According to the Pew Research Center, in their latest poll among registered voters,
conservatives outnumber liberals by a two-to-one margin —

Dems ……………… Repubs …………….. All
Lib Mod Cons …..Lib Mod Cons …… Lib Mod Cons
32 41 23 …………… 5 64 29 ………… 19 38 38

Somebody is confused.

If there are 32% of Dems who consider themselves Liberal, then why do they vote for so many Conservative DLCers like Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton? According to Republicans there is no such thing as a Conservative or Moderate Democrat, so all those 41% moderate Democrats really don’t know what they are. It just seems a lot of Dems think they’re a lot more to the Left than they’ve been voting.

Republicans obviously don’t like the “liberal” label, regardless of where it puts them when modified with “liberal Republican”. But, wow, that’s a lot of 64%ers who think they’re Moderate. They are really really misinformed!

Now, considering the Dem positions and the Repub positions, just how does one get All Libs at 19%. That just makes no sense at all. First, 32% of Dems and 5% of Repubs does not make 19% overall Libs. They aren’t the same kind of fish at all. You can’t average these guys. Besides, if you averaged the 41% Moderate Dems with the 64% Moderate Repubs you’d end up with 53% All moderate, not 38%.

Can’t anybody do math any more?

At WashingtonMonthly.com blog they had some charts from Pew and the Repubs thought Hillary was so far to the left she wasn’t even Liberal. She was off into the Socialist area. This kind of misinformation just blows my mind and leaves me wondering if we’re fit to be a Democracy.

Of course, politicians who pander and lie their proverbial asses off don’t help. They don’t want to be categorized and lose voters.

I knew in 1980 when Reagan started using rhetoric which was traditionally Democratic that they were confident he’d win and they wanted more voters. They were wooing Democrats. Well, these days Clinton and Obama have repeated lines from Edwards speech so much that people actually believe those are their positions. Reagan did nothing for Democrats and I suspect our neither Clinton nor Obama would do much for Progressives. Obama’s line about uniting America, I fear, only relates to uniting to vote for him. After that all bets are off.

It’s been said Edwards is a phony. Pot meet kettle. I’m just hoping for someone who will do some good stuff and at this point I’m hoping more and more for someone who won’t do so many horrible things. It’s a tragedy. The politicians, pundits and spinners have completely boiled all the hope out of me.

This time it was to send them out in the guise of “diplomats” to threaten Canada. To threaten to stop Niagara Falls, and to prohibit the entry of hockey playing immigrants and the import of maple sugar and lumber if Canada didn’t take the United States of America off its Torture Watch List.

Regrettably, but understandably in light of the upcoming Stanley Cup, Canada relented to this “offer it couldn’t refuse”. Those not in Mr. Cheney’s secret prisons will live to fight another day. But frustrated Foreign Ministers, like US voters, may hold grudges as long as usurping “vice” presidents.

(h/t to Think Progress)

The entire MTP today was just Clinton bashing today, Reagan loving, and Obama boosting. Even Doris Kearns Goodwin said that Obama perpetuating the GOP myths of Reagan was stating fact!

I agree. MSNBC is on the defensive about Matthews’ sexism and misogyny. I hope the blogosphere will keep the heat on.

Chris Matthews is an embarrassment to your network. His rambling about candidates is little more than a creepy recital of his personal likes and dislikes. It isn’t just the misogyny, most prominently directed at Senator Clinton, on full display both in his regular commentary and in the so-called apology. The boot-licking towards the people he likes is just as icky. Seeing him with other members of your news team shows just how inappropriate his behavior is.

I don’t watch Hardball, and I can’t stand watching any time he shares the camera with others of your team. Can’t you do something about this?

I didn’t see it, but apparently he finally said that the only reason she won her senate seat was because people felt badly for her because she was a victim re the Monica affair. As though she has done NOTHING in her own rite.

I did see it, and it was even worse than you indicate, because his next words were something like, “She didn’t do it on merit!” But I’m around Rethugs often enough that I’ve learned to say, “Well, he’s just an asshole!” and move on.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5582

In addition to references in the letter to “Recorded wiretaps pertaining to conversations between Mr. Marc Grossman…and a Turkish official at the Turkish Embassy in Washington, DC, between August 2001 and December 2001,” there are references to “Internal communication within the Department of Justice between December 2005 and march [sic] 2007.” Edmonds points out she has no information on such internal communications at any period after 2002, when she was fired by the FBI after whistleblower complaints to her superiors about infiltration within the translations department. Those allegations were later described by the DoJ Inspector General as “credible,” “serious,” and “warrant[ing] a thorough and careful review by the FBI.”

When we asked whether she could confirm the case number referenced in the anonymous letter, Edmonds told us, “I can confirm outright that the FBI lied in their denial of the existence of the file. 100%. It was an outright lie.”

The case in question, she told The BRAD BLOG, careful to avoid categorical defiance of her gag order, “concerns 1996 to 2002 information, targeting Turkish counter-intelligence, and it involves U.S. officials both appointed and elected.”