|
Post by jiminix on May 2, 2017 19:56:46 GMT -7
Update on Heritage Foundation - Jim DeMint fired A few days ago on another thread, I mentioned a developing situation at the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation. I do note with pleasure the developing situation at the Heritage Foundation, which tried for a long time to keep conservatism moored to a rationally defensible foundation. That effort ended when Jim DeMint was named president, and set about making it into a promoter of Tea Party activism. It appears that the old guard principle-oriented conservatives may have regained the upper hand, and DeMint will probably be fired in a matter of days or weeks. Events have moved quickly. Faced with a unanimous vote by the board of the Heritage Foundation to remove him as president, DeMint "resigned" today. I believe that a diversity of intellectual ideas in governance and social policy is healthy in a democracy if the ideas are grounded in reason. I hope DeMint's departure is a sign that the Heritage Foundation is planning a return to the intellectual roots of conservatism. While I disagree with most of the conclusions of conservatism, I think it's important for the public debate, relying on reason and facts, to take place, and for the public to understand that decisions are best when based on careful thinking, not on emotion. American conservatism from Reagan onward has lost its way, and veered into demagoguery.
|
|
|
Post by osha on May 3, 2017 5:31:50 GMT -7
It sure would be nice to get back to intelligent discourse with the right.
But, I don't think it will happen. You have the right who simply thinks they can run this country like we did 100 years ago and they don't change with the times.
|
|
|
Post by badman on May 3, 2017 12:41:24 GMT -7
Cheers jiminix! You certainly called that right. Tea anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Entimos on May 4, 2017 14:54:09 GMT -7
This is why it's never a good idea to get news on conservatives from a rabid leftist site like Politic o.
Are you interested in the rest of the story?
Here you go:
- The narrative Politico offers, supported by quotes from a single anonymous board member, is that Heritage is in disarray as a result of DeMint’s decisions since taking over several years ago. DeMint destroyed the organization’s brand as an esteemed think tank, prioritized politics over research, and mismanaged the institution’s assets after taking control. As a result, according to this narrative, Heritage Foundation’s executive committee had no choice but to remove DeMint pending a full meeting of the board, which is scheduled to take place on Tuesday morning. DeMint’s five-year contract with Heritage runs out at the end of the year.
That’s the public narrative. The narrative offered independently by multiple sources with intimate knowledge of the ongoing turmoil, several of whom are not particularly sympathetic to DeMint, is quite different. According to these sources, the actual story is the exact opposite of what has thus far been peddled in the media, and it all starts with Ed Feulner’s creation of Heritage Action in 2010 and his decision to let Mike Needham, a brash former Rudy Giuliani operative, control the new operation. Contrary to the media narrative floated last week that DeMint needlessly politicized Heritage and turned it into a brass-knuckle political combat group instead of a policy-focused think tank, these sources say Needham bears much of the blame for politicizing Heritage. Rather than pushing to make Heritage more political and less focused on producing high-quality policy research, DeMint actually tried to rein in Heritage Action in recent years, as the 501(c)(4) group began racking up enemy after enemy on Capitol Hill without actually putting any congressional policy points on the board. Multiple sources told The Federalist that Needham bristled at DeMint’s repeated attempts to assert control over the splinter organization and began plotting to overthrow DeMint once it became clear that the former South Carolina senator had no desire to outsource control of the think tank to the 30-something political operative with no policy background. At one point, a high-placed source told The Federalist, Needham personally confronted DeMint and his team and told them that DeMint was done, that Needham himself would be taking over the organization. thefederalist.com/2017/05/02/the-coup-against-jim-demint-threatens-to-tear-apart-the-heritage-foundation/
|
|
|
Post by jiminix on May 4, 2017 18:43:42 GMT -7
Entimos, you've been misled on many points in your post.
First of all, Politico is not leftist, it is a Republican organization through and through - founded by Republicans, and controlled by Republicans ever since. It's just not a Tea Party organization, and of course Tea Party people think everybody who disagrees with them on anything is leftist.
DeMint had his supporters in Heritage, so naturally, if you talk to them, you will get a different story about what happened. However, the ousting of DeMint was not an end run by a small group of Mike Needham puppets, it was a UNANIMOUS vote of the Heritage board.
And Feulner is not anybody's proxy or puppet, he is one of the founders of the organization, and was himself its longest serving president (about 25 years I believe I read somewhere).
Heritage Action (as distinct from the Heritage Foundation) is a separate entity created for political action, specifically for the purpose of keeping the Foundation focused on policy, and apart from politics.
Yes, it's true DeMint tried to disempower Heritage Action, because he wanted to make the Foundation itself focus on political action instead of policy research. That's the main reason he was fired.
|
|
|
Post by Entimos on May 5, 2017 16:28:52 GMT -7
Entimos, you've been misled on many points in your post. First of all, Politico is not leftist, it is a Republican organization through and through - founded by Republicans, and controlled by Republicans ever since. It's just not a Tea Party organization, and of course Tea Party people think everybody who disagrees with them on anything is leftist. DeMint had his supporters in Heritage, so naturally, if you talk to them, you will get a different story about what happened. However, the ousting of DeMint was not an end run by a small group of Mike Needham puppets, it was a UNANIMOUS vote of the Heritage board. And Feulner is not anybody's proxy or puppet, he is one of the founders of the organization, and was himself its longest serving president (about 25 years I believe I read somewhere). Heritage Action (as distinct from the Heritage Foundation) is a separate entity created for political action, specifically for the purpose of keeping the Foundation focused on policy, and apart from politics. Yes, it's true DeMint tried to disempower Heritage Action, because he wanted to make the Foundation itself focus on political action instead of policy research. That's the main reason he was fired. Politico is biased to the left and its audience support shows how much: ANY organization that is to the left of MSNBC is NOT Republican nor unbiased. As far as the board's unanimous vote, Feulner controls the board and they do what he says. And Needham, architect of the more active political role for Heritage, is Feulner's favorite. Can you back up this statement of yours with any facts?: " because he wanted to make the Foundation itself focus on political action instead of policy research. That's the main reason he was fired"
|
|
|
Post by badman on May 5, 2017 16:32:35 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by jiminix on May 6, 2017 15:55:07 GMT -7
Politico is biased to the left and its audience support shows how much: ANY organization that is to the left of MSNBC is NOT Republican nor unbiased. As far as the board's unanimous vote, Feulner controls the board and they do what he says. And Needham, architect of the more active political role for Heritage, is Feulner's favorite. Can you back up this statement of yours with any facts?: " because he wanted to make the Foundation itself focus on political action instead of policy research. That's the main reason he was fired" As I said before, "Politico was founded by Republicans, and controlled by Republicans ever since. It's just not a Tea Party organization," The chart you posted rated the audience, not the source. You can see the absurdity of that if you just observe that NPR, the most neutral and deliberately balanced source in the country, is rated to the left of the Colbert Report. The obvious conclusion is that the audience can't be used as a measure of the viewpoints expressed by the source. I can vouch for that fact, because I sometimes read Politico, not because I agree with them, but to see what the rational faction of the Republican Party is thinking. The placement of MSNBC has a simple explanation I expect. I don't get any news from MSNBC because I regard it as a political entertainment channel, not a news channel. And in case you aren't aware, MSNBC has plenty of right wing representation - Joe Scarborough (former Republican U.S. congressman), Steve Schmidt (John McCain presidential campaign manager), Michael Steele (former chairman of the Republican National Committee). Don't be surprised if Bill O'Reilly turns up on MSNBC. Liberals don't patronize the propaganda media like conservatives do. In general, liberals look for reliable reporting, not for scurrilous rants against the other side. That's why liberal talk shows never caught on like conservative talk shows.
|
|
|
Post by badman on May 6, 2017 16:43:57 GMT -7
jiminix, the founder of Politico tends to disagree with your opinion.
.washingtonexaminer.com/politico-founder-reporters-so-biased-so-partisan-against-trump/article/2603534
|
|
|
Post by jiminix on May 6, 2017 18:17:42 GMT -7
jiminix, the founder of Politico tends to disagree with your opinion. .washingtonexaminer.com/politico-founder-reporters-so-biased-so-partisan-against-trump/article/2603534 In case you have forgotten, all Republican politicians, pundits, and scholars were adamantly opposed to Trump a year ago, and thought that Trump was a disastrous anomoly in the party. Why don't you just stop trying to twist the truth. Accept the fact - Politico is a Republican site. There was a Republican Party long before the Tea Party. Many of them were rational, thinking people who read books and learned history and understood science. A lot of those same people are still around, just waiting to pick up the pieces when the know-nothing Tea Party fad fizzles out.
|
|
|
Post by Entimos on May 8, 2017 9:10:53 GMT -7
As I said before, "Politico was founded by Republicans, and controlled by Republicans ever since. It's just not a Tea Party organization," The chart you posted rated the audience, not the source. You can see the absurdity of that if you just observe that NPR, the most neutral and deliberately balanced source in the country, is rated to the left of the Colbert Report. The obvious conclusion is that the audience can't be used as a measure of the viewpoints expressed by the source. I can vouch for that fact, because I sometimes read Politico, not because I agree with them, but to see what the rational faction of the Republican Party is thinking. The placement of MSNBC has a simple explanation I expect. I don't get any news from MSNBC because I regard it as a political entertainment channel, not a news channel. And in case you aren't aware, MSNBC has plenty of right wing representation - Joe Scarborough (former Republican U.S. congressman), Steve Schmidt (John McCain presidential campaign manager), Michael Steele (former chairman of the Republican National Committee). Don't be surprised if Bill O'Reilly turns up on MSNBC. Liberals don't patronize the propaganda media like conservatives do. In general, liberals look for reliable reporting, not for scurrilous rants against the other side. That's why liberal talk shows never caught on like conservative talk shows. Anyone that thinks that NPR is "the most neutral and deliberately balanced source in the country" hasn't been paying attention. NPR is a FAR leftist leaning news organization that even a cursory review will confirm. And that easily refutes your "audience-knows-nothing-and-means-nothing." theory. www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/lachlan-markay/2011/03/07/nprs-schiller-denies-liberal-bias-stations-content-policies-boardwww.mrc.org/bozells-column/npr-admits-liberal-biasAnd again, get your facts straight on Politico..they are a left biased "news" organization, not neutral or conservative: mediabiasfactcheck.com/politico/Finally, on your last statement above, you disappoint me...I didn't expect you to devolve into the tired old "liberal talk shows failed because liberals are better" routine. We conservatives look for the truth and we know we won't get it from any "news" organization that liberals favor.
|
|
|
Post by osha on May 8, 2017 10:17:59 GMT -7
Finally, on your last statement above, you disappoint me...I didn't expect you to devolve into the tired old "liberal talk shows failed because liberals are better" routine. We conservatives look for the truth and we know we won't get it from any "news" organization that liberals favor. Your supposed "truth" is very subjective and slanted now isn't it? You claim Christianity and you claim to be conservative and that's like many of you folks. So, let's seek some truth shall we based on what are your supposed beliefs. Doesn't your God teach you to love your neighbor? Then tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving you neighbor if using your vote to kick that person off insurance? How are you loving your neighbor when you use your vote to vote in people who would gut social security for the elderly and disabled? Tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving your neighbor when people flee to this country to escape death and you vote in people who want to push those people away? Tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving your neighbor when you vote for a larger military so they can go around the world, kill innocent people and create terrorists? Not to mention Mr. Truth, Thou shall not kill. Supporting those who kill does not erase your liability there Mr. Truth. Hypocrite! Interesting, liberals are more likely to support things that are more along the lines of the bible. So this to me at least means, your moral compass is corrupt and you and your brand that is nothing but hypocrites doing the work of the devil. How lost you are Mr. Truth. Maybe you should drop both the truth bit and the christian bit, because you are doing them both wrong.
|
|
|
Post by hoofie on May 8, 2017 15:43:09 GMT -7
Finally, on your last statement above, you disappoint me...I didn't expect you to devolve into the tired old "liberal talk shows failed because liberals are better" routine. We conservatives look for the truth and we know we won't get it from any "news" organization that liberals favor. Your supposed "truth" is very subjective and slanted now isn't it? You claim Christianity and you claim to be conservative and that's like many of you folks. So, let's seek some truth shall we based on what are your supposed beliefs. Doesn't your God teach you to love your neighbor? Then tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving you neighbor if using your vote to kick that person off insurance? How are you loving your neighbor when you use your vote to vote in people who would gut social security for the elderly and disabled? Tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving your neighbor when people flee to this country to escape death and you vote in people who want to push those people away? Tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving your neighbor when you vote for a larger military so they can go around the world, kill innocent people and create terrorists? Not to mention Mr. Truth, Thou shall not kill. Supporting those who kill does not erase your liability there Mr. Truth. Hypocrite! Interesting, liberals are more likely to support things that are more along the lines of the bible. So this to me at least means, your moral compass is corrupt and you and your brand that is nothing but hypocrites doing the work of the devil. How lost you are Mr. Truth. Maybe you should drop both the truth bit and the christian bit, because you are doing them both wrong. Whoa man. The Bible also says the Lord helps them who help themselves. The bible tells farmers to only reap their harvest once so that widows and orphans can reap some food as well. No one is kicking anybody off insurance at this time. What was passed in the House will not come out of the Senate. All of your fear mongering statements are just that. Where are your facts that SS for disabled & elderly being "gutted"? As for immigration, what happened to coming here legally? My grandmother was born in NYC, her parents came through Ellis Island legally. The Trump travel ban was temporary so that vetting processes would deter terrorists. We don't need a larger military but a well supplied one to deter attacks on our land. Do you want what's happening in the Middle East to happen here on our soil? We all know "thou shalt not kill", but some evil doers just need killin. I have managed to live almost 56 years in this country, never taking public assistance, but also never denying someone help that needed it. The United States is the most generous country on this planet. If you lived in Tuscaloosa through the tornadoes a few years ago, you would know that. We don't need to government to do our charity work. There were community barn raisings long before a federal government existed. You give the federal government more credit than it deserves and local communities and churches less faith than their abilities. That's the difference between the left and the right.
|
|
|
Post by osha on May 8, 2017 16:15:40 GMT -7
Your supposed "truth" is very subjective and slanted now isn't it? You claim Christianity and you claim to be conservative and that's like many of you folks. So, let's seek some truth shall we based on what are your supposed beliefs. Doesn't your God teach you to love your neighbor? Then tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving you neighbor if using your vote to kick that person off insurance? How are you loving your neighbor when you use your vote to vote in people who would gut social security for the elderly and disabled? Tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving your neighbor when people flee to this country to escape death and you vote in people who want to push those people away? Tell me Mr. Truth, how are you loving your neighbor when you vote for a larger military so they can go around the world, kill innocent people and create terrorists? Not to mention Mr. Truth, Thou shall not kill. Supporting those who kill does not erase your liability there Mr. Truth. Hypocrite! Interesting, liberals are more likely to support things that are more along the lines of the bible. So this to me at least means, your moral compass is corrupt and you and your brand that is nothing but hypocrites doing the work of the devil. How lost you are Mr. Truth. Maybe you should drop both the truth bit and the christian bit, because you are doing them both wrong. Whoa man. The Bible also says the Lord helps them who help themselves. The bible tells farmers to only reap their harvest once so that widows and orphans can reap some food as well. No one is kicking anybody off insurance at this time. What was passed in the House will not come out of the Senate. All of your fear mongering statements are just that. Where are your facts that SS for disabled & elderly being "gutted"? As for immigration, what happened to coming here legally? My grandmother was born in NYC, her parents came through Ellis Island legally. The Trump travel ban was temporary so that vetting processes would deter terrorists. We don't need a larger military but a well supplied one to deter attacks on our land. Do you want what's happening in the Middle East to happen here on our soil? We all know "thou shalt not kill", but some evil doers just need killin. I have managed to live almost 56 years in this country, never taking public assistance, but also never denying someone help that needed it. The United States is the most generous country on this planet. If you lived in Tuscaloosa through the tornadoes a few years ago, you would know that. We don't need to government to do our charity work. There were community barn raisings long before a federal government existed. You give the federal government more credit than it deserves and local communities and churches less faith than their abilities. That's the difference between the left and the right. Who judges who helps themselves? I mean, a minimum wage worker at Walmart is working and still having to collect food stamps to make ends meet. I really believe that what the bible is saying can be translated many different ways. What I mean is, if someone has to drive to the food stamp office and they get in their car and drive there, they are helping themselves. I think the biggest focus on the bible is love. Love others without judgement. I don't think people are doing a good job loving others when they use their voting power to vote in people who are against helping others. 24 million people risk being kicked off insurance because of Trump and his people. Is that a caring gesture? Would we say allowing people to die or forcing others to pay higher premiums is what God would want? What about tax breaks for the rich so the rich can have more? This is one of the 7 deadly sins of the early church (greed). So it is alright to claim to be one thing and vote in the interest of the other? It's not up to me or you to judge who is helping themselves, it's up to me and you to love our neighbor as the bible teaches. As far as immigration, we could make the path to citizenship easier. I don't at all support illegal immigration, but, I am also not bound by any rule to love anyone as I don't follow a religion. I have just read the bible many times and I understand it. The churches in this country cannot help everyone and that is fact. We have a homeless problem here and many of the people who are homeless are Veterans. We cannot look to a church to solve that problem just like we have tried looking to the free market to solve healthcare. The free market solved neither of those problems and now we are trying to push the idea of free market insurance back into the hands of rising premiums. The ACA was not perfect but it gave 24 million people insurance, that should be improved to work for everyone instead of raising premiums for those who can pay. That would be love, what the bible talks about, what Christians are supposed to represent. As far as social security, Republicans would love to gut it and make it into investments. That helps the rich by raising the value of said invested company, of course the Guardians of Profit would love that. I don't for a moment believe we are a nation of lazy do nothings. I believe we are a nation of people struggling and people needing help. And when we make it harder for those people, however we do it, we are not showing love and we are going against the bible these people represent. So instead of people trying to be the judge and jury into the lives and struggles of others, why don't they let God worry about the judgement and they work just on the love? Hard concept for the hypocrites, I know. Just to add, the fact that the law may not pass is irrelevant in my book. It shows that a group of people in the government would love nothing more then to kick people off insurance. And Christian Conservatives voted for those people to try and do that. Even if it fails, to close for comfort for 24 million people.
|
|
|
Post by jiminix on May 8, 2017 17:01:09 GMT -7
Whoa man. The Bible also says the Lord helps them who help themselves. No, the Bible doesn't say that.
|
|