About Me

Name: Armanius
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

AP: equating conservatives to racists and is the country more liberal than conservative?

The AP published a recent piece titled GOP maintains grip in the South, but at what cost? The article states in part the following:
 
"Forty years ago, Republicans under Richard Nixon decided that national success required breaking up the Democratic dominance in the South. They did so by employing a "Southern strategy" of appealing to white resentment over desegregation and later by highlighting liberal Democratic positions on social and welfare issues.

Today, conservative positions on gun rights, abortion and gay marriage are staples of the Republican platform, as well as a disdain for any tax increases and unyielding support for the war in Iraq.

 
But if these hard-line conservative positions sell in the Deep South, they appear to have alienated voters elsewhere, if the past two elections are any indication."
 
Note how the article associates "conservative positions" with "white resentment over desegregation." In other words, as one of my liberal coworkers likes to imply when we discuss politics, conservatism equates and breeds racists and bigots.
 
The article then goes on to conclude that the purported "conservative positions" alienated 52% of the American voters. The article forgets that even in an overwhelmingly blue state such as California, Californian voters voted for Proposition 8, which banned gay-marriage. 52.4% of Californians voted for Proposition 8, even though 61.1% of them voted for Obama, and 37.1% went for McCain.
 
What does this article show? First, the very much liberal AP sees conservativism as something negative and directly related to racism and bigotry.
 
Second, the AP is probably wrong that conservative positions alienated voters who are not in the Deep South. To make that connection, one would have to assume that the majority of the country holds "liberal" positions. In my opinion, the vote for Proposition 8 dispells that myth, especially because California is considered one of the more liberal states in the country. Yet, the vote for Proposition 8 shows that either 15.3% of Obama supporters are conservatives who chose not to vote for McCain, or 15.3% of Obama supporters are liberals who oppose gay marriage. I believe that the country still leans right. But most Americans, even the conservative ones, were so disillusioned with Republicans, whether rightfully or wrongfully, that they were willing to vote for Obama. Hence, I do not believe conservative positions is a lost proposition in national elections.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Libs at CNN want to pretend 9/11 never happened

I was watching CNN's coverage of the RNC when the RNC started showing a video about remembering 9/11. The CNN crew, not only their liberal commentators but even their anchors started making comments about how "some people" will say that a video about 9/11 with "powerful images" has no place in a political convention. Blitzer said that "some" say that there is no need to bring these images into this hall. John King noted that "some" will say that a video about 9/11 is "playing politics out of a tragedy." Brown added that the message from the RNC is "fear" and made a rhetorical question that "is that what Republicans want?"
 
Obviously, these types of comments and criticisms against Republicans are nothing new. That's what the libs said in 2004 and now they are saying again in 2008.  Libs want to pretend that 9/11 never occurred.  But they do so not because they want to be "sensitive" to the victims of 9/11. Rather, they want 9/11 to disappear from the memories of the American people, because the American people have typically perceived the libs that make up the Democratic Party as "weak" on defense/foreign policy since the Jimmy Carter days. So these libs and their media lackeys (i.e. CNN) cry out foul every time someone talks about the war on terror, or 9/11, or how no more attacks on American soil have occurred since President Bush took the war on terror onto foreign soil.
 
Libs can so easily diffuse the perception of being "weak" by adopting a tougher policy. Instead, libs choose to chant their usual mantra of moral relativism while singing kumbaya with people who don't particularly like America. Instead of adopting a tougher policy against the "bad guys," libs want to say that America needs to have "clean hands" before telling those Russian invaders that they are "bad." And ultimately, instead of telling the American people that they, the libs of the Democratic Party, will lead America to victory over terrorism, libs would rather pretend that there is no war against terror, and that America should just leave 9/11 alone in Vol. III, page 439 of Encyclopedia Brittanica.
 
I wonder why libs in the Democratic Party are so afraid of being tough.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media once again shows its liberal colors

The NY Times talked about how unimportant and irrelevant the John Edwards story was to the world. The NY Times talked about how it always proceeds with caution when accusations can harm the lives of people. The NY Times talked about how its lack of coverage of the Edwards story was not a sign of the newspaper being in the liberal tank. But rather, it was cautious and good journalism. Boy, that spinning sure went out of the window pretty quickly when it came to Gov. Palin's pregnant teenage daughter. When it came to Palin's daughter, that story was worth three page one articles! Not one. Not two. But three page one articles!
 
Similarly, both the newsmedia and newspapers around the country have been blasting stories left and right about how Palin is "conservative" and "ultra-conservative". But the same media never mentions Obama or Biden as being "liberals." Obama's press secretaries Katie Couric and Brian Williams have kept up their barrage of leading questions during interviews that often suggest positive answers when it comes to Obama, while suggesting negative answers when it comes to McCain and Palin.
 
When Palin was announced as the VP choice for McCain, MSNBC ran under the heading of "Breaking News", "How many houses do McCain and Palin own?"
 
The media has suggested that Palin shouldn't be running for VP, because that would be a deriliction of her duties as a mother of a down syndrome child. Or that Palin was at fault for having a down syndrome child. Perhaps, the liberals would applaud Palin if she had chosen to abort the child.
 
I wonder what the media is going to talk about if Obama wins and the Dems take total control of the Senate. Who are they going to criticize, the remaining 30 or so Republican senators? Here's my prediction, something bad is going to happen in Iraq in 2010, and the media is going to say, "oh, that was all President Bush's fault."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More subtle but blatant media bias by a CNN reporter

Check out this article in CNN.com today, written by Barbara Starr, CNN's Pentagon correspondent. In discussing whether a troop "surge" would work in Afghanistan, Ms. Star wrote the following:

"In 2007, as part of the surge strategy, President Bush sent roughly 30,000 additional troops to Iraq in an attempt to improve security. That effort COINCIDED with a drop in violence, and, now that the troops in Iraq are returning to pre-surge levels ..." (emphasis added).
 
"Coincided"??? Looks like Ms. Starr wants to join the one member club of individuals who think the surge was not succesful. Obama is the charter member. Ms. Starr can be the second member. And remember, this is not an op-ed piece. This is supposed to be reporting!!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »