liberals
Occupy entertainment
Submitted by Drew Mckissick on Tue, 11/01/2011 - 09:58One of the great things about American politics is that it often doubles as entertainment. Given that most of network and cable television has devolved into so-called reality TV, it is getting pretty hard to distinguish between “entertainment” programming and political “news” coverage – especially where the occupy Wall Street protests are concerned.
On one hand we have strangers living in a house together with hidden cameras, arguing and having casual sex, and on the other we have what looks like a bunch of camping trips gone bad – complete with no showers, drugs and casual sex.
The former are usually paid to display their foolishness, so they know why they are there. But the later really can’t give a cogent explanation of why they are there and what they want to accomplish, other than that they are mad at “the man” and that they won’t leave until they get what they want.
Follow @DrewMcKissickRight-wingers, conspiracies and racists, oh my!
Submitted by Drew Mckissick on Tue, 10/13/2009 - 13:00
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
When political times get tough for liberal Democrats in Washington, conservative conspiracies are the bogeymen of choice.
Back in 1998 when things got tough for Bill Clinton, Hillary declared that there was a “vast right-wing conspiracy” looking to bring her husband down. Other Democrats where quick to pick up the mantra and do anything they could to discredit those who criticized Clinton.
Now here we are eleven years later and, (although there are no chubby interns involved), we have another liberal President facing hard times. So out pop the conspiracy theories like some worn out jack-in-the-box. The only difference is that now we have two former Democrat Presidents cranking the handle.
Follow @DrewMcKissickLiberals want subsidized campaigns
Submitted by Drew Mckissick on Sun, 03/30/2008 - 20:08Here they come again, liberals wanting South Carolina to go to a system of public financing for political campaigns. The latest plea for making you finance candidates you don't even support comes from Common Cause's State Director John Crangle, via an editorial in the State Paperthis week...
Follow @DrewMcKissickIt is obvious that self-financed, rich candidates have major unfair advantages over non-wealthy candidates who must raise contributions to run — rich candidates can donate huge unlimited sums to their own campaigns while normal fund-raiser candidates are limited by state law to no more than $3,500 per source per election for statewide office or $1,000 per source for legislative office. The rich candidate can donate much more to his campaign than his fund-raiser opponent can raise, and further spend no time on fund-raising and much more time campaigning.
From the Blog |
