James Rove

"Liberals ignore the polls, public opinion, and overall proof of a liberal lean in todays media" You can provide all the polls you want of how most Americans think the media has a liberal bias, but that does not prove anything. The 1992 RNC chairman admitted that there is no liberal media* and that it's just a myth conjured by Republicans. He described crying "liberal media!" similar to "working the refs". Bill Kristol even s

The post by Dirty Harry has no evidence to back up his scathing accusations, just assertions.

" uh huh and what part of the dnc platform do you speak of? hmmmmm??" What on Earth are you talking about? Since when does a party platform control what religion its members belong to? Well, I say to you, where in the DNC platform does it say that Christianity should be eliminated. You're rite, dabe, these are just generalizations and as I said before, strawmen. "They just hate any Christian religion. They love islam

Nice job at irrelevantly smearing Wolf Blitzer with no evidence and ignoring Dean's statement. You haven't refuted anything. And BakerStreet, I don't think you read the transcript right. Notice he said if Democracts are going to lose, they should lose with 100% turnout, meaning he thinks election reform is a nonpartisan issue. No where did he say that if there was election reform Democrats would say. In fact, that is exactly what he did no

Right on, DNCdude. Most liberals do have religions. Liberals don't hate religions. Come on. Stop burning straw men.

Right on, DNCdude. Most liberals do have religions. Liberals don't hate religions. Come on. Stop burning straw men.

COMMON SENSE ALERT: Howard Dean was obviously not talking about registered Republicans. He was talking about Republican political leadership in Washington. Did you really think he was talking about all of you, or are you just being disingenuous? I'm sorry for sounding offensive, but it really shocks me to log on and find this stuff being posted. I thought it was quite obvious what he meant. Howard Dean today on Wolf Blitzer R

I don't think this is fair. You talk about the slurring, looney left hating Bush while the cosnervatives on this thread write about preparing to shoot and fire upon the liberals who are all always out of touch with reality. "How can you tell a liberal from a conservative? just check who is clueless. That's the liberal." You accuse a liberal of slurring, and turn right around and produce a slurring of your own. You hope that you can ge

How would you mock hypocracy? You do it by making reference to the act that was hypocritical.

You did not address what the important part of what I said. He was not making fun of his drug problems, but of his hypocracy.

Putting in context does not purely mean not splicing speaches. It also means considering the situation, surroundings, and past events, such as the fact that he was lampooned for not saying bin Laden was absolutely guilty.

No, Dean did not say Sanders was a socialist. Maybe that's difficult to realize because you didn't see the video clip and the way he said it. He didn't say, all right, he is a socialist. He said all right, we're talking labels now.

Once AGAIN, you are taking things out of context. Asked whether he was rushing to judgment, the former Vermont governor said with a laugh, ''I got in trouble because I wouldn't convict Osama bin Laden. Maybe I've learned something.''

Dean was not mocking the fact that Rush was addicted, but the fact that Rush said people who did drugs should be in jail, all while he himself was doing drugs. How about reading the rest of the article? Dean said he was pointing out the hypocracy, not the act itself. As the Captiol Steps, a very popular satire group who themselves wrote a parody about Limaugh's drug problems ("Look Away, Limbaugh Fans" ["I Wish I was on Oxycontin"]) ,

Come on, be real. We all know he meant to say "Saddam Hussein" and tripped on his words.

How did you come up with THAT conclusion? If you actually put the quote in context, you will notice that Dean said Sanders is not a socialist, but instead, a liberal democrat. When he said "we're talking about words here", he means they're getting into semantics and labels, which, as we saw in the thread about what the definition of a neocon is, is not helpful.

It's been said a lot here how "neoconservative" is misused. Maybe, instead of just accepting the fact that it's misused, we should all correct people when they misuse it and other words from politics. (Conservatives have done a good job at giving "liberal" a negative conotation, just as "neocon" is used as a knee-jerk word by liberals)

No, neoconservative is not another word for conservative, Reagan conservative, Reagan Republican, or any other kind of Republican. They are the small groups who only believe in the liberal-goal-through-conservervative-means policy of invading countries to spread democracy. (Not everyone who believes that, but the few who only believe in that and will support the positions on other issues of the party that will adopt the neocon policy) Here is

Neo-conservative, as defined in Pat Buchanon's "Where the Right Went Wrong", is one who believes in the Wilsonian idea of spreading democracy through developing world countries, but they believe in doing so by invading them. Neocons many, many decades ago were liberals. During the Cold War they were strong advocates of eliminating the Soviet Union (NOTE: all those who opposed the USSR are NOT neocons; however all neocons opposed the USSR), bec

Draginol, thanks for the response. I appreciate your work to try to get your update and your new effort to make the sequal. Thanks!

I, too would like to know what's happening with the updates. The ideas I like the most are new candidates (Biden, Jeb Bush, DEAN, Feingold, Frist, Gingrich [yes, he's in NH], Giuliani, Lieberman [maybe], MCCAIN, Pataki) and the primaries. I'd like all of the updates mentioned above, but those two are my favorites. Also, if you add primaries, it might be a good idea to add even a few more candidates (Dole(s), Dukakis, Hatch, Hart, Kemp

"Can you just imagine if a Republican made a comment like this. The media would have non-stop coverage of it, but since he's a liberal democrat, he gets a pass. " No offense intended, but I think supporters of Republicans have become so used to using the phrase, "If Republicans had done... can you imagine what people would have said?" that they are using it when it doesn't apply. Byrd's comments were not racist. And if I imagine a Rep

Why does this statement make Byrd a bigot? He was not refering to the racism of Nazism, but how authoritarians have taken power in the past. History should be looked back upon to make sure mistakes aren't made again. Byrd was looking back at how dictators took power in hopes it could be prevented. When the Constituion was written, people like Madison wanted to make sure that there was a seperation of power and that the majority was thwarted, otherwise,

You don't know that they tried to bring down Bush. The 60 Minutes incident was not a news disaster about bias, but how some people in the news can get desperate to get and finish a story. An example of this can be seen in Michael Crichton's novel "AIRFRAME", where a 60-minutes-type news magazine show loses a guest at the last minute and is so desperate to find a replacement story that they almost wrongfully destroy an American aviation manufacturing co

But you probably don't care, so... enjoy your echo chamber.