Chris Matthews asked his panel of reporters, on this weekend's syndicated "The Chris Matthews Show," to offer their prescriptions on how the GOP, in the wake of the Arlen Specter departure, can regain its popularity to which most of the liberal reporters like Joe Klein and Howard Fineman suggested they needed to abandon their "cut taxes, shrink government," message and some of their "trollish"spokesmen like Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney and Newt Gingrich because they're turning off families, women and "people who think that caring matters."[audio available here]
First up Time magazine's Joe Klein suggested the GOP should moderate on health care because it would finally make them, "look sane!" and "bring them into...the mainstream of American politics." Then Newsweek's Fineman charged it was the conservative message of "cut taxes, shrink," government that was the problem: "But it doesn't sell with, with people outside of their base demographic which are white males. There's something about that message that turns off families, that turns off women, that turns off people who think that caring matters about other-, I know that this sounds silly, but caring about other people." And finally Matthews went further saying it's not just the GOP's message but it's messengers who are the problem: "Can you, can you, can they get past the cacophony of Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich? These are sort of trollish figures. These aren't the caring people, are they?"
The following exchange occurred on the May 3 edition of "The Chris Matthews Show":
Story Continues Below Ad ↓JOE KLEIN, TIME: I think health care is a real litmus test for this party. I mean Mitt Romney is the one guy who has created universal health insurance in Massachusetts. And I've talked to members of the Senate who are Republicans who are willing to go down this road. If the Republicans show some moderation on this issue and don't just say, "no," then it'll be a sign that they might be able to come back.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: How does it help them if people like Mike Enzi out in Wyoming, people like that, do join this effort? Does it make them look nicer? What, what does it do for them?
KLEIN: It makes them look sane! It brings them into the, you know, the mainstream of American politics.
HOWARD FINEMAN, NEWSWEEK: Well Chris here, here's the thing that they have to confront. They're very comfortable, the core of the Republican Party, with their message of skepticism about government. Okay, that's what it is. Cut taxes, shrink government. Supposedly that's the theory. But it doesn't sell with, with people outside of their base demographic which are white males. There's something about that message that turns off families, that turns off women, that turns off people who think that caring matters about other-, I know that this sounds silly, but caring about other people. That's why the health care thing, Joe mentions, is so important. Because it's an expression of caring about people other than yourself. That's what matters. Yeah, yeah.
KLEIN: Caring about themselves! I mean you know a lot of those white men are scared they're gonna lose health insurance.
MATTHEWS: Can you, can you, can they get past the cacophony of Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich? These are sort of trollish figures. These aren't the caring people, are they?
(laughter)
MATTHEWS: I mean you talk about compassion
FINEMAN: Yeah.
MATTHEWS: Do these voices like Newt and, and these guys, I'm just being serious here.
—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Chris Matthews (the spitter)
May 4, 2009 - 11:48 ET by merlin61No, its the Dems that don't understand what we need. We do need lower taxes, not Obama's false
promises that 95% of Americans will get a tax
break. I'm so tired of hearing that Bush gave tax
breaks to the richest people. What a total lie. They
just keep lying to us, and we need the GOP to
understand that we don't need them going more
left or to center, we need them to stand for the
Constitution. We also need Rush to dissect what
giberish is put out by the MSM and let us know
what's really going on.
Howie Fineman...yeah, I'd ask him
May 4, 2009 - 11:58 ET by StarAZThat guy never has anything interesting or new to say. Now, the Wagyu beef, let them eat hamburger, guy is more caring? He has never suffered. Why, his credit card rates, if he even knows he has them, probably don't get jacked up.This applies to Howie and you know who. Yeah, everyone who doesn't love Junior is a troll and and idiot...none of this is new. But I guess they can't say it enough to each other.
Idiots.
May 4, 2009 - 15:34 ET by blazermaniacKlein, Fineman & Matthews. Among the three of them. they can't even account for 1/100,000 of a brain.
these guys act like just
May 4, 2009 - 19:09 ET by TruthMongerthese guys act like just because they engineered a hostile unchecked takeover of the US gov - suddenly they think their asinine opinions really count with the American people...
government is the communists capitalism
Merlin, One of the main
May 4, 2009 - 12:01 ET by Scuba DudeMerlin,
One of the main problems the GOP has is that no one is fighting these lies!! Us complaining and ranting about it at NB is not enough. We need people to be able to get on air and refute the lies that the Dims are spreading. We need to get more aggresive and maybe a little more "in you face" in confronting the talking heads on tv. Show them for what they are, shills for the DNC
That's my 2 cents.
"The wrOng ONE was elected"
Both Scarborough and ingraham spoke well yesterday
May 4, 2009 - 12:22 ET by jondelwicheon MTP and FNS: Go hard right, to true conservatism!
The Dems were at a 50 year low point just in the summer of 2006 (i.e. less than 3 years ago) and they went hard left and won big.
Since the Dems assumed power in 1/2007, the federal debt has grown by an average of over 100 billion per month, so they are NOT invincible, not by a long shot.
The Obama-lovin' clowns cited in this thread don't want republican success so I dont believe them.
Trollish?
May 4, 2009 - 11:57 ET by jcbeck1000Chris Matthews calls someone trollish??? Really??? I find that one hilarious.
Just by the by
May 4, 2009 - 12:00 ET by StarAZOh, and by the way--I have heard Matthews talk about HIS insurance--we wouldn't ALL have to change, would we? So it's not just trollish old white Republicans.
is it too late-Republicans tried the soft left
May 4, 2009 - 12:01 ET by JIMMY1660get the GOP strong on tax relief-remove personal income taxes replace with flat sales/consumption taxes. all tax evaders are in the fold, paying their share. keep family values up front. no more government involvement in business. the Federal government has never run anything well outside the military.
and why listen to the left-do you think they would like the right to win an election. hell no. their suggestions are self serving.
move farther right.
proud to be a Christian right wing extremist!
Democrats are and have always been,anti American-socialist/Marxist/communist thinkers.
Turning off families?
May 4, 2009 - 12:09 ET by moderncommentaries83Really? They're going to make this argument with a straight face when liberals support some or all of the following anti-family policies:
And I could go on.
If nothing else, the venemous attacks on Sarah Palin in last year's election proved beyond a shadow of a doubt how the left really feels about families. They hate them.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
My Question....
May 4, 2009 - 12:21 ET by farstar99Is this Mathews-Shuster-Olbermann triad a plurality of ignorance or a false consensus?
I guess the 2010 elections will be the only gauge for that.
Wow...
May 4, 2009 - 13:02 ET by retroconModcom83!
Bullseye!!!
Would not wanna be down range from you when you take aim.
I'll second that wow
May 4, 2009 - 13:03 ET by katainkentand raise you a fist bump and a woo-hoo ;)
Hold on ‘cause the world will turn if you're ready or not ~ KT Tunstall
Thank you very much. I'm
May 4, 2009 - 13:36 ET by moderncommentaries83Thank you very much.
I'm hell with a keyboard, let me tell you. ;) And fed up to the eyeballs with liberals.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
I wouldn't even call Matthews a liberal
May 4, 2009 - 13:48 ET by StarAZHe is among the Smitten, I would say. He has said he voted for Bush at least once--his brother is a Rep. I guess Tweets is just situational--whatever sells at the moment--you know, pragmatic, like a certain someone.
While several other posters
May 4, 2009 - 16:26 ET by JasonCWhile several other posters fall over themselves to say how great this post is, allow me to point out that it reads more like the usual unsubstantiated laundry list of gripes that a hardcore Rush Limbaugh fan would deploy as evidence of the insidiousness of liberalism.
Let's review these 'anti-family' charges, shall we?
Prohibiting choice schools and/or homeschooling
Not entirely sure what you mean by "choice schools" - is there a law that parents can't send their kids to any private school if they can afford tuition? As for homeschooling, it's quite legal in all 50 states, and happens to be thriving in some parts of stereotypically liberal states like Vermont. So long as you demonstrate that you have the commitment and competency to homeschool your kids, you may.
Allowing abortion-on-demand
And it should be allowed. So long as it is a matter of individual choice (which conservatives, like liberals, seem to champion only when it suits them) and people are not being compelled to abort against their will, it is specious to claim this is an 'anti-family' position.
Stepping on parental notification rights with regard to birth control and/or abortion
If the child is under 16, I'd agree, parents should be involved. 16 or over, they're close enough to adulthood to take responsibility for it him/herself. Just my opinion.
Redefining marriage to include homosexual unions
Which, of course, doesn't affect heterosexual marriages or the family in general in any possible, conceivable way. If gay people want to legally sanctify their monogamy and adopt or artificially inseminate in order to have children, that would in fact be inherently a pro-family step. Just because families that are not identical to yours are being allowed access to the same social institutions you enjoy does not mean yours is being threatened.
Two-child limits (to "save the planet") or taxes on children exceeding said limit or a moratorium on having children
Presently, we pay less, not more taxes, for having children. Do you have any credible source as to the possibility of this limitation/tax penalty/moratorium coming to pass other than fringe paranoiacs?
Hostility toward religious practice
In what way? Do liberals stop you from attending your preferred place of worship? Do "liberal" laws tell you you can't raise your children a certain way?
Banning use of gender-specific terms, including "mom" and "dad"
I found this one the most amusing. Where, exactly, did you hear that anyone, anywhere (again, besides the fringe) wants to make this the law?
Encouraging no-fault divorce
Divorce is unfortunate, but better that a kid be in a split-custody or single-parent situation than in a violently dysfunctional home atmosphere. And I think "encouraging" is a misleading way to characterize it. How about "accepting" it, since it is clearly a necessity in many cases?
Glorifying single motherhood
I'm not sure where exactly the concept itself is being glorified. Every single mother I've ever known has talked about how difficult it is, and I see that as being society's general attitude toward it. However, given the difficulty of it, when a single mother does succeed spectacularly, or just raises a good kid, I see nothing wrong with pointing out that she did it without a father figure helping her.
Holding up pop-icons and repeated failed marriages
Let's be honest here. Pop culture icons are made icons by the masses who make them rich and highly visible. This is not a liberal plot, it stems from the public (liberal and conservative) and its voyeuristic fascination with celebrity culture.
Encouraging promiscuity
Promiscuity may not be as taboo as it was 50 years ago, but I'd highly disagree that it's "encouraged." "Accepted," at best.
And gee, maybe a lot of people were hard on Palin because she was a terrible VP pick. Naaaah, it must be that us liberals "hate families." Your post is straight out of the Limbaugh/Hannity/Coulter handbook. Blunt, unnuanced accusations concerning issues that deserve nuance, culminating in an outrageous claim. Not surprising that so many on this thread are already lauding it. This is why Rush is a right-wing demi-God, and why, as many have astutely pointed out recently, conservatism has gone so dramatically out of fashion.
that's your *opinion*
May 4, 2009 - 16:40 ET by katainkentand you're entitled to it.
Hold on ‘cause the world will turn if you're ready or not ~ KT Tunstall
The last part is an
May 4, 2009 - 17:29 ET by JasonCThe last part is an opinion, yes. The rest is a challenge to the reductive nature of the original post.
interesting jason
May 4, 2009 - 19:36 ET by TruthMongerWhile several other posters fall over themselves to say how great this post is, allow me to point out that it reads more like the usual unsubstantiated laundry list of gripes that a hardcore Rush Limbaugh fan would deploy as evidence of the insidiousness of liberalism.
Let's review these 'anti-family' charges, shall we?
Prohibiting choice schools and/or homeschooling
Not entirely sure what you mean by "choice schools" - is there a law that parents can't send their kids to any private school if they can afford tuition? As for homeschooling, it's quite legal in all 50 states, and happens to be thriving in some parts of stereotypically liberal states like Vermont. So long as you demonstrate that you have the commitment and competency to homeschool your kids, you may.
SO ITS LEGAL - THEY STILL FIGHT IT TOOTH AND NAIL
Allowing abortion-on-demand
And it should be allowed. So long as it is a matter of individual choice (which conservatives, like liberals, seem to champion only when it suits them) and people are not being compelled to abort against their will, it is specious to claim this is an 'anti-family' position.
WHAT ABOUT THE BABY'S CHOICE?
Stepping on parental notification rights with regard to birth control and/or abortion
If the child is under 16, I'd agree, parents should be involved. 16 or over, they're close enough to adulthood to take responsibility for it him/herself. Just my opinion.
YES JUST YOUR OPINION - WHICH IS A HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE OPINION - IN OUR OPINION
Redefining marriage to include homosexual unions
Which, of course, doesn't affect heterosexual marriages or the family in general in any possible, conceivable way. If gay people want to legally sanctify their monogamy and adopt or artificially inseminate in order to have children, that would in fact be inherently a pro-family step. Just because families that are not identical to yours are being allowed access to the same social institutions you enjoy does not mean yours is being threatened.
THE TROUBLE IS THAT HOMOSEXUALS SUFFER FROM A MENTAL ILLNESS OF SEXUAL PERVERSION - AND ENCOURAGING THIS IN OUR COMMUNITY NOT ONLY ADVERSELY AFFECTS PROPER HEALTHY FAMILIES - BUT IS ALSO EXTREMELY NEGLECTFUL OF THESE ILL INDIVIDUALS
Two-child limits (to "save the planet") or taxes on children exceeding said limit or a moratorium on having children
Presently, we pay less, not more taxes, for having children. Do you have any credible source as to the possibility of this limitation/tax penalty/moratorium coming to pass other than fringe paranoiacs?
YES PLENTY
Hostility toward religious practice
In what way? Do liberals stop you from attending your preferred place of worship? Do "liberal" laws tell you you can't raise your children a certain way?
YES THEIR ATTEMPT IS LARGELY STEALTH AND LONGTERM - MADE VIA THE "ENTERTAINMENT" MEDIA AND THE "INFORMATIONAL NEWS" OUTLETS - IT ALSO HAS MUCH SUPPORT WITHIN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY SYSTEM - CHECK OUT THE LATEST DECLINE IN RELIGION THEIR CELEBRATING...
Banning use of gender-specific terms, including "mom" and "dad"
I found this one the most amusing. Where, exactly, did you hear that anyone, anywhere (again, besides the fringe) wants to make this the law?
RECENT ATTEMPTS AT CIVIL RIGHTS LEGISLATION - REF THE ACLU WEBSITE
Encouraging no-fault divorce
Divorce is unfortunate, but better that a kid be in a split-custody or single-parent situation than in a violently dysfunctional home atmosphere. And I think "encouraging" is a misleading way to characterize it. How about "accepting" it, since it is clearly a necessity in many cases?
WHY ACCEPT IT SO EASILY? NO-FAULT DIVORCE CLEARLY ENCOURAGES ACCEPTANCE WHEREAS MOST OF THOSE MARRIAGES WOULD BE SAVED IN A SUPPORTIVE CULTURE
Glorifying single motherhood
I'm not sure where exactly the concept itself is being glorified. Every single mother I've ever known has talked about how difficult it is, and I see that as being society's general attitude toward it. However, given the difficulty of it, when a single mother does succeed spectacularly, or just raises a good kid, I see nothing wrong with pointing out that she did it without a father figure helping her.
I'LL GRANT YOU THEY'VE CALLED SOMEWHAT OF A TIMEOUT ON THIS AS THEY REGROUP TOWARDS A NEW STRATEGY
Holding up pop-icons and repeated failed marriages
Let's be honest here. Pop culture icons are made icons by the masses who make them rich and highly visible. This is not a liberal plot, it stems from the public (liberal and conservative) and its voyeuristic fascination with celebrity culture.
NO THEY ARE MADE VIA THE LEFTWING MEDIA
Encouraging promiscuity
Promiscuity may not be as taboo as it was 50 years ago, but I'd highly disagree that it's "encouraged." "Accepted," at best.
And gee, maybe a lot of people were hard on Palin because she was a terrible VP pick. Naaaah, it must be that us liberals "hate families." Your post is straight out of the Limbaugh/Hannity/Coulter handbook. Blunt, unnuanced accusations concerning issues that deserve nuance, culminating in an outrageous claim. Not surprising that so many on this thread are already lauding it. This is why Rush is a right-wing demi-God, and why, as many have astutely pointed out recently, conservatism has gone so dramatically out of fashion.
WELL YA KNOW LIKEWISE OBAMA IS UNBELIEVEABLY IN-EXPERIENCED FOR POTUS (BEING AN EXECUTIVE POSITION - SARAH PALAN WAS THE MOST EXPERIENCED IN A SIMILAR POSITION THAN ALL OF THE OTHERS ON THE TOP TW TICKETS COMBINED) ALONG WITH COMPLETELY UN-AMERICAN GOV PHILOSOPHIES- BUT YES WE HATE HIM CAUSE HE'S BLACK
YOUR WELCOME AND REGARDS
TM
Gee, when I first saw this
May 4, 2009 - 20:35 ET by JasonCGee, when I first saw this post I thought "Wow, someone took a long time to carefully rebut my points -- what a refreshing change." Then I realized it was just that long because you copied and pasted the entirety of my responses to modcom and the entirety of his original posts. Your own rebuttals essentially say nothing. We'll have to agree to disagree on the abortion thing; everything else is nonsense. A small sampling:
SO ITS LEGAL - THEY STILL FIGHT IT TOOTH AND NAIL
Example, please...
YES JUST YOUR OPINION - WHICH IS A HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE OPINION - IN OUR OPINION
Why? And what's with the 'our'? Are you speaking for every conservative here now?
RECENT ATTEMPTS AT CIVIL RIGHTS LEGISLATION - REF THE ACLU WEBSITE
Couldn't find anything about mom and dad there, but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts it's a paranoid conservative fantasy or, at best, some small comment made by someone with tenuous ACLU affiliations which has been misconstrued as official liberal policy.
By the way, typing in all caps makes your posts seem extra unhinged. Just FYI.
Good evening Jason
May 4, 2009 - 17:14 ET by cocodrieAll the loose morals you are so proud of have given us gteat things.
Aids, the sperad of all manner of STDs and hepatitis. Broken marriages, a soaring divorce rate, and runnaway juvenile delinquincy.
Most important of all they have given us over FIFTY MILLION DEAD AMERICANS FROM MURDER BY ABORTION.
You are despicable.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Well, your post is barely
May 4, 2009 - 17:28 ET by JasonCWell, your post is barely worth replying to. Suffice to say that none of these things I have said "encourage" promiscuity or disease. They encourage personal freedoms and responsibility. A person can responsibly enjoy a hearty sex life without spreading disease, just as others who are so inclined can handle a gun without injuring anyone or blowing off a toe.
As to abortion, your opinion is your own. I take issue with the hyperbole, but I repsect your opnion and know there's nothing I can say to sway you.
Jason
May 4, 2009 - 17:57 ET by cocodrieOVER FIFTY MILLION DEAD AMERICANS ARE HARDLY HYPERBOLE. Neither are they opinion They are in reality DEAD PEOPLE.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Jason doesn't read NB, does he?
May 4, 2009 - 19:24 ET by NforceBecause if s/he really did, or if he really paid attention, he'd know just about EVERY issue brought up has been attacked by either the media or other left wing wh0res like Olbermann & Jon Stewart who are mindless "entertainers."NB reports about this stuff all the time. Good grief man. What does Jason think this entire website is about for crying out loud! Jeeze.
Hey I remember NForce.
May 4, 2009 - 20:37 ET by JasonCHey I remember NForce. Last time I interacted with you, Noel S. came along and put the smackdown on you for calling me a troll. Then, troll-like, you vanished. That was like a year and a half ago. Meanwhile, if you are such a trove of wisdom concerning these accusations, please furnish us all with some examples of these insidious liberal plots in action...
Don't remember that...
May 5, 2009 - 20:22 ET by NforceBut I do now see a new PM message dating from 2007. Oh well. Guess I forgot to check as my life got busier around that time. Now, back to the points, since you asked. Maybe a word change or two would help you out:
LOBBYING for prohibiting choice schools and/or homeschooling.
"The National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers
union, has long lobbied against home schooling, passing a yearly
resolution that says "home schooling programs cannot provide the
student with a comprehensive education experience."--CNN
NEA = liberals & Democrats
LEFT WINGERS want two-child limits (to "save the planet" OR the economy) or taxes on children exceeding said limit or a moratorium on having children
"According to a UK Times Online report, Commission Chairman Jonathon
Porritt states having more than two kids is irresponsible behavior. He
advocates more contraception and abortion as a means of population
control...United States' Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is not far behind. Appearing on ABC's "This Week" with host George Stephanopoulos, Pelosi attempted to explain the new administration's theory that
spending more money on contraception and abortion (er, family planning)
will help save America's economy." Associated Content News
Hostility toward religious practice OF CHRISTIANS
"When you tune in to the show you'll see how kids in public schools are
forbidden to mention Jesus but are forced to learn about Muhammad and
chant praises to Allah calling him "lord of creation." You'll see how a
church is being sued because they wouldn't allow their building to be
used for a lesbian civil union. We'll even show you how the move to be
politically correct has led to the Veteran's Administration removing
Christian crosses from its hospital chapel. Can you imagine a chapel
where a cross is forbidden? Or how about a man dressed as a woman with
full rights to use the girl's locker room where your 14-year-old
daughter is dressing? It's staggering when you look at what's
happening, and it's time we stand up and say "enough."--OneNewsNow
PUSHING for banning use of gender-specific terms, including "mom" and "dad"
"Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into effect a new law that will
prohibit words like "husband and wife", or "mom and dad" from being
spoken or read by both schoolteachers and students. The
bill is part of Schwarzenegger's ongoing battle against traditional
heterosexual-based curriculum in an effort to make public schools more
gay and trans friendly. Books describing marriage between a man and a
woman will be outlawed."
Glorifying single motherhood (leaving unchanged)
Finally, to drill the point home about, as I mentioned, what his website contantly does, I'll link a NB reference to the above:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2009/01/07/coulter-newsbusters-gmta-msm-glorification-single-motherhood
Yeah, the format here is messed up. Can't get italics to clear. Oh well. All it takes is time to prove to you liberals ... err excuse me, PROGRESSIVES that what is said here is more thruth than not. Some of us have jobs and families and don't have hours upon hours to run down every single proof for you people on the left.
"The National
May 6, 2009 - 08:11 ET by JasonC"The National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers
union, has long lobbied against home schooling, passing a yearly
resolution that says "home schooling programs cannot provide the
student with a comprehensive education experience."--CNN
NEA = liberals & Democrats
Woooowwww, so a politically-minded union of professionals is lobbying for something that would directly benefit them and their profession? Get right out of town. Of course a group that is composed of public school teachers is going to advocate the benefits of a public school education and try to make homeschooling look inferior by comparison. But I wouldn't say that makes them inherently "anti-family" any more than the oil industry is "anti-environment" or big tobacco is "pro-cancer" or the NRA is "pro-kids-shooting-each-other".
LEFT WINGERS want two-child limits (to "save the planet" OR the
economy) or taxes on children exceeding said limit or a moratorium on
having children
Having fewer children consuming resources would benefit the environment and the economy. "Left-wingers" pointing this out and making reference to the availability of family planning services is one thing. Get back to me when they're actually pushing for China-esque laws to this effect, and I will be right there with you. It will not happen.
Hostility toward religious practice OF CHRISTIANS
An out-of-context rant cited from a virulent right-wing "news" source (OneNewsNow) is indicative of precisely nothing. Is anyone stopping you from going to church or raising your kids with the religion you want to raise them with? There have to be limits on Christian practice in public schools, for obvious reasons, and if that's not OK with you, there's homeschooling (legal in all 50 states!) and private schools. And God forbid that social studies class teach students about the existence and significance of another religion!
PUSHING for banning use of gender-specific terms, including "mom" and "dad"
Let's put this nonsense to rest once and for all. This law does not punish students for talking about their own parents. If one kid says to another in the cafeteria "I'd like to go to the game but mom and dad won't let me", for instance, he will not get in trouble. The point of the law is to avoid awkward situations on the teacher's part, to keep him or her from saying things like "Be sure to have your mom and dad sign this permission slip." Because so many kids don't have both. It's a perfectly simple measure which is sensitive to kids who don't happen to live in a perfect nuclear unit. Should it be the law? Maybe not. But it's far from being the insidious anti-family measure that you, and TM, and many others want it to look like. Part and parcel of this is the overarching SB777 which "bans anything in public schools that could be interpreted as negative
toward homosexuality, bisexuality and other alternative lifestyle
choices." And from this perfectly reasonable measure of not wanting a school to go out of its way to promote homophobia, we have Randy Thomasson, president of "Campaign for Children and Families" stating that "Arnold Schwarzenegger has delivered young children into the hands of
those who will introduce them to alternative sexual lifestyles . . . This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms."
There's a word for Thomasson's statement: Idiocy.
And last I checked Arnold is a republican. Don't blame me for your side going off the ideological reservation.
As for glorifying single motherhood...if Ann Coulter says it, it must be true!
Yeah hi, it's me again!
May 6, 2009 - 18:40 ET by NforcePoint 1: You asked I gave an example. It is no big secret that your beloved liberals (the "progressive" label is a joke for you modern leftists) hate home schooling and private schooling and wish for it to go away and everyone be indoctrinated to liberalism in public NEA-run schools. NO big story at all as a matter of fact. To us.
Point 2: Again, you asked, I gave an example. Pelosi's birth control wishes (that were removed after an uproar) in the stimulus bill speak volumes of mentality.
Point 3: Again, you asked, I gave an example from "right wing rant". It's in the little stories around the nation that speak the truth. Of course, the New York Times won't be reporting any of it, which is, again, one of the jobs of this website.
Point 4: Again, you asked, I gave an example IN LAW. You can wash your hands of it, spin it, or roll it up and smoke it. But, the fact is that more and more, inch by inch, libtardism under the guise of political correctness is incroaching on and slowly knocking down what Conservatives believe in. And AGAIN, that is what this website exposes all. The. TIME.
Point 5: It's not exactly easy to post links and reports on how your liberal main stream media trumps up single motherhood in glorification. Articles aren't worded that way for an easy search. However, anyone who has been following the (DNC) news since Bush's election in 2000 can see how further left/PC the media has shifted. And yes, you guessed it, AGAIN, that is what this website is all about. One of the biggest glorifiers is MSN.com.
Miscellaneous points: I tend to not get involved in abortion and gay marriage issues because nobody will win over someone else on that (lessen you be called a bigot/homophobe/hater JUST because you are against gay marriage but not being against being gay itself), so that's why I didn't address them. I did not bring this original thread response up and perhaps the poster took wordings a little too far - BUT s/he was in the ballpark of libtardism. You do not SEE any of these issues because you are, indeed a liberal and nothing the DNC main stream media reports is biased to you or rubs you the wrong way. That is, in fact, why you people hate "Faux News" and see them as biased far-right. Mind you, their commentators like Hannity are, but their news reporting is not. Any time people like you whine about bias in the news, it makes me want to go check it out, because you people NEVER whine about bias from ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, NPR, NYT, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, LA Times, blah blah blah..........
In fact, just for fun, I'll throw this at you since I'm sure you do not believe that the media is biased left (why no outrage over Michelle O's $500 shoes while at a cause for the poor? You think MSNBC wouldn't have pointed that out had it been Laura Bush?). This is from the LA Times, of all liberal rags and media bias:
http://newsroom.ucla...
wow this song is getting old
May 4, 2009 - 12:35 ET by katainkentfive wolves sitting around concerning themselves about the structure of the fence around the sheep's pen. Why should they care unless its to further demoralize the sheep.
Hold on ‘cause the world will turn if you're ready or not ~ KT Tunstall
I really love it when liberals speak for me!
May 4, 2009 - 12:47 ET by jefflebowskiThere are two certain things in this old world...and both of them are Chris Matthews does not speak for me! Thank heavens for NYC and places of that stature. It gives him somewhere to continually say stupid things without getting slapped silly. I, myself, prefer Texas.
Angry White Dude
www.angrywhitedude.c...
LOL jeff......as I do Big
May 4, 2009 - 13:01 ET by bigtimerLOL jeff... ...as I do Big Sky Country!
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
We watched this
May 4, 2009 - 12:59 ET by bigtimerWe watched this yesterday...my instant reaction was anger with his pathetic wisdom/whiz-bang words...then I just started laughing like crazy...these people are truly clueless...they really need help, I understand the agenda here, but this is past pathetic, yet comical at the same time.
Matthews can't help himself, plus he will spew anything for attention...anything.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I must disagree...
May 4, 2009 - 18:04 ET by unkeeafI saw this show too and must disagree with you. I think they know EXACTLY what they are doing. They lie, cheat, steal, make things up, etc., etc., etc. Whatever it takes to forward the communist agenda.
These people are scum of the earth. They'd be some of the first I'd like to see put before the firing squad for treason.
MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party
Hi unkee... Did you not
May 4, 2009 - 18:19 ET by bigtimerHi unkee...
Did you not see where I put the word "agenda"?
I know full well what they are doing...I feel the same as you do...what makes me angry is there is nothing I can do about this after so many years, decades, except what I am doing when it comes to blathering, spewing Matthews and his minions and all their leftist tripe....there are times I have to laugh...I have no choice...unless I come unglued 24/7 (like they all are)
...and what good would that do?
These are ugly people with ugly lives...how can they possibly ever be happy, when they get what they want...they still aren't happy...it is too funny at times.
Understand where I am coming from?
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I did miss the word agenda...
May 4, 2009 - 19:25 ET by unkeeafGlad to hear it, but I'm not surprised we're on the same page.
These scoundrels are significantly upping the ante and I'm very concerned about our ability to stop them. I think talk radio will be off the air as we know it in 90 - 120 days.
Sad times.
MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party
This is nothing more than a
May 4, 2009 - 13:52 ET by MrSnugglesThis is nothing more than a concerted effort by the left to marginalize conservatives and bully us into becoming more liberal. They know that if this happens, it will guarantee their eternal dominance. They know that a conservative opposition which offers real ideas and stands on principle will win every time.
This is because of the simple fact that conservatism is honest, it does not lie, but the left is in perpetual lying mode in order to push their agenda. They would never come out and openly advocate for outright government control of every aspect of our lives because they know people would reject that immediately.
Well just cuz you love Rush
May 4, 2009 - 14:43 ET by HeaterManWell just cuz you love Rush doesn't mean you'd want him to date your daughter.
Matthews, have you come out
May 4, 2009 - 15:54 ET by RogerCfromSDMatthews, have you come out yet?
A nation cannot be free without a free, unbiased media. We are not free.
Howard Fineman is a
May 4, 2009 - 17:35 ET by fitzfongHoward Fineman is a moron. Women with brains understand that tax cuts and limited government put more money in their pockets so that they can decide how to raise their own families...not have a bunch of low-grade union thugs get paid more to fail at it.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
You're Right - Liberal Family Values Will Be Our Downfall!
May 4, 2009 - 17:45 ET by StogieGuyJust saw this today and it's worth the few minutes to watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU
Our future is looking bleak and it's idiots like these guys who are speeding things up!
Sg... That it is...I have
May 4, 2009 - 18:01 ET by bigtimerSg...
That it is...I have also posted this all over myself...here a couple of places and elsewhere...people should listen.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I,m tired . I read day after
May 4, 2009 - 20:10 ET by hixI,m tired . I read day after day how my conservatism is somthing to be put under a microscope dissected and corrected by the likes of Chris Mathews and whom ever else is the expert dujour. And I say to hell with them all. the left has control of administration and both houses of congress and soon probably the courts and still they attack. they never let up. why? what are they afraid of? the only course of action they seem to understand is to try and make me beleive I,m wrong. well I,m sorry fellas I AM NOT WRONG! and history will bear this out. so crrawl back into your little holes and hatch your tiny little plans. conservatism is right and will regrow and survive.
Why should we care about what they say
May 5, 2009 - 10:33 ET by Tom PaineWhen liberals were getting bitch slapped in election after election did we ever see one of these shows suggesting they had to adopt more conservative positions in order to win? The themes were always more along the line that the conservatives had to become more “inclusive” of liberals in the political process. They were even promoting the idea that a Supreme Court nominee could be filibustered in a full Senate vote when the Constitution clearly specifies a straight majority vote. The basis tenets of liberalism have never been questioned by any of the mainstream media talking heads. Why on earth would we want to take any advice from them?
You don't speak for me,
May 5, 2009 - 10:36 ET by wiwfYou don't speak for me, Chris. You don't get it. RINOs like McCain turn me off from the Republican Party. Limbaugh, Bush, and your endless inaccurate stereotypes about "republicans" keep me going in my party.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
I'm so loving watching
May 5, 2009 - 23:20 ET by RR GOPI'm so loving watching these jerks sink...slowly but surely...we need to savor it.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).