To Participate on Thurstonblog

email yyyyyyyyyy58@gmail.com, provide profile information and we'll email your electronic membership


Monday, June 4, 2012

Politically independent

........................................................................................
Poll: Political independents largest share of public in 75 years as party polarization grows

By Associated PressUpdated: Monday, June 4

Call it a pox on both the Republican and Democratic houses.

More Americans now call themselves politically independent than at any point in the last 75 years, according to a new poll. The survey also shows that those who do align themselves with a party are more ideological and have become more polarized than at any point in the last 25 years, particularly on issues important in this year’s presidential and congressional campaigns.
Party loyalty, however, only goes so far; neither Republicans nor Democrats say their own party is doing a good job standing up for its traditional positions.
Five months before the November elections, the Pew Research Center poll released Monday sheds light on how the electorate feels about the nation’s two major political parties. And sour seems to be an understatement.
The results indicate a collective thumbs down to both the Democratic and Republican Party, showing that an unprecedented 38 percent of adults rejected both parties and call themselves independents. Only 32 percent now say they are Democrats and 24 percent now call themselves Republicans.
This flight away from the two major political parties began in 2008, a time of intense partisanship as President Barack Obama battled Republican Sen. John McCain for the White House.
Then as now, independent voters are a critical constituency that candidates must win over to prevail in competitive general elections.
Exit polls show these voters have sided with the winning candidate in all but two of the past 10 presidential elections. Independents broke for Obama, 52 percent to 44 percent for McCain four years ago. And recent polling suggests independents are about evenly divided now between Obama and Mitt Romney, his likely Republican rival.
Independent voters also have been on the winning side in congressional contests eight out of nine times since the 1994 election, when Republicans took control of the House for the first time in 40 years.
So both Republicans and Democrats are making serious plays to win them over.
The survey found that the face of the independent voter also is changing, posing challenges for Democrats.
More Hispanic and younger voters — key Democratic voting blocs — say they are politically independent and Republicans are aggressively courting them.
Hispanics who describe themselves as independents have jumped from 31 percent in 2006 to 46 percent now. And nearly half of Americans born since 1981 now say they are independents.
To be sure, 56 percent of Americans still identify themselves as a member of either the Democratic or the Republican parties.
But the parties are pushing out those in the ideological middle.
The vast majority of Republicans, 68 percent, say they are conservative, up from 60 percent in 2000. And the conservative Democrat has become scarce as the share of self-described liberals in the party has grown 10 points since 2000, from 28 percent to 38 percent. As the moderates abandon both parties, the poll finds partisans’ views on the major issues in this year’s campaign have become more deeply polarized since the Pew Center first measured those views in 1987.
The poll measured opinions on 48 different questions about basic political values, and found Democrats and Republicans farther apart than at any point since 1987.
The sharpest differences between partisans fall mostly on the issues at the core of this year’s campaign regarding government’s role and effectiveness: whether regulation helps or hurts business, how involved government should be in people’s lives and whether government programs are effective or wasteful. Sharp differences also centered on the question of how much of a “social safety net” government should provide — whether government should make sure every citizen’s basic needs are met or take care of those in need even if it means more debt.
Shifting opinions on these issues are not limited to core partisans: Independents who lean toward either Republicans or Democrats are also more sharply polarized from each other than they were 25 years ago, particularly on how much government should do and how effective it is.
Obama holds a slim edge over Romney in the poll, 49 percent to 45 percent, among registered voters, and the results suggest the sharpest divides between Romney and Obama supporters are over the role and effectiveness of government.
About one-fourth of voters are “swing voters,” or those who are not firmly committed to a candidate. Ideologically, this group is closer to Romney on the social safety net, but closer to Obama on social issues and questions about labor unions. They fall about evenly between the two on the role of government.
The poll also found a liberal shift on social issues in recent decades, with fewer saying they hold old-fashioned values about family and marriage, or the role of women.
The Pew Research Center 2012 Values Survey was conducted by telephone April 4-15 among a random national sample of 3,008 adults. Interviews were conducted by live interviews and respondents were reached on landline and cellular telephones. The margin of sampling error for results based on all interviews is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.
.........................................................................................

Congressional dumbness?

...................................................................................................
Who’s dumber: Congress or Martin Luther King Jr.? The dumb report on congressional dumbness
By Virginia Heffernan, Thu, May 24, 2012


Are conservatives stupider than liberals?


That’s one way to read the lively parlor-game data released this week by the Sunlight Foundation, a 6-year-old educational concern that attempts to make government more transparent. Sunlight’s report—which assigned grade levels to how members of Congress talk—revealed that the most right-wing of our representatives express themselves, on average, at the lowest grade level in Congress. 

“No abortion,” you can imagine these simple-minded conservatives saying. “It is bad.”

According to the report, Democrats have a more sophisticated way of expressing themselves. Democrats evidently use multi-syllabic words—like “moreover”—and more complex sentence structure than their colleagues on the right. Replete with internal clauses—the ones that can throw off listeners and muddy a point—the rococo stylings of Democrats evidently go hand-in-hand with the promotion of their pet causes, like universal health care and of course their longstanding war on antidisestablishmentarianism.
Republicans dominate the extremes of the list—both the speaker at the highest level and the one at the lowest are members of the GOP. Their average grade level is 10.4; that of Democrats is 10.8. Sunlight has also made a point to say that eloquence, or verbal complexity, anyway, is on the wane among lawmakers. Congress as a whole now apparently speaks like high school sophomores, one grade level lower than it did in 2005.
I like the foundation’s freestyle, groundless and yet stirring account of why this might be so: “Perhaps it reflects lawmakers speaking more in talking points, and increasingly packaging their floor speeches for YouTube. Gone, perhaps, are the golden days when legislators spoke to persuade each other, thoughtfully wrestled with complex policy trade-offs, and regularly quoted Shakespeare.”

If you skim Sunlight’s findings, and bring to them a sporting quotient of party prejudice, you might conclude that Republicans are, say, “idiots” and Democrats are, oh, “showoffs.” To use the pre-K-level idiom preferred by the biased twerp in each of us.

If, however, you listen to a sampler of speeches by various congresspeople at a range of oration grade levels, you might find something completely different. I listened to Daniel Lungren, whose speech at grade 16.01 (first week of summer school after college graduation?) outranks every other congressperson, give a Memorial Day greeting in 2009. (The Sunlight report analyzes each figure’s speeches since 1996.)

Lungren, a Republican from California, sounded low-key and didn’t stutter, but he repeatedly used the euphemism “fallen” instead of “died.” Trying to get choked up and earnest about the Civil War dead—the Civil War “fallen”—he sounded fakey and insincere.
I also listened to John “Mick” Mulvaney, a Republican from South Carolina, who is the low man on the grade-level totem pole. He is said to speak at a seventh-grade level.
Like many English Ph.D.s who have taught writing to undergraduates, I was ready to condescendingly award this kid points for “clarity” and “forthrightness” while privately calling him illiterate. But no such condescension occurred to me once he started to talk. Mulvaney is terrific—a natural orator who toggles nimbly between irony and seriousness, doesn’t miss a note and—unlike most seasoned politicians—never goes on rhetorical autopilot. He stays in the room; his emotions in the moment color his speech; and he responds to his audience.
After thanking the organizers of the June 8, 2011, town hall meeting in Lake Wylie, S.C., Mulvaney—in a deceptively casual and even self-deprecating way—elegantly prevented boredom by setting the stage for a short, engaged talk with a clear timeframe. He sowed anticipation in the audience for a spirited Q&A. He set people thinking about their questions and set up a reward system for attention-paying. And he unobtrusively laid out the topics of his speech. That is rhetoric.
“Basically, it’s about half an hour’s worth of information that we’ll go over. And then at the end I’ll shut up and answer questions for pretty much as long as you all want to sit around. I think when we did this in Rock Hill, we did questions for almost an hour and a half, maybe two hours. And I will take all of the questions. There are folks here who want to talk today about Medicare and Medicaid. There’s folks who want to talk about defense spending. I will answer all the questions that I can possibly answer.”

Mulvaney was an honors scholar at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service, he attended Harvard Business School and he got a law degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This is the man who the Sunlight Foundation now says uses the diction and syntax of a seventh-grader? The least evolved speaker in Congress?

Something is flawed here. I’m beginning to think that the Flesch-Kincaid test, which invented the “reads at an nth-grade-level” metric, is a crock. 

Rudolf Flesch was an Austrian who immigrated to the United States, advocated phonics in the teaching of English and published “Why Johnny Can’t Read” in 1955. In the 1970s, he and J. Peter Kincaid, a psychologist and Navy scientist, first created their readability test for the military’s use with technical manuals.

The notoriously opaque U.S. Constitution merits a whopping 17.8 grade level, and the Federalist Papers come in at 17.1. Oh well, sorreeee you fancy founding documents of the Republic!

On the other end of the scale, the Gettysburg Address lands at an 11.2 grade level. “I Have a Dream” gets the grade of a freshman: 9.4. 

Feeling as though I could now face the test myself, I plugged this column into a Flesch-Kincaid readability index calculator. It came in at grade 11—slightly below Lincoln at Gettysburg but safely above Martin Luther King Jr. and “I Have a Dream.”

I’m better than King. Somehow I’m not convinced.
....................................................................................................


Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Romney: president of Amercia?

..................................................................................
Romney Campaign Spelling Gaffe Mars iPhone App Release



It's the typo that has the Twitterverse buzzing.
Just as Mitt Romney scored the GOP presidential nomination last night, his campaign released an iPhone app called "With Mitt" — only to discover it had one major error. The free app lets users customize photos with Mitt-inspired frames and messages, then post the images directly to Facebook or Twitter, or email it to a friend. The email recipient receives a message saying "I'm with Mitt Romney in 2012. And here's a photo showing my support. Check it out!"
But there's just one problem. One of the 14 slogans you can add to your image reads: "A Better Amercia."
Yes, you read that correctly. Amercia.
The typo quickly went viral, inciting a wave of jokes on Twitter.
"Apparently Obama doesn't have anything to worry about. Romney is running to be the president of Amercia," tweeted @AmericanHumor.
"Turns out Obama is running uncontested as Romney shifts focus to be the president of 'Americia,'" tweeted @wesleyverhoeve.
"I don't know where #Amercia is but I fear it has a low literacy rate," quipped @asifintoronto.
Another Twitter user, @KatieHudkins pointed out that "While #Amercia does have a nice ring to it, Romney's developers of "his" app may want to begin looking for new jobs."
A Romney campaign spokeswoman reportedly told MSNBC that, simply, "mistakes happen." The campaign has submitted a corrected app to Apple, which has yet to approve the new error-free version.
As of Wednesday morning, the typo was still live. The app is available for free in the App Store.

..................................................................................

George Will has Donald Trump's number [snicker]

.........................................................................................
George Will Calls Donald Trump a 'Bloviating Ignoramus'
By Jake Tapper.  May 27, 2012

This morning on "This Week," ABC News' George Will called Donald Trump a "bloviating ignoramus," questioning why presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is associating with the real estate mogul, who once again falsely questioned President Obama's birthplace this week.
"I do not understand the cost benefit here," Will said on the "This Week" roundtable. "The costs are clear. The benefit - what voter is gonna vote for him (Romney) because he is seen with Donald Trump? The cost of appearing with this bloviating ignoramus is obvious it seems to me."
"Donald Trump is redundant evidence that if your net worth is high enough, your IQ can be very low and you can still intrude into American politics," Will added. "Again, I don't understand the benefit. What is Romney seeking?"
Fox Business Network anchor Liz Claman agreed, adding "it's a dangerous game that Mitt Romney is playing here because Donald Trump doesn't have a lot to lose by keeping this birther conversation alive."
Trump revived the false claims about Obama's birthplace on Thursday, citing a discredited story about a literary agency that mistakenly listed that Obama was born in Kenya in a recently discovered catalog of clients that included the president.
"Look, it's very simple," Trump told The Daily Beast. "He said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia… Now they're saying it was a mistake. Just like his Kenyan grandmother said he was born in Kenya, and she pointed down the road to the hospital, and after people started screaming at her she said, 'Oh, I mean Hawaii.' Give me a break."
The real estate mogul endorsed Mitt Romney in February, and plans to host a fundraiser for him in Manhattan on June 28 according to The Daily Beast.
Trump himself repeatedly flirted with his own presidential run, regularly pushing the false "birtherism" claim that President Obama was not born in the United States.
.........................................................................................

Saturday, May 26, 2012

OK, this means that THE BIBLE doesn't trump the Constitution?

..........................................................................................
Kansas governor signs bill banning Islamic law
By Kevin Murphy, May 25

Republican Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed a bill aimed at keeping state courts and agencies from using Islamic or other non-U.S. laws when making decisions, his office said on Friday, drawing criticism from a national Muslim group.
The law has been dubbed the "sharia bill" because critics say it targets the Islamic legal code. Sharia, or Islamic law, covers all aspects of Muslim life, including religious obligations and financial dealings. Opponents of state bans say they could nullify wills or legal contracts between Muslims.
Supporters said the law will reassure foreigners in Kansas that state laws and the U.S. Constitution would protect them. Opponents said it singled out Muslims for ridicule and was unnecessary because American laws prevail on U.S. soil.
Sherriene Jones-Sontag, a spokeswoman for the governor, said in an e-mail that the bill "makes it clear that Kansas courts will rely exclusively on the laws of our state and our nation when deciding cases and will not consider the laws of foreign jurisdictions."
Legislators supporting the bill said there were many cases around the country where judges or state agencies cited sharia law in deciding cases, especially involving divorce-related custody and property matters where Islamic code differs from U.S. law.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations in Washington denounced the Kansas law and said it is considering legal action.
About 20 states have considered similar legislation but the Kansas law is the only one signed in recent weeks, council spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said.
"It's unfortunate the governor chose to pander to the growing Islam-phobia in our society that has led to introduction of similar unconstitutional and un-American legislation in dozens of state legislatures," Hooper said.
Hooper said legislators have often referred to sharia law in supporting such legislation, but he said they take the word out of the bill to stave off legal challenges. The Kansas bill does not mention sharia.
Federal courts struck down an Oklahoma law voters approved in 2010 that barred state judges from considering sharia law in making decisions. The court called the law discriminatory.
...................................................................................

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

They don't call him Booker for nothing

"Glancing at his campaign filings from that race, it is easy to find not only major donors from Bain and other private equity firms, but big Romney backers such as Julian Robertson of Tiger Capital Management and Paul Singer of Elliot Capital Advisers, each of whom has given the Republican candidate at least $1 million in this cycle. Both Robertson and Singer gave the maximum $26,000 to Booker’s campaign.

Friday, May 18, 2012

Wassat?????????????

“I am not familiar, precisely, with exactly what I said, but I stand by what I said, whatever it was.” — Mitt Romney, May 2012.
Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2012/05/16/past-behaviors-demonstrate-true-character/#comment-219625#storylink=cpy

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Drama Queens are everywhere

"Now, as to his invitation for you to join his personal blog in Olympia. You might want to think twice about that, because if you sign up for HIS blog, you give him access to your personal information, and that may come back to haunt you."
Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/letters/2012/05/17/referendum-74-unconstitutional/#comment-219559#storylink=cpy

Yeah....we will have the email address you give us.   muuuuuuuuuahahahahahahahahaha

send us a line at yyyyyyyyyy58@gmail.com and we'll have your personal information and you'll be haunted forever......or thrown out of the blog if you act like this asshole.

Saturday, May 5, 2012

An informal but interesting poll

Active member of an organized religion
962
28%
28%
Believer, but not active in house of worship
1366
40%
40%
Non-believer
1059
31%
31%
Total Votes:  3387
 
Non-believers out number active church members.