How about more user-friendly policy, too?

How about a media that focus's on select candiadates of their choosing rather than focusing on all candidates?

Tell Gallup to contact me next time they're looking for a real answer. I'll save them thousands of dollars and we'll save everyone else the time wasted by reading a load of inconsequential bunk.

The 35% moderates are those who split their vote in Indiana voting for Obama and Mitch Daniels. If you voted for Obama you are not moderate you are a Liberal; end of story. Therefore it is probably more like 51% Liberal 40% Conservative and 5% moderate.

IndypendentReview.com

That's right Shorebreak. Obama said it himself when he told the media that “MOST you covered me (during the campai) but ALL of you voted for me.”

Indypendent: how dare you define my voting patterns by your definitions and labels.

I voted for Obama and I am a moderate. If Mitch could run again, and he keeps governing like he has the last six weeks, I'd vote for him, because he finally gets the BS meter in this town. And he apparently has zero patience for it, which is a huge plus.

The problem with some folks, on both sides of the aisle, is that they want to define others with their narrow parameters, and work on consistency. Stick to your own beliefs, define those, and then get back to me.

Until then, don't step outside your comfort zone. It isn't pretty, or accurate.

How can you agree with Mitch's small government, privatization, and spending cuts; yet also agree with President Obama's Large Government, Nationalization, and Increased Spending? That is not moderate that is just confused.

There is a huge difference in scope and purpose between being governor of a state and being president of the united states. Think Again and I like Mitch because he might be able to actually get these incompetent legislators to do somethings positive. I like Obama for many of the same reasons, but also because I know we need to spend more money on important projects (as opposed to unimportant and dangerous misadventures like Iraq and wealthy tax cuts).

Finally, words are just that: words. Mitch should privatize the lottery. Government shouldn't be in the business of running a lottery. And Obama should nationalize health care (or at least some aspects) because the federal government should work to efficiently and effectively prevent and then treat illness. But the actual policies are more important than the labels.

I wish the really smart commentators on this blog would move into a more reasoned and nuanced discussion of those policies instead of just grabbing at bloated terminology.

Can you explain your classification system?

There you go again, Indypendent. Inappropriate and misguided broad-brush definitions. Do you strain something when you reach that hard?

I supported candidate Obama because I agreed with 95% of his foreign policy, 75% of his domestic policy, and 100% of his attitude and demeanor. And I was impressed with his educational and life experiences. I made a voter's judgment that I was with him far more than I was against him. No candidate is a 100% proposition. Except, perhaps, with narrow-definition zealots as you appear to be.

As proof of that philosophy, I agreed with some of Bush's policies. And I think he may have been the worst president ever. Most independent reviews agree. And he has been an excellent ex-president thus far. If only he could reign in that Xenophobic warmonger he called vice president. Ugh.

And if I like the governor's turn toward more practical, I'm entitled. I could pass 1 50-question quiz on his policies, motorhome to now. Could you?

Indypendent, I take government seriously. I educate myself. For me, democracy is not a spectator sport. There are 330 million Americans, and no politician can ever garner 100% support from 100% of the people. We have to learn about them, and stick with the ones who most-closely agree with our views.

And sometimes (gasp!) in that education process I change my mind. You oughta try it. That process typically does not include broad-brush talking points from Sean Hannity, who's an expert, or, for that matter, neither does it include the Sierra Club's talking points.

Minds absorb when they're open.

I wonder how many of the self-described conservatives would characterize Republican policies from 2001 – 2009 as “conservative.”

The Terri Schiavo legislation didn't exactly qualify for the “limited government” award.

What's funny is I agree with 75% of BHO's policies and 150% of his vision and attitude. And all of what Think Again wrote.

Andrew Sullivan's blog — http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/ — has been fabulous in terms of Iran coverage. I would vote for Andrew for any office (though he can't run) because he understands the process and the outcomes.

How are daniels and obama anything alike?

where does it say in any state or the federal constitution that the govermnent should have anything to do with health care? What federal agency or program has ever been run eeficiently or effectively?

The VA hospital for both. I would hope we have a responsibility to provide health and services to wounded soldiers.

Maybe the conservatives don't cheat as much at the polls?

So you agree with Obama's arrogant, narcissistic, anti-American attitude? You should be very proud.

..and you agree with Obama's vision of destroying our economy and relegating us to third world status, Jacob? I only pray that you are a felon and can't vote(legally).

Rico, your diatribe really is a broken record. And it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the real issues, too. Anti-American, huh? In Cheney-Hannity speak, is that anyone who disagrees with Rush?

Pitifu.

Melyssa, honey, I love ya more than my bank book, but you really don't want to go down the vote-cheating path. It isn't pretty. For reference: Bush v. Gore, Palm Beach-Broward Counties, 2000.

Discuss.

*pitiful

sorry

yes, the Left Coast has arrived in Indianapolis! They are trying to DESTROY our moral values and society. I canceled The Star this week, after being sickened (again) by the “San Francisco slant”…trying to homosexualize our community.

The publisher thinks he is in San Francisco and has San Francisco (non)values. If we all cancel The Gannett Star, perhaps a message that Indianapolis does NOT subscribe to the San Francisco standard will come to the Board Room!!!

Granted I disagree with the entirety of this post, but could you please clarify what your values are? To be clear, what do you stand for — not what do you stand against? Thanks!

Rico, I'm glad Abdul gives you a place to post your concerns.

Does anyone know where I could have an honest conversation with a conservative that does not break down into name calling or label throwing?

Someone please define conservative? We have Rush Limbaugh conservative, Reagan cons, Dbuh cons, Beck cons, neo cons, Abdul cons, fianacial cons, social cons, religious cons, right wing cons the list is long and it appears that none of the cons are on the same page.

The Republic party needs to move more to the right, pure unadulterated conservatism in the Limbaugh & Cheney mode. Proven vote getter.

1)Shorebreak nails it re media in post 3.
.
2)The terms are subjective. Two nutcase murderers (killings of the abortion doctor and museum guard) had about as much to do with the “far right-wing” as the pack of tower-toppling hijackers with the average Islamic. Am I wary of extremists from any and both groups? Heck, yeah. Looking at the bulk of history, probably more the Islamics. Or, are Rush Limbaugh and Rev. Jerimiah Wright now “centrists”?
.
3)Congress and our President Obama are helping oodles, but the madness of our economic course (as much spent in 100 days as all of FDR's terms and quadruple the deficit of George Bush) may still need selling to swing voters. Fighting the standard of “Here's more free stuff!” is tough. However, conservatives must cite examples like the Roman Empire overexpansion or the seizing of private assets in modern Argentina with simple examples like you can buy food and pay your electric now, but good luck when currency is devalued. We've already tipped-over our economic model from idiocy like everyone should be able to own a home, vote in the Middle East, and shelter taxes offshore. Spending money we don't have is indeed intoxicating. Anybody looking forward to the hangover?

I was a republican but Garrison really pissed me off the way he does not let his listeners talk (he or his producer shuts off the callers microphone and the audience no longer hears them talking into a dead phone even though the caller is still connected and can hear Garrison). So I voted straight democrat because I was pissed. I was also pissed at the lies about Obama being a “terrorist”. Those lies all cease on election night when all the polls were closed.

“because the federal government should work to efficiently and effectively prevent and then treat illness.”

Jacob, Do you believe in the spirit and intent of the federal Constitution? If so, then your statement collides with that belief. Besides, when is government ever efficient or effective?

I blame Bush & Co. for the Obama win. After enduring 8 years of his brand of tyranny and Constitution-trashing, Obama must have seemed to many as a breath of fresh air.

Constitutional government was out the door with Bush. It's down the road with Obama.

Jacob,
I am educated (MBA), father of two great sons (one just graduated from DePauw in Chemistry the other a Junior at UE in Engineering), I own a small business, came from poverty, and I am white. My aunt worked, not volunteered, for the Obama campaign. I've had the talks you are requesting with her. She's still my favorite aunt, but we have to disagree…. So if you want to ask a question, feel free. But, understand they may not be the answers you want, but there will be no name calling on either side.

I find Obama's assertion self-contradicting, that we need to spend a TRILLION dollars to make healthcare affordable.

What's affordable about another trillion dollars of debt?

So we shouldn't provide medical care outside of the battlefields for our soldiers because that directly contradicts the spirit and intent of the Constitution? So the Constitution gave the federal government the responsibility to declare war but forbids taken care of the soldiers/

Who did you vote for in 2000? 02? 04? 06? 08? My guess, please correct if wrong, but fiscally and morally irresponsible republicans.

What you are missing is that there are plenty of conservative Democrats. Just cuz you consider yourself “conservative” does not make you a Democrat. Just look at the large number of self-identified evangelical Christians who voted for Obama.

Besides, every person who has ever studied and analyzed polls show that most people, regardless of their politics identify themselves as conservatives.

This is the problem with politics: labels. Many people are conservative on some issues and liberal on others. How else to explain the majority of Americans being pro-choice? Or the growing number of Americans (now around 55%) who favor civil unions for gay Americans?

By the way, for the first time since 1996, there was no widespread allegations of voter misconduct.

There is no monopoly on cheaters at polls. I am QUITE sure there are just as many liberals who cheat at the polls as there are conservatives.

Jacob, I never said anything about denying care to wounded veterans. I am a veteran.

Providing health care for veterans, and meddling in health care for the rest of the country are two very different things.

BTW, the federal Constitution does not give the so-called federal government the responsibility to declare war. The Constitution specifically empowers Congress, and ONLY Congress, may declare war.

Jacob, I never said anything about denying care to wounded veterans. I am a veteran.

Providing health care for veterans, and meddling in health care for the rest of the country are two very different things.

BTW, the federal Constitution does not give the so-called federal government the responsibility to declare war. The Constitution specifically empowers Congress, and ONLY Congress, may declare war.