Longtime PBS news commentator Bill Moyers said Friday that billionaire George Soros has “been the victim, of course, of Glenn Beck and the right-wing, the Fox News assassins.” Moyers made his comments in a discussion with Huffington Post founder Arianna Huffington, during which he praised Soros, whom Moyers also said is “deeply troubled by the Orwellian power of the right-wing in this country today.” Transcript below, via Newsbusters : BILL MOYERS: I’ll tell you somebody you could, you should go for, because he has given more thought to this than almost anyone I know: George Soros, believe it or not. George Soros, whatever you think about his wealth or his politics, George Soros was next to Vaclav Havel I think the most catalytic agent for helping to bring down the Communist government behind the Iron Curtain because he, he gave everybody who wanted one an equivalent of a Xerox machine, and so they could get the message out. And he is deeply troubled by the Orwellian power of the right-wing in this country today. He talks about it. I was on his board for a several years, and I’m off now that I’m back on the air, but I was on his board, and he is deeply troubled. He is a great devotee of the open society, the society that does change because it listens to itself, and learns from its experience. He’s been the victim, of course, of Glenn Beck and the right-wing, the Fox News assassins. So he’s thought a great deal about the Orwellian idea, and he said it has arrived in this country. It is here, part of the permanent, a permanent characteristic of American democracy which is therefore self-suicidally bent because of the power and force of propaganda. He’d be somebody I know would write you a really good piece for that. (h/t Newsbusters )
Read the original post:
PBS Commentator Bill Moyers: George Soros Has Been the ‘Victim’ of Glenn Beck and Fox News ‘Assassins’
Enough Sheriff Dupnik! From an editorial in the Arizona Republic: Dupnik took up his cause again on Monday. And, in response, we have to say at last . . . enough. Enough attacks, sheriff. Enough vitriol. It is well past time for the sheriff of Pima County to get a grip on his emotions and remember his duty. With each passing hour, we learn more about the 22-year-old suspect. And everything we learn adds to the profile of a deeply troubled young man detached from reality. There is nothing to date that suggests any partisan motivation for his crimes, whether right-wing or left. Dupnik needs to recall that he is elected to be a lawman. With each additional comment, the Democratic sheriff of Pima County is revealing his agenda as partisan, and, as such, every bit as recklessly antagonistic as the talk-show hosts and politicians he chooses to decry.
The rest is here:
Major AZ paper says what we’re all thinking
At the clip is Time ‘s Mark Halperin , making the case for a massive blowout in November, with a tidal wave washing out as many as 60 Democratic House incumbents. But Political Scientist Larry Sabato provides a more scholarly projection, ” The Crystal Ball’s Labor Day Predictions “: For decades I’ve advised students to let the facts speak for themselves, while avoiding the indulgence of shouting at the facts. In other words, we should take in all the available, reliable information; process it; and let the emerging mosaic tell its story—whether the picture pleases or not. The human (and partisan) tendency to twist facts into pretzels in order to produce a desired result must be avoided at all costs. We’ve been patient and cautious here at the Crystal Ball as a year’s worth of facts has accumulated. We’ve sifted the polls, cranked up the models, and watched the candidates and campaigns closely. All political observers have “gut feelings” about an election year, but feelings make for good songs and lousy predictions. Forecasting is an imprecise art. People who get too far ahead of the facts or are too insistent about what will happen are usually partisans—openly or in disguise. The Crystal Ball’s predictions are clinical. We are fond of people in both parties. We cheer for no one. 2010 was always going to be a Republican year, in the midterm tradition. It has simply been a question of degree. Several scenarios were possible, depending in large measure on whether, or how quickly, the deeply troubled American economy recovered from the Great Recession. Had Democratic hopes on economic revitalization materialized, it is easy to see how the party could have used its superior financial resources, combined with the tendency of Republicans in some districts and states to nominate ideological fringe candidates, to keep losses to the low 30s in the House and a handful in the Senate. But conditions have deteriorated badly for Democrats over the summer. The economy appears rotten, with little chance of a substantial comeback by November 2nd. Unemployment is very high, income growth sluggish, and public confidence quite low. The Democrats’ self-proclaimed “Recovery Summer” has become a term of derision, and to most voters—fair or not—it seems that President Obama has over-promised and under-delivered. Obama’s job approval ratings have drifted down well below 50% in most surveys. The generic ballot that asks likely voters whether they will cast ballots for Democrats or Republicans this year has moved increasingly in the GOP direction. While far less important, other controversies such as the mosque debate and immigration policy have made the climate worse for Democrats. Republican voters are raring to vote, their energy fueled by anti-Obama passion and concern over debt, spending, taxes, health care, and the size of government. Democrats are much less enthusiastic by almost every measure, and the Democratic base’s turnout will lag. Plus, Democrats have won over 50 House seats in 2006 and 2008, many of them in Republican territory, so their exposure to any sort of GOP wave is high. Given what we can see at this moment, Republicans have a good chance to win the House by picking up as many as 47 seats, net . This is a “net” number since the GOP will probably lose several of its own congressional districts in Delaware, Hawaii, and Louisiana. This estimate, which may be raised or lowered by Election Day, is based on a careful district-by-district analysis, plus electoral modeling based on trends in President Obama’s Gallup job approval rating and the Democratic-versus-Republican congressional generic ballot (discussed later in this essay). If anything, we have been conservative in estimating the probable GOP House gains, if the election were being held today. There’s more at the link (and Sabato discusses GOP Senate prospects, the view on the governors’ races, etc.). As noted at the few times I’ve written about this, I personally wouldn’t make predictions unless based on a district-by-district analysis of partisan electoral trends. So here we have in Sabato’s analysis the kind of approach that’s probably best for making projections, and that’s topped off with the electoral modeling and the shares of the generic ballot. See my previous post, ” How Bad For the Democrats in 2010? ” So, yeah, I guess JBW was smart not to take me up on the wager challenge. But bet or not, I’m not going to hesitate from a bit of gloating on election night. The administration is awful and the Dems just suck. And I’m not going be shy of saying good riddance.
Read more from the original source:
Larry Sabato’s Labor Day Predictions
