Category Archives: Liberal

Tim Farron recognised the divisions in his party when he told Andrew Mar he is a bit of a Eurosceptic Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

I dont think Im the only Liberal Democrat to have identified unreasonable optimism as one of the characteristics of my own party. In some senses its built in: during the bad times lets face it, quite a lot of the time those not optimistic enough go off and do something else.

There are positives and negatives about this, of course. Serious optimism gives you amazing resilience. But it can get in the way of self-criticism when things are not going quite right.

The Lib Dems went into the local and general election campaigns believing that the other main parties (apart from Ukip, apparently) were divided about Brexit. They argued that they were riding a burgeoning wave of anti-Brexit sentiment.

It is certainly true that remainers now have increasing energy behind them, as research into Twitter trends revealed last week. It is also true that the Lib Dems have reached a record membership, pushing over the 100,000 mark in the last month and it seems likely that the overwhelming majority of those are remainers. They will be cheered by the announcement yesterday of commitment to a second referendum on the Brexit deal in the Lib Dem manifesto.

The trouble is, the electorate as a whole does not seem to have responded yet. The Lib Dems slipped back a little in seats won during the council elections (though their vote share went up). The recently defined re-leavers category the 23% who voted remain but want to respect the vote, according to a YouGov survey suggests that not the whole 48% will be tempted to vote Lib Dem this time.

Luckily for the Lib Dems if they see it like this there is a clue about what to do next. This lies in an awkward, unheralded group, an unresearched, unrecognised corner of the political taxonomy: the Liberal Brexiters.

It hasnt suited academics or political anoraks to track these, so how do we know they are there? The obvious evidence is that so many former Liberal strongholds including Cornwall, Devon, parts of west Wales and parts of Lancashire voted strongly for Brexit. They therefore hold an unpredictable key to a Liberal revival, and especially in the west.

There has always been a sense of rugged independence in these places areas with high self-employment rates, which used traditionally to vote Liberal.

There are also, undoubtedly, Liberal-minded people who voted to leave the EU not because they were convinced by Boriss bluster or the 350m but because they have an instinctive dislike of large supranational bureaucracies (and national ones too), however they might approve of their internationalist purpose.

So here is the problem for the Lib Dems: they are divided, not among their current members, but between their current voters and an important section of their traditional ones. They are a broad church, like all political ideologies. But to achieve the breakthrough (or breakback) they need, they will have to find ways of holding this division together.

Tim Farron clearly recognised this dilemma himself when he told Andrew Marr he was, as he put it, a bit of a Eurosceptic. This is partly because he realises, perhaps more than others in his party, the need to reach out to Liberal Brexiters; partly because his own constituency is in a leave area; and partly because he regards liberalism, as he told Marr, as an ideology that challenges people in power the EU, in government, in councils.

The reason the Liberal Brexiters provide a somewhat unwelcome clue is that the party somehow needs to articulate what unites the Lib Dems and this group: a scepticism about large, over-mighty institutions, which is part of the Liberal purpose.

There are mutterings in the Lib Dem camp from those fearing an identical rerun of the referendum campaign, which was over-technocratic, under-emotional and not noticeably successful.

None of this suggests that Farron should row back from his position on Brexit. But it does suggest that he needs to find other grounds in common with the Liberal Brexiters.

If he can wriggle out of the Brexit dialogue of the deaf between those who defend the purpose of our institutions (the technocrats) and those who attack the way they work in practice (the radicals) he can apply some of that radicalism to those other institutions nearer home that work in theory but not in practice: the housing market, Southern Rail, the energy market and, especially, the banks.

If the 2015 election taught the Lib Dems anything, it is that centrism needs to be driven by a crusading fervour for change. Those who want an effective Liberal opposition will therefore hope Farron can as he promises that the British people will have have a final say on any deal speak effectively to those old curmudgeons, the Liberal Brexiters.

See the rest here:

Tim Farron can still reach out to the Lib Dems' lost tribe, the Liberal Brexiters - The Guardian

The death of Fox News founder Roger Ailes shocked fans of the network and the world of journalism Thursday morning. But many liberals, who despise his creating, took the opportunity of the mans death to attack him and the network he created.

Unable to contain their contempt, they took to social media to attack the man.

Though some of the tweets have since been deleted by their authors, the magic of screen captures allows the Internet to relive their poor taste forever.

Huffington Posts senior politics editor:

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

Screen capture from Twitter

However, it was all nasty. MSNBCs Al Sharpton managed to show some class.

Many of the cable news networks handled Ailes death with class as well, although one particular network was especiallynasty. Watchtosee their reactions:

Continued here:

Sick: Liberal Journalists Celebrate The Death Of Fox News Founder Roger Ailes - The Daily Caller

The Conservatives' manifesto proposalto require ID to cut down on electoral fraud has many on the left worried that the proposal is actually a ruse to decrease the number of Labour voters who are eligible to vote. Are they right?

The first thing to note is that while there is a very small number of electoral malpractice cases fewer than 100 some of which count as an electoral fraud, they involve matters unrelated to the wrong people voting at polling stations. The most frequent crime is putting false signatures on nomination papers, after that breaking expenses rules, and lastly making false claims about other candidates.

The most recent high-profile cases of electoral fraud involved false claims about a candidate (Labours Phil Woolas against his Liberal Democrat opponent in 2010), postal vote fraud(Birmingham, 2004) and bribery and spiritual influence (Lutfur Rahman, 2014).

In none of the cases would a stronger ID requirement have detected or prevented the crime.

Of course, some people will ask, but what about the criminals we dont catch? The difficulty there is that its hard to see where this fraud is taking place. In all those cases, the result itself was a sign something was up. If someone is rigging results, they are doing so in a way that produces outcomes entirely in keeping with national swing and demographic behaviour. Other than the thrill of the chase, its not clear why someone would do this.

What we do know from the one part of the United Kingdom that requires voters to produce ID before voting Northern Ireland is that it makes it harder for poorer people to vote as they are less likely to have the required identification. That's why after their pilot, their scheme, introduced in 2002,went hand-in-hand with free ID.

There is, however, a strong argument that elections need to command a high level of public legitimacy, making the case for ID stronger. But there is a wide suite of measures the government could bring in alongside this change that would achieve that while lessening the impact of having an ID. They could, for instance, make it so you are automatically enrolled when you pay council tax, a water bill, a heating bill or any other charge that comes with a fixed abode. They could roll out a free photo ID for elections.

But as they are doing neither, it feels fair to say that at best the government is relaxed about making it harder for supporters of its opponents to vote, and at worst is actively seeking to do so.

Link:

The Liberal Democrat manifesto is a blast from the past - New Statesman

CNN anchor Kate Bolduan lost it on Trump-supporting former Navy SEAL Carl Higbie during a Tuesday night roundtable interview. Discussing reports that President Donald Trump had shared highly classified information with Russian diplomats during last weeks White House meeting, Bolduan became enraged during the segment.

When asked by Bolduan if it frightened him as a military man that Trump may have shared classified information with Russian officials, Higbie fired back hard.

Ive been sitting here quietly listening to all this B.S. quite frankly, Higbie observed of the rest of the panel at the roundtable discussion. Did you listen to anything [White House National Security Adviser H.R.] McMaster said today? Where he said, I was in the room, that didnt happen?

Higbie was referencing McMasters comments, which alleged that Trumps conversation with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak was wholly appropriate.

As Bolduans temper rose, Higbie became more composed.

Higbie attacked outlets such as CNN over using anonymous sources who were purportedly knowledgeable of the situation regarding the Russian meeting and were running with the allegations.

Youre basing all of these allegations off of one or maybe two sources, Higbie said. Two former officials? Come out, name those people, then well have something to talk about.

Bolduan claimed that many other liberal outlets received the same type of tips from anonymous sources, such as ABC, NBC and The New York Times.

Yeah, but who are the sources? Higbie asked. Oh, because theyre hiding behind this anonymity.

Bolduan was triggered by Higbies dismissal of the anonymous sources and began shouting at the former Navy SEAL.

Oh, please! Please! Bolduan shouted. Do not even start with me, that youre just going to attack sources. That is ridiculous!

Higbie, undeterred, asked Bolduan outright if she felt that McMaster was lying.

Im not saying McMaster is lying, Bolduan countered. He didnt answer the question. You cannot attack do not attack the stellar reporters of CNN, who have their sources and would protect their sources.

Seeming to find the term stellar reporters entertaining, Higbie mocked, OK, the stellar reporters of CNN that I am going to attack right now and say: Guess what? I dont believe them because they are staying anonymous. If they stand behind the story, come out, face the camera.

See the heated exchange in the video below.

More:

Liberal CNN anchor has a meltdown on a Trump-supporting former Navy SEAL. It does not end well. - TheBlaze.com

The impeachment process is ultimately political. Photograph: Michael Reynolds/EPA

To watch Fox News on Monday night or peruse rightwing outposts like Breitbart and the Drudge Report was to find an America that will always be to Donald Trumps liking. Deep State Strikes, blared Breitbart, perhaps Trumps most ardent media defender. Leaks Classified Info to Washington Post to Smear Trump.

Looks like more Fake news, Foxs Sean Hannity tweeted. Drudge struck the same tune: More Leaks Smear President.

Tuesday night, when news broke that Trump had asked his since ousted FBI director, James Comey, to shut down an investigation into his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, the wagon-circling renewed. Comeys Revenge? White House Pushes Back on Report Trump Asked Ex-FBI Boss to End Flynn Probe, read the banner headline across Foxs website.

The decidedly Trump-unfriendly Washington Post revealed the president had disclosed classified intelligence about an Islamic State plot at a meeting last week with Russian officials, while the New York Times broke the Comey news. The intelligence, according to subsequent reporting, was provided by Israel, one of Americas closest allies. The consequences were immediately clear: in the future, countries could balk at sharing intelligence with a country led by such a reckless man.

A president can declassify intelligence. Trump acted stupidly, not illegally. What he did, most likely unwittingly given his disdain for learning the intricacies of governing, is violate espionage etiquette and prove to the world once more that Americas impulsive overlord will go rogue at any moment.

The Comey revelation is more disturbing. If hard evidence is produced, Trump is opening himself up to obstruction of justice charges. Both Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon were subject to impeachment proceedings on these grounds.

But the rightwing medias reaction to Trumps latest imbroglios should be a comedown for every Democrat and liberal member of the punditocracy who is convinced that his days as president are numbered. What they always seem to forget is that a large chunk of the people who elected Trump still want him around. Just as importantly, the media they consume hasnt given up on him. With no consensus reality uniting all Americans, news consumption becomes tribal: you remain in the fiefdoms you trust and shut everyone else out.

The Watergate scandal felled Nixon because, in part, his own party turned on him. House Republicans, giddy about their newfound majority, pressed the case against Clinton. No president in American history has been impeached when his own party controlled Congress, but weve at least learned from 2016 that few people should take comfort in any kind of precedent.

Will Republicans desert the president? More importantly, will the media they read and watch to form the only reality they know suddenly decide Trump is totally unfit to lead? If there are signs of fissures on the right Ann Coulter, once a tireless Trump acolyte, recently blasted him for not keeping all his campaign promises they are tied to questions of policy, not propriety.

Republicans waited eight years for Barack Obama to disappear and arent ready to make war with one of their own, despite what people like John McCain may intimate.

If polls show Republican voters are fleeing Trump en masse, House Republicans may stand up and move against a president who devolves into a true albatross. If this happens, even the most sycophantic of news outlets could decide Trump isnt worth the effort of defending. Then, and only then, will impeachment from a Republican Congress become viable.

The impeachment process is ultimately political. A majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate are needed for a conviction. The rule of law only means so much. This, more than anything else, may be Trumps saving grace.

More:

The liberal punditocracy thinks Donald Trump is toast. Not so fast - The Guardian

A number of participants are people who are considered to be 2020 presidential contenders: Senators Kirsten Gilibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Chris Murphy will all address the conference, as will Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. Montana Governor Steve Bullock, who won a state Trump won by 20 points, will also address the conference, as will Obamas National Security Advisor Susan Rice, who has been accused of several offenses by the sitting president.

We should keep in mind that were in month four of the Trump administration, Tanden said about the shadow Trump will cast on the conference. Its reasonable for people to be focused on his actions because theyre such an assault on vulnerable people, on progressive values, on other Americans. There is a lot to criticize. But our expectation is that people will provide an alternative vision and that our speakers, whether theyre senators or governors or even a mayor, will provide a positive alternative as well.

No one who has already run for president was invited to speak at the conference, underscoring its goal of highlighting progressive rising stars. Our focus is really on trying to highlight people who other people dont see every day, Tanden said. People who are fighting and have positive ideas about how the country can move forward.

Unlike CPAC, the Ideas Conference will be much more focusedit has only one stage and lasts for only one day, unlike CPAC, which goes on for four. Like CPAC, the Ideas Conference aims to bring together grassroots and established organizationsTanden highlighted Indivisible, Swing Left, Town Hall Project, Digital Democracy, Democracy Lab, and Our Revolution, as well as Planned Parenthood and the ACLUwith political leaders. But the more modest scope also means, however, that the grassroots groups wont have the kind of prominence that they have at CPAC. Its panel on the resistance features Indivisibles Leah Greenberg, civil rights activist DeRay Mckesson, Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas, and immigration activist and DREAMer Astrid Silva, but the majority of the other talks are more dominated by politicians.

Asked about the influence of the grassroots, Tanden highlighted the resistance panel and a training session CAP will be hosting for groups and activists attending the conference. But she also stressed that the Ideas Conference is trying to fill a leadership void on the progressive side. We wanted to have a mix of politicians and grassroots leaders, Tanden said. We really hear the deep demand for leaders and we definitely wanted to showcase them. We wanted to highlight the resistance. Youll feel that throughout the day. People are anxious for leaders to step up up right now.

Continue reading here:

Will the Liberal CPAC Kick Off the 2020 Race? - New Republic

LONDON Emmanuel Macrons overwhelming victory over the right-wing nationalist Marine Le Pen in the final round of the French presidential election by 66 percent of the votes cast to 34 percent for his opponent is good news for those who believe in liberal democracy. But the threats to democratic institutions in the West are real and increasing.

In France, President Macron, whose new party La Republique En Marche has yet to hold seats in parliament pending the June election, faces huge challenges to his proposals to reform the way the French economy operates. Both right-wing and left-wing extremists will fiercely oppose him.

In Germanys autumn elections, the right-wing AfD may gain representation in the Bundestag, but democratic processes in Germany are strong enough to cope with any threat from the right or from Russian attempts to manipulate the electoral process. Chancellor Angela Merkel remains Europes staunchest upholder of liberal democracy.

Some of the countries of Eastern Europe seem to be sliding into autocracy. Victor Orban, the prime minister of Hungary, is a right-wing nationalist who is opposed to the democratic principles enshrined in the European Union treaties. The present Polish government has taken steps to enfeeble the judiciary and move toward a more autocratic regime.

In Britain there are a few right-wing Tories who denigrate liberal democracy and would support actions which in the past led to it being called the nasty party, as British Prime Minister Theresa May herself once famously described her party. A failure to achieve reasonable terms in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations would encourage some Tories who favor a hard Brexit to attack their opponents as enemies of the people, but liberal democracy will be safe in Britain so long as the media remain free and the judiciary keeps its independence.

The threats to liberal democracy from the autocrats of Russia and China are clear. The number of other countries that can claim to be liberal parliamentary democracies has significantly declined in recent years. In Turkey President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and in the Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte have shown that they intend to rule as autocrats above the law. In Africa there is no country that can claim to be a liberal democracy.

The most worrying threat to democratic institutions and the rule of law is that posed by President Donald Trump in the United States, which in the past was intent on propagating democracy in areas that had no knowledge of what it meant.

Trump appears to believe that as president he is above the law. He even ignores the law, which limits a president from accepting favors from a foreign country. He has refused to publish his tax returns or divest himself of his business interests, which could benefit from government contracts or foreign interests.

He has attacked judges who have ruled against measures that he wishes to take and seems to believe that federal judges are little different from civil servants bound to do as the president demands.

He has railed against members of Congress who held up and mauled his attempt to repeal Obamacare. He is contemptuous of congressional inquiries and privilege.

He regards the media as his enemies and has threatened to end official briefings. He prefers to work through social media, which he tries to manipulate with false news.

His recent dismissal of James Comey, the director of the FBI, was egregious. The method he used of sending a message delivered to Comey while he was speaking to members of the FBI was extraordinary and unnecessary. His language you are hereby terminated and removed from office, effective immediately was grossly rude and suggested a playground bully.

Comey was leading an inquiry into Russian contacts with the Trump election team. This inquiry was based on leads and information, which had already led to the dismissal of Trumps first national security adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn. Comeys sudden dismissal suggested that the FBI might have found leads to the president himself. This suspicion was reinforced by the reception at the White House on the day of Comeys dismissal of Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, and by the unconcealed glee in Moscow at the apparent Russian success in meddling in the U.S. elections.

Trumps ambition to Make America Great Again looks unlikely to be fulfilled. Americas reputation has been sadly undermined by what commentator Edward Luce (in his recent book The Retreat of Western Liberalism) describes as theater politics in which Trump will operate as a kind of Ku Klux Kardashian, combining hard-right pugilism with the best postmodern vaudeville.

Trumps unpredictability and emotionalism are dangerous characteristics in a president who is also commander-in-chief of what is likely to remain for some time to come the most formidable military machine in the world. We shudder at the thought of Kim Jong Un of North Korea having the capacity to launch a nuclear attack on the U.S. But we should remember that Trump could destroy our civilization in a fit of pique unless restrained by responsible advisers.

Trump has called on State Department officials who disagree with his policies to resign, and he rejects and resents any attempt to get him to recognize unpalatable facts.

The most worrying aspect of recent developments in the U.S. is that according to opinion surveys Trump still has the support of the vast majority of members of the Republican party. There seems little readiness among Republican senators even to agree to the appointment of a special prosecutor to investing possible links with Russia, let alone to impeach the president for his flouting of the law.

The checks and balances in the American Constitution were designed to protect America from tyranny. But they will only work if individual Americans are prepared to speak truth to power and act to uphold and enforce the constitution. As Benjamin Franklin declared, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Hugh Cortazzi served as Britains ambassador to Japan from 1980-1984.

Read the rest here:

Threats to liberal democracy - The Japan Times

The majority of British Columbians oppose the idea of a Liberal-Green coalition government, according to a newMainstreet/Postmedia poll.

The Liberals won atotal of 43 seats in last Tuesdays B.C. election, one short of the 44 needed to form a majority government. The NDP won 41 seats and the Greens won three.

If the situation after next weeks recounts and counting of absentee ballots continues to point toa minority, a poll conducted by Mainstreet Research indicates that just 27per cent of British Columbians would approve of a Green-Liberal coalition.

The majority of respondents,58 per cent, said they would prefer the Green party to work with the governing party on a issue-by-issue basis ratherthan joining a formal coalition.

If there were to be a coalition, however, the preference was overwhelmingly for the Greens to work with the NDP with57 per cent sayingthey would approve.

The poll indicateda large segment of voters are still unsure of how they feel about the outcome.

According to a poll conducted by Mainstreet Research over the weekend, nearlyone in five of B.C. voters (19 per cent) say they dont know how they would vote if they were given the chance to do so again.

InMetro Vancouver, where 37 per cent of voters said they would vote NDP (versus 30 per cent for the B.C. Liberals and 15 per cent for the Greens), 18 per cent said they were undecided on which party they would support if given another chance.

UBC political science professor Max Cameron saw two different possible reasons forthis post-election ambivalence.

One would be because it was an indecisive outcome, he said, pointing to thelacklustre nature of the overall campaign, with all three parties seemingly on script. Voters just dont know what the result is at the moment, and arent sure how they really feel.

The other was something analogous to sticker shock, he said. There might have been Greens who voted NDP out of fear of splitting the vote and now arent sure.

He also noted the frustration with the outcome among NDP supporters: 57 per cent said they were either somewhat unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with the outcome. (Overall, 49 per cent of British Columbians said they were very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the outcome, with seven per cent not sure.)

Theyre feeling the victory was snatched away, he said. NDP supporters were done with the B.C. Liberals being in power and wanted to see a decisive switch in power. But Cameron cautioned against thinking the outcome came about because ofthe Greens splitting the vote.

My interpretation is theres more disaffected Liberal voters who found a home with the Greens than anything else, he said.

That is seen in the polls overall picture:an electorate that was verydissatisfied withthe Christy Clark government, as just 28 per cent of voters said they would like to see the B.C. Liberals returning to government. Instead, the clear preference is forthe NDP: 51 per cent said it was time for the centre-left party to form government, with a further 21 per cent calling for the Greens to be in charge.

Mainstreet surveyed a random sample of 1,650 British Columbians from May 11-13.The margin of error for survey results is plus-minus 2.41 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

pjohnston@postmedia.com

twitter.com/risingaction

Excerpt from:

British Columbians do not want a Liberal-Green coalition government: Poll - Calgary Herald

BELLEVILLE-

Ontarios hydro rates have electrified another surge of partisan rhetoric a year ahead of the next election. Mere days after the Progressive Conservatives leaked cabinet documents in an effort to bore holes in the Liberals plan to reduce hydro rates by 25 per cent, the New Democrats, too, have come out swinging, with leader Andrea Horwath signalling they will not be voting in favour of the cuts. A little bit of temporary relief is going to turn into a huge increase, Horwath told The Intelligencer. At the heart of the contention is the Liberals announcement they will set up a special purpose financial entity to manage the borrowing of billions of dollars to fund the cuts. Interest payments would fall on the shoulders of Ontarians, with ratepayers picking up the tab for an estimated $25 billion in interest over 30 years, in an effort to lower rates this year. Prince Edward-Hastings MPP Todd Smith was behind the leak. We were the ones who released the cabinet document last Thursday. I had received them from a whistleblower who was upset the government was talking about providing instant relief when really what theyre doing is making the problem worse, Smith said. What the document shows is, after the next election, electricity bills will start to skyrocket again. Smith said the documents reveal the Liberals setting up a debt entity at Ontario Power Generation OPG. We will see the debt retirement charge returning to electricity bills in the mid-2020s, he said. Theyre taking the cost of the global adjustment off the bills and theyre moving that cost over to the new debt ($25 billion) entity at OPG. Customers are going to pay the interest on the new debt theyre creating. The Liberals say the aim of the proposed Fair Hydro Plan is to give people a break on rates now, but Horwath told The Intelligencer there is no concrete plan to put a lid on the root cause of the increases and the borrowing scheme is simply a political ploy to revive the premiers slumping ratings. Her plan is going to have those rates start soaring in about three or four years time, said Horwath. All shes doing is borrowing money to try to get her through the next election. Files from the leaked document suggest rates will fall this year, increasing by an average of about two per cent over the next four years, before jumping 6.5 per cent annually. Energy Minister Glenn Thibeault has called the leaked documents outdated, dismissing claims rates will only hike. Horwath has promised to cut hydro rates a minimum 30 per cent if she wins the June 7, 2018 polls. The Liberals havent wasted any time before taking shots at Horwaths plan. Their biggest idea buying more than $4 billion worth of Hydro One shares on the stock market will not take one cent off electricity bills, a release sent to The Intelligencer newsroom stated. Other alleged savings rely on a vague, yet-to-be determined expert panel to be convened sometime in the future. And theyre banking on lengthy, uncertain negotiations with the federal government for supposed reductions as well. Despite Ontarios Fair Hydro Plan helping families, businesses, and farms across the province including in Belleville Horwath said the NDP cant and wont vote in favour of this during a press conference this morning, the Liberal release stated. Horwath responded, saying selling off Hydro One is going to make hydro bills go up even further.

Visit link:

Liberal plan questioned - Belleville Intelligencer

NewsBusters (blog)

'Criminalizing Immigrants' is New Catchphrase of Dems, Liberal Media NewsBusters (blog) In lock step with the Democrats, since the beginning of the Trump administration the liberal media have incessantly characterized Republican-led efforts to uphold and enforce the nation's immigration laws as amounting to the criminalization of ...

Link:

'Criminalizing Immigrants' is New Catchphrase of Dems, Liberal Media - NewsBusters (blog)