2009.10.27
Tuesday open thread
"Little River gets more colorful by the moment. What'll she do next?"
"Either blow us all up or rub soup in our hair. It's a toss-up."
"I hope she does the soup thing, it's always a hoot and we don't all die from it."
What are you going to do next?
RSS feed 
The RTEB has (apparently) never met a democrat it didn't like.
Comment by Bob H — October 27, 2009 @ 7:40 am
The liberal MSM gets it's just rewards:
Average daily circulation at 379 U.S. newspapers plunged 10.6 percent in the April-September period from the same six-month stretch last year, according to figures released Monday by the Audit Bureau of Circulations. (AP 10/26/09)
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL -- 2,024,269 -- 0.61%
USA TODAY -- 1,900,116 -- (-17.15%)
THE NEW YORK TIMES -- 927,851 -- (-7.28%)
LOS ANGELES TIMES -- 657,467 -- (-11.05%)
THE WASHINGTON POST -- 582,844 -- (-6.40%)
DAILY NEWS (NEW YORK) -- 544,167 -- (-13.98%)
NEW YORK POST -- 508,042 -- (-18.77%)
CHICAGO TRIBUNE -- 465,892 -- (-9.72%)
HOUSTON CHRONICLE -- 384,419 -- (-14.24%)
THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER -- 361,480 -- N/A
Notice the WSJ with a conservative opinion page is the top print newspaper in the USA and growing, the same company as Fox News, the top cable news station. Fancy that!
Comment by John R — October 27, 2009 @ 7:56 am
Recent Gallup poll:
PRINCETON, NJ -- Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.
The country is center-right politically. The liberal Dems will feel it starting November and for the next few years. They have tried to move the country too far left.
Comment by John R — October 27, 2009 @ 8:10 am
#2 and #3,
Blame Bush!
Comment by Bob H — October 27, 2009 @ 8:34 am
Interesting information John R.
I would appreciate an analysis from the RTEB in terms of the climate in the industry and the challenges they are facing and how they are responding to these dramatic numbers.
Comment by Uptheriver — October 27, 2009 @ 8:55 am
"Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal."
Hmm, so 60 percent of Americans do NOT consider themselves conservatives. Sounds like a majority disagrees with "conservatism" (whatever that actually is).
Problem with this poll is that the really hard right conservatives who consider themselves the REAL conservatives do not consider a fair percentage of this 40 percent REAL conservatives. At a place like FR, a large number of them would be called RINOs or even traitors.
In addition, exactly what did the poll define as conservative, liberal and moderate? Or did it allow the responders to set those parameters?
Comment by gdad — October 27, 2009 @ 10:12 am
ALl the bashing of RTEB for their endorsements is ridiculous. After years of the RT supporting and writing about issues such as transportation, energy, and so forth you know the positions they support. When the Republicans Party line position and their candidates are diametrically opposed to every position the RT supports, how could you expect them to endorse your candidate?
It just amazes me that ther are no Republican candidates that have a viewpoint that agrees with anything the RT has written about. In fact all of their candidates support exactly the same thing with no disagreements. So there is little chance they will get support from anyone who disagrees with those issues.
Comment by Richard — October 27, 2009 @ 10:35 am
The people I know who subscribe to the WSJ do so for financial news, not for the editorial page. The writing in the paper is excellent.
BTW, truly hard-core righties don't consider the WSJ all that conservative. More conservative than most, but not conservative enough.
You might also want to note that Virginia's most conservative newspaper, the RTD, has been laying off people left and right. I don't have exact circulation figures, but they've been dropping.
Comment by gdad — October 27, 2009 @ 10:35 am
@ 6, 7 & 8
Spinning wheels got to go round!
Comment by Walker — October 27, 2009 @ 10:43 am
Dems push public option again. They need 60 votes, and there are only 60 Dems in the Senate. Surely they'll not get this many votes to implement a plan that will eventually result in a single payer system. We must vote these socialists out of office before they further threaten the choices and freedoms we Americans enjoy.
In other news, Colin Powell stated, "We are safer than we were before 9-11 because of President Bush". Did you hear that liberals? Be thankful!
Comment by Jim — October 27, 2009 @ 10:45 am
The Wall Street Journal hs kept its circulatin because it stays on the phone pushing its subscriptions. They twist your arm so hard its hard to get them to turn loose. What used to be a strictly financial paper is being transformed into a US News with more financial information. As for the editorials, no one ever gets to them.
Comment by Richard — October 27, 2009 @ 10:48 am
"Spinning wheels got to go round!"
Walker, you must be referring to the people here continuously whining and pouting about the RTEB endorsements.
Comment by gdad — October 27, 2009 @ 10:52 am
Spin? I don't complain that our favorite "broadcasters" support only candidates that agree with their positions. I can't imagine suporting a candidate that did not agree with the positions you espouse.
Now I strongly disagree with the format, means, and positions espoused by your favorite "broadcasters". But, their opinion and positions are their own and may they vote and endorse the candidates that agree with them.
Comment by Richard — October 27, 2009 @ 11:07 am
I am a hardcore conservative. I voted for Goldwater in '64. A day without the WSJ would be a day without sunshine. It is the only print newspaper I read. I peruse the RT online edition for comedy relief. I quit reading the print edition years ago.
I love it when liberals say no one pays any attention to opinion on such media as the WSJ or Fox News. Reminds me of that old Yogi comment about a restaurant: "nobody goes there any more, it's too crowded!"
Comment by John R — October 27, 2009 @ 11:48 am
Jim #10,
Yep, the Democrats are so extreme, they even alienated Olympia Snowe who withdrew her support. Good. I want this disaster to have only Democratic names attached to it.
Comment by Suzie — October 27, 2009 @ 10:50 pm
I'm having a tough time getting over 0bama's cluelessness and arrogance in his speech to the military in Jacksonville yesterday. He told them he would never place them in harm's way if it wasn't absolutely necessary. Okaaaaay, so what about the soldiers in Afghanistan now? Is he saying they're there unnecessarily.
0bama's dillydallying is frustrating to a growing number of generals, one of which has resigned, as well as to NATO who went along with the recommendation to increase our troops. October is now the deadliest month of the entire Afghan conflict. I've only heard that reported of FOX. FOX is also the only network questioning 0bama's reasons for delay, going against the wishes of his generals while the situation deteriorates.
Where are the other networks?
Comment by Suzie — October 27, 2009 @ 11:07 pm
If you've only heard that October is the deadliest month in Afghanistan on Fox, then that's proof positive you only watch Fox. It has been widely reported (Google reports well over 6,000 articles from an endless variety of sources on that subject). I heard it on NPR - that so-called liberal bastion - just this afternoon.
That makes the rest of your post suspect, to say the least.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 27, 2009 @ 11:11 pm
By the way, who put the soldiers in Afghanistan in harm's way, then shifted attention and resources to an unnecessary conflict in Iraq?
Hint: It was not Obama.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 27, 2009 @ 11:14 pm
#17,
Um, nooo. It means I heard it reported on FOX, and during the time I watched CNN and ABC, I heard nothing about it. So what do those liberal networks have to say about 0bama's indecision, Dan? Are they wondering why he isn't listen to his generals and to NATO?
LOL. You can't blame Bush for 0bama's inaction in Afghanistan. If it were as poorly managed as you say, well, 0bama has had 9 months to take measures. So why is he ignoring his generals, Dan? It wouldn't have anything to do with bald politics would it?
Comment by Suzie — October 27, 2009 @ 11:37 pm
You mean the request tabled by Bush until Obama took over?
A military official familiar with McKiernan's thinking said his request for 30,000 troops last fall was tempered by a belief that the Bush White House would reject it outright if he asked for more. As it was, Bush tabled the request, leaving it to Obama.
I think Obama is on the right track, giving Afghanistan policy serious consideration before deciding what to do and how many more lives to commit to a war that Bush and Cheney dithered around in for eight years without appreciable results.
You do know that Obama has sent in more troops to Afghanistan since taking office, don't you? Did they report that on Fox? You probably also know that Obama hasn't "dithered" as long on this decision as Bush did on the "surge" strategy in Iraq.
At least you know that if you're getting your news somewhere other than Fox.
I've got about 5,999 reasons to believe that's not the case, however.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 27, 2009 @ 11:48 pm
What's there for 0bama to think about? His generals told him how to win a month ago. How many more casualty records have to be set before 0bama makes a decision. Is he waiting for his military experience to give him a hunch? Gee, it wouldn't have anything to do with politics, would it? And then he has the nerve and unprofessionalism to badmouth Bush to the troops. What a pathetic human being.
Comment by Suzie — October 28, 2009 @ 12:07 am
Newscorp's recent acquisition of the WSJ removed any objectivity the paper might once have claimed. It is now just another propaganda outlet in the Murdoch empire.
Comment by Art Hill — October 28, 2009 @ 12:41 am
What Bush did in Afghanistan is totally irrelevent at this point in time...he is not the one making decisions anymore. Hate Bush all you want, but it is Obama's war now. Instead of listening to his generals who are the experts, he's taking advice from John Kerry, who's primary tactical experience was to get out of Vietnam as fast as he could.
It makes no sense to ignore the professional who is giving you advice on how to accomplish a task. Would you ignore the plumber and listen to the electrician to fix a plumbing problem?
Obama wanted the job title...not the job.
Comment by Patrick — October 28, 2009 @ 1:42 am
Patrick,
What Bush did only matters this way: Conservatives like Dick Cheney are muttering because Obama is "dithering" - even though he is moving with more deliberate speed than Bush did when deciding on the surge strategy. There were no complaints then, which demonstrates that the complaints now are so much hot air.
And, anyway, what right does Cheney have to criticize anyone on Afghanistan after the way he and Bush handled it - or failed to?
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 28, 2009 @ 7:15 am
Dan, what good does it do to constantly go back and blame the current situation in Afghanistan on Bush, other than to reinforce your intense hatred of Buch/Cheney? Seriously, does blaming Bush or Cheney do anything to prevent another soldier from getting killed? No.
Obama is the CinC right now and is not acting like one. He needs to listen to his professionals and act accordingly before more troops die while he tries to vote "Present".
Comment by Patrick — October 28, 2009 @ 8:15 am
Again, Patrick, this is not about blaming Bush but about exposing the double standard on the right.
Bush takes months to decide on surge strategy in Iraq: No problemo.
Obama takes a month to figure out how to best salvage Afghanistan after eight years of mismanagement and neglect: Omigod, he's AWOL!!!!!!
Obama is doing what a good CnC should do: Listen to advice from all his advisers, then make the best, deliberate decision he can. He is the CnC, after all, not McChrystal. If the job was simply to do whatever the generals advise, we wouldn't need to bother electing a president.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — October 28, 2009 @ 8:55 am
And again, Dan, what good does it do exposing the double standard on the right? Holy smokes, you think a double standard doesn't exist for the left? My God, Charlie Rangel, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd (among a slew of others) would be out of office right now if they were Republicans!
Why does the left always yell to "let it go" unless it pertains to someone on the right that they hate?
Obama is in charge...not Bush. Bush is gone...Obama is here.
And by the way, Dan, it's "CinC" not "CnC".
Comment by Patrick — October 28, 2009 @ 9:09 am
Dan repeats the oft-heard talking point that Iraq was "unnecessary". Bush had Afghanistan pretty well under control, then addressed the situation he deemed more critical. If you are judging the decision by whether we were again attacked by Al Queda, you'd have to say Bush made the right decision. No way you can say he made the wrong decision, though.
Democrats have been saying for years Afghanistan is the important war. Now they have the remote, and they are sitting on their hands, which means they were playing politics all along.
Comment by Suzie — October 28, 2009 @ 9:35 am
'dithering' by obama is killing our guys
Comment by pammala — October 28, 2009 @ 11:22 am
'dithering' by obama is killing our guys"
Before Obama dithered Bush dithered. He shares the blame.
Comment by gdad — October 28, 2009 @ 11:58 am
Our mission in Afganistan is to destroy the organization that planned and carried out the attack on our country on 9/11 and find and kill its leader. This is not NATO's war. or the UN or the people of Afganistan or Pakistan's war. We are the country that was attacked and we should be the nation to finish what they started. Our soldiers should find, kill or capture the fanatics who belong to that organization. Those captured should be brought back to GTMO and interrogated using any means necessary to get information on where the rest of them are. After we have crushed them to the point where they will never think again of attacking the United States of America, we can leave and they can go back to raising opium poppies and herd goats. Nothing to dither about.
Comment by waynep — October 28, 2009 @ 12:09 pm
Dithering? Pftttt. Why is anybody still listening to Dick Cheney? The Neocons trashed EVERYTHING they touched in the last 8 years, including Afghanistan. These guys are hoping for another attack so they can say, "see, we told you so," in another shameless bid for power at America's expense. Talk about your pitiful human beings.
Comment by Art Hill — October 28, 2009 @ 12:12 pm
#4 Bush and Cheney made the wrong decision and not only that
In 2005, Cheney mistakenly said of the insurgency in Iraq, "I think they're in the last throes".-Wrong
Cheneny also blatantly lied when he said; "Saddam attempted to acquire yellow cake uranium from Nigeria."
Cheney and Bush absolutely swore that; "We believe he [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."-Wrong
Cheney and Bush also incorrectly said that "Iraqi oil will pay totally for the war."-Wrong
And the list goes on so have no idea where you can say they made the right decision unless you turn to fixed network.
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 28, 2009 @ 12:13 pm
#30 - "Before Obama dithered Bush dithered."
Amazing. People are dying and this is stuck in the collective head of the left.
Comment by Patrick — October 28, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
#34 there is no collective head of the left. Try a car load of us in a car and when lost see if anyone agrees with each other.
Comment by Bill Hudson — October 28, 2009 @ 12:37 pm