Sen. Chafee recalls a crucial vote for a good reason. Many of us fall back again and again, thinking our choices are either/or. Here is a dramatic reminder anew that there are middle grounds. So very often, many of us fail to steer toward the middle, see only the left turn or the right turn.

This really becomes a very long whine, does it not? It is an immature complaint about things not being fair and "everybody picks on me" and "they always get their way."

Begin a consideration with this fact: Al Gore received the most popular votes for president of the United States in 2000. There were no Christians, no Protestants, no citizens who could be said "highly religous" voting for the most popular candidate? Absurb. This report is based on an assumption of, "One of the keys to Republican success…" So - yes - Republican candidates were supported by people involved with churches/religion. But so were Democratic candidates supported by people involved with churches/religion. The report of course has to be with "highly religious Americans" and their views on whether it is necessary to "change society." What does "change society" mean? Did respondents understand this phrase? This report is ... More »

A crucial consideration is omitted. There is a factor which James Madison and his supportive colleagues did not fully calculate. There is a story which basically is true, even if it is not true in every detail. The president of the United States is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. In his turn, Theodore Roosevelt wanted to dispatch America's "Great White Fleet" on a voyage around the world. Congress would not appropriate the money. TR responded by ordering the fleet on its way - it was then for Congress to appropriate money or to allow the U.S. Navy to bob on the waves of the Indian ocean with no fuel. This is the advantage the President has. It is in the President's power today to order 50,000 more troops to Iraq. It ... More »

There are some other things we need to know to make this meaningful, aren’t there? (1) This is a frequency “test.” “Gallop asked Americans to report the frequency with which they get their news from each of 13 media sources.” Fifty-five of every 100 say they turn to local TV news every day. Perhaps they are turning to an additional source four days each week, or two days each week or once each week. We are only learning their first response in seeking news on most days. (2) There is no accounting for “the other 45” from every 100. Fifty-five of every 100 go daily to local TV news. The other 45 ignore local TV news? Or: the other 45 turn first to another source and then to TV news? Some of the 45 go to the Internet and ... More »

This account is factual as a report can be factual. It simply, plainly reports the numbers. Many reporters attempt to forecast the future on the basis of poll results. This account makes no attempts at predicting what is to come or what is the meaning of whatever. It tells what polls are finding as of given date.

The writers were willing to pass along information from anonymous sources but they also reported on sources who could be/were identified. There might have been some more backgrounding - are there precedents? There might have been an assessment of reactions - move thought to be quirky, or move appears to have some support or significant support. It is a worthy effort, however.

News people spend significant time and effort focused on what might come to be. Generally, this is not a useful focus. None among us ever knows. This particular topic and the attendant speculation are appropriate for, "Editor and Publisher." E&P readers would be interested in learning what some informed individuals have come to conclude with regard to the future of print news. But no one goes to the bank on the strength of this kind of story. (It is akin to, 'Will Plymouth Rock be at its familiar place tomorrow?' Probably. But maybe not. Maybe an earthquake will topple it. Maybe the sea will claim it. Maybe a terrorist will explode it. Maybe -) Maybe there will be no print news sources. Sometime. Maybe.

This is a novel story - bloggers speaking out on network television. The thing important about it - and the thing rare - is that it gives emphasis to a fact that the American electorate is not divided between Bushies and Liberals, or between red states and blue states. Mainline news media commentators seem often to have lost this perspective. The bloggers note that Democrats, opponents of the Bush Administration, Americans who do not vote Republican may be liberals, they may be voters who could be labeled progressives, there are latter-day populists, there are people who bear allegiance to the Democratic party, there are Democrats who can be rated fiscal conservatives, there are Democrats who match most criteria for a definition ... More »

George Bush's religious stance and professed faith is a story which has been told. We have not had Madeline Albright's appraisal of these and of their impact on foreign policy, however. This is an important story. This nation has never had to deal with it before - never had to deal with a president who made religious faith a part of his campaign, a president who professed he is "God chosen," a president who advances faith-based causes, a president who challenges the faiths of others. i think the press has not dealt well with this concern; it was been reported and then largely forgotten or ignored. (How far has the President got with doling out government funds to Christian-based charities and institutions? This question has not ... More »

I don't think Christians are perceived fairly as left or right, conservative or liberal. All Christians are conservative, holding to their ancient faith. What we have been witnessing in America through recent years is extremism.