Regards, Ivan
Regards, Ivan
I partly agree with the author here. I don't think the leftwing media is an 'organised' effort. I believe their liberal bias simply comes natural to them.
Yeah, they really did Mr. Jeffords in, didn't they! Susan Collins gets a committee chairmanship when she gets purged.
Wish it (the purging) were true, but I don't think so.
He has that "all those conservatives look alike to me" blindness that we see so often on the left; where he sees a coherent and united -- even authoritarian -- right marching to victory shorn of its moderates, we see a party full of RINOs. And if he thinks the Republican response to the Trent Lott fiasco was "coherent," I'd like to see his version of incoherence. One gets the sense that his knowledge of the Wall Street Journal and the Fox News Network is limited to information provided to him by Tom Daschle and Al Gore. He states that "liberal points of view are seldom if ever aired in the conservative media," which is touching in its victimism but hardly truthful. Except for its editorial page, the WSJ is the same, basically liberal, newspaper that the Washington Post is. Fox News, as we all know, has NPR reporters -- about as liberally biased a news organization as exists in the U.S. -- as regular participants in its discussion programs. Many on the left seem genuinely shocked that conservative opinions are aired in the media at all, so when they see it on Fox, they assume this must be "bias." They deny the reality that the liberal was sitting there right alongside. In a similar vein, Mr. Lind repeats the now-tiresome canard concerning "the militant unilateralism of the Bush administration." It appears to have become de rigeur on the left to describe anything Bush does internationally as "unilateral." Those unanimous votes in the UN Security Council are to be pretended away, as if they never existed. The danger in this of course is that it leads self-fooling leftists to believe that there is an open position on the playing field that they can occupy; they'll be the guys who get UN backing for their actions. We saw how well that worked in November; the public was not fooled, even if the leftists had fooled themselves. |
Bwahahahaha!!!!!
The Republican party today, having purged most of its liberal and moderate members, is a streamlined, authoritarian organisation dominated by its right wing.
Yeah, I wish. This guy’s an idiot.
Hoo-Hah! This from a liberal?
This entire article is so replete with inaccuracies and illogical statements that it is no wonder that Mr. Lind switched from being a "conservative" to a "liberal." Being able to B/S on subjects that they are not qualified to comment on seems to be one of the left's defining characteristics.
A couple of years ago I was at the health club, on the tread mill, watching one of the early morning network shows. It may have been Good Morning America, I really don't know, nor do I care. The topic had something to do with the Republican party and after presenting the left's side of the topic, the co-hosts trotted out a political analyst to explain the Republican position. You can imagine my surprise when none other than George Stephanopoulos was introduced as just such a person.
Mr. Lind is right about both sides being presented on network news. The problem is, who is speaking for and defining the conservative side of the issue.
Answer: Not as long as we have the Klintons, Pelosis, Murrays, the Congressional Black Caucus, Carvile, Moore, the Hollyweirds, Jessie, the RINOS and the whole DNC, plus the liberal media et al, to help dig their hole even deeper. May it be so!
I suppose Lind might make himself sound important to his relatively uninformed readers in the UK, but Americans will laugh at his Stalinist fantasy of the GOP conducting "purges" of liberal and moderate members. To the contrary, this last election was characterized by greater involvement on W's part than any other president in recent memory, and that involvement was largely on behalf of moderate Republicans such as Norm Coleman, Elizabeth Dole and even his own brother. "Streamlined, authoritarian?" The GOP is much more of a grassroots organization than the Democrats. This is reflected in the fact that the donor base of the GOP is much broader, with many more smaller individual donors than the Dems. They are the party of the elites, of the ideological purity tests that have prohibited pro-life speakers from their conventions and force virtualy all their candidates to embrace their radical agenda.
I think this fellow is trying to be commendably honest in cataloging the difficulties facing the American left. He seems to understand that fairly well. His ignorance of the right peeks through occasionally, and to some degree spoils his analysis.