This is what I actually said:

Well your welcome SteveK cept I happen to be one of those pessimistic LIBERALS we all seem to talk about.

Im not a progressive by any stretch of the imagination. I believe that the FAR LEFT loons that run the progressive movement in the democratic wing of our party are no different then the FAR RIGHT loons who have run and subsequently destroyed the Republican party.

I make no such claims to being a progressive. What I claimed was to be a Democrat. A Liberal and A supporter of Hillary Clinton.

Who is Her base? Obviously she has been abandoned by the far left progressives. Thank God for that. She represents the working class, everyday, rooted in reality democrats that have been the basis of the party for decades if not a century now.

She wants health care for all. Obama wants health care for some……

On and on the contrasts are subtle.

So I am pleased to inform you that I am not a left wing loon who has simply changed my mantle to progressive in an effort to hide the fact that I am no different then those far right wingers who sought and obtained the power in the GOP..

I want this country to unite. I DO NOT believe that a Candidate claiming moderation whose support comes from this far left wing crowd(and whose policies mirror this groups demands) will go very far without preaching, teaching and governing to his base.

Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama and John McCain all have bases in which they draw their fundamental support. Look to the base to see what it is you will get. If you like the base, you will like the candidate. Its as simple as that to me. It always has been.

ALSO and this is very important. Not everyone who supports Barak Obama is a far left wing loon. Or even a loon. I do not want you to leave here with the presumption that I believe all or even a majority of those pushing Barak Obama to power are loons or far left.

No. The christian coalition was not a majority in the GOP either but their influence since 1979 became more and more powerful culminating in the reelection of GWB in 2004. As things grew worse for GWB he more and more and progressively turned to his base and now he governs to his 28 percent base.

Progressives in the country probably make up about 28 percent of this countrys political base. Yet when you look at Barak Obama's website and listen to what he stands for he has become the mouthpiece for them. He mirrors and reflects this base and it is this base he will preach too when elected.

I reject their message as I rejected the Christian Coalition message as being unduly influencing and working the premise that the minority is ruling the majority.

I have to laugh, too, Neocon. Your rant above shows us once again what a “pessimistic progressive” you really aren't.

Thanks for the refresher course in progressive thought. Some were wondering about your claim of being a misunderstood liberal… You've now set the record straight. ; )

How dare A politician call another politician an appeaser or hint that he might not be a good president. Or lord forbid that he might say something negative in a comment.

It is amazing the transformation that the progressive left has come to in the last 5 years. At one point they were the screamers. Those who shouted the loudest and the longest at what was transpiring in this country.

They called Bush Dubya, Heir, Nazi, American Taliban. They accused him of this and that that pales, no, that does not even come into the same universe as calling Barak Obama an appeaser with his statements on foreign policy.

So the new strategy now is to scream, browbeat, become outraged at the absolute hostile actions that are taken against their man. How dare those evil Republicans or that Evil Hillary dare to say anything even remotely negative. To call into question Barak Obama's ability to lead this nation as commander in chief and as president.

How dare they question. Speak to the hand.

The transformation from screaming lunatics with drool dripping from their jowls to indignant self righteous and morally unassailable is quite fascinating to watch.

Whenever anyone says anything even remotely negative about Barak Obama the plan is to lamblast any such rhetoric with righteous indignation and demand an apology.

This is absolutely amazing. I am glad that I have witnessed this in my life time. For I believe that it will be written about for decades to come as the most ingenious and deceptively insightful concept ever to hit politics in over two centuries.

I can only stand amazed at the absolute brillance that the progressives have pulled in the last two years. Amazing. Absolutely amazing. Not only have they pulled it on the Republicans but they have done it to Hillary as well. Truly an amazing feat.

* * *

“if we don't live up to your definition of moderate”

You and most users on this site are well left of moderate, not moderate at all, Joe.

* * *

“The spin from the Rightie comments the other day was W wasn't talking about Obama Husein”

My 30-second (after-the-hourly-news) sniff test of Shawn Hannity on the road yesterday on my way to Detroit (test failed — I went back to listening to CDs) included his taking pains to emphasize, Emphasize, EMPHASIZE! that Bush never, Never, NEVER! mentioned Obama or anyone else by name. (He has a point, overly loud as it is; it's the lefties who are reading much more into the Bush remarks, as well as childishly and ridiculously overreacting to them, as if they were Shawn Hannity on steroids and stimulants.) Bush's remark was, of course, more general, and that's how it was calmly and intelligently interpreted no matter what the howing mob says or how clumsily the Bush handlers try to explain it themselves.

(Greetings from Sterling Heights, Rudi and T-Steel. I'm starting to get more familiar with this place now. Wish more of this immediate area were like Ann Arbor, which I drove through earlier this morning on my way here. Man, the home of Borders is a snazzy little community.)

The spin from the Rightie comments the other day was W wasn't talking about Obama Husein – LOL.

It's clear from your comment here that clear that if you don't like someone they are hacks or political tools but if they agree with you they are brilliant. Why not write a comment that could possibly change someone's mind and stick to the issues and tell us why specifically you disagree with the view I gave in my post that makes no bones about being an analysis. Yes. You can state your conclusion in analyses.

Independent voters do reach conclusions, form opinions and vote in the end and aren't like CSPAN hosts with noncomittal faces who can't take sides.

There are bloggers on the Internet and writers in comments who've changed my perceptions because they gave their own takes on it. Quite often when people on the left or right don't like a post on TMV they start in with the stuff about being moderate. It has gotten very old and not on topic. Sorry if we don't live up to your definition of moderate, which apparently would mean I would have to write a post patently anti-Obama and consider the Washington Post's blogger a hack — which I do NOT, just as I don't consider the LA Times blogger, NY Times blogger USA Today bloggers hacks or many bloggers with whom I don't even agree and writers on both the Huffington Post and Pajamas Media, two of my favorite sites.

And DLS just drivels as usual.

It's nice to watch them squirm after all the carnage they've cheered on.

Before the “moderates” mention “swift-boating” four years later might be okay, the Swift Boat Captains served years in Vietnam and knew Kerry was a three-month wonder who faked Purple Hearts and then defected to the enemy.

James Rubin's little concocted video [his wife is Iran-loving CNN shill Amanpour] was done at Davos right after the Hamas victory and before the terrorist group maintained its terrorist credentials by shooting rockets and missiles into civilian areas in Israel. A total misrepresentation.

But I guess that's okay with the MSM because James' career move from Hillary to Obama is the kind of defection most “moderates” here would do in a heartbeat, I'd guess.

Looks like even country music stations are upset with Bush attacking an American citizen running for public office with comparisons to a HIlter appeaser:

“Currently, 147 country music stations have instituted the [Bush] ban, a number which has been growing by the hour. Clear Channel, a major syndicator to all radio formats across America, is considering the ban, which would increase the numbers significantly and be a major blow to the White House. Several Clear Channel stations have independently instituted their own ban.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-j-elisberg…

Bush may find his Hitler remarks backfiring even further on him considering his own well documented family history of appeasement, support and money laundering for Hitler.

http://newsmine.org/archive/cabal-elite/familie…

http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/012303A.ma.dead…

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0925-01

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?sho…

All but that 28% of hardcore Bush supporters are aware of this fact, and although it has taken many of them a rather disappointingly long time to figure it out, it's still a case of better late than never. McCain will need to be very careful in order not to be fatally tainted by the Bush legacy, particularly since the D's are unlikely to be pulling their punches anymore.