The Liberal Mind – Examples of separate worlds continue (corrected)

George Rebane

The 'Liberal Mind' segment of RR is dedicated to the analysis and illustration of how fundamentally different are the highways and byways of reason in the liberal (progressive) mind that give rise to their heartfelt and fervent efforts to create what to the rest of us often seems like a perverted and insane world.  In these pages we have another confirmation of this which is so clear and compelling that it needs its own posting.

I began ‘Ruminations – 29jun12’ with a segment on another instance in which the Left seeks to summarily shut down and eliminate media voices with which it cannot compete in ideas and new reporting.  Specifically, I reported on the latest of longstanding efforts by the Soros funded Media Matters to shut down Fox News, a media channel that has eaten alive the competing left-leaning lamestream outlets in news and commentary offerings.  I argue that such tactics are totally asymmetrical from the polarized political poles.

The gauntlet, to revealingly argue the other side, has most prominently been picked up by Mr Steven Frisch, a long-time reader and welcome (when being civil) antagonist of RR.  Mr Frisch is CEO of the Sierra Business Council, and is also a leading regional progressive intellectual and apologist for collectivist causes who has repeatedly denied any such biases and resents leftwing appellations as "name calling".  Its name notwithstanding, SBC is a regional NGO that promotes liberal policies and is funded by public and foundation grant monies.

The following comment stream from the cited Ruminations post is repeated here in my continued effort to illuminate the liberal mindset.  An unfortunate artifact of the progressive debate on these issues is the progressive penchant for reducing the arguments to the address and critique of specific individuals.  Their ability to generalize and to embrace an ideological issue per se is often limited.   The exchange in the relevant comment thread follows -

*** Posted by: Steven Frisch | 29 June 2012 at 07:11 AM

Ha...nothing new here, I bet I could come up with dozens of examples of coordinated, well funded, and effective plans to manipulate the media by the Right if I really tried.

Lets just start with this one:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/interactive/2012/may/09/wind-power-memo

or this one from Frank Lutz on how to "frame" environmental issues so Republicans can appear to be pro-environmental while supporting the industries that destroy environmental assets:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/images/4/45/LuntzResearch.Memo.pdf

or how about this one, the mother of all memos by conservative interests on how to create the narrative necessary for the promotion of their financial interests:

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/powell_memo_lewis.html

I coud come up with several more, designed to take everything from Murphy Brown to Jim Hightower down, but what is the point really?

Nothing to see here......

*** Posted by: George Rebane | 29 June 2012 at 08:29 AM

StevenF 711am - I don't think you have yet to find, let alone understand, the subject of the 'Drop Fox' topic. Clue - it is not the generation of policy and position papers by one side to counter the propositions and the propaganda of the other. Happy hunting.

*** Posted by: Steven Frisch | 01 July 2012 at 07:32 AM

The point I am making is that this is sour grapes personified.

First, I have personally crossed two picket lines to see movies in my life, the first Monty Pythons' Life of Brian and the second Martin Scorsese' The Last Temptation of Christ. In one case the Christian Coalition, in another, called for the boycott and picketing the Family Research Council. Only last year the group One Million Mom's called a boycott of JC Penney over the their use of Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson because she is gay. The same group called for a boycott of Toys R Us for including a gay character in the Archie comic book series. In 2009 Rush Limbaugh called for a boycott of GM because they took 'bailout' money from the Obama administration. The Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute called for a boycott of Girl Scout cookies because the Girl Scouts support Planned Parenthood. The American Family Association called for a boycott of Old Navy for supporting the "It Gets Better" campaign against anti-gay teen bullying. US Christian Ministries called for a boycott of Starbucks for advertising its tolerance of gay rights and gun control laws. Mike Huckabee called for a boycott of NPR after Juan Williams was fired.

Second, it is ludicrous to critique Media Matters for taking legitimate and constitutionally protected action against a particular media entity when more conservative entities have done exactly the same thing over the years in numerous instances. The Powell memo pretty clearly spells out how conservatives, beginning in the early 1970's, identified that they were losing the 'public relations' fight over the future of America, and went on to build a specific infrastructure to affect American public opinion and media. The memo was picked up by numerous organizations and used as a blue print to construct what David Brock has called the "The Republican Noise Machine". In short, the Powell memo is the Brock strategy, articulated 40 years ago, by the right. And David Brock should know; when he was part of that very same noise machine and writing about the evils of Hilary Clinton he was a darling of the conservative right. Now that he has switched sides and is exposing fallacy on the right he is public enemy number one. The case I am making is that the results of the Powell memo, the building of a conservative media, a network of right wing think tanks using pseudo-science to advance their agenda, and providing a training ground for right wing activists, is no different than what David Brock is doing. It is the height of hypocrisy to object to it on the part of Media Matters, while holding up the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Reason Foundation, and Brent Bozells' Media Research Center, which is doing exactly the same thing, as heroes.

And finally, I would ask conservatives here: if they actually support he idea there is something wrong with private sector support for alternative media and criticism? This is protected free speech in our society. The constitution does not limit speech, or the adoption of a strategy to criticize or hold media accountable, on the part of a private party. The constitution protects us from GOVERNMENT intrusion into free speech.

*** Posted by: George Rebane | 01 July 2012 at 08:10 AM

StevenF 732am - Thanks for that thorough demonstration of how liberals form analogues. There is nothing in the examples and citations you gave that even comes close in intent and functionality to what Media Matters is doing in their attempt to shut down Fox News. That you equate efforts to START modes of communication and messaging with the opposite efforts to STOP such channels is again most revealing and confirming. It is of a piece to which 'The Liberal Mind' section of RR is dedicated, and most closely continues such illustrations as
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2010/09/the-liberal-mind-giving-and-receiving.html

It is such gross differences in the fundamental way that collectivists vs conservatives reason, the logics that they each subscribe to, that makes our co-operative future together doubtful and more unlikely every day. And as has been reported in these pages, the basis for such differences have also been observed clinically in the regions of the brains both sides use when thinking about such topics. We more often than not view each other as somewhat insane.

*** Posted by: Steven Frisch | 01 July 2012 at 09:12 AM

George, I find it amazing that you never seem to be able to actually answer questions. The strategy of Media Matters is the EXACT same strategy that the Media Research Center is using, with almost exactly the same tactics. Why is it a problem when Media Matters deploys the same tactic? Why do you object to this if it is constitutionally protected free speech? It just goes to show you that your "constitutional" governance position is malarky; it is "the constitution protects my free speech but not your free speech". …

It is evident that Mr Frisch fashioned out of whole cloth the notion that I objected to Media Matters' exercise of free speech, which I have nowhere done.  Yet resuscitating that red herring seems to be the only thing on which Mr Frisch can hang any countering argument.  And so goes what passes for reasoned dialogue.

Related materials and supportive arguments are found in ‘The Liberal Mind’ section of RR.

[correction]  Per Mr Frisch's decorous request, I have added the first two comments of this thread to the above record.  They were originally omitted because Mr Frisch's 711am comment missed the mark on my original point so badly that I didn't think that it would contribute to the present exposition.  However, upon reconsideration, I believe that Mr Frisch is right and I was wrong.  Rereading the complete sequence does add a certain missing flavor and completes the stew.

Comments

[billy T]

I have just one thing to say about the Liberal Mind: If I had a dollar for every time that CAPITALISM was blamed for the problems caused by GOVERNMENT, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap.

[billy T]

President Obama has spent his whole life creating straw men and then proceeds to slay them. Kinda like what libs do when they reject logic and pull the straw men out of their left hip.

[Steven Frisch]

Hey Joe McCarthy, how about you post the original message I put up, linking to several instances of right wing organizations, thinkers, and media leaders seeking to "reframe" or shut down what they perceive to be left wing messages.

If you can't see my key point, which is that there is not a dimes worth of difference between Brent Bozell and David Brock, then I guess you will never get it. What I am objecting to is your serial hypocrisy. The Powell memo, the Brock memo--Media Matters, Media Research---same thing, different ideology. Yet you trust the right wing noise machine--post from them--repeat their mantra--use their dog whistle messages and fear as a key part of your appeal.

Lets state it one more time: if Media Matters, as a private sector entity, wants to run a campaign to get people to boycott Fox News, they are perfectly within their rights to do so. And if you object to George Soros once having spent his money to fund Media Matters, take it up with the Koch Brothers!

[Steven Frisch]

Nothing like actually posting the full comments when one exercises their editorial control and moves them to another thread to ensure that they are not taken out of context.

[Todd Juvinall]

George, as you can see, the liberal can't even accept the facts when using their own words. It is a hopeless case. The liberal is from Uranus and we are from earth.

Anyone who thinks Brent Bozell is the same as Brock is either stupid or just trying to get a rise. Bozell even goes afte Grover Norquist, a staunch conservative while Brock just attacks only conservatives.

You have now satisfied the liberal's narcissism so maybe the liberal will finally shut up and return to the "Little red book" of thoughts.

[Michael Kesti]

When you don’t know grammar: "One Million Mom's" (sic) is plural rather than possesive and should therefore contain no apostrophe.

[billy T]

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street, If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold, I'll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet.
-- The Beatles in “The Taxman”

[A Facebook User]

George,
This post is embarrassing. This is something I expect to see over at Sierra Dragon's Breath.

B. Emery

[Todd Juvinall]

Why thanks BenE, we on the right revel in the derision from liberals. Our badge of honor. Again, thanks for the compliment.

BTW, where is your blog BenE?

[George Rebane]

Facebook(BenE) 843am - "embarrassing"? That's an interesting characterization to add to my own attempt to demonstrate 'revelation' and 'corroboration' of how the liberal mind works. While I'm not sure of how you ascribe embarrassment here, I did initially seek to avoid embarrassing SteveF by leaving out his first comment in the thread which demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of the point.

But perhaps you had another perspective on the matter.

In a broader vein, we have to constantly remind ourselves why our ideologies and their derived prescriptions are so wildly different. Else the independent and/or undecided reader will be confused and frustrated in seeking out concurrence where none is possible. Some years back I expanded on this in detail. Hope this helps.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2009/11/why-reason-fails.html

[Steven Frisch]

I understood the point perfectly George....(and you implying I do not is an intentional insult) you were claiming that what Media Matters was doing has no precedent. I pointed out precedent, and stated that your objection was over content...that is, when people you like support boycotts and media criticism you support it, and when people you do not like do not, it is unprecedented and somehow wrong.

In short, I was pointing out that YOU are the definition of a hypocrite.

Steve Frisch

[A Facebook User]

George,
A grown man that having your resume reverting to adolescent behavior is embarrassing. Steve clearly stated his opinion and you either cannot or will not cede that he was correct. Instead you resort to a tactic that of a 12 year old bully.

Media Matters doesn't pretend to be anything other what it is, a web based progressive research center that dedicates itself to debunking right wing misinformation in the media.

Media Matters and Media Research Center

Media Matters about

Media Matters for America is a
Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.

Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation - news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda - every day, in real time.

Using the website mediamatters.org as the principal vehicle for disseminating research and information, Media Matters posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally, Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions.

Media Research Center about

News Analysis Division, the "Leader in Documenting, Exposing and Neutralizing Liberal Media Bias," employs a team of expert news analysts who daily monitor all major nationally televised and print news broadcasts. The News Analysis Division publishes the daily CyberAlert e-mail report, weekly Media Reality Check reports and the every other week Notable Quotables collection of the most biased quotes from journalists — including the annual year-end "Awards for the Year's Worst Reporting" — as well as Profiles in Bias examinations of bias exhibited by influential journalists and Special Report studies. Also part of the division: The MRC's annual "DisHonors Awards" gala and the MRC's blogs, NewsBusters, "Exposing and Combating Liberal Media Bias" and TimesWatch, "Documenting and Exposing the Liberal Political Agenda of the New York Times."

[George Rebane]

SteveF 1039am and Facebook(BenE) 1040am - You both are flying in tight formation as you should. My argument that Media Matters is practicing something fundamentally different than boycotting a product or performance. MM seeks to shut down an entire conservative channel, and has declared this through the issuance of a detailed plan that was cited and linked in 'Ruminations - 29jun12'. I asked progressives to point to a similar document authored by conservatives that calls for silencing a prominent liberal channel.

It is instructive that neither of you understand the seminal difference to which I refer, or you are instead choosing to perform a mighty sidestep to distract readers from the issue. And the latter is point of this post.

[Steven Frisch]

Here is what George said:

"RR has long maintained that the radical leftwing has had in its agenda the silencing of opposition voices for the simple reason that open debate of issues and solutions has always been harmful to their cause. The self-declared middle roaders always gather to downgrade such campaigns by claiming that they are just symmetrical efforts by both left and right to silence each other. To my knowledge no such conservative campaign has ever been exposed by the Left (witness the response of the local echo chamber on these pages) beyond their empty accusations. Can anyone produce a strategy and planning document like this that was written by the Right?"

What did I do? I provided numerous examples of exactly what George asked for, including the Powell memo, which is precisely such a strategy and planning memo written by the right.

I also provided numerous examples of the 'right' trying to shut down "open debate of issues", including two personal examples that all of us can remember against films.

SOUR GRAPES IT IS! Get over it George, the left is learning to use the rights tactics against them.

[A Facebook User]

George,
Try explaining it in different terms and without the insults and maybe we could decipher your point.

B. Emery

[George Rebane]

SteveF 1055am - I guess that settles it then, since we are all happy with our interpretations of the matter, and that is all I was highlighting in this post.

And thank you for pointing out that citing the memorandum by SCOTUS Justice Powell is in your (and the progressive) view the analogue of the Media Matters plan to shut down Fox News. There is no conservative who would consider those two documents to be equivalent since Powell neither prescribed nor suggested that any liberal media outlet be silenced. The liberal mind stands as described.

[George Rebane]

BenE 1113am - if you consider my descriptions of the progressive mindsets to be insults, then there may be hope for rapprochement - in a sense, I too would feel slighted if someone pointed out that the way I think is unreasonable, and ignores fundamental aspects of life on Earth. However, I believe you meant something more personally pejorative. In that case all I can suggest is that you limit your responses in such comments threads, or simply withdraw from the discussion so as to avoid trafficking with those of "adolescent behavior".

[A Facebook User]

George,
I have limited time to participate in blogs due to work hours. I have set times to check voicemail/ emails per day and swing over to comment if I feel my opinion could add to the topic.

I don't like bullies of any kind and your clique of blogosphere friends seem to be cyber bullies. I spent my childhood fighting for those kids who were picked on and wouldn't fight for themselves. That fighting has shifted from physical to political/ intellectual. Bullies in my opinion are cowards who are afraid and lash out towards those who are the most vulnerable or those who cannot fight back for various reasons such as personality type or economic status.

Steve F. can handle his own on RR but I wanted him to know he was not alone.

I am sorry you have such a limited mental capacity that is seems to be absent of independent/ critical thought and so dependent on regurgitated opinions of others.

B Emery

[Todd Juvinall]

Well George, nice try but as you can see the liberal brain is unmovable from its brick wall. How anyone can equate a Media Matters jihad to destroy a network with boycotting France by Bill O'Reilly a few years ago, is in my opinion, ridiculous and insane. Of course we see the insanity of a liberal all around us. They are truly narcissists and I want to thank you George for exposing them so well to your readers. Now people can see why America is in the terrible state it is in.

[Account Deleted]

The conservatives have never tried to shut down debate. There are no examples given. 2 movies were picketed? Were there 2 big thugs with batons at the door, Frisch? What debate has been shut down? The modern left has been on record in many instances in trying their darndest (and succeeding) in shutting up voices they don't agree with. Why don't we start we several instances of speakers being heckled and shouted off of the stage at tax payer funded schools? Or the occasions in which the speaker is informed he or she can't even take the stage due to violence or the threat of violence? The folks that came to hear an opinion were denied that opportunity because of illegal and fascist disruption by the left. The disrupters should have been thrown out of the school for good and banned from ever setting foot in any public school ever again for any reason. Was your trip to the movies denied? Of course, it wasn't. I read the left wing blogs and web sites (Daily Kos, Truthout, etc) and the comments by the other readers. Violent threats, verbal abuse, foul language and fascism are rampant. The American left is all about shutting down opinion they don't agree with. It is a hallmark of Fox commentators that they invite the opposition to the debate. Left wing commentators won't dare to do that. The left is always happy to abscond with tax payer money for their views but where is the likes of W F Buckley on PBS? No where and that's how the left likes it.

[Account Deleted]

Sorry - "with" Why don't we start we several instances

[Earl Crabb]

In my experience as a cartoonist, I have received a lot more flak from the left than the right. Even my liberal cartoonist buddies reluctantly admit the same. It is true, however, that the religious right don't take too kindly to us when sex is involved. I know of many cases in the last thirty-odd years of prosecution in alleged obscenity cases. At least in this part of the world we don't get our fingers broken or have our homes burned down like they do in less enlightened countries. Some people just can't take a joke.

[A Facebook User]

Nothing to do with this topic other than I am appalled and am a liberal/ populist/ progressive. Just another liberal point of view I guess. Other than being a black man what was his crime and could this murder been avoided?

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/2/kenneth_chamberlains_family_files_suit_after

B. Emery

[billy T]

More examples of the Separate Worlds. One world faces Defense cuts and makes adjustments. The OTHER World faces Defense cuts and comes up with a expensive idea. One world considers dollars and cents. The Other World does not care about dollars or sense. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/02/gop-in-congress-critical-navy-great-green-fleet/ Smells like fried chicken

[A Facebook User]

Billy T,
One world believes government provides services to its citizens and the other is so far removed from what life would be like without those services they say they do not want them or their costs. I encourage all of you to visit a third world country and do not stay at tourist destinations. Then come back and make the same claims how you do not want government services such as roads, bridges, education, drinkable water, affordable energy, ect....

B. Emery

[David King]

B. Emery

"Then come back and make the same claims how you do not want government services such as roads, bridges, education, drinkable water, affordable energy, ect...."

Who are you posting for?...Not us!

[David King]

"One world believes government provides services to its citizens..."

"I encourage all of you to visit a third world country..."

What a sad joke!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ZWdX6Z5T4

[Steven Frisch]

SCott, did you read the posts? I gave about 6-8 specific examples, many from the last 2-3 years. I could list many more examples, but i suspect it would do no good. You, and every other regular reader will simply refuse to acknowledge that these things ever happened.

[Barry Pruett]

Crabb: I had a conversation with Jeff Ackerman before he left in which he indicated that our local left are far more likely to demand the silencing of opinion in the community. He based this opinion on the calls received in connection with letters to the editor. The left would demand that conservative opinions not be published for a variety of reasons. Also to Mr. Frisch...you have provided not a single instance of a conservative organization trying to "shut-down" a news organization...fyi...boycotting does not equate to silencing. The goal of Media Matters is to shut-down Foxnews while the goal of Media Research Center is to shine a light upon (or as Ben put it "debunk") other news organizations. Media Matters seeks to lessen speech while Media Research Center provides more speech. You must agee that more speech is better than less speech.

[A Facebook User]

David,
So you supported the Obama stimulus trying to bring the US's infrastructure up to 21st Century and stop the hemorrhaging of the US economy? The problem is our infrastructure is around $3 trillion in disrepair from 30 years of neglect.

Here is another link of lack of infrastructure.
http://water.org/water-crisis/water-facts/water/

[Todd Juvinall]

DavidK, as you can read from BenE, you don't know squat about the role of a wonderful government since he assumes you have never visited a foreign third world country and if you did, you were just within the vacation spots compound. What hubris by BenE.

When I travel to a foreign country I get out and travel around to get a feel of the way of life of the local community. What usually always see is the LACK of benefits to the people by their government. Even though the people pay their taxes, the third world government steals the money and vacations in our country! So, maybe BenE needs to reevaluate the third world where his love for government is in charge?

Regarding the stimuli Obama passed here. The money went to the unions and other friends of Obama. For goodness sakes BenE, do some research h before you make such a ridiculous statement. The infrastructure has been neglected because your pals in the unions and the government have diverted the trillions of dollars into their pensions and pay. Lifetime medical paid by the taxpayers. So that bridge you complain about needing repairs could have been fixed but the money went into Guido's pension plan. In California, we pay a tax on a tax when we buy gasoline. We also pay 18 cents or so to the Feds. The trillions that has raised was to repair and maintain our infrastructure. Guess where the money is? In our state the girls and boys in the playground of Sacramento, including the Governor, borrowed it all and never paid it back. They spent it on pensions.

So, before you assume everyone is as dumb as a liberal, you may need to study a bit more before bloviating in a blog that has a lot of people that are pretty darn smart.

[Ryan Mount]

Forgive my naive question, but just how can anyone (or anything) shutdown speech especially given the numerous media channels we have now? We have more speech than ever in the history of civilization. Not to mention the protections of the 1st Amendment.

We have more speech than we know how to process. And I'm happy about that.

I think we're confusing criticism, whether justified, civil or not, with censorship. And we're using this hypersensitivity to criticism to lash out against people we don't agree with.

[George Rebane]

RyanM 822am - Let's not confuse or conjoin 1) the expressed desire, 2) the effort expended, and 3) the prospects for success in shutting down a communication channel; they are orthogonal notions. To various degrees Media Matters has demonstrated accomplishment in all three.

[Account Deleted]

Yes, S Frisch - I read the entire post and all of the links. None had anything to do with shutting down debate, silencing anyone or stopping anyone from being able to receive information. I provided examples of lefties stopping people from being able to air their views. I also notice you (and Ryan) have no response to my specific examples.

[THEMIKEYMCD]

George, the fact that progressives tend to deploy an emotion based thought process while the right uses a more reason/logic based approach is not exactly groundbreaking. I focus on the good news: The left has failed to use government (FORCE/guns) to censor radio/tv despite their best laid plans to do so.

[George Rebane]

MikeyMcD 958am - The Fairness Doctrine and its halo legislation notwithstanding, you make a hopeful point. Long may it wave.

And it's also best to ignore reports like these.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/06/silencing-and-suppressing-the-right.html

[David King]

Todd said:

"DavidK, as you can read from BenE, you don't know squat about the role of a wonderful government since he assumes you have never visited a foreign third world country and if you did, you were just within the vacation spots compound. What hubris by BenE."

Yep!

I spent most of my working life overseas.

By the way Ben, cheap energy is the key to clean water.

[Gregory]

I get busy for a few days and it all hits the fan.

Earl, I guess S.Clay Wilson didn't bring many bible-thumpers to the Rip-Off Press readership :)

We also were treated to Steve Frisch's examples of respectful dialog.

I thought Ben Emery's declaration of George Rebane's limited intellectual capacity was the funniest part of this whole thread. George, it's true, if you were only as smart as Ben, you'd probably believe in the same things he does!

DK, cheap energy was the key to the entire industrial revolution, starting with James Watt's improvements that made steam engines useful. Here's a glimpse of life without engines, with someone akin to Ben E providing the punchline that is the title of the clip:

[Gregory]

2nd try:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA3lfQ1RQsw

[Gregory]

Media Matters isn't trying to shut down debate, they're trying to raise their rabble to fight towards November, and the Fox boogeyman is the route to take if you're trying to scare the children for some of that cheap emotional energy.

[billy T]

Great news everybody. Just found out members of a Native American tribe are exempt from the tax penalty, mandate and Obamacare. Gotta love the liberal white guilt. Amish are exempted as well. As a Native American Amish person, I wish to thank you all and say I forgive you. Even you Tiny Tim. I forgive all you white liberal crackers not for what you have done to my people(especially the Amish), but rather I forgive you because that is the kind of man I am. Now, don't any of you members of the Great Right Wing Conspiracy get any ideas and challenge this under the equal protection clause or some other jailhouse lawyer ploy. I got my exemption, now you go get yours. Two thoughts on the Separate Worlds thingie. One world wants to penalize those with good health care benefits starting in 2018 (a gift to the unions). Most union plans provide full accommodations, i.e. someone pays at least $1,025/year for the workers' health bennies, or known in the underworld as a "Cadillac Plan." Great. If you got yourselves one of those shiny Cadillacs, you will be "penalized" 40% of the value of what your bossman pays. The underworld calls that fair and affordable, lol. The second thing the underworld does puzzles me. Very few people die as a direct cause of Man Made Global Warming as compared to the hundred of thousands that die each year due to unsanitary indoor pollution. Shanties that heat and cook food over burning dung, poor drinking water, etc. The above world would say that running natural gas to these huts would save millions of lives and cause less green house catastrophes . The under world would say give them electric cars. The underworld is quite creepy. The above world is focused on tangible results. Thanks again liberal crackers.

[Gregory]

Billy T, the issue with Cadillac plans is not that someone has gotten more value from their employer for their labors, it's that it is untaxed income. It is *the* major tax loophole in the entire IRS code.

The mortgage deduction is railed against by some, but ALL interest was originally deductable, including revolving credit, because interest paid is taxed as income to the creditor. W

[Gregory]

The mortgage deduction is railed against by some, but ALL interest was originally deductable, including revolving credit, because interest paid is taxed as income to the creditor. When health benefits really were fringe, it wasn't a big deal, but folks with those "Cadillac" plans are a big driver of everyone's costs. It isn't a "penalty", it is a tax.

If it wasn't for unions being among the ones getting the goodies, it's a loophole that might have been closed a long time ago.

[Russ Steele]

billyt@12:06

How much Native American do you have be for an exemption? My great, great grandmother was an half-breed Native American, my grandfather had dark skin, black hair and big hook nose. If just a little bit of Native American counts maybe I can get an exemption also. If a little bit counts, ancestry.com will be real busy in the coming month as everyone looks for their exemption.

[billy T]

Gregory, call it a tax. Still feels like a penalty. Yep, I see your point. Like working on a ranch and then having to pay taxes on the value of the "rent" of the bunkhouse or when hauled into divorce court and calling the bunk "income" so she can get more money out of this turnip. Hey, when the Native Americans roamed this land freely, women did all the work and there were no taxes. Then the paleface came and tried to improve on that. Suppose if an employer pays $1,126/month for my plan. Are you telling me that I got to pay the 40% regressive tax/penalty and declare an additional $5,404.80 income a year that I never saw? How does that make it affordable? Everybody wants good health care delivery. Just suppose I seek and obtain a visible means of support that includes health care for myself and the precious little children who call me Papa. Seems I will be taking home less and paying more and YOU state I am the reason health care costs go up? Never see me walk into a hospital uninsured or the precious little ones whose frontal lobes have not fully developed. Next thing you will tell me is the limits on my HSA's will be reduced to $2,500 year. Then you will probably tell me that my employer can not longer write off the health care expenses the Bossman pays for employee health care expenses. Next thing you know I will no longer be able to claim health care expenses as pre-tax deductions. Nonsense. Are you on drugs??! No need to answer the last question. Yes, life is not fair but I don't see how this makes anything more affordable or accessible. And what is this nonsense about the 8% rule for the uninsured??? Downright crazy I tell ya. Suppose a dude or dudette makes, say, 36K/year. Not a lot, just enough to pay rent and drive a used car and keep shoes on the little bambinos. Has to fork over $2,880/year? Or is that he has to pay anything over $2,880/year to cover health insurance. I can see why AARP has risen the amount of their employee contribution to drop it just under the Cadillac limits. AARP cares about its employees. Pay more for the same, hopefully. And why are the old people scared shitless that they will lose some coverage under Medicare? They will pay more for less. And why is Barrakberry Ojama cutting 500 billion out of the elderberry's health care? Sounds like he is tossing Grandma over the cliff. Those mean nasty Libbowels. Taking a pound of flesh from our elderberries and driving up Grandma's utilities. You crackers have it all ass backwards. We Native American Amish take care of our wise elders with respect and dignity and honor. The Great White Father in Washington always culls the herd by shooting the old and feeble first. Low hanging fruit I suppose. Well, I got my exemption. Thank again for excusing me from your party. Besides, I would rather sink my tom-tom in the mashed potatoes.

[George Rebane]

Taxes for value not received or those that force behaviors are penalties.

[Gregory]

Billy T, how it should work is that if you were given, as part of your wages, a health insurance benefit that your employer paid $6,000 for, you should pay income taxes for that $6,000 in wages and benefits you actually did receive.

Done right, the tax tables would be adjusted so that the whole thing is revenue neutral; folks with lousy insurance, or none at all, would get more take-home pay, those who might have been getting $30K of before tax pay would finally see what that manna from heaven was actually costing. And finally, insurance would be purchased with after tax dollars, allowing a market for individual policies to be on equal footing with employer plans.

As I've just found out, that isn't how Pelosi & Company did it. The penalty will be paid starting in 2018 by the insurance company for daring to actually sell a company the policy, assuming Obamacare is still in place in 6 years.

[Gregory]

"Taxes for value not received or those that force behaviors are penalties."

If your employer has been buying you a $30k/annum health insurance policy with before tax dollars, you've been receiving value. Lots of it.

[George Rebane]

Gregory 354pm - hence the critical insertion of that little word 'not'.

[Dixon Cruickshank]

George I would think the quote I sent you from the unknown author fits this, although I would think it needs a full posting not an update or a comment - just say'in

[Douglas Keachie]

Name calling? Gee what would the Rightys here have as a name for this dude? Romney Inspired? http://grist.org/news/duke-ceo-bill-johnson-resigns-after-one-day-gets-44-million-in-severance/

[George Rebane]

DougK 252pm - It seems that you're a little confused about relating Johnson's sudden resignation (for whatever reason) to labels that help identify ideologies. And the relationship to Romney is something I look forward to seeing explained.

[Douglas Keachie]

Here's one sentence with both answers: They are both capitalists with a Capital "C."

[Douglas Keachie]

As in "Cee what's in it for me, and the commons be damned." How many Duke middle class customers will pay how much each to cover the expense? If this were a school superintendent, how would you state your apparent non-interest in the topic (for whatever reason)?

[George Rebane]

DougK 347pm, 351pm - You did it again; thanks for highlighting how the progressive mind thinks and reasons.

I too am a Capitalist (note cap C), and so are many other RR readers. In our minds, basing your characterization of the relationship on the fact that they're both Capitalists is a tenuous connection indeed in an attempt to make as yet an unmade point about Johnson's resignation. And your inclusion of the notion of a commons in this item is totally puzzling, and calls into question what understanding you have of a commons.

If the sudden resignee were a school superintendent paid for with my taxes, the sumbich would not have gotten the job with a contract that had such a severance clause in it. If the superintendent were in some other district which did not draw upon my wallet, then I would simply wish them Vaya con Dios and let them do what they like.

But your concern with Johnson's behavior, given that you were a Duke shareholder, is understandable. However, if you own no Duke stock, then your concern would be most curious until you were identified as a progressive - in which case all would again become clear.

[Account Deleted]

Thank you Douglas for once again showing the main difference between a lefty and conservative. You operate on about one one-hundredth as much of a knowledge base as a conservative. First of all, no one wrote the guy a check for 44 million for one day's pay. They actually don't even know if he got that much anyway if you would actually slow down and read the whole story. A lot of it was built up over the years of service that he had with Progress Energy. Duke and Progress have a combined customer base of approximately 10.2 million customers with other operations around the world. So each poor, poor customer is out less than a cup of coffee, if that. And if he was let go as the story implies, it could be because the board didn't like his ideas about the future that could have ended up costing the companies (and the customers) far more than 44 million. I notice that there is a political connection. That evil scum bag power company, Duke, is pledging to raise 32 million for the DEMOCRATS! Apparently, a re-elected President Zero will give back accordingly.