Monday, September 12, 2005

Bush Team Conspired Against Blacks, Activists Charge

Senility rears its ugly head.

By Nathan Burchfiel
CNSNews.com Correspondent

(CNSNews.com) - Several black civil rights leaders are accusing the federal government of conspiring against poor African Americans in the aftermath of the flooding in New Orleans. But one of those hurling the charges, comedian and political activist Dick Gregory, on Friday refused to say what, if anything, he has personally contributed to the relief effort.

Gregory, who had just visited evacuees at the Houston Astrodome and the city's convention center, said he was able offer the flood victims something else besides money and food.

"I'm a hero in America, so just to go there and touch them, means a lot to them. [That] means more than taking them to the Red Cross and giving them food," Gregory told Cybercast News Service. Gregory did not reply to the question about whether he had made a personal donation.

Earlier, Gregory participated in a rally in front of the White House with leaders of the National Black Environmental Justice Network (NBEJN) and Black Voices for Peace. They charged that the Bush administration delayed rescue efforts of the flood victims because of racism and class-ism.

The Network's co-chair Donele Edwards laid the specific blame at the doorstep of the Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps, she charged, "deliberately designed the floodwaters to go into the 9th Ward," of New Orleans.

Damu Smith, founder of the National Black Environmental Justice Network, added that "whether they (the federal government) got in a room and conspired or not, what they did is they ignored us, they forgot about us ... because we look like we look." As he was speaking, Smith held out his arm to show his skin color.

New Orleans' mayor, Ray Nagin, who is African American, should bear little responsibility for the city's flooding, Smith said. "I think Mayor Nagin has done everything he could. He's cried out, but I really think the governor, and Bush especially, they really dropped the ball on this," according to Smith. Louisiana Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco is white.

"There's been some mistakes made by folks in the mayor's office, too," Smith said. "But the most of the blame must be laid at the doorstep of Bush and Governor Blanco."

Smith said he had personally contributed "a lot" to aid in the recovery efforts. "I have friends who lost their homes and lost everything and they've been displaced so this is very personal to me to help out so we gotta do it."

He encouraged people to donate to small organizations instead of the American Red Cross. "You see, the Red Cross is getting all the money - about $500 million - but there are groups in Houston and other places that are struggling, that are helping people," Smith said. "They don't get the money, so we're gonna make sure the money gets channeled to them as well."

Gregory intensified Edwards' conspiracy charges, accusing the government of orchestrating the evacuation to access oil under the city.

"It (Hurricane Katrina) didn't hit, it went down the Gulf," Gregory said. "And nobody is asking, if it missed, where's this damn water coming from? Who shut them pumps off and who's going to investigate those two barges with dynamite on them that hit that levee," he said in reference to the failure of the city's levees and water pumps, which were intended to protect the city from flooding.

Gregory said the government has no plans to let residents back into New Orleans or to rebuild the city. "They will have no problem declaring that whole city a disaster area because of the mold," he said.

"Last Friday he (U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert) said there's no need to rebuild it, plow it under," Gregory said, exaggerating the comments Hastert made immediately after the city was flooded. "Well that's what they're planning on doing," Gregory added.

If his accusations are correct, Gregory told Cybercast News Service, it will create a backlash beyond just the black community. "If they found oil under there and they're going to turn it into an oil well," Gregory said, "that's black and white folks."

In time, as people stop reacting based on emotion, Gregory concluded, "It's gonna come out. There's been too many mistakes."

Some Snoopservations

The suggestion, that the news media do not tilt to the left, is just not serious thinking. Or, if it's coming from those who would consider themselves serious thinkers, it's just not intellectually honest.
After posting a response on a blog we got into liberal media bias.
Some comments made:

Kitty said...
“What Ditto would call the Rush O'Hannity factor - liberals say what liberal media? That's why sites like DailyKos are so popular. Did you know they get 16 million hits a month? We seek solace in those that feel the same, and their audience and contributors, as well as those of JABBS, recognize the importance of spreading the word. Thats why we like blogs, we appreciate the debate.
We can't understand why everyone isn't screaming what went wrong? Do all conservatives think the deaths of thousands is acceptable? Or is it just that they were poor and black and didn't have the money to get out of town.”
DEATH TOLL AS OF TODAY IN LOUISIANA 197

Snoop, the conservative media =

1) Conservative talk radio (more than 90% of all talk radio hours are hosted by conservatives or religious types).

Because conservatives do it better, what a shock, a sorry ass former Saturday Night Live hack Al Franken is your best bet, no wonder you are pissed

2) Fox News Channel

3) More than half of MSNBC

Now, a lot of people get their news from these sources. Check the combined ratings of the top radio hosts (Rush, Sean, Savage, etc.) and then add in the ratings of the conservative shows on cable (Sean, Cavuto, Scarborough, Carlson, etc.) and the religious and conservative shows (EWTN, 700 Club, etc.) and you wind up with a very similar number to the total of CBS, NBC and ABC evening news shows, plus any given hour of CNN.

So the problem is not how many news sources, but the percentage of right thinking folks who specifically get their news from these sources. So liberals are hacked off at the fact that we don’t get our news from the “proven” left wing sources.

But what about PBS and NPR, you ask? Check out the "news rosters," and you'll see that, thanks to Bush appointees, the coverage is roughly 50/50 left and right (I say roughly, because there are some shows that I might consider apolitical, and you'd consider liberal, and other shows that you'd consider apolitical, and I'd consider conservative).
But what about newspapers, you ask? I'll admit the NY Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe, LA Times and SF Chronicle lean left in their news coverage -- although I can also point to individual reporters at each paper that lean right, as well as the plethora of conservative editorial page writers and syndicated columnists they feature.

Classic liberal rhetoric. To find liberal idiot media tendencies you need only to look at NBC, and the Today Show.
This morning I found it amusing that the NBC journalists covering New Orleans found them a particularly “well spoken” (according to perky Katie) little Negro boy.
This little Negro boy was able to give our liberal journalists friends some insight on the conditions suffered by he and his family while marooned at the New Orleans Convention Center.
I bet Katie is thinking; wow, this little Negro boy surrounded by so much poverty, suffering, drug abuse and crime how could he possible learn to speak so well. Also lets not forget he was raised by his grandmother who herself is ailing.
I’m sick of hearing these perverted media types gawking at and using these poor black folks as political capital.
AND ANOTHER THING....
Tim Russert can’t get off mentioning every fucken day how low Bush’s poll numbers are, I’m still trying to figure out what fucken difference does it make.
HE CAN’T RUN FOR PRESIDENT AGAIN YOU JACKASS!
You liberals who are filled with glee over his falling numbers I don’t get how you think this will benefit you.
Because when it is all said and done, whatever candidate you put up in 2008 still has to be able to forward ideas that this country can get behind and support.
You still must be able to convince the American people why we should vote for your crazy asses.
You have several idiot bloggers calling for Bush’s impeachment, which is beyond stupidity. In addition liberal bloggers and the media still distorting what went on in NOLA. Keep praying for poll numbers to decrease if that makes you feel better.
Also what are you gonna do after the Prez throws billions of dollars at NOLA in an attempt to change his perception of the American people. How will you demonize him then?

The federal response to Katrina was not as portrayed

It is settled wisdom among journalists that the federal response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was unconscionably slow.

"Mr. Bush's performance last week will rank as one of the worst ever during a dire national emergency," wrote New York Times columnist Bob Herbert in a somewhat more strident expression of the conventional wisdom.

But the conventional wisdom is the opposite of the truth.

Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:

"The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

Journalists who are long on opinions and short on knowledge have no idea what is involved in moving hundreds of tons of relief supplies into an area the size of England in which power lines are down, telecommunications are out, no gasoline is available, bridges are damaged, roads and airports are covered with debris, and apparently have little interest in finding out.

So they libel as a "national disgrace" the most monumental and successful disaster relief operation in world history.

I write this column a week and a day after the main levee protecting New Orleans breached. In the course of that week:

More than 32,000 people have been rescued, many plucked from rooftops by Coast Guard helicopters.

The Army Corps of Engineers has all but repaired the breaches and begun pumping water out of New Orleans.

Shelter, food and medical care have been provided to more than 180,000 refugees.

Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:

"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

"The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.

"You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets (in the affected areas) since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.

"No amount of yelling, crying and mustering of moral indignation will change any of the facts above."

"You cannot just snap your fingers and make the military appear somewhere," van Steenwyk said.

Guardsmen need to receive mobilization orders; report to their armories; draw equipment; receive orders and convoy to the disaster area. Guardsmen driving down from Pennsylvania or Navy ships sailing from Norfolk can't be on the scene immediately.

Relief efforts must be planned. Other than prepositioning supplies near the area likely to be afflicted (which was done quite efficiently), this cannot be done until the hurricane has struck and a damage assessment can be made. There must be a route reconnaissance to determine if roads are open, and bridges along the way can bear the weight of heavily laden trucks.

And federal troops and Guardsmen from other states cannot be sent to a disaster area until their presence has been requested by the governors of the afflicted states.

Exhibit A on the bill of indictment of federal sluggishness is that it took four days before most people were evacuated from the Louisiana Superdome.

The levee broke Tuesday morning. Buses had to be rounded up and driven from Houston to New Orleans across debris-strewn roads. The first ones arrived Wednesday evening. That seems pretty fast to me.

A better question -- which few journalists ask -- is why weren't the roughly 2,000 municipal and school buses in New Orleans utilized to take people out of the city before Katrina struck?

Jack Kelly is national security writer for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio

Sunday, September 11, 2005

It is settled wisdom among journalists that the federal response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was unconscionably slow.

"Mr. Bush's performance last week will rank as one of the worst ever during a dire national emergency," wrote New York Times columnist Bob Herbert in a somewhat more strident expression of the conventional wisdom.

But the conventional wisdom is the opposite of the truth.

Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:

"The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

Journalists who are long on opinions and short on knowledge have no idea what is involved in moving hundreds of tons of relief supplies into an area the size of England in which power lines are down, telecommunications are out, no gasoline is available, bridges are damaged, roads and airports are covered with debris, and apparently have little interest in finding out.

So they libel as a "national disgrace" the most monumental and successful disaster relief operation in world history.

I write this column a week and a day after the main levee protecting New Orleans breached. In the course of that week:

More than 32,000 people have been rescued, many plucked from rooftops by Coast Guard helicopters.

The Army Corps of Engineers has all but repaired the breaches and begun pumping water out of New Orleans.

Shelter, food and medical care have been provided to more than 180,000 refugees.

Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:

"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

"The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.

"You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets (in the affected areas) since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.

"No amount of yelling, crying and mustering of moral indignation will change any of the facts above."

"You cannot just snap your fingers and make the military appear somewhere," van Steenwyk said.

Guardsmen need to receive mobilization orders; report to their armories; draw equipment; receive orders and convoy to the disaster area. Guardsmen driving down from Pennsylvania or Navy ships sailing from Norfolk can't be on the scene immediately.

Relief efforts must be planned. Other than prepositioning supplies near the area likely to be afflicted (which was done quite efficiently), this cannot be done until the hurricane has struck and a damage assessment can be made. There must be a route reconnaissance to determine if roads are open, and bridges along the way can bear the weight of heavily laden trucks.

And federal troops and Guardsmen from other states cannot be sent to a disaster area until their presence has been requested by the governors of the afflicted states.

Exhibit A on the bill of indictment of federal sluggishness is that it took four days before most people were evacuated from the Louisiana Superdome.

The levee broke Tuesday morning. Buses had to be rounded up and driven from Houston to New Orleans across debris-strewn roads. The first ones arrived Wednesday evening. That seems pretty fast to me.

A better question -- which few journalists ask -- is why weren't the roughly 2,000 municipal and school buses in New Orleans utilized to take people out of the city before Katrina struck?

Jack Kelly is national security writer for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio

Sunday, September 11, 2005

It is settled wisdom among journalists that the federal response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina was unconscionably slow.

"Mr. Bush's performance last week will rank as one of the worst ever during a dire national emergency," wrote New York Times columnist Bob Herbert in a somewhat more strident expression of the conventional wisdom.

But the conventional wisdom is the opposite of the truth.

Jason van Steenwyk is a Florida Army National Guardsman who has been mobilized six times for hurricane relief. He notes that:

"The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 2002. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

Journalists who are long on opinions and short on knowledge have no idea what is involved in moving hundreds of tons of relief supplies into an area the size of England in which power lines are down, telecommunications are out, no gasoline is available, bridges are damaged, roads and airports are covered with debris, and apparently have little interest in finding out.

So they libel as a "national disgrace" the most monumental and successful disaster relief operation in world history.

I write this column a week and a day after the main levee protecting New Orleans breached. In the course of that week:

More than 32,000 people have been rescued, many plucked from rooftops by Coast Guard helicopters.

The Army Corps of Engineers has all but repaired the breaches and begun pumping water out of New Orleans.

Shelter, food and medical care have been provided to more than 180,000.


Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:

"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

"The United States military can wipe out the Taliban and the Iraqi Republican Guard far more swiftly than they can bring 3 million Swanson dinners to an underwater city through an area the size of Great Britain which has no power, no working ports or airports, and a devastated and impassable road network.

"You cannot speed recovery and relief efforts up by prepositioning assets (in the affected areas) since the assets are endangered by the very storm which destroyed the region.

"No amount of yelling, crying and mustering of moral indignation will change any of the facts above."

"You cannot just snap your fingers and make the military appear somewhere," van Steenwyk said.

Guardsmen need to receive mobilization orders; report to their armories; draw equipment; receive orders and convoy to the disaster area. Guardsmen driving down from Pennsylvania or Navy ships sailing from Norfolk can't be on the scene immediately.

Relief efforts must be planned. Other than prepositioning supplies near the area likely to be afflicted (which was done quite efficiently), this cannot be done until the hurricane has struck and a damage assessment can be made. There must be a route reconnaissance to determine if roads are open, and bridges along the way can bear the weight of heavily laden trucks.

And federal troops and Guardsmen from other states cannot be sent to a disaster area until their presence has been requested by the governors of the afflicted states.

Exhibit A on the bill of indictment of federal sluggishness is that it took four days before most people were evacuated from the Louisiana Superdome.

The levee broke Tuesday morning. Buses had to be rounded up and driven from Houston to New Orleans across debris-strewn roads. The first ones arrived Wednesday evening. That seems pretty fast to me.

A better question -- which few journalists ask -- is why weren't the roughly 2,000 municipal and school buses in New Orleans utilized to take people out of the city before Katrina struck?

Jack Kelly is national security writer for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio

The Next American Quake




















BY GEORGE WILL
Earth, that living, seething, often inhospitable and not altogether intelligently designed thing, has again shrugged, and tens of thousands of Pakistanis are dead. That earthquake struck 10 months after an undersea quake caused the December 2004 tsunami that killed 285,000 in Asia. Americans reeling from Hurricane Katrina, and warned of scores of millions of potential deaths from avian flu, have a vague feeling — never mind the disturbing rest of the news — of pervasive menace from things out of control. Too vague, according to Simon Winchester.
His timely new book, "A Crack in the Edge of the World: America and the Great California Earthquake of 1906," teaches — reminds, really — that we should have quite precise worries about the incurably unstable ground on which scores of millions of Americans live. This almost certainly will result in a huge calamity, probably in the lifetime of most people now living.
Before the study of plate tectonics revolutionized geology just 40 years ago, that science, Winchester writes, was concerned with "rocks, fossils, faults and minerals that were scattered around simply and solely on the surface of the earth." But the surface consists of between — depending how they are defined — six and 36 floating plates, which Winchester calls "rafts of solid rock." The plates' slow movements are powered by Earth's molten innards, the boiling and bubbling radioactive residue of the planet's formation.
The plates grind against — and slide up on, or plunge below — one another. But not smoothly, which is the lethal problem. When friction freezes them for a while, stupendous energy builds up until, suddenly, plates unlock and the energy is released, sometimes in ways that seem to involve related spasms around the world.
On the last day of January 1906, that seismically dangerous year, an earthquake in Ecuador and Colombia of perhaps 8.8 magnitude on the Richter scale killed about 2,000. Sixteen days later there was a large Caribbean quake, followed five days later by one in the Caucasus, and on March 17 by one that killed 1,228 on the island of Formosa. On April 6 a 10-day eruption of the volcano Vesuvius began with rocks blown 40,000 feet into the air over Naples. Two days after Vesuvius subsided, San Francisco was knocked down, and 2,600 acres of it were then devoured by three days of fires. About 3,000 San Franciscans died then, four months before a Chilean quake killed 20,000.
San Francisco's quake was smaller than the series of shocks around New Madrid, Mo., over a few winter weeks in 1811-12. They were strong enough to ring the bells in a Charleston, S.C., church that was later destroyed in that city's 1886 quake. Scores of millions of Americans now live on the unstable faults that shook mid-America in 1811-12.




















For San Francisco, the bad news is that the quake that killed 63 in 1989 (6.9 magnitude, compared with 8.3 in 1906) was caused not by the San Andreas fault but by a neighboring one. So the big menace, the San Andreas, has not recently lurched, as it surely will because it is moving, sporadically, in grinding concert with the Pacific Plate. Since 1906 there have been only five major earthquakes along the 750 miles of the San Andreas, and none in Northern California. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates a 62 percent probability of a quake in that area of at least 6.7 magnitude before 2032. Pondering the prosperous town of Portola Valley, south of San Francisco, exactly astride two of the most active strands of the San Andreas, Winchester, like many geologists who have warned the town, is fascinated by "humankind's insistent folly in living in places where they shouldn't."
After Earth's heavings subside, they reverberate in people's minds. Winchester says that after the 1755 Lisbon earthquake killed 60,000, "priests roved around the ruins, selecting at random those they believed guilty of heresy and thus to blame for annoying the Divine, who in turn had ordered up the disaster. The priests had them hanged on the spot."
The 1883 eruption of Krakatoa in what is now Indonesia fueled the growth of an extremist strain of Islam, bent on purging society of impurities displeasing to God. That strain has twice recently been heard from in Bali.
San Francisco's 1906 disaster prompted the explosive growth of a Pentecostal movement based in Los Angeles, a movement then embryonic but now mighty. Yet when A.P. Hotaling's whiskey warehouse survived San Francisco's post-quake inferno, a wit wondered:

If, as some say, G-d spanked the town
For being over frisky,
Why did He burn the churches down
And save Hotaling's whiskey?


Good question.

The Post-Katrina Era

By George Lakoff,

Katrina's tragic consequences were not just due to incompetence, natural disaster, or Bush policies (though he is accountable). This is a failure of moral and political philosophy.
It is impossible for me, as it is for most Americans, to watch the horror and suffering from Hurricane Katrina and not feel physically sore, pained, bereft, empty, heartbroken. And angry.
The Katrina tragedy should become a watershed in American politics. This was when the usually invisible people suddenly appeared in all the anguish of their lives -- the impoverished, the old, the infirm, the kids and the low-wage workers with no cars, TVs or credit cards. They showed up on America's doorsteps, entered the living rooms and stayed. Katrina will not go away soon, and she has the power to change America.
The moral of Katrina is mostly being missed. It is not just a failure of execution (William Kristol), or that bad things just happen (Laura Bush). It was not just indifference by the President, or a lack of accountability, or a failure of federal-state communication, or corrupt appointments in FEMA, or the cutting of budgets for fixing levees, or the inexcusable absence of the National Guard off in Iraq. It was all of these and more, but they are the effects, not the cause.
The cause was political through and through -- a matter of values and principles. The progressive-liberal values are America's values, and we need to go back to them. The heart of progressive-liberal values is simple: empathy (caring about and for people) and responsibility (acting responsibly on that empathy). These values translate into a simple principle: Use the common wealth for the common good to better all our lives. In short, promoting the common good is the central role of government.

This is only part of the article, but it illustrates how liberals seek to frame this mess in NOLA to further their agenda. The name Katrina will be given saintly status in the months to come as liberals try to promote wacked liberal ideas using the poor and particularly blacks as poster people.
If you have not read, do so the story:Dancing on the Graves of Black People.
Paints a clear picture of how liberals were jumping for joy as the Bush administration was the central focus on the supposed failures of the Feds.

Signs You Might Be a Liberal



1. You think Ted Koppel's Hair is real!

2. You like to give to charities - with other people's money.

3. You think free love is sheik and still wonder why your third marriage just went down the toilet.

4. Whenever an intern disappears in Washington, you say it's all about sex.

5. Your father wore flowers and your mother wore army boots in the sixties.

6. You think Al Gore won the election in 2000.

7. You fondly recall Stalin as "Uncle Joe".

8. You think the second amendment is the right to keep and bear a white flag.

9. Whenever you hear Rush Limbaugh's name mentioned you foam at the mouth and your knee jerks.

10. When hooligans throw rocks at police, you call it civil disobedience, when Republicans protest a fixed election you call it a riot.

11. If you nod your head and genuflect when Ted Kennedy speaks (or belches) then you might be a liberal.

12. If you went to prep school, got your bachelor's, master's, doctorate; you teach in a university, and still imagine that you know all about the real world, then you might be a liberal.

13. If you think evangelical is a dirty word you might be a liberal.

14. If you make sure to invite a lone conservative to your chic (not sheik) party because you want to show people how open-minded you are then you might be a liberal.

15. If you think alcoholics are disabled and deserve Social Security (or should be elected to be the senior senator from Massachussettes) then you might be a liberal.

16. If you eat granola bars for breakfast, salad greens for lunch, quiche for supper and then wake up hungry in the middle of the night and eat a whole quart of ice cream...and still think you are eating healthy, then you might be a liberal.

17. If you think rats, mice and houseflies are people, too, then you might be a liberal.

18. If you burried your dead goldfish in the compost bin because you thought it would be good for the environment then you might be a liberal.

19. If you think the government can solve your personal problems then you might be a liberal.

20. And our favorite: You might be a liberal if your FIVE-YEAR-OLD tells YOU what to do!

21. "You might be a liberal if you give money to the homeless man on the corner of the freeway, but you turn up your nose every time you see a boy scout."