As the news magazines decline and fall into snarky opinion journals, Newsweek this week has a cover titled "We Are All Socialists Now." They’re recalling Richard Nixon saying "We are all Keynesians now" in 1971. But conservatives uniformly would reply on a rebuttal cover, if there were one: "Speak for Yourself."
The "cover story," if you can call it that, is a brief editorial by Newsweek editor Jon Meacham and former Washington bureau chief Evan Thomas, and it began by attacking Sean Hannity and Mike Pence for being in denial about Socialist America and threatening to foist on America an "fractious and unedifying debate" that refuses the terms of surrender:
The interview was nearly over. On the Fox News Channel last Wednesday evening, .Sean Hannity was coming to the end of a segment with Indiana Congressman Mike Pence, the chair of the House Republican Conference and a vociferous foe of President Obama's nearly $1 trillion stimulus bill. How, Pence had asked rhetorically, was $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts going to put people back to work in Indiana? How would $20 million for "fish passage barriers" (a provision to pay for the removal of barriers in rivers and streams so that fish could migrate freely) help create jobs? Hannity could not have agreed more. "It is … the European Socialist Act of 2009," the host said, signing off. "We're counting on you to stop it. Thank you, congressman."
Meacham and Thomas don’t rebut the notion that NEA-subsidized art or fish barriers aren’t exactly a "stimulus" – they merely disparage all that troublesome ideological labeling:
There it was, just before the commercial: the S word, a favorite among conservatives since John McCain began using it during the presidential campaign. (Remember Joe the Plumber? Sadly, so do we.) But it seems strangely beside the point. The U.S. government has already—under a conservative Republican administration—effectively nationalized the banking and mortgage industries. That seems a stronger sign of socialism than $50 million for art. Whether we want to admit it or not—and many, especially Congressman Pence and Hannity, do not—the America of 2009 is moving toward a modern European state.
This is a remarkable declaration from the liberal media. They disparaged the Republicans as they told the voters that Obama would install socialism, and then when he begins to do that, media elites say well, "we are all socialists now" any way and demand that conservatives get on the bandwagon of "reality" instead of trying to resist:
If we fail to acknowledge the reality of the growing role of government in the economy, insisting instead on fighting 21st-century wars with 20th-century terms and tactics, then we are doomed to a fractious and unedifying debate. The sooner we understand where we truly stand, the sooner we can think more clearly about how to use government in today's world.
Liberals are forever whining about being called liberals – lamenting "20th century terms and tactics." How is it that socialism is the 21st century vogue, and free markets are a vestige of the past? The obvious answer is the election returns (and the strong socialist flavor of our media establishment). That does not mean in a free society that conservatives can't try to reverse the vogue, just as it happened in 1980 and 1994.
It's cute to argue that since this latest phase of socialism started under a lame-duck Republican president, that the time for "unedifying debate" is over, and that somehow conservatives weren't resisting socialism then. (Check your talk-radio transcripts, Newsweek.)
The only Newsweek cover that would be more obviously untrue would be "We Are All Objective Journalists Now."
Newsweek cover image above via Newscom.com.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
The Press - A Brief Essay...
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:29 ET by unkeeafThe United States is in big trouble for a number of reasons, not the least of which is an activist press that serves as a full-time public relations firm for the Democrat party.
Following is an overview of the typical PR firms responsibilities:
With that being the case, the typical unengaged American gets information about our country from a public relations firm that is employed full-time by the Democrat Party. How is this any different than what existed in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy? It's not, and that spells big trouble for this country.
MSM= PR firm for the Democrat Party
MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party
THE "STIMULUS": A QUICK STUDY
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:33 ET by reelman46THE “STIMULUS”: A QUICK STUDY
It will not work…Japan has tried this 8 times.
It did not work for FDR, it lengthened the pain by 7 years.
Its at least a trillion tax dollars with interest.
Its all borrowed money on your VISA.
Your kids will still be paying it back.
It robs the private sector of money and promotes serious inflation.
It encourages states to be irresponsible over spenders.
It buys blue state votes and pays lefty groups back.
It has hidden radical items for social (not just economic) change.
The permanent jobs will be in gov-meant growth to manage all this (bureaucrats).
Many programs will never go away and cost taxpayers.
The DOW looks 6-9 months ahead and knows baloney when it sees it.
The average recession lasts 11 months without gov-meant interference.
It fails to make permanent the current tax cuts on income and inheritance.
Excuse-making will wear thin by summer when IRAs are still stagnant…reality rage will grow.
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish)
Reelman....right on. The
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:54 ET by celatorReelman....right on. The evidence that this pig bill will not work is overwhelming. The socialists who are pushing the bill with all their strength can see the same evidence we can all see--that the bill will lead to enormous economic catastrophe.
And they refuse to put into realistic play the very steps--reduction of taxes, lower spending etc--that will pull us out of this. They will not do it.
It's crystal clear to me that they want the economy, the markets, our personal savings, the value of the US dollar to descend into complete chaos. They want this economic war on the citizens of the United States to continue. What other conclusion can a reasonable person derive?
For liberal Democrats and the Old Media, everything is crisis, chaos, calamity and catastrophe. That justifies stealing your property and liberties.
I meant to add that the
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:16 ET by celatorI meant to add that the Congressional Budget Office's dire predictions if the pig bill is passed are being purposely ignored by Obama and the Ds, as well.
For liberal Democrats and the Old Media, everything is crisis, chaos, calamity and catastrophe. That justifies stealing your property and liberties.
We are all socialists
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:33 ET by motherbeltWe are all socialists now?
If this lot have their way, you can bet on it.
I've brought this up in the past, but I think they are reading the tea leaves and interpreting the message as Americans being ready for socialism. Far too many people see the government's responsibility to take care of them and protect them from the consequences of their own acts of irresponsibility, or even just plain bad choices.
Here in Harrisburg, PA, a young woman went to the State House for a hearing on education, and complained to the legislature that she was going to graduate from college with $30,000 in debt. "How is that fair?" she whined.
An MP in Britain some time ago wrote about that country's slide into what he called a "pocket money society." In other words, government taking on more and more of the heavy lifting in regard to providing needed services: health care, education, etc., and the individual's earnings being used as "pocket money," for the individual's desires, (vacations, electronics, etc), not needs.
I believe Americans are on their way to this mindset. And far too many are willing to give up some freedom in order to have guaranteed freebies.
Just as long as they don't look too closely at the health care plan in the stimulus bill, with its seniors need to live with their infirmities instead of treating them and cost-effective (not necessarily best) treatment, they will be happy at the thought of a free lunch.
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
In many respects, this is a racial thing...
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:41 ET by unkeeafDue to the significant percentage of African-Americans who have found themselves on government assistance over the last several decades, I believe that population has become far more accepting of socialism than the typical american of european dissent. In many ways, the last 40 years have conditioned that group of Americans to accept it.
This is not to say a percentage of white americans don't feel the same (they most certainly do), I just believe it is a far smaller percentage on a per capita basis.
MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party
Racist Socialism
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:55 ET by Sergeant ROCKYou are correct.
Many years ago I was working on a project to re-roof a large HUD project and discovered, through conversation with a resident there, that there were in some cases three generations at a time living there as wards of the State. Liberals will insist that this is success by definition. I beg to differ.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Bolton/KEYES 2012
With respect, I disagree
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:07 ET by KC MulvilleI've worked with many blacks over my career. (By the way, I refuse to refer to them as African-American, because I deny that their African descent detracts from their American-ness in any way, and certainly not enough that we need reminding that they're American.) I rarely worked with any black who displayed that mentality - and indeed, I can't recall any at the moment. The black co-workers in my experience didn't act like that at all, and I only go by my own experience.
I'll change your definitions a bit. Blacks in the academic world tend to favor socialism - but then, so do their white counterparts. But in the working world, it hasn't been my experience.
The problem is..
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:16 ET by Sergeant ROCK.. that it is not the academics that end up the victims of their flawed idealogy. The evidence is that there is disportionate number of blacks on welfare of one kind or another.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Bolton/KEYES 2012
The problem is..
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:16 ET by Sergeant ROCK.. that it is not the academics that end up the victims of their flawed idealogy. The evidence is that there is a disportionate number of blacks on welfare of one kind or another.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Bolton/KEYES 2012
The economics of fear
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:47 ET by KC MulvilleTrue capitalism depends on risk, and risk provokes fear. Risk and fear must go together. An investment is a risk, and unless you have an environment that allows risks, you won't get any investment. Therefore, capitalism is ... and must be ... a scary business. Risk is crucial to its success, and fear plays a crucial role. Fear is how capitalism regulates itself. Fear is what prevents investors from investing in bad companies, and that's what keeps companies on the up-and-up. If there is no fear, the system doesn't work.
You can't make an economy safe. You just can't. It is, and must be, a scary business. The people who sold those bundled credit packages weren't making anything safe ... they were just hiding the fear. And now Democrats and liberals are doing the same thing. They're assuring vulnerable Americans that they will rescue people from fear. They can "fix" the economy.
the good news is socialism
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 14:49 ET by TruthMongerthe good news is socialism always fails spectacularly
i guess we're all soviets now:)
If by "socialist", they
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:37 ET by Ruths husband BenIf by "socialist", they mean "in deep sh%t", I agree. I think we will be there for at least 4 years (and I am praying it isn't longer).
This one pisses me off
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:53 ET by KC MulvilleBetween the media and the administration, have you ever met a group of people who are so desperate to end the argument and declare themselves the victor? And why, do we suppose, are they so eager to stop thinking and reviewing?
What a disingenuous premise! Bush claimed himself to be a conservative president, and in many aspects he was, but when it comes to the economy, he certainly wasn't. Unlike arithmetic, political ideology has no distributive property.
George Bush didn't define conservatism, and these two liars simply exploit Bush's off-conservative decisions to make their own point. Conservatives have been against this from the beginning.
This editorial shows why Newsweek is dropping so quickly. The editors are so over-the-top in their unfairness, and so deceitful in their arguments, that no one should take them seriously. And by the way ...
Bad direction from a bad Government
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 09:59 ET by rightwingchefBarry has been in office for only a few weeks and we have gone from capitalism to socialism . And the sad thing is we let it happen. The government now runs most of our free market institutions, they are making decisions in our lives that we no longer have control over. We are now going to have to depend on the government for all our social needs, just like the USSR a few short years ago. I see no difference in the two. We have gotten the change he promissed, we better wake up soon or our country will be given away as well as our natural born rights as American citizens.
The "we" they're referring
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:01 ET by moderncommentaries83The "we" they're referring to must be Meacham and Thomas, and the mice in their respective pockets.
I am not a socialist and never will be. I fully reject the concepts of socialism and deny that any government that embraces socialism represents me and the interests of my fellow citizens.
Please, can someone here explain this to me, because I'm having a hard time getting my head around the inconsistency:
Liberals like Meacham and Thomas would decry, say, Evangelicals or Catholics because we (supposedly) belong to churches that deny our individuality and repress individual thought and personal independent expression. They think it's terrible and encourage radical dissent in such churches.
Liberals claim that individuals have a right to be diverse and diversity of thought, creed, etc. is vital to society (something I don't necessarily disagree with).
But then LIBERALS turn around and embrace a political ideology that does the exact opposite. They embrace an ideology that denies the individual his right to free expression, free speech, free religious worship, and the right to free enterprise and individual wealth. And they embrace a political ideology that enforces strict collectivist mentality with a force much greater and violently brutal than, say, the Vatican.
Am I the only one who thinks this is totally inconsistent and rather hypocritical? I can't be alone in making this observation...can I?
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
No, you are not alone in that
Sat, 11/14/2009 - 17:51 ET by RHawkinsI am getting so frustrated that it seems everything the left says is either a contradiction or an abomination. I have conservative friends who are not closely following all this and they seem happy. Maybe I should just ignore it all, too. I had one friend explain to me (I may have posted this idea on here before) that you can not argue with a liberal. They are arguing from emotion and you are attempting to argue with logic, and it will NEVER get through. Sigh I swear to you I did not spend the last 28 years of my life under an oath to support and defend socialism.
I think
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 10:37 ET by klchadwickI think that I just threw up in my mouth!
Me Too
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 23:21 ET by Dont_Like_TheBluesNow I know why the Romans needed vomitoriums.
If we are now "socialists",
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 11:04 ET by rbosqueIf we are now "socialists", then we NEED to march on Washington. And I don't mean with signs and holding hands.
We may not all be
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 11:13 ET by DJEddleWe may not all be socialists, but all of us may soon be living in a socialist country. Our government is printing money at a record pace and promising to nationalize our financial institutions, healthcare, and perhaps even the energy industry - all in the name of "economic recovery." If we really need an economic boost, why not pass legislation that will actually accomplish that goal?
This article offers up some pretty good analysis and suggestions on how to do that:
The Stimulus Needs Stimulus
Does anyone think that such plans could ever pass through our Congress? Shouldn't that tell us something?
*If you like the comments, check out the articles.
newsweek
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 11:50 ET by east tennessee johnOf course Newsweek the NY &LA Times and other members of the MSM want to declare we're all socialists. Since they can't thrive in a market economy they must support the alternative in order to hopefully survive. They want to be PBS/NPR add-ons . Since they support the administration of our 1st Marxist POTUS, they think they'll actually become, in fact, the new Pravda and Investia.
newsweek
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 11:50 ET by east tennessee johnOf course Newsweek the NY &LA Times and other members of the MSM want to declare we're all socialists. Since they can't thrive in a market economy they must support the alternative in order to hopefully survive. They want to be PBS/NPR add-ons . Since they support the administration of our 1st Marxist POTUS, they think they'll actually become, in fact, the new Pravda and Investia.
1970s Redux
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 11:54 ET by rammingspeedWhen the pain of socialistic policies reached the average American during Jimmy Carter's presidency, there was a sudden, unexpected (from the liberals point of view) rebellion and the bums (Carter) were unceremoniously tossed out in the 1980 election.
Things are still too much in the abstract at this time, with the economic crisis distracting people from the implications of a socialistic system. Wait until the expanded governmental plans and policies hit them personally. Wait until people say, "You're taking my money away - making me suffer - for what?!" It just doesn't stick, not in a free society where people can vote and change things.
If it doesn't happen, if people lay down and accept socialism, then there's nothing that can be done. I'm betting on human instinct to take over and make things right.
Betting on instinct?
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 12:21 ET by jakewashereI'm betting on human instinct to take over and make things right.
You're also betting that thirty years of liberal bullshit being shoveled into Americans' brains has done nothing to pervert their 'instinct.'
I find it much more realistic to believe that a small majority of Americans (right around, oh, say, 52%) have been brainwashed by the Lefty media and academia into treating their own political instinct as a thing to be distrusted. Sure you like capitalism, but what has it ever done for YOU? When did capitalism pay off your student loans? Has capitalism ever offered you free healthcare? What has capitalism ever done for the environment?
No, no. It's highly unlikely that anyone in this country can still think clearly enough to notice what they're being sold.
Our fate is darkness.
~I still have hope, Jack
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 12:35 ET by choselife3xOur first Revolution began with a lot fewer people than we have now. Getting to know the people on this site encourages me to believe that there are still plenty of real Americans left. We will not let America die so easily.
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
jake, I agree. People seem to think this will be "fixed" in 2010
Sat, 02/14/2009 - 21:46 ET by R D HelmNot a chance in hell that will happen, as we who love and appreciate true freedom are now decidedly outnumbered.
As for 2012, I am of the considered opinion that there is only a 50/50 chance that elections will even be held in this country by then. Even if they are, and the dems are sent packing, it isn't going to matter.
It is so over for the America we once knew that it almost isn't even worth talking about anymore.
Forked, we are. :-(
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Not by the hair....
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 12:07 ET by oldLouA these are the people who were originally un-biased. All I got to say is not by the hair of my chinny, chin,chin. My house is built of conservative stone.
Nothing but wishful
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 12:55 ET by HockeyKidNothing but wishful thinking on the part of Newsweek. America is still America--we just happen to have a traitorous president and Congress at the moment.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
“We Are All Socialists Now.”
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 21:29 ET by needleWhat this means is that all the people on the editorial staff of Newsweek are Socialists now. This is front cover news?
PS: At least for one week Obama himself is not on the cover, just his spirit.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
A WineJunky Thought
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 13:46 ET by cbeskiMy daily exercise in futility emailed to Newsweek. I'm sure it will be read with great interest. Yep, right.
Sirs,
Of all your covers over the past year that have been worthy of lining my cat's liter pan, your most recent declaring that "We Are All Socialists Now" is so far beyond that it makes me wonder ..... If I did line my cat pan with something like this would the cats refuse to use the facility believing it already too full.
I have one request for your editorial board. Please find a country that you feel matches you anti American beliefs and move there as soon as possible. You are doing this Country a great disservice by remaining here and calling yourselves Americans.
Sincerely, But With No Respect Intended,
C. M. House
C.M.House
Fri, 02/13/2009 - 00:40 ET by MICHIGAN-MOMPersonally I loved your entire email to Newsweek, but in particular:
If I did line my cat pan with something like this would the cats refuse to use the facility believing it already too full.
and
Sincerely, But With No Respect Intended,
Couldn't have said it better myself.
What scares me is . .
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 14:14 ET by 1611LilacLady. . . the people who will read that are the same people who still do not use a computer. They have no way of knowing their brainwashing continues. After all if Newsweeks says it's so, it must be true.
That's scary!
MSM is amended to be MSSM
Main Stream Socialist Media
Isaiah 5:20a Woe unto them who call evil good, and good evil. . . KJV
'We Are All Socialists Now" newsweak
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 14:22 ET by vrwc13...huh?
v
...so what's next?
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 14:44 ET by vrwc13"We Are All Pro-choice Now."
"We Are All Liberals Now."
"We Are All One Religion Now."
"We Are All The World Now."
"We Are All his Now." ...sorry Jesus, we got a new messiah...
v
→ That's the problem
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 22:27 ET by Cool ArrowIf we had driven American cars, we wouldn't all be in one Accord.
in one accord?
Fri, 02/13/2009 - 00:28 ET by MICHIGAN-MOMSpeak for yourself, I love my Chevrolet.
Eventhough I personally have never worked for the big three, as a native Michiganian I am savvy enough to know not to bite the hand that feeds me. When others in my state are laid off from lack of work, the repercussions are palpable, as all outlying businesses suffer from their departure from our state's economy.
And as for Newsweek saying "We are all socialists now.'', my sister likes to say: "You can stand in a garage all day long, but that doesn't make you a car." Even if political thugs have managed to put a socialist noose on the USA economy, there are millions of Americans who will never BE socialists. Depend on it.
We are all screwed now!
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 14:47 ET by jackie3We are all screwed now. The whole bill is a scam. The derivatives trading from the wall street bucket shops of 2000 have come home to roost. There is no way to pay the debt from the derivatives trading. Hence, Paulson's: "we're all screwed now" look.
If people realized 8 trillion of the bill goes overseas and is probably going to pay off legal gambling debts the public would be marching. I guess we all too stupid to figure just how screwed we really are out.
Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
We aren't socialists yet, but we will be in a few hours
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 15:27 ET by R D HelmOnce the Government Takeover Bill is signed into law, its all over for the America we all grew up in.
Good luck, comrades.
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
NO!
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 17:18 ET by NorthCoasterNo, only the Left Wing is Socialist!
not in my country
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 17:50 ET by boozyLock and load fellow americans...we cannot let this happen....
Well, I guess if we're all
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 17:54 ET by pitter43Well, I guess if we're all socialists, I guess the last American left in what used to be America. I don't believe I am by the way. I'm 59 and lived all those years as an American fought as an American and will die an American. democrat/liberals might be ( are ) socialists but I'm not with them and never will be. If I die as I'm typing this, I'll be happy because I've lived my life proudly as an American.
pitter43
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 18:24 ET by AnotherFedUpOne...Well Said!
with you all the way, its just that I am so afraid for my children, grandchildren, and thier grandchildren......
with you all the way, its
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 18:54 ET by pitter43with you all the way, its just that I am so afraid for my children, grandchildren, and thier grandchildren......
*******************************************************
Not trying to scare you but you have good reason to be concerned with the way hussian is starting out. I heard on fox news that the new " heath care " that's in the pork bill that the government wants all your health records and they will be decieding who gets what heath care. It reminds me of the 70s movie science fiction called " Soylent Green ". That has something to do with stimulas?
"Future" Health Care..............
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 20:00 ET by AnotherFedUpOne...............is now here. When I heard "The One" talking about making everyones health care records availible by using more computers, it didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out what he meant by that. Its not that I have anything to hide, I DO NOT want the Gubment to make descisions on MY health care!
This is beyond belief, and that we are now in the future. I do remember the movie Soylent Green, and never in my wildest dreams ever think that we would see this sort of thing in my lifetime.
Question is, when are we as Americans, going to stand up and tell the "Goverment" that we are not going to take this anymore?
Sorry for the rant.............
No need for an apology. I
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 22:25 ET by Clear thinkerNo need for an apology.
I wish more Americans would get worked up as you are. These are defining moments in history that we are living. We must not sit on our asses and let this slide towards Marxism succeed.
Angry American!
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
Question is, when are we as
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 12:25 ET by jakewashereQuestion is, when are we as Americans, going to stand up and tell the "Goverment" that we are not going to take this anymore?
Never. Never. Never.
We're all pigs at the trough. Oink, oink.
You'll eat your goddam slop and LIKE it, mister.
No wonder they are going out
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 19:53 ET by dOhNo wonder their readership has so drastically declined. If only "News"weak would go out of business for good!
We are all to blame
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 21:52 ET by PopularTechBy being ignorant to Bush's big government policies and playing partisan politics, conservatives and republicans allowed this to happen.
Bush Was a Big-Government Disaster (The Wall Street Journal)
How many people do you engage in discussion on these issues? How many books do you recommend to friends and family? If you cannot convince people you know as to why socialist policies are against their liberties and freedom then what hope does any of this have?
If you want to read what is coming I suggest...
FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression (Jim Powell, Historian, 2003)
"The politically astute deployment of relief and public works money gave FDR considerable advantages in the 1936 presidential election campaign. Virginia's Democratic senator Carter Glass acknowledged that "the elections would have been much closer had my party not had a four billion, eight hundred million dollar relief bill as campaign fodder." - FDR's Folly pg 98
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution
Thanks Pop
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 22:18 ET by choselife3xNothing like a little light reading to get me out of my funk. ;)
What has America come to?
In order to be pro-choice, one must first be born. Ah, the irony.
Discussion engagement
Fri, 02/13/2009 - 00:02 ET by MICHIGAN-MOMI would love to engage more people in discussion re: the issues. But it is a sad fact that there are too many intellectually lazy people in our country who simply will not be engaged. They would rather follow the lead of the celebrity du jour, no matter how ill informed, morally bankrupt or intellectually stunted a famous face may be.
Vituperative utterance unfettered by something as basic as the facts, have sadly taken the place of well-informed opinions and reasonable discussion of the pros and cons of an issue. Which is why, by the way, the reason that people are waking up to the frightening and unwelcome realization that an increasingly socialized ecomony has been foisted upon them much to their chagrin, while they floated in their intellectual limbo.
M-Mom... Wow. Thank
Fri, 02/13/2009 - 00:16 ET by bigtimerM-Mom...
Wow.
Thank you.
You sure spoke for me....much better than I could have ever dreamed of.
I haven't seen you here before, but sure glad I did tonight. ;-)
What a way with words you have...a gift.
Newsweek can go to
Wed, 02/11/2009 - 22:23 ET by Clear thinkerNewsweek can go to hell.
I am not a Socialist, and will rail against Socialism until I die. We still live in a free country... at least for a little longer.
Angry American!
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
I Saw That Cover And Wanted To Rip It To Shreds
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 06:22 ET by L.N. SmitheeI saw that Newsweek cover for the first time tonight as I was browsing in a Barnes & Noble. I wanted to rip it to shreds. The same journalists who laughed at Joe Wurzelbacher's warnings of creeping socialism prove him right, but they still disrespect him!
In the 2008 debates, when Obama would talk about "21st Century solutions," I was hoping someone from the McCain camp would help him counter that with something like "What is a '21st Century solution'? It's a meaningless phrase. It doesn't mean anything. Good ideas that get results don't have expiration dates even if they were first conceived in, say, 1776. Ill-conceived, unworkable ideas aren't made any better because the people that thought of them are thirty years younger than usual."
"Well, I've got nothing against the press...they wouldn't print it if it wasn't true..." -- Joe Jackson, "Sunday Papers"
Damn it to Hell...
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 10:50 ET by AMR1960It frosts me to no end, but NEWSWEEK IS RIGHT!!! Just look at the damn headlines. This Socialistic nightmare descending upon us all, is because too many of us are more interested in the latest episode of Survivor. Or what the latest sports scores are. I for one will not go quietly into the night...Demand responsibility, accountability, and reject those that betray good honest American values.
Long Live...THE REPUBLIC !
re: Newsweek numbskulls
Thu, 02/12/2009 - 22:24 ET by MICHIGAN-MOMIn a 1969 speech vice President Spiro Agnew made a speech written by William Safire which seems eerily appropos to describe American politics 2009. He said: "A spirit of national masochism prevails, encouraged by an effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals." To a 1970 San Diego audience Agnew said: "In the United States today, we have more than our share of the nattering nabobs of negativism."
It would appear many of the nattering nabobs of negativism have nested at Newsweek. Graham, your last sentence was spot on.