Now the Wall Street Journal is a little on the left.

Dena, is there anything fact based in your belief system????

A little to the left of Rush Limbaugh, a little to the left of Dick Cheney,
a little to the left of Glen Beck. A lot to the right of 80% of the country.

Edit: I am pretty sure from what I have read and heard that Glenn Becks numbers included everyone in the opposing MLK commemorative that his usage of the memorial blocked the way of.

He has become a legend in his own mind.

---

Janice

Now the Wall Street Journal is a little on the left.

Dena, is there anything fact based in your belief system????

A little to the left of Rush Limbaugh, a little to the left of Dick Cheney,
a little to the left of Glen Beck. A lot to the right of 80% of the country.

Edit: I am pretty sure from what I have read and heard that Glenn Becks numbers included everyone in the opposing MLK commemorative that his usage of the memorial blocked the way of.

He has become a legend in his own mind.

Left of center. You must not have noticed that he had about 20 religious leaders from all faiths on stage with him backing up what he said.

---

his friends with the moral majority? Sorry, did not watch. But there is no way/shape/form that Glenn Beck is anything left of a right winged reactionary.

---

Janice

his friends with the moral majority? Sorry, did not watch. But there is no way/shape/form that Glenn Beck is anything left of a right winged reactionary.

Then you need to relearn your history and find out what a Republic is.

---

Interesting thread, but with some jaw dropping posts in it.

There are actually people out there who take Glen Beck seriously???

The man is a right wing nut job who should be prosecuted for hate-speech.

Why do you call him right wing? He hates both the left and the right. You should watch the show instead of selectively selected clips that only tell half the story.

I really tried, but Fox News alone makes me sick to my stomach, let alone that crazy bile.

It makes me sad that people are so taken in by such an obvious propaganda machine.

Right wing or not, I am glad at least you agree on the nut job bit.

I first saw this news item in the Wall Street Journal. The link is dead so I had to locate it somewhere else but Glen turned out something like half a million people at this assembly. How can someone with so much hate in his heart rate a story like this from a paper thats a little on the left. Link . By the way, after Obama's inauguration the place was trashed. It must of taken several days for the park service to clean the place up after Obama was done with it.

Wall Street Journal a little to the left??? Oh my. Something tells me we're not in Kansas any more.

Plus there is the implication that news papers should be biased in their reporting. Seriously? I know that is Fox News agenda, but there are still plenty of journalists out there who think they should be reporting the news.

---

Reality Internet Personality

his friends with the moral majority? Sorry, did not watch. But there is no way/shape/form that Glenn Beck is anything left of a right winged reactionary.

Then you need to relearn your history and find out what a Republic is.

A republic is a form of government in which the citizens choose their leaders and the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its government. The word "republic" is derived from the Latin phrase res publica, which can be translated as "a public affair".

Sounds like what we have. Though any Gov't cannot be purely defined. Clearly, we have Social(Socialist) programs, and we have our GOV'T buying using non-dual use products from Military industries(Fascism). So no we are not and is there ever a clearly defined Gov't that explicitely fits into the square peg. To think that any would is short sighted. We could look even further at Reagan that declared that Gov't wasn't the solution but the Problem(Libertain at best/Anarchist at worst) Though I'm not sure what question that gov't was the answer for but its pretty clear things started getting worse under his watch. In particular the childhood shot program that is now under 51 different bereaucracies instead of having one. Some things are just better with less Medussa heads attached

I still don't see how the definition of a Republic has anything to do with Beck.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Interesting thread, but with some jaw dropping posts in it.

There are actually people out there who take Glen Beck seriously???

The man is a right wing nut job who should be prosecuted for hate-speech.

Why do you call him right wing? He hates both the left and the right. You should watch the show instead of selectively selected clips that only tell half the story.

I really tried, but Fox News alone makes me sick to my stomach, let alone that crazy bile.

It makes me sad that people are so taken in by such an obvious propaganda machine.

Right wing or not, I am glad at least you agree on the nut job bit.

I first saw this news item in the Wall Street Journal. The link is dead so I had to locate it somewhere else but Glen turned out something like half a million people at this assembly. How can someone with so much hate in his heart rate a story like this from a paper thats a little on the left. Link . By the way, after Obama's inauguration the place was trashed. It must of taken several days for the park service to clean the place up after Obama was done with it.

Wall Street Journal a little to the left??? Oh my. Something tells me we're not in Kansas any more.

Plus there is the implication that news papers should be biased in their reporting. Seriously? I know that is Fox News agenda, but there are still plenty of journalists out there who think they should be reporting the news.

In our last election, they did a study on coverage of the political parties. It turned out that the Democrats had 3 times the coverage that the Republicans had. Of all the news services, Fox came closest to a 50/50 coverage but even their coverage was a little more toward the Democrats. I can live with Fox not getting it exactly right but 3 to 1 is a bit out of control.

---

but there are still plenty of journalists out there who think they should be reporting the news.

They are the ones going hungry for lack of ratings ...

---

his friends with the moral majority? Sorry, did not watch. But there is no way/shape/form that Glenn Beck is anything left of a right winged reactionary.

Then you need to relearn your history and find out what a Republic is.

A republic is a form of government in which the citizens choose their leaders and the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its government. The word "republic" is derived from the Latin phrase res publica, which can be translated as "a public affair".

Sounds like what we have. Though any Gov't cannot be purely defined. Clearly, we have Social(Socialist) programs, and we have our GOV'T buying using non-dual use products from Military industries(Fascism). So no we are not and is there ever a clearly defined Gov't that explicitely fits into the square peg. To think that any would is short sighted. We could look even further at Reagan that declared that Gov't wasn't the solution but the Problem(Libertain at best/Anarchist at worst) Though I'm not sure what question that gov't was the answer for but its pretty clear things started getting worse under his watch. In particular the childhood shot program that is now under 51 different bereaucracies instead of having one. Some things are just better with less Medussa heads attached

I still don't see how the definition of a Republic has anything to do with Beck.

You are correct about it being hard to define MOST governments but Anarchy and Republic can be define. Anarchy is simply no government and Republic is defined by a constitution where the powers the government is permitted to have are clearly documented. If the government exceeds these powers, you no longer have a Republic.

Beck's, the tea party and my views are those of a Republic. Democrats and Republicans are not exclude from membership in this group but they must agree to the idea of a constitutional limited government. While many Democrats and Republicans are progressive, I am an optimist that there are still some old fashion Democrats and Republican out there who will help return us to sanity.

How could things have gotten worst under Regain when Clinton who followed Reagan was the second best president (FDR the best)?

---

but there are still plenty of journalists out there who think they should be reporting the news.

They are the ones going hungry for lack of ratings ...

In the Cable market, Foxes ratings are better than all the other outlets combined. Over the air is another matter because Fox is limited in that market.

---

You are correct about it being hard to define MOST governments but Anarchy and Republic can be define. Anarchy is simply no government and Republic is defined by a constitution where the powers the government is permitted to have are clearly documented. If the government exceeds these powers, you no longer have a Republic.

You need a lesson in forms of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government
If you note there is more than one form of republic listed.

Now as to exceeding the powers and poof not a republic, then I guess the USA isn't a republic any more after the unconstitutional Bush spying on American Citizens.

---

Interesting thread, but with some jaw dropping posts in it.

There are actually people out there who take Glen Beck seriously???

The man is a right wing nut job who should be prosecuted for hate-speech.

Why do you call him right wing? He hates both the left and the right. You should watch the show instead of selectively selected clips that only tell half the story.

I really tried, but Fox News alone makes me sick to my stomach, let alone that crazy bile.

It makes me sad that people are so taken in by such an obvious propaganda machine.

Right wing or not, I am glad at least you agree on the nut job bit.

I first saw this news item in the Wall Street Journal. The link is dead so I had to locate it somewhere else but Glen turned out something like half a million people at this assembly. How can someone with so much hate in his heart rate a story like this from a paper thats a little on the left. Link . By the way, after Obama's inauguration the place was trashed. It must of taken several days for the park service to clean the place up after Obama was done with it.

Wall Street Journal a little to the left??? Oh my. Something tells me we're not in Kansas any more.

Plus there is the implication that news papers should be biased in their reporting. Seriously? I know that is Fox News agenda, but there are still plenty of journalists out there who think they should be reporting the news.

In our last election, they did a study on coverage of the political parties. It turned out that the Democrats had 3 times the coverage that the Republicans had. Of all the news services, Fox came closest to a 50/50 coverage but even their coverage was a little more toward the Democrats. I can live with Fox not getting it exactly right but 3 to 1 is a bit out of control.

Coverage is a very lose term. What did they mean by coverage?

I mean me claiming that Obama is a Muslim and demanding to see his birth certificate is coverage. So you'd have to explain to me what fox news 50/50 coverage actually entails.

---

Reality Internet Personality

You are correct about it being hard to define MOST governments but Anarchy and Republic can be define. Anarchy is simply no government and Republic is defined by a constitution where the powers the government is permitted to have are clearly documented. If the government exceeds these powers, you no longer have a Republic.

You need a lesson in forms of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government
If you note there is more than one form of republic listed.

Now as to exceeding the powers and poof not a republic, then I guess the USA isn't a republic any more after the unconstitutional Bush spying on American Citizens.

You are correct and I should have said Constitutional Republic. You are also correct about Bush pushing us farther down the road. We have not lived under a Republic in my life time and I strongly suspect we will not be able to return to one in my life time. This would not be a short term project.

---

Interesting thread, but with some jaw dropping posts in it.

There are actually people out there who take Glen Beck seriously???

The man is a right wing nut job who should be prosecuted for hate-speech.

Why do you call him right wing? He hates both the left and the right. You should watch the show instead of selectively selected clips that only tell half the story.

I really tried, but Fox News alone makes me sick to my stomach, let alone that crazy bile.

It makes me sad that people are so taken in by such an obvious propaganda machine.

Right wing or not, I am glad at least you agree on the nut job bit.

I first saw this news item in the Wall Street Journal. The link is dead so I had to locate it somewhere else but Glen turned out something like half a million people at this assembly. How can someone with so much hate in his heart rate a story like this from a paper thats a little on the left. Link . By the way, after Obama's inauguration the place was trashed. It must of taken several days for the park service to clean the place up after Obama was done with it.

Wall Street Journal a little to the left??? Oh my. Something tells me we're not in Kansas any more.

Plus there is the implication that news papers should be biased in their reporting. Seriously? I know that is Fox News agenda, but there are still plenty of journalists out there who think they should be reporting the news.

In our last election, they did a study on coverage of the political parties. It turned out that the Democrats had 3 times the coverage that the Republicans had. Of all the news services, Fox came closest to a 50/50 coverage but even their coverage was a little more toward the Democrats. I can live with Fox not getting it exactly right but 3 to 1 is a bit out of control.

Coverage is a very lose term. What did they mean by coverage?

I mean me claiming that Obama is a Muslim and demanding to see his birth certificate is coverage. So you'd have to explain to me what fox news 50/50 coverage actually entails.

The news agencies put news crews on the planes with the candidate. The amount of time these stories are broadcast is the coverage. The Muslim thing was not an issue then, but some attention was payed to the country of birth. On the other hand, Fox was about the only network that covered Joe the Plumber. John McCain was an old hand at election so it was hard to find fault with him till he picked a Vice President. Then the left came down on him like a ton of bricks. Most the coverage for both sides consisted of speeches and interviews, Over all, the attacks were within limits for both sides.

It always seems unfair when the attacks are directed at you, but fair when the attacks are directed at the other side.

---

democrats are not excluded. But the Tea Party does not represent their views.
Same with African Americans. Same with moderates.

The tea party remains a far right principle despite their denial. Your view of having "the church" provide for people excludes those who do not bow to the accepted church. You would leave others to rot and just take care of those who you agree with. This is the republican party I have known in my life time.

I will not deal on political theories. I will in political realities.

There is NOTHING moderate about the tea party. To claim there is is disingenuous at best. There is NOTHING moderate about faux news. Even they will not make that claim.

And despite their claims there is nothing "Fair and balanced" about faux. When challenged they will say "oh that was commentary". But the commentary works right through the "news". They can not attract two sides of the debate to the program, you will notice the token liberal view is almost always the same 2-3 ill informed people.

---

Janice

all networks covered "joe the plumber". Faux is the only network that paraded him around as a trophy. Reality he was just an ill informed working stiff that was only worried about his own well being. The selfishness that is the far right.

---

Janice

Joe the Plumber was a plant. He was clearly not speaking on his own.

The Teaparty folks are in the same category, though they are being duped by some very rich people. This was never about a grass roots movement but more of a well organized well planned well oiled machine from the The Conservative end of Politics. This we know because we've discussed this very thing on the forums. The teabaggers are just a repeat performance of the H. Ross Perot plan to cut taxes but and programs as long as they don't cut mine. This is a silly idea since it basically benefits the individuals that are sponsoring this, the Exceedingly wealthy. The folks that are screaming about cutting taxes will get nothing but a handshake

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

You are correct about it being hard to define MOST governments but Anarchy and Republic can be define. Anarchy is simply no government and Republic is defined by a constitution where the powers the government is permitted to have are clearly documented. If the government exceeds these powers, you no longer have a Republic.

You need a lesson in forms of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government
If you note there is more than one form of republic listed.

Now as to exceeding the powers and poof not a republic, then I guess the USA isn't a republic any more after the unconstitutional Bush spying on American Citizens.

You are correct and I should have said Constitutional Republic. You are also correct about Bush pushing us farther down the road. We have not lived under a Republic in my life time and I strongly suspect we will not be able to return to one in my life time. This would not be a short term project.

Perhaps not since Marbury v. Madison?

---

You are correct about it being hard to define MOST governments but Anarchy and Republic can be define. Anarchy is simply no government and Republic is defined by a constitution where the powers the government is permitted to have are clearly documented. If the government exceeds these powers, you no longer have a Republic.

You need a lesson in forms of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government
If you note there is more than one form of republic listed.

Now as to exceeding the powers and poof not a republic, then I guess the USA isn't a republic any more after the unconstitutional Bush spying on American Citizens.

You are correct and I should have said Constitutional Republic. You are also correct about Bush pushing us farther down the road. We have not lived under a Republic in my life time and I strongly suspect we will not be able to return to one in my life time. This would not be a short term project.

Perhaps not since Marbury v. Madison?

So that's why Jefferson and Adams were so mad at each other. Then Jefferson turns around and makes the Louisiana purchase. I think through most of history we have had trouble interpreting the Constitution as I can think of other events in the 19th century that were later than your example. Old problem of saying what you mean and making sure nobody will be able to misinterpret your meaning. In my view, the real problem is the concept of the "Living Constitution" where the meaning changes depending on how you feel today and no attention is payed to words on paper or the thoughts of the people who wrote them.
I still need to read the Federalist and Anti Federalist papers and should be getting to that soon as I now have a good feel for where we went wrong in the 20th century. I now need to understand more about the thoughts behind the Constitution.
So much history, so little time.

---

It's pretty simple. Eliminate the bad things that the Brits had in their system. incorporate things that will make the general populous accept the words

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope