— Phil Checchia
- Nancy Pelosi's socialist political views are exactly what have kept her elected in San Francisco, along with the flow of union campaign money. The staunch “union supporter” Pelosi has even received the Cesar Chavez Award from the United Farm Workers Union. But her $25 million Napa vineyards and winery, she and her husband own are non-union shops. The extra profit she earns is more than she gets from labor unions. But I don’t think she wants the rank and file to know this. She also owns a resort in California complete with 250 employees yet none are member of the SEIU. Oh the hypocrasy.
- Conservatives are generally racists.— RightWingHypocrite
- tom: O'Reilly wrote it on TownHall.com on July 17. For some reason, his archive is now gone. Everyone else's is still there.— still_independent
- Still- You said " I could then make the charge that tea partiers are effite', wine-loving girly men (sorry, had to go there).".................... Good one. LOL We would all be nicer if we just drank more wine.
- Phil, you can call it whatever you want but the FOP is still a legal entity. They may observe accomplishments of their members but the membership is closed to outsiders (those that they don't represent)The union halls up off of Southhampton Rd are also social meeting places. The police I know have no problem calling it a union - they run to it for protection. Your wife (and her friends, I assume) complained about teaching - therefore all teachers are slugs. (BTW, I met two current cops last weekend, and they complained endlessly about their jobs) The 5 squad of a few years back were dirty cops - therefore all cops can be assumed dirty????— JimR
- Phil, almost forgot, the last group of officers reinstated were granted back pay and 'missed assumed overtime' That's 'union think' at its best.— JimR
- Nancy Pelosi is one tough broad who is as adept a backroom arm twister as Tom DeLay was. With her being the hate-poster girl of the Right, the Dems better hope she stays cleaner than he did or they have no chance of keeping the House. By himself, heavyweight Charlie Rangel makes them look almost as corrupt as the 'Pubs circa 2005.— yobill626
- The gig is up and the Tea Baggers have been exposed a racists. First Williams gets the boot for being a pig-headed bigot. Then Breitbart intentionally edits a video trying to paint the NAACP as racists. What a dope!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine
- Hypocrit- Anger management sessions begin at 9am. Don't be late.
- Here is the real reason the left is calling conservatives, Independents, and Libertarians racist.......Overall, 43% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. Fifty-six percent (56%) disapprove.............. So faced with declining poll numbers and policies that are not working the last refuge of the left is just to hurl the racist charge. I think it's backfiring on them.
- We told you so. This is from the NY Times........... "When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”.................... The Obama regime getting called on the carpet for being the liars that they are. Guess it's time to declare racism.
- The White House released revised budget projections on Friday (did that get much play in the MSM?) with what the WSJ called devastating results. The WSJ did an excellent op-ed piece on the Obama budget projections in comparison to Reagan. For example, under Reagan, deficits never exceeded more tha 6% of GDP, while under Obama they are projected to be 10% of GDP. Under Obama, spending has reached 25% of GDP for the first time since WWII and WWI. Under Reagan revenues never fell below 17% of GDP despite the tax cuts so many liberals say we could not afford, while under Obama revenues are only projected to hit 15% of GDP next year despite the tax increases. Obama's budget office is also projecting economic growth of 4% in 2012-2014. The last time that happened was in 1997-200, and also in 1983-1985, and in both of those circumstances taxes were cut. Under Obama, taxes are only going to rise, so who is going to spark that growth? Clearly we cannot tax and spend our way to prosperity, yet Howard Dean on Fox yesterday stated that in no way does he believe raising taxes will have any adverse effect on the economy. We shall see.— tom - wilmington, de
- Mike, they are going to the tax defense because they do not believe the commerce clause defense will work. They even stated they believe the tax defense is their best chance of passing Constitutional muster.— tom - wilmington, de
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
Search this blog:
Blog Roll
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: